[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 117 (Friday, June 17, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39729-39730]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14307]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78045; File No. SR-ICEEU-2016-008]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating To Clearance of Containerised White Sugar Futures Contracts

June 13, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 1, 2016, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule changes described in Items I, II and III below, which
Items have been prepared primarily by ICE Clear Europe. ICE Clear
Europe filed the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the
Act,\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(4)(ii) \4\ thereunder, so that the proposal
was effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The principal purpose of the change is to modify the ICE Clear
Europe Delivery Procedures in connection with the launch by the ICE
Futures Europe market of new containerised white sugar futures
contracts that will be cleared by ICE Clear Europe.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, ICE Clear Europe included
statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule
change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places
specified in Item IV below. ICE Clear Europe has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the rule amendments is to modify the ICE Clear
Europe Delivery Procedures in connection with the launch by the ICE
Futures Europe market of new containerised white sugar futures
contracts that will be cleared by ICE Clear Europe (the ``Containerised
White Sugar Contracts''). ICE Clear Europe does not otherwise propose
to amend its clearing rules or procedures in connection with the
Containerised White Sugar Contracts.
    The amendments adopt a new Part BB to the Delivery Procedures,
applicable to the Containerised White Sugar Contracts. The amendments
provide, among other matters, specifications for delivery of white
sugar under a Containerised White Sugar Contract, including relevant
definitions and a detailed delivery timetable for the contracts. The
amendments also address invoicing and payment for delivery. The revised
procedures also set out various documentation requirements for the
relevant parties, and provide procedures for rejection of delivery
documentation under applicable contract terms.
2. Statutory Basis
    ICE Clear Europe believes that the changes described herein are
consistent with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \5\ and the
regulations thereunder

applicable to it, including the standards under Rule 17Ad-22.\6\
Specifically, the amendments are consistent with the prompt and
accurate clearance of and settlement of securities transactions and, to
the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts and
transactions, the safeguarding of securities and funds in the custody
or control of ICE Clear Europe or for which it is responsible and the
protection of investors and the public interest, within the meaning of
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\7\ The Containerised White Sugar
Contracts have similar characteristics to other softs futures contracts
currently cleared by ICE Clear Europe, and ICE Clear Europe believes
that its existing financial resources, risk management, systems and
operational arrangements are sufficient to support clearing of such
products (and to address physical delivery under such contracts).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, ICE Clear Europe believes that it will be able to
manage the risks associated with acceptance of the Containerised White
Sugar Contracts for clearing and physical delivery in such contracts.
The Containerised White Sugar Contracts present a similar risk profile
to other ICE Futures Europe softs contracts currently cleared by ICE
Clear Europe, and ICE Clear Europe believes that its existing risk
management and margin framework is sufficient for purposes of risk
management of the Containerised White Sugar Contracts and related
deliveries. Similarly, ICE Clear Europe believes that its existing
systems are appropriately scalable to handle the Containerised White
Sugar Contracts, which are generally similar from an operational
perspective to other ICE Futures Europe softs contracts currently
cleared by ICE Clear Europe.
    For the reasons noted above, ICE Clear Europe believes that the
proposed rule changes are consistent with the requirements of Section
17A of the Act and regulations thereunder applicable to it.

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

    ICE Clear Europe does not believe the proposed changes to the rules
would have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act. ICE
Clear Europe is adopting the amendments to the Delivery Procedures in
connection with the listing of a new contract, the Containerised White
Sugar Contracts, for trading on the ICE Futures Europe market. ICE
Clear Europe believes that such contracts will provide additional
opportunities for interested market participants to engage in trading
activity in the sugar market. ICE Clear Europe does not believe the
adoption of the Delivery Procedures amendments would adversely affect
access to clearing for clearing members or their customers, or
otherwise adversely affect competition in clearing services.

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

    Written comments relating to the proposed changes to the rules have
not been solicited or received. ICE Clear Europe will notify the
Commission of any written comments received by ICE Clear Europe.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective upon filing pursuant
to Section 19(b)(3)(A) \8\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(4)(ii) \9\
thereunder because it effects a change in an existing service of a
registered clearing agency that primarily affects the clearing
operations of the clearing agency with respect to products that are not
securities, including futures that are not security futures, swaps that
are not security-based swaps or mixed swaps, and forwards that are not
security forwards, and does not significantly affect any securities
clearing operations of the clearing agency or any rights or obligations
of the clearing agency with respect to securities clearing or persons
using such securities-clearing service. At any time within 60 days of
the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml) or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ICEEU-2016-008 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-ICEEU-2016-008. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filings will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of ICE Clear Europe
and on ICE Clear Europe's Web site at https://www.theice.com/clear-europe/regulation#rule-filings.
    All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2016-008
and should be submitted on or before July 8, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-14307 Filed 6-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 153 (Thursday, August 8, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 48302]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18703]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0004; Airspace Docket No. 13-AGL-1]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Wagner, SD

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace at Wagner, SD.
Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate new Area Navigation
(RNAV) Standard Instrument Approach Procedures at Wagner Municipal
Airport. The FAA is taking this action to enhance the safety and
management of Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, October 17, 2013. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone 817-321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On May 24, 2013, the FAA published in the Federal Register a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish Class E airspace for the
Wagner, SD, area, creating controlled airspace at Wagner Municipal
Airport (78 FR 31430) Docket No. FAA-2013-0004. Interested parties were
invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written
comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. Class E
airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9W dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15, 2012, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in
the Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to ensure that required controlled airspace exists to
contain new standard instrument approach procedures within an 8-mile
radius of Wagner Municipal Airport, Wagner, SD. Controlled airspace
enhances the safety and management of IFR operations at the airport.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes controlled airspace at Wagner Municipal Airport,
Wagner, SD.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9W, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15,
2012, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface.

* * * * *

AGL SD E5 Wagner, SD [New]

Wagner Municipal Airport, SD
    (Lat. 43[deg]03'51'' N., long. 98[deg]17'47'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within an 8-mile radius of Wagner Municipal Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 25, 2013.
David P. Medina,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2013-18703 Filed 8-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 163 (Thursday, August 22, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43839-43842]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18056]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86692; File No. SR-DTC-2019-006]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Amend the Distributions Service Guide

August 16, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on August 13, 2019, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') 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 clearing agency. DTC filed the proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(4) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change \5\ of DTC consists of amendments to the
Distributions Guide to (i) update its U.S. tax withholding service
(``UTW Service'') to transition functions related to the service from
DTC's Participant Terminal System (``PTS'') and its Participant Brower
Service (``PBS'') \6\ to the Corporate Actions Web system (``CA Web'')
and (ii) make ministerial and clarifying changes to text, as discussed
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Each capitalized term not otherwise defined herein has its
respective meaning as set forth in the Rules, By-Laws and
Organization Certificate of DTC (the ``Rules''), available at http://www.dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures.aspx, and the Distributions
Service Guide (the ``Distributions Guide''), available at http://
www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/service-guides/
Service%20Guide%20Distributions.pdf.
    \6\ PTS and PBS are user interfaces for DTC's settlement and
asset services functions. PTS is mainframe-based, and PBS is web-
based with a mainframe back-end. Participants may use either PTS or
PBS, as they are functionally equivalent. References to a particular
PTS function in this rule filing include the corresponding PBS
function.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

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

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The proposed rule change would amend the Distributions Guide to (i)
update the UTW Service to transition functions related to the service
from PTS and PBS to CA Web and (ii) make ministerial and clarifying
changes to text, as discussed below.
Transition of PTS/PBS Reorganizations Functions to CA Web
    Beginning in 2012, DTC has filed a series of rule changes to update
DTC's corporate action services by migrating the corporate action
services for Distributions (as defined below) from PTS/PBS to CA Web, a
then new browser user interface.\7\ After a Participant testing phase,
DTC retired PTS/PBS functions for Distributions in 2015, and the use of
CA Web for processing Distributions became mandatory for all
Participants.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68114 (October 26,
2012); 77 FR 66497 (November 5, 2012) (SR-DTC-2012-08).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73864 (December 17,
2014); 79 FR 77063 (December 23, 2014) (SR-DTC-2014-012) (``2014
Rule Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2016, DTC submitted a rule filing to transition PTS/PBS
functions for redemptions to CA Web, and to update the Redemptions
Service Guide \9\ to add the appropriate references.\10\ After a
Participant testing phase, DTC retired PTS/PBS functions for
redemptions in 2017, and the use of CA Web for processing redemptions
became mandatory for all Participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Available at http://www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/
legal/service-guides/Redemptions.pdf.
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79746 (January 5,
2017), 82 FR 3372 (January 11, 2017) (SR-DTC-2016-014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Most recently, DTC submitted proposed changes to amend the
Reorganizations Service Guide \11\ for the further transition of
corporate action functions to CA Web.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Available at http://www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/
legal/service-guides/Reorganizations.pdf.
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85986 (May 31,
2019); 84 FR 26466 (June 6, 2019) (SR-DTC-2019-003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to the proposed rule change, DTC would transition PTS/PBS
functions for the UTW Service to CA Web.
UTW Service Background
    DTC offers services for processing corporate action events,
including, but not limited to, the distributions service for the
announcement and processing of cash and stock dividends, principal and
interest, and capital gain distributions (collectively,
``Distributions'').
    The U.S. Internal Revenue Code (``Code'') generally requires U.S.
payors such as DTC to deduct and withhold 30 percent from U.S.-source
income paid to a foreign payee, unless lower U.S. withholding tax rates
or exemptions apply under provisions of the Code, regulations, or
applicable tax treaties.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Sections 1441, 1442 and 1443 of the Code and the
regulations promulgated thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its role as a U.S. tax withholding agent, through the UTW
Service, DTC (i) accepts from a foreign Participant instructions
relevant to determining the withholding tax rates, (ii) pays dividends,
interest and other securities distributions to the Participant net of
appropriate taxes, if any, based on the applicable withholding rates,
and (iii) reports and remits the taxes to the IRS. The UTW Service
utilizes the PTS/PBS Elective Dividend Service (``EDS'') function to
solicit and receive the instructions from foreign Participants.
Proposed Rule Change
    While most EDS functions were moved to CA Web pursuant to the 2014
ruling, the EDS UTW Service functionality has continued to be offered
through PTS and PBS. To enhance the end-to-end processing of corporate
actions for Participants, DTC is proposing to move the EDS UTW Service
functionality from PTS/PBS to CA Web and amend the section of the
Distributions Guide titled ``U.S. Tax Withholding'' (``UTW Section'')
to remove a reference that states that users of the UTW Service can
access the menu item to use the service through the EDS function on
PTS/PBS, and to instead state that Participants can access the UTW
Service menu item on CA Web. The proposed rule change would simplify
Participants' use of DTC's corporate actions by allowing foreign
Participants to submit instructions relating to tax withholding within
the same systemic platform as they use for other corporate action-
related activity, CA Web.
    Pursuant to the proposed rule change, DTC would also make the
following ministerial and clarifying changes to the text of the UTW
Section:
    (1) DTC would delete the word ``non-withholding'' from text that
states: ``To the extent allowable under U.S. federal income tax laws,
UTW allows non-withholding qualified intermediaries \14\ to submit
withholding instructions to DTC on U.S. source income payments.'' This
change would make the sentence consistent with existing U.S. tax
practice where in certain circumstances a full-withholding qualified
intermediary does not perform withholding and would instead instruct
DTC to perform withholding on its behalf. Therefore, the distinction
between a full-withholding and non-withholding qualified intermediary
is no longer necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ A qualified intermediary (``QI'') is any non-U.S.
intermediary (or non-U.S. branch of a U.S. intermediary) that has
entered into a qualified intermediary withholding agreement with the
IRS. See Distributions Guide, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) For the same reason cited in 1 immediately above, DTC would
delete the word ``non-withholding'' from text that states: ``As a U.S.
tax withholding agent, DTC: . . . Informs non-withholding QI users of
the ``instruction window'' during which they must send withholding rate
instructions to the depository; . . . .''

    DTC would also update the copyright date that is set forth in the
``Important Legal Information'' section of the Distributions Guide to
change text that shows the copyright date as ``Copyright (copyright)
1999-2014'' to ``Copyright (copyright) 1999-2019.''
Implementation Timeframe
    The proposed rule change would become effective upon filing with
the Commission.
2. Statutory Basis
    DTC believes that this proposal is consistent with the requirements
of the Act \15\ as described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, inter alia, that the
Rules be designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions.\16\ DTC believes that the
proposed rule change with respect to the migration of the processing
functions described above from PTS/PBS to CA Web is consistent with
this provision of the Act because it would migrate UTW Service
processing to a more flexible interface that utilizes market standard
language and incorporates the entire lifecycle of an event into one
platform. By providing Participants with more efficient access to UTW
Services, DTC believes that the proposed rule change is designed to
promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions relating to Distributions, consistent with Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DTC believes that the proposed rule change with respect to the
clarification of the Distributions Guide is consistent with Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\18\ DTC believes that the proposed rule change
would enhance the clarity and transparency of the Distributions Guide,
which would allow a Participant to more efficiently conduct its
business in connection with UTW Service processing. Therefore, DTC
believes that the proposed rule change is designed to promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions
related to Distributions, consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Id.
    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    DTC believes that the proposed rule changes with respect to the
migration of UTW Service processing functions from PTS/PBS to CA Web
may have an impact on competition, because it would facilitate a more
efficient process for communicating and processing UTW Service
information. Having a more efficient process could promote competition
by potentially reducing Participants' operating costs. In addition, CA
Web is an existing DTC platform that all Participants are required to
use to access other types of services, including other Distributions
functions, reorganizations and redemptions processing, and so would not
affect the rights and obligations of any Participant. Therefore, DTC
believes that the proposed rule changes with respect to the migration
of functions from PTS/PBS to CA Web may promote competition but would
not create a burden on competition.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DTC believes that the proposed rule changes with respect to
clarifying the Distributions Guide would not have an impact on
competition. The proposed rule changes would enhance the clarity and
transparency of the Distributions Guide to better reflect DTC's UTW
Services and practices. Improving the clarity and transparency of the
Distributions Guide would help Participants to better understand their
rights and obligations regarding DTC services, and so would not affect
the rights and obligations of any Participant or other interested
party.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments relating to this proposed rule change have not
been solicited or received. DTC will notify the Commission of any
written comments received by DTC.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \21\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\22\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend
such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-DTC-2019-006 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-DTC-2019-006. 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 DTC and on DTCC's website
(http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). 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-DTC-2019-006 and should be submitted on
or before September 12, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-18056 Filed 8-21-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 81 (Thursday, April 26, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24833-24835]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9475]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0033; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-086-AD;
Amendment 39-17029; AD 2012-08-12]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A310 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of
an electrical arc and hydraulic haze in the wheel bay of the left-hand
main landing gear (MLG) possibly resulting from chafing between the
hydraulic high pressure hose and electrical wiring of the green
electrical motor pump (EMP). This AD requires temporarily prohibiting
in-flight use of the green EMPs; temporarily revising the airplane
flight manual (AFM) limitations section; temporarily installing a
placard in the cockpit overhead panel; doing a one-time general visual
inspection for correct condition and installation of hydraulic pressure
hoses, electrical conduits, feeder cables, and associated clamping
devices; and corrective action if necessary. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct chafing of hydraulic pressure hoses and electrical
wiring of the green EMPs, which in combination with a system failure,
could cause an uncontrolled and undetected fire in the MLG bay.

DATES: This AD becomes effective May 31, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 31, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2125; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on January 20, 2012 (77
FR 2928). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    An operator reported an electrical arc and a large hydraulic
haze in the left hand Main Landing Gear (LH MLG) wheel bay that
occurred during ground operation. The analysis revealed that this
occurrence is likely the result of chafing between hydraulic high
pressure hose and electrical wiring of the Green Electrical Motor
Pump (EMP).
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, and in
combination with a system failure leading to the use of the Green
EMPs in flight, could lead to an uncontrolled and undetected fire in
the MLG bay.
    For the reasons explained above, this AD temporarily prohibits
the in-flight use of green EMPs, by mandating an update of the
Aeroplane Flight Manual (AFM) limitations section and installation
of a placard in the cockpit overhead panel. This [EASA] AD requires
also a one-time [general] visual inspection of hydraulic pressure
hoses and electrical wiring of Green EMPs and corrective action(s),
depending on findings.

Corrective actions include repairing or replacing the hydraulic
pressure hoses and electrical wiring. You may obtain further
information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We have considered the comment received.

Request To Add Word to Summary Paragraph

    Airbus requested the word ``temporarily'' be added before the
phrases in the Summary section of the NPRM (77 FR 2928, January 20,
2012): ``prohibiting in-flight use of the green EMPs,'' ``revising the
airplane flight manual (AFM) limitations section,'' and ``installing a
placard in the cockpit overhead panel.'' Airbus explained that after
the one-time visual inspection of the hydraulic pressure hoses and
electrical wiring of the green EMPs and accomplishing the corrective
actions, if needed, these limitations must be removed.
    We concur. We have added the word ``temporarily'' before those
phrases in the Summary section of this AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD as proposed except for minor editorial changes. We have determined
that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (77 FR 2928, January 20, 2012) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (77 FR 2928, January 20, 2012).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 58 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 2 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $200 per product.
Where the service information lists required parts costs that are
covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge
for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected
parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based
on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators
to be $21,460, or $370 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM (77 FR 2928, January 20,
2012), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the Docket Operations office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2012-08-12 Airbus: Amendment 39-17029. Docket No. FAA-2012-0033;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-086-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective May 31,
2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, -
304, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes, certificated in any category,
all serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 29: Hydraulic
Power.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of an electrical arc and
hydraulic haze in the wheel bay of the left-hand main landing gear
(MLG) possibly resulting from chafing between the hydraulic high
pressure hose and electrical wiring of the green electrical motor
pump (EMP). We are issuing this AD to detect and correct chafing of
hydraulic pressure hoses and electrical wiring of the green EMP,
which in combination with a system failure, could cause an
uncontrolled and undetected fire in the MLG bay.

(f) Compliance

    You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD
performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions
have already been done.

(g) Installing Placard and Revising Airplane Flight Manual (AFM)

    For all airplanes, as of the effective date of this AD, the in-
flight use of green EMPs is prohibited. Before the next flight, do
the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Install in the cockpit on the hydraulic power overhead panel
427VU, a locally manufactured self-adhesive placard temporarily
prohibiting the in-flight use of the green EMPs, in accordance with
the

instructions in Airbus All Operators Telex A310-29A2101, Revision
01, dated April 12, 2011 (for airplanes equipped with EATON
(formerly VICKERS) hydraulic EMPs); or Airbus All Operators Telex
A310-29A2102, dated April 12, 2011 (for airplanes equipped with
PARKER (formerly ABEX) hydraulic EMPs).
    (2) Revise the Limitations section of the applicable AFM to
prohibit the in-flight use of the green EMPs. This may be
accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD into the Limitations
section of the AFM.

(h) Inspecting for Damage and Chafing

    Within 500 flight hours or 4 months after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs first, do a one-time general visual
inspection for correct condition (i.e., no damage and no chafing)
and correct installation of the hydraulic pressure hoses, electrical
conduits, feeder cables, and associated clamping devices at frame
54, as well as the electrical conduits and feeder cables underneath
the clamps (including removal of the concerned clamps), in
accordance with the instructions in Airbus All Operators Telex A310-
29A2101, Revision 01, dated April 12, 2011 (for airplanes equipped
with EATON (formerly VICKERS) hydraulic EMPs); or Airbus All
Operators Telex A310-29A2102, dated April 12, 2011 (for airplanes
equipped with PARKER (formerly ABEX) hydraulic EMPs). If any
incorrect installation is found, before further flight, install the
affected parts correctly, in accordance with Airbus All Operators
Telex A310-29A2101, Revision 01, dated April 12, 2011 (for airplanes
equipped with EATON (formerly VICKERS) hydraulic EMPs); or Airbus
All Operators Telex A310-29A2102, dated April 12, 2011 (for
airplanes equipped with PARKER (formerly ABEX) hydraulic EMPs).
    (1) If any damage or chafing marks are found during the
inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, before further
flight, replace or repair the affected parts (hydraulic pressure
hoses, electrical conduits, feeder cables, clamps, and spacer, if
installed), in accordance with the instructions in Airbus All
Operators Telex A310-29A2101, Revision 01, dated April 12, 2011 (for
airplanes equipped with EATON (formerly VICKERS) hydraulic EMPs); or
Airbus All Operators Telex A310-29A2102, dated April 12, 2011 (for
airplanes equipped with PARKER (formerly ABEX) hydraulic EMPs).
    (2) Before further flight after compliance with the requirements
of paragraph (h) of this AD, as applicable, remove the placard
required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD; and remove the revision of
the Limitations section of the AFM, as required by paragraph (g)(2)
of this AD; from the airplane and the AFM, respectively.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the International
Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2125; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC, notify
your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district
office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter
must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(j) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2011-0071, dated
April 18, 2011; Airbus All Operators Telex A310-29A2101, Revision
01, dated April 12, 2011; and Airbus All Operators Telex A310-
29A2102, dated April 12, 2011; for related information.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) You must use the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The
Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference (IBR) of the following service information under 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51:
    (i) Airbus All Operators Telex A310-29A2101, Revision 01, dated
April 12, 2011. The document number, revision level, and issue date
of this document is specified only on the first page of the
document.
    (ii) Airbus All Operators Telex A310-29A2102, dated April 12,
2011. The document number, revision level, and issue date of this
document is specified only on the first page of the document.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS--EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at an NARA facility, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 12, 2012.
John P. Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-9475 Filed 4-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


TRIAD EARLY ACTION COMPACT   June 30, 2004 PROGRESS REPORT Table of Contents Page PART A LOCAL AND REGIONAL PROGRESS Progress Since On Development of Control Strategies ..................... 1 Progress Toward Strategy Adoption and Implementation............... 3 Meetings Conducted By Stakeholders ............................................... 4 Excerpt from Speech by EPA Administrator on EACs .................... 5 Air Quality Editorial from Greensboro News and Record ................ 6 PART B NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY STATUS REPORT Section 1 Introduction........................................................................................ 8 Section 2 Emissions Inventories......................................................................... 8 Section 3 State and Federal Control Measures ................................................ 10 Section 4 Modeling Status ................................................................................. 13 Part A Local and Regional Progress ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 1 1 Progress Since December 31, 2003 Regarding Development of Control Strategies and Early Action Plan Since December 31, 2003 the Triad EAC's major initiative has been development, adoption and refinement of regional and local control strategies. These measures were submitted as part of the Triad Early Action Plan to EPA on March 31, 2004. On April 15 EPA accepted the Triad Early Action Plan as meeting the March 31 milestone, and the Triad Area's effective date of nonattainment was deferred until September 30, 2005.

By December 31, 2003 43 local governments in 11 counties had adopted resolutions incorporating the regional and local control measures. Between January 2004 and March 31, 2004 the Stakeholders group clarified, refined and, to the degree possible, quantified the strategies and agreed on implementation dates.

During this period several local measures were adopted and/ or implemented: converting to biodiesel in Greensboro for all on and off road diesel vehicles; school bus diesel retrofits in Guilford County; replacement of new gasoline engines that meet California standard; building 5 Park and Ride lots ( 15 more to be built); elimination of coal fired boilers at RJ Reynolds; a no idling policy for Guilford county school buses; and implementation of energy efficiency in identified schools and public buildings. These measures are included in the control measures submitted to EPA Between March 31 and June 30, 2004 EAC Stakeholders ( or representatives of the Stakeholders Group) engaged in several activities related to the control measures. These are not implementation activities but they have resulted in either: a) clarification of one or more control measures, or b) identification of methods/ opportunities to implement the strategies.

March 26  Meeting in Davidson County with local officials and Division of Air Quality representatives to discuss Ozone and PM2.5 issues. As a result of Davidson County's participation in the EAC and its PM2.5 problem, considerable effort will be devoted to identification of emissions sources and reduction measures.

April 21  Triad EAC, Piedmont Triad COG, Northwest Piedmont COG and Triangle Clean Cities Coalition co sponsor the Alternative Vehicles Road Show. Morning workshop at Greensboro Coliseum; afternoon workshop in downtown Winston Salem. ( See invitation logo, following page.) This event stimulated much interest. As a result, the Triad EAC will sponsor a Biodiesel Briefing in August for local government and private sector fleet managers with the supplier who has the Greensboro B20 contract. ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 2 The Piedmont Triad Rural Planning Organization and the Early Action Compact bring you The Alternative Fuel Vehicle Road Show The Piedmont Triad Rural Planning Organization and the Early Action Compact bring you The Alternative Fuel Vehicle Road Show Plan to join us for a very special RPO meeting April 21st 10: 00 am   11: 45 am Greensboro Colliseum Special Events Center Greensboro, NC ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 3 June 3  Meeting with representatives of the Southern Environmental Law Center ( SELC) and Division of Air Quality regarding specifics of EAC strategies. Follow up meeting between DAQ and SELC set for July 9. In addition, SELC representatives and Triad EAC have scheduled a September 13 meeting for in depth discussion on control measures and implementation..

June 9  Briefing at Duke Energy Belews Creek Power Plant ( Stokes County) on selective catalytic reduction facility and new precipitators which will reduce NOx by 80% by 2009 ( 80% between 1996 and 2009), consistent with N. C. Clean Smokestacks Act. Most of the reductions have already occurred. New scrubbers will be installed beginning 2005 with a target operational date of 2008 and will yield a 70% reduction in SO2.

J une 16  Briefing for elected officials and managers in the Region on Ozone and nonattainment status and PM2.5 Beginning with the August 2 EAC meeting, we will begin a concerted effort of several months, assigning implementation responsibilities for carrying out key strategies and monitoring progress. The August meeting will focus on gaps and overlaps between EAC transportation strategies and the work of the region's four MPOs and PART. Following that, with the help of a transportation subcommittee, we will identify what more can be done to achieve progress in transportation efficiencies and emissions reductions.

2 Progress Toward Adoption and Implementation of Local Measures To date, the schedule for adoption and implementation of control measures, submitted on March 31 has not changed.

Two new control measures have been added:

  The Winston Salem City Council in June adopted a fee to be charged for unauthorized burnings.

  50 electrified parking spaces will be installed at a truck stop along Interstate 85/ 40 in Mebane ( Alamance County EAC member). This is funded by a grant from the National Association of State Energy Offices to the NC departments of Energy and Environment and Natural Resources. These electrified parking spaces give truckers access to heat, air conditioning, internet and telecommunications without idling their diesel engines. ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 4 3 Meetings conducted by Stakeholders Since December 31, 2003 The Triad EAC has conducted the following meetings since December 31, 2003:

February 2, 2004  Work on refining strategies  quantification, combining, etc.  Report by DAQ on conversations with Southern Environmental Law Center February 16, 2004  Final full EAC meeting on strategies and quantification  Quantification presentation by Forsyth County Environmental Affairs Department April 5, 2004  Distribution of March 31 Early Action Plan  Discussion of next steps  Discussion of environmental groups and EACs  PM2.5 issues in Davidson County and the Triad June 7, 2004  Discussion of April 15 nonattainment designations  EPA technical comments on Triad EAC March 31 submission  EPA administrator's National Press Club speech, April 14, supporting EACs ( see following page)  Status of state modeling and progress on SIP  Planning for regional briefing and contracting on Biodiesel  Updates on meetings with Southern Environmental Law Center  Potential PM2.5 designation ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 5 Major speeches and testimony delivered by U. S. EPA Administrators 2001  2004 Speech Date: 04/ 14/ 2004 Delivered at The National Press Club in Washington Subject: The Clean Air Rules of 2004: The Next Chapter in America's Commitment to Clean Air Excerpt related to EACs:

" Today I will define a new chapter in America's commitment to clean air; it lays out a vision that acknowledges our nation's environmental aspirations and the realities of economic globalism. It is a vision that contemplates new and better approaches in producing one of the most productive periods of air quality improvement in our nation's history. . .

Did non attainment designation mean that we couldn't grow our economy or build highways? No. Did it mean we had to have a plan and take action to clean our air? Yes.

Today, I have used the phrase " better way." I've spoken of " old thinking" v. " new thinking." An illustration clarifies what I'm talking about.

Some communities recognized early on that they would not meet our new, more stringent ozone standards, and began to think creatively about how to clean the air more quickly and avoid designation. Thirty three metropolitan areas collaborated with the EPA, states and environmental organizations to create an innovative, voluntary agreement called Early Action Compacts. 13 The Compacts accelerate the planning, implementation and emission reductions before they were required in the Clean Air Act. If all the requirements are met, EPA defers the effective date of the non attainment designation.

The Early Action Compacts are an example of new thinking. Approximately 10 million people will have cleaner air, faster. It was an effort to avoid some of the frustrating lessons we learned the hard way while implementing earlier standards. For example, we learned that polarizing conflict, endless litigation, and needlessly complex regulations are road blocks to cleaner air.

We learned that using collaborations, incentives and a direct focus on results accelerates our efforts to clean the air, and competitiveness. That's new thinking.

The EPA is optimistic about these Early Action Compacts and we want them to work. The best way to do that is to hold them to a high standard. Nearly all the submissions required significant actions to reduce ozone emissions before the December planning deadline. Regrettably a small number simply haven't demonstrated the necessary progress and they will be designated as nonattainment areas on April 15th.

Will someone object to the existence of Early Action Compacts? Probably. The tension between old thinking and new thinking remains. We will support the agreements because our experience in their development proves once again that we can make more progress, faster if we focus on collaborative, incentive driven and results oriented solutions. . ." ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 6 EDITORIAL 6 15 04 Greensboro News & Record Is the Triad heeding call for cleaner air?

Go figure.

Just six weeks ago, the American Lung Association ranked the Triad's air quality among the worst in the nation. Only two weeks earlier, the EPA had warned: If the Triad continues to violate ozone pollution laws, it will face severe penalties.

Yet, at least so far this summer, the Triad has yet to log a single ozone alert. No " code orange'' days, when the air is unsafe for people with certain health problems. No '' code red'' days, when the air is so bad everybody is put on notice.

Last year, the Triad had only one bad ozone day by now, but in recent years it typically has logged several at this point. Even a code red by mid June isn't unusual.

One likely factor is humidity. Hot, dry air fuels the ozone level. We've had plenty of heat, but the humidity has been high. We might gripe about sweating buckets on a stroll around the block, but this humidity could be helping the air quality. Of course, weather patterns can change in a minute.

Experts can only speculate as to other reasons for lower ozone levels, but the possibilities are promising. One might involve stricter requirements on automobile and smokestack emissions. In February, Duke Power Co. installed new cleaning equipment in its coal fired power plant at Belews Creek that should reduce harmful nitrogen oxide emissions substantially. Such emissions contribute to ozone pollution, especially during hot weather.

Another possibility is that residents and businesses are heeding the EPA's call to use less energy. The Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation reports that calls from commuters interested in its transit service are up considerably, as is ridership. PART officials say calls are up 15 to 20 percent, and they estimate that ridership in May rose about 10 percent from May of last year. The increased demand has led PART to add an extra bus and two new van pools.

At least some of the increase no doubt stems from sky high gasoline prices. So, the question becomes, with gas prices back on a downward swing in the past few weeks, will commuters who parked their cars to save money turn fickle and revert to their old ways? Let's hope not.

Increasing PART ridership is among the strategies in the Piedmont Triad's plan to reduce pollution to acceptable levels or risk facing penalties such as restrictions on industry and the loss of federal road money. Private carpooling, which companies could help organize and support, is another. The region's governments also have agreed to replace old vehicles with newer, cleanerburning ones.

The EPA has given the Triad until 2007 to reduce ozone to acceptable levels. Meeting that goal will require all of us to do our share. ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 7 Part B North Carolina Division of Air Quality Status Report ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 8 1 Introduction As a requirement of the Early Action Compacts ( EACs), the progress report due June 30, 2004, must include a status report regarding the air quality modeling. This report satisfies this requirement. Discussed in this report is an overview of the changes in the emission inventories and the air quality modeling results.

2 Emissions Inventories Emissions modeling performed by NCDAQ estimates NOx and VOC emissions for an average summer day, given specific meteorological and future year conditions and using emission inputs based on emission inventories that include anticipated control measures. The biogenic emissions are kept at the same level as the episodic biogenic emissions since these emissions are based on meteorology. Projections for 2007 take into account all State and Federal control measures expected to operate at that time, including Federal vehicle emissions controls, NOx SIP Call controls, and North Carolina Clean Smokestacks controls.

The modeling emission inventories changed since the last progress report for both the current year and the 2007 attainment year. These revisions were made to address errors that were found and the use of better available data.

Current Year ( 2000) Inventory Changes The changes in the current year point source emission inventories included:

  using actual 2000 emissions data for sources in North Carolina when available,   corrections to Alabama and Illinois emissions modeling files to remove duplicate sources, and   inclusion of dropped CEM emissions data.

The current year mobile source emission inventory was changed to correct:

  the vehicle miles traveled data in South Carolina,   the vehicle age distribution that was used in North Carolina,   the mobile input files for North Carolina so that the modeled temperatures were used to calculate the emission factors.

The current year nonroad mobile source emission inventory was changed to reflect changes in EPA's NONROAD mobile model. The NONROAD mobile model was re run for all counties within the 36 km modeling domain. The changes to the inventory were minor, but NCDAQ wanted to use the most recent data available for this modeling ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 9 project. There were no changes made to the current year area source or biogenic source emission inventories.

Attainment Year ( 2007) Inventory Changes The changes in the 2007 attainment year point source emission inventories included:

  growing the North Carolina 2000 emissions data to 2007,   correction of stack temperatures in the North Carolina emission files,   using the latest North Carolina utility emissions according to the Clean Smokestacks Act compliance plan update,   corrections to Alabama and Illinois emissions modeling files to remove duplicate sources,   growing the other States non utility current year emissions to 2007 via EGAS growth factors, and   using the Clear Skies modeling emission files for the other States utilities.

The 2007 attainment year mobile source emission inventory was changed to correct:

  the vehicle age distribution that was used in North Carolina,   the mobile input files for North Carolina so that the modeled temperatures were used to calculate the emission factors.

The 2007 attainment year nonroad mobile source emission inventory was changed to reflect changes in EPA's NONROAD mobile model. The NONROAD mobile model was re run for all counties within the 36 km modeling domain. Again, the changes to the inventory were minor, but NCDAQ wanted to use the most recent data available for this modeling project. Also, the airport projection factors were updated for the three major airports in North Carolina, as well as the airport in Forsyth County. The updated projection information was obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA).

For area sources the 2007 attainment year inventory was changed to apply North Carolina's open burning rule, and apply federal control strategies expected to be in place by 2007. There were no changes made to the biogenic source emission inventory.

Updated Emission Inventories The emissions summary for both the 2000 current year and 2007 attainment year for the EAC area is listed in Table 2 1. These emissions represent typical weekday emissions and are reported in tons per day. ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 10 Table 2 1: Estimated NOx and VOC emissions NOx Emissions VOC Emissions Source 2000 2007 2000 2007 Point 397.44 62.33 60.94 62.97 Area 4.82 5.07 70.82 73.86 Nonroad 39.27 37.32 30.42 25.16 Mobile 147.35 101.97 81.94 62.22 Biogenic 2.20 2.20 446.00 446.00 Total Emissions 591.08 208.89 690.13 670.21 The total predicted NOx emissions for the EAC area decreased by 64% from 591 tons per day ( TPD) in 2000 to 209 TPD in 2007. The total predicted VOC emissions for the EAC area decreased by approximately 3%, from 690 TPD in 2000 to 670 TPD in 2007.

There are few VOC control measures expected for area and point sources in the Triad area, so they continue to grow. However, since the Triad area contains the largest power plant in North Carolina, the point source NOx emissions decrease significantly due to the NOx SIP Call rule. Additionally, there are significant decreases in both highway and nonroad mobile source VOC and NOx emissions. Thus the overall region has a decrease in both NOx and VOC emissions.

3 Control Measures Several control measures already in place or being implemented over the next few years, will reduce point, highway mobile, and nonroad mobile sources emissions. These control measures were modeled for 2007 and are discussed in the Sections below.

3.1 State Control Measures 3.1.1 Clean Air Bill The 1999 Clean Air Bill expanded the vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance program from 9 counties to 48, phased in between July 1, 2002 through January 1, 2006. Vehicles will be tested using the onboard diagnostic system, an improved method of testing, which will indicate NOx emissions, among other pollutants. The previously used tailpipe test did not measure NOx. The inspection and maintenance program will be phased in from July 1, 2002 through July 1, 2005, in the Triad area. Table 3.1.1 1 lists the phase in dates for the Triad area. ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 11 Table 3.1.1 1 Phase In Dates for the Triad Area County Phase In Date County Phase In Date Alamance January 1, 2004 Randolph January 1, 2004 Davidson July 1, 2003 Rockingham July 1, 2004 Forsyth July 1, 2002 Stokes July 1, 2005 Guilford July 1, 2002 Surry July 1, 2005 3.1.2 NOx SIP Call Rule North Carolina's NOx SIP Call rule will reduce summertime NOx emissions from power plants and other industries by 68% by 2006. The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission adopted rules requiring the reductions in October 2000.

3.1.3 Clean Smokestacks Act In June 2002, the N. C. General Assembly enacted the Clean Smokestacks Act, requiring coal fired power plants to reduce annual NOx emissions by 78% by 2009. These power plants must also reduce annual sulfur dioxide emissions by 49% by 2009 and by 74% in 2013. The Clean Smokestacks Act could potentially reduce NOx emissions beyond the requirements of the NOx SIP Call Rule. One of the first state laws of its kind in the nation, this legislation provides a model for other states in controlling multiple air pollutants from old coal fired power plants.

3.1.4 Open Burning Bans In June 2004, the Environmental Management Commission approved a new rule that would ban open burning during the ozone season on code orange and code red ozone action days for those counties that NCDAQ forecasts ozone.

3.2 Federal Control Measures 3.2.1 Tier 2 Vehicle Standards Federal Tier 2 vehicle standards will require all passenger vehicles in a manufacturer's fleet, including light duty trucks and Sports Utility Vehicles ( SUVs), to meet an average standard of 0.07 grams of NOx per mile. Implementation will begin in 2004, and most vehicles will be phased in by 2007. Tier 2 standards will also cover passenger vehicles over 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight rating ( the larger pickup trucks and SUVs), which are not covered by current Tier 1 regulations. For these vehicles, the standards will be phased in beginning in 2008, with full compliance in 2009. The new standards require vehicles to be 77% to 95% cleaner than those on the road today. Tier 2 rules will also reduce the sulfur content of gasoline to 30 ppm by 2006. Most gasoline currently sold in North Carolina has a sulfur content of about 300 ppm. Sulfur occurs naturally in gasoline but interferes with the operation of catalytic converters in vehicle engines ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 12 resulting in higher NOx emissions. Lower sulfur gasoline is necessary to achieve Tier 2 vehicle emission standards.

3.2.2 Heavy Duty Gasoline and Diesel Highway Vehicles Standards New EPA standards designed to reduce NOx and VOC emissions from heavy duty gasoline and diesel highway vehicles will begin to take effect in 2004. A second phase of standards and testing procedures, beginning in 2007, will reduce particulate matter from heavy duty highway engines, and will also reduce highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 ppm since the sulfur damages emission control devices. The total program is expected to achieve a 90% reduction in PM emissions and a 95% reduction in NOx emissions for these new engines using low sulfur diesel, compared to existing engines using highercontent sulfur diesel.

3.2.3 Large Nonroad Diesel Engines Proposed Rule The EPA has proposed new rules for large nonroad diesel engines, such as those used in construction, agricultural, and industrial equipment, to be phased in between 2008 and 2014. The proposed rules would also reduce the allowable sulfur in nonroad diesel fuel by over 99%. Nonroad diesel fuel currently averages about 3,400 ppm sulfur. The proposed rules limit nonroad diesel sulfur content to 500 ppm in 2007 and 15 ppm in 2010. The combined engine and fuel rules would reduce NOx and particulate matter emissions from large nonroad diesel engines by over 90 %, compared to current nonroad engines using higher content sulfur diesel.

3.2.4 Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines and Recreational Engines Standard The new standard, effective in July 2003, will regulate NOx, HC and CO for groups of previously unregulated nonroad engines. The new standard will apply to all new engines sold in the US and imported after these standards begin and large spark ignition engines ( forklifts and airport ground service equipment), recreational vehicles ( off highway motorcycles and all terrain vehicles), and recreational marine diesel engines. The regulation varies based upon the type of engine or vehicle.

The large spark ignition engines contribute to ozone formation and ambient CO and PM levels in urban areas. Tier 1 of this standard is scheduled for implementation in 2004 and Tier 2 is scheduled to start in 2007. Like the large spark ignition, recreational vehicles contribute to ozone formation and ambient CO and PM levels. They can also be a factor in regional haze and other visibility problems in both state and national parks. For the off highway motorcycles and all terrain vehicles, model year 2006, the new exhaust emissions standard will be phased in by 50% and for model years 2007 and later a 100%. Recreational marine diesel engines over 37 kW are used in yachts, cruisers, and other types of pleasure craft. Recreational marine engines contribute to ozone formation and PM levels, especially in marinas. Depending on the size of the engine, the standard for will begin phase in in 2006. ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 13 When all of the standards are fully implemented, an overall 72% reduction in HC, 80% reduction in NOx, and 56% reduction in CO emissions are expected by 2020. These controls will help reduce ambient concentrations of ozone, CO, and fine PM.

4 MODELING STATUS 4.1 Status of Current Modeling Modeling completed to date include: the base case model evaluation/ validation runs, the current year modeling runs and the 2007 future year modeling runs. The results of these modeling runs can be viewed at the NCDAQ modeling website:

http:// www. cep. unc. edu/ empd/ projects2/ NCDAQ/ PGM/ results/

NCDAQ still needs to complete the 2012 and 2017 future year modeling runs with the updated emission inventories.

4.2 Modeling Results The base case model runs for all three episodes met the validation criteria set by the EPA. The model evaluation statistics can be viewed at the NCDAQ modeling website cited above.

An example ( July 14, 1995) of the 8 hour ozone modeling results for the 2000 current year and 2007 future year are displayed in Figures 4.2 1 and 4.2 2, respectively. One can see a significant decrease in the 8 hour ozone maximums between the current year and the future year. These decrease were the results of the all of the controls listed in Section 3 that are expected to be in place by 2007. The 1996 and 1997 episodes show similar results. Additional modeling results can be viewed on the NCDAQ modeling website cited above.

Figure 4.2 1 2000 current year 8 hour Figure 4.2 2 2007 future year 8 hour ozone maximum for July 14, 1995. ozone maximum for July 14, 1995. ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 14 4.3 Geographic Area Needing Further Controls The current draft version of EPA's attainment test was applied to the modeling results. In very basic and general language the attainment guidance states if the future year design value for a given monitor is below 0.085 parts per million ( ppm) then the monitor passes the attainment test. The future year design value of a monitor is calculated by multiplying the current year design value of a monitor by a relative reduction factor ( Equation 4.3 1).

DVF = DVC x RRF Equation 4.3 1 Where DVF is the Future year Design Value, DVC is the Current year Design Value, and RRF is the relative reduction factor.

The Current year Design Value ( DVC) in the attainment test framework is defined as the higher of: ( a) the average 4th highest value for the 3 yr period used to designate an area " nonattainment", and ( b) the average 4th highest value for the 3 yr period straddling the year represented by the most recent available emissions inventory. In this exercise, the DVC used to designate an area nonattainment will be 2001 2003 and the DVC straddling the year represented by the most recent available emissions inventory is 1999 2001. The higher of those two values is shown in Table 4.3 1 as the DVC. The relative reduction factor ( RRF) is calculated by taking the ratio of the future year modeling 8 hour ozone daily maximum to the current year modeling 8 hour ozone daily maximum " near" the monitor averaged over all of the episode days ( Equations 4.3 2).

RRF = mean future yr. 8 hr daily max " near" monitor " x" Equation 4.3 2 mean current yr. 8 hr daily max " near" monitor " x" ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 15 There are nine ozone monitors in Triad EAC area. These monitors are: Bethany, located in Rockingham County; Cherry Grove, located in Caswell County; McLeansville, located in Guilford County; Sophia, located in Randolph County; Cooleemee, located in Davie County; and Hattie Ave, Pollirosa, Shiloh Church and Union Cross, all located in Forsyth County. The location of these monitors are shown in Figure 4.3 1. ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 16 Figure 4.3 1: Triad Area's Ozone Monitor The results of applying the attainment test showed all monitors in the EAC area in attainment of the 8 hour ozone NAAQS in 2007. These results are displayed in Table 4.3 1 below.

Table 4.3 1 Attainment Test Results for the EAC Area Monitor Name DVC ( ppm) RRF DVF ( ppm) Bethany 0.091 0.84 0.076 Cherry Grove 0.090 0.85 0.076 Cooleemee 0.096 0.88 0.084 Hattie Avenue 0.094 0.86 0.080 McLeansville 0.090 0.85 0.076 Pollirosa 0.082 0.85 0.069 Shiloh Church 0.089 0.86 0.076 Sophia 0.085 0.85 0.072 Union Cross 0.093 0.85 0.079 It appears from these results that the expected controls already in place will result in attainment of the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. ______________________________________________________________________________ Traid EAC June 2004 Progress Report Page 17 4.4 Remaining EAC Schedule Emissions Modeling Schedule 7/ 9/ 2004 Submit 2012 future maintenance emissions 7/ 16/ 2004 Submit 2017 future maintenance emissions AQ Modeling Schedule 7/ 23/ 2004 2012 future maintenance AQ runs done 8/ 2/ 2004 2017 future maintenance AQ runs done General Schedule 7/ 7/ 2004 Preliminary " concept" presented to AQC 7/ 9/ 2004 Share MOBILE inputs w/ DOT and MPOs ( 95,96,97,00,07,12,17)

7/ 30/ 2004 Draft MOBILE documentation to DOT and MPOs 8/ 6/ 2004 EAC modeling complete 8/ 20/ 2004 Comments from DOT/ MPOs due 9/ 1/ 2004 Final documentation complete 9/ 9/ 2004 AQC meeting 10/ 19 22/ 2004 Public Hearings 10/ 29/ 2004 Public comment period ends 12/ 3/ 2004 Submit EAC SIPs 4.5 Anticipated Resource Constraints The resource constraint of most concern is the funding needed to implement some of the local control measures. NCDAQ and the local EAC areas are both looking for grant opportunities to help fund EAC initiatives.


[Federal Register: March 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 47)]
[Notices]
[Page 11010-11011]
[DOCID:fr12mr07-70]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-317-000]

Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas
Tariff

March 5, 2007.
    Take notice that on February 28, 2007, Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C
(Guardian) tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas Tariff,
First Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets attached to the filing,
to become effective on April 1, 2007.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is 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>.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-4351 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: February 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 37)]
[Notices]
[Page 8378]
[DOCID:fr26fe07-84]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Jurisdictional Review and Soliciting Comments, Protests
and/or Motions To Intervene

    Take notice that the following review has been initiated by the
Commission:
    a. Review Type: Jurisdictional Review.
    b. Project No.: 2306-080.
    c. Owner: Great Bay Hydro Corporation.
    d. Name of Project: Clyde River Hydroelectric Project.
    e. Location: The project is located on the Clyde River in Orleans
County, Vermont.
    f. Owner Contact: Mr. William Rodgers, Great Bay Hydro Corporation,
1 New Hampshire Avenue, Suite 125, Portsmouth, NH 03801. (603) 766-
4990.
    g. FERC Contact: Any questions on this notice should be addressed
to Chris Yeakel at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    h. Deadline for filing comments, protests, and/or motions to
intervene: March 20, 2007.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and/or
interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of
paper. Any questions, please contact the Secretary's Office. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov.

    Please include the docket number (Project No. 2306-080) on any
comments, protests, and/or motions to intervene filed.
    i. Description: Great Bay Hydro Corporation filed an application on
January 5, 2006, proposing to amend the license to, among other things,
remove from the license and project boundary, the Seymour and Echo
reservoirs and convey them to the state of Vermont, because they are
not needed for project purposes. Staff will review the jurisdictional
status of the two reservoirs to determine whether they are needed for
project purposes.
    j. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    k. Protests, Comments, and/or Motions To Intervene--Anyone may
submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with
the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210,
.211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests, but only those who file a motion
to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a
party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests and/or motions to
intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for
the particular application.
    l. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents--Any filings must
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTESTS'', and/
or ``MOTIONS TO INTERVENE'', as applicable, and the Docket Numbers of
the particular review.
    m. Agency Comments--Federal, state, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described review. If an agency does not file
comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be
presumed to have no comments.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-3224 Filed 2-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 28, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 18312]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06368]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following Complaints
and Compliance filings in EL Dockets:

    Docket Numbers: EL23-48-000.
    Applicants: Ponderosa Power, LLC v. North Western Corporation.
    Description: Complaint of Ponderosa Power, LLC v. North Western
Corporation.
    Filed Date: 3/20/23.
    Accession Number: 20230320-5128.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/10/23.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER21-378-003.
    Applicants: Mississippi Power Company.
    Description: Compliance filing: Gulf States TFA Order No. 864
Supplemental Further Compliance Filing to be effective 1/27/2020.
    Filed Date: 3/21/23.
    Accession Number: 20230321-5113.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/11/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2462-002; EL22-27-001.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company,
Mississippi Power Company, Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power
Company, Mississippi Power Company.
    Description: Southern Companies submits a Compliance Filing with
respect to a revised version of its Formula Rate Protocols as directed
in January 19, 2023 Commission Order.
    Filed Date: 3/20/23.
    Accession Number: 20230320-5203.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/10/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1427-000.
    Applicants: American Electric Power Service Corporation, Ohio Power
Company, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: American Electric Power
Service Corporation submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: AEP
submits one Facilities Agreements re: ILDSA, SA No. 1336 to be
effective 5/21/2023.
    Filed Date: 3/21/23.
    Accession Number: 20230321-5014.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/11/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1428-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original ISA, Service
Agreement No. 6827; Queue No. AE1-108 to be effective 2/21/2023.
    Filed Date: 3/21/23.
    Accession Number: 20230321-5016.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/11/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1429-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2023-03-21_SA 4015 NSP-
Mayhew Creek Solar FSA (J1445) to be effective 5/21/2023.
    Filed Date: 3/21/23.
    Accession Number: 20230321-5020.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/11/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1430-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to Attachment AE
to Modify the Regulation Mileage Compensation Design to be effective
12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 3/21/23.
    Accession Number: 20230321-5027.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/11/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1431-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to OATT and OA RE
Market Suspension Rules to be effective 6/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 3/21/23.
    Accession Number: 20230321-5031.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/11/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1432-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Cancel High Desert Power Project IFA
(TOT005_SA No. 11) to be effective 5/21/2023.
    Filed Date: 3/21/23.
    Accession Number: 20230321-5044.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/11/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1433-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Constellation FKA Exelon
NITSA (OR DA) SA 943 Rev 5 to be effective 3/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 3/21/23.
    Accession Number: 20230321-5049.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/11/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1434-000.
    Applicants: Sugar Maple Wind, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Shared Facilities Agreement
Between Big Savage, LLC and Sugar Maple Wind, LLC to be effective 5/21/
2023.
    Filed Date: 3/21/23.
    Accession Number: 20230321-5096.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/11/23.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 21, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-06368 Filed 3-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P