[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 114 (Thursday, June 13, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27688-27690]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12490]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2019-0008]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 12 individuals from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate
commerce. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for
various reasons. The exemptions enable these individuals to operate
CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision requirement in
one eye.

DATES: The exemptions were applicable on May 21, 2019. The exemptions
expire on May 21, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>,fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have
questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Insert the docket number, FMCSA-2019-0008, in the keyword box, and
click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket Folder'' button and
choose the document to review. If you do not have access to the
internet, you may view the docket

online by visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on
the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

B. Privacy Act

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

II. Background

    On April 18, 2019, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt of
applications from 12 individuals requesting an exemption from vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and requested comments from the
public (84 FR 16333). The public comment period ended on May 20, 2019,
and ten comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would
achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level
that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at
least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual
acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with
corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen)
in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at
least 70[deg] in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability
to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red,
green, and amber.

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received ten comments in this proceeding. Merlon Cronkite
submitted a comment in support of FMCSA's decision to exempt Bret
Graham from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
    Nicole Neft of the Minnesota Department of Public Safety (MN DPS)
submitted a comment stating that MN DPS holds no objections to the
decision to grant exemptions to Vilas R. Adank, Lance S. Binner, and
Stephen L. Cornish.
    Eric Garman, Evelyn Goris, Maricelis Guzman, Robert Moran, Anthony
Sanchez, and Juana Sanchez submitted comments in support of FMCSA's
decision to grant the exemptions.
    An anonymous individual submitted a comment in support of FMCSA's
decision to grant an exemption to an unspecified individual.
    Andrew Schave submitted a comment stating that individuals applying
for an exemption from the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10)
should not be required to demonstrate three years of experience
operating a CMV in intrastate commerce. FMCSA requires a person to
present verifiable evidence that he/she has driven a commercial vehicle
safely with the vision deficiency for the past three years in order to
qualify for an exemption from the vision standard. This evidence, and
other factors, allow FMCSA to determine if granting an exemption is
likely to achieve a level of safety that is greater than, or equal to,
the level that would be achieved without the exemption. The basis for
this requirement is discussed at length in Section IV of this notice.
    Mr. Schave also suggested that the vision standard of 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10) be changed, altering the requirements for distant visual
acuity. This is outside the scope of the current announcement.

IV. Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for up to five years from the vision standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10)
if the exemption is likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of
safety than would be achieved without the exemption. The exemption
allows applicants to operate CMVs in interstate commerce. FMCSA grants
exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-year period to align with the
maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
    The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is
based on medical reports about the applicants' vision, as well as their
driving records and experience driving with the vision deficiency. The
qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each applicant
were stated and discussed in detail in the April 18, 2019, Federal
Register notice (84 FR 16333) and will not be repeated in this notice.
    FMCSA recognizes that some drivers do not meet the vision
requirement but have adapted their driving to accommodate their
limitation and demonstrated their ability to drive safely. The 12
exemption applicants listed in this notice are in this category. They
are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for various
reasons, including amblyopia, aphakia, central serous
chorioretinopathy, glaucoma, macular scar, optic nerve damage, optic
neuropathy, prosthesis, and retinal scar. In most cases, their eye
conditions were not recently developed. Eight of the applicants were
either born with their vision impairments or have had them since
childhood. The four individuals that sustained their vision conditions
as adults have had it for a range of 5 to 30 years. Although each
applicant has one eye that does not meet the vision requirement in 49
CFR 391.41(b)(10), each has at least 20/40 corrected vision in the
other eye, and, in a doctor's opinion, has sufficient vision to perform
all the tasks necessary to operate a CMV.
    Doctors' opinions are supported by the applicants' possession of a
valid license to operate a CMV. By meeting State licensing
requirements, the applicants demonstrated their ability to operate a
CMV with their limited vision in intrastate commerce, even though their
vision disqualified them from driving in interstate commerce. We
believe that the applicants' intrastate driving experience and history
provide an adequate basis for predicting their ability to drive safely
in interstate commerce. Intrastate driving, like interstate operations,
involves substantial driving on highways on the interstate system and
on other roads built to interstate standards. Moreover, driving in
congested urban areas exposes the driver to more pedestrian and
vehicular traffic than exists on interstate highways. Faster reaction
to traffic and traffic signals is generally required because distances
between them are more compact. These conditions tax visual capacity and
driver response just as intensely as interstate driving conditions.
    The applicants in this notice have driven CMVs with their limited
vision in careers ranging for 3 to 66 years. In the past three years,
one driver was involved in a crash, and one driver was convicted of a
moving violation in a CMV. All the applicants achieved a record of
safety while driving with their vision impairment that demonstrates the
likelihood that they have adapted their driving skills to accommodate
their condition. As the applicants' ample driving histories with their
vision deficiencies are good predictors of future performance, FMCSA
concludes their ability to drive safely can be projected into the
future.
    Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these
applicants from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) is
likely to achieve a level

of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

V. Conditions and Requirements

    The terms and conditions of the exemption are provided to the
applicants in the exemption document and includes the following: (1)
Each driver must be physically examined every year (a) by an
ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and
(b) by a certified Medical Examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) each driver
must provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to
the Medical Examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and
(3) each driver must provide a copy of the annual medical certification
to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or
keep a copy in his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-
employed. The driver must also have a copy of the exemption when
driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local
enforcement official.

VI. Preemption

    During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with
respect to a person operating under the exemption.

VII. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 12 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the vision requirement, 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above:

Vilas R. Adank (MN)
Lance S. Binner (MN)
Jody E. Bondi (AZ)
Stephen L. Cornish (MN)
Dale A. Dodson (KS)
Jorge Estol (FL)
Bret S. Graham (ME)
Daniel W. Hodge (TN)
Russell P. Kosinko (PA)
Joe M. Perez (TX)
Samuel Sanchez (NY)
Curtis M. Tharpe (VA)

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption
will be valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked
earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following
occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of
the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of
safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation
of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives
of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.

    Issued on: June 7, 2019.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-12490 Filed 6-12-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 62 (Monday, April 1, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 12304]
[FR Doc No: 2019-06178]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-85417; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2019-02]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change Relating to the Listing and Trading of the Shares of the
ProShares UltraPro 3x Natural Gas ETF and ProShares UltraPro 3x Short
Natural Gas ETF Under NYSE Arca Rule 8.200-E

March 26, 2019.
    On January 28, 2019, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to list and trade
shares of the ProShares UltraPro 3x Natural Gas ETF and ProShares
UltraPro 3x Short Natural Gas ETF under NYSE Arca Rule 8.200-E. The
proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register
on February 15, 2019.\3\ The Commission has received no comment letters
on the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85088 (February 11,
2019), 84 FR 4573.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that within 45 days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding, or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change
is April 1, 2019. The Commission is extending this 45-day time period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds it appropriate to designate a longer period
within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that it has
sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change. Accordingly, the
Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\5\ designates May
16, 2019 as the date by which the Commission shall either approve or
disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NYSEArca-2019-02).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.
    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-06178 Filed 3-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 115 (Friday, June 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 27743]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12492]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

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

Extension:
    Rule 15c2-5, SEC File No. 270-195 ; OMB Control No. 3235-0198.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 15c2-5 (17 CFR 240.15c2-
5) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.)
(``Exchange Act''). The Commission plans to submit this existing
collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget
(``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Rule 15c2-5 prohibits a broker-dealer from arranging or extending
certain loans to persons in connection with the offer or sale of
securities unless, before any element of the transaction is entered
into, the broker-dealer: (1) Delivers to the person a written statement
containing the exact nature and extent of the person's obligations
under the loan arrangement; the risks and disadvantages of the loan
arrangement; and all commissions, discounts, and other remuneration
received and to be received in connection with the transaction by the
broker-dealer or certain related persons (unless the person receives
certain materials from the lender or broker-dealer which contain the
required information); and (2) obtains from the person information on
the person's financial situation and needs, reasonably determines that
the transaction is suitable for the person, and retains on file and
makes available to the person on request a written statement setting
forth the broker-dealer's basis for determining that the transaction
was suitable. The collection of information required by Rule 15c2-5 is
necessary to execute the Commission's mandate under the Exchange Act to
prevent fraudulent, manipulative, and deceptive acts and practices by
broker-dealers.
    The Commission estimates that there are approximately 50
respondents that require an aggregate total of 600 hours to comply with
Rule 15c2-5.\1\ Each of these approximately 50 registered broker-
dealers makes an estimated six annual responses, for an aggregate total
of 300 responses per year.\2\ Each response takes approximately two
hours to complete. Thus, the total compliance burden per year is 600
burden hours.\3\ The approximate internal compliance cost per hour is
$57.00 for clerical labor,\4\ resulting in a total internal compliance
cost of $34,200.\5\ These reflect internal labor costs; there are no
external labor, capital, or start-up costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 50 respondents x 6 responses per year x 2 hours per response
= 600 hours per year.
    \2\ 50 respondents x 6 responses per year = 300 responses per
year.
    \3\ 300 responses per year x 2 hours per response = 600 hours
per year.
    \4\ Cost per hour for a clerk is from SIFMA's Office Salaries in
the Securities Industry 2013, modified by Commission staff to
account for an 1800-hour work-year and multiplied by 2.93 to account
for bonuses, firm size, employee benefits and overhead.
    \5\ 600 hours per year x $57.00 per hour = $34,200 per year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: Pamela Dyson, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: June 12, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-12492 Filed 6-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 79 (Wednesday, April 24, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24308-24309]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09399]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Notice of Application for Special Permits

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

ACTION: List of Applications for Special Permits.

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

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

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 24, 2013.
    Address Comments to: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Washington, DC 20590.
    Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include
a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.

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

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 16, 2013.
Donald Burger,
Chief, General Approvals an Permits.

                                               New Special Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Nature of special
  Application No.          Docket No.            Applicant       Regulation(s) affected      permits thereof
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15837-N............  .....................  Department of       49 CFR 173.304a........  To authorize the
                                             Defense, Scotts                              transportation in
                                             AFB, IL.                                     commerce of a
                                                                                Submarine High Data
                                                                                Rate (HDR)/Advanced
                                                                                Communications Mast
                                                                                (ACM) configured with
                                                                                a non-DOT
                                                                                specification pressure
                                                                                vessel containing
                                                                                anhydrous ammonia.
                                                                                (modes 1, 2, 3, 4)
15838-N............  .....................  Primo Water,        49 CFR 171.2(k)........  To authorize the
                                             Winston-Salem, NC.                           Corporation
                                                                                transportation in
                                                                                commerce of certain
                                                                                used cylinders that
                                                                                contain CO2, but not
                                                                                necessarily in an
                                                                                amount qualifying as
                                                                                hazardous material.
                                                                                (modes 1, 2, 3, 4)
15839-N............  .....................  Sensors, Inc.,      49 CFR 172.202,          To authorize the
                                             Saline, MI.         172.301, 172.400 and     discharge of a
                                                                 177.834(h).              Division 2.1 material
                                                                                from an authorized DOT
                                                                                specification cylinder
                                                                                without removing the
                                                                                cylinder from the
                                                                                vehicle on which it is
                                                                                transported. (mode 1)
15847-N............  .....................  Safariland, LLC,    49 CFR 173.4a..........  To authorize the
                                             Jacksonville, FL.                            transportation in
                                                                                commerce of Nitric
                                                                                acid up to 65% as an
                                                                                excepted quantity by
                                                                                cargo aircraft only.
                                                                                (modes 1,4)
15848-N............  .....................  Ambri, Inc. ,       49 CFR 173.222(c)(1)...  To authorize the
                                             Cambridge, MA.                               transportation in
                                                                                commerce of Dangerous
                                                                                Goods in Equipment
                                                                                containing a lithium
                                                                                battery that exceeds
                                                                                the net quantity
                                                                                weight restriction
                                                                                when transported by
                                                                                motor vehicle and rail
                                                                                freight. (modes 1, 2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2013-09399 Filed 4-23-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4909-60-M


[Federal Register: November 2, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 211)]
[Notices]
[Page 66373]
[DOCID:fr02no05-62]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL06-4-000]

Acadia Power Partners, LLC; Cleco Power LLC; Cleco Evangeline
LLC; Perryville Energy Partners, LLC; Notice of Institution of
Proceeding and Refund Effective Date

October 25, 2005.
    On October 21, 2005, the Commission issued an order that instituted
a proceeding in Docket No. EL06-4-000, pursuant to section 206 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA) 16 U.S.C. 824e, to examine the justness and
reasonableness of the Cleco Companies' \1\ market-based rates for the
City of Lafayette Power Authority and the Louisiana Energy and Power
Authority control areas. Acadia Power Partners, LLC, et al., 113 FERC ]
61,073 (2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Cleco Power LLC, Cleco Evangeline LLC, Perryville Energy
Partners, LLC and Acadia Power Partners LLC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL06-4-000, established
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-6034 Filed 11-1-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57154-57158]
[FR Doc No: 2023-17981]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98149; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2023-39]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Change To Amend the Connectivity Fee Schedule
Regarding Power Allocation

August 16, 2023.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on August 3, 2023, NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Connectivity Fee Schedule to
provide an alternative procedure by which the Exchange can allocate
power in the Mahwah Data Center via deposit-guaranteed orders from
Users made within a 90-day ``Ordering Window.'' The proposed rule
change is available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Connectivity Fee Schedule to
provide an alternative procedure by which the Exchange can allocate
power in the Mahwah Data Center (``MDC'') \4\ via deposit-guaranteed
orders from Users made within a 90-day ``Ordering Window.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Through its Fixed Income and Data Services (``FIDS'')
business, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (``ICE'') operates the
MDC. The Exchange and its affiliates NYSE American LLC, NYSE Arca,
Inc., NYSE Chicago, Inc., and NYSE National, Inc. (the ``Affiliate
SROs'') are indirect subsidiaries of ICE. Each of the Exchange's
Affiliate SROs has submitted substantially the same proposed rule
change to propose the changes described herein. See SR-NYSE-2023-29,
SR-NYSEARCA-2023-53, SR-NYSECHX-2023-16, and SR-NYSENAT-2023-16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    Shortly after the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Exchange
began experiencing unprecedented User \5\ demand for cabinets and power
at the MDC. In order to manage its inventory, in late 2020, the
Exchange filed to create purchasing limits and a waitlist for cabinet
orders.\6\ In early 2021, the

Exchange filed to create additional purchasing limits and a waitlist
for orders for additional power in the MDC.\7\ Pursuant to the terms of
those filings, a Combined Waitlist is currently in place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For purposes of the Exchange's colocation services, a
``User'' means any market participant that requests to receive
colocation services directly from the Exchange. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 76009 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR 60213
(October 5, 2015) (SR-NYSEMKT-2015-67). As specified in the
Connectivity Fee Schedule, a User that incurs colocation fees for a
particular colocation service pursuant thereto would not be subject
to colocation fees for the same colocation service charged by the
Affiliate SROs.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90732 (December 18,
2020), 85 FR 84443 (December 28, 2020) (SR-NYSE-2020-73, SR-
NYSEAMER-2020-66, SR-NYSEArca-2020-82, SR-NYSECHX-2020-26, SR-
NYSENAT-2020-28,) (establishing the procedures in current Colocation
Note 6(a) and 7(a)).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91515 (April 8,
2021), 86 FR 19674 (April 14, 2021) (SR-NYSE-2021-12, SR-NYSEAMER-
2021-08, SR-NYSEArca-2021-11, SR-NYSECHX-2021-02, SR-NYSENAT-2021-
03) (establishing the procedures in current Colocation Note 6(b) and
7(b)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2021 and 2022, the Exchange expanded the amount of space and
power available in the MDC by opening a new colocation hall (i.e., Hall
4), yet User demand for additional power continues to climb. Currently,
the waitlist includes 27 Users collectively requesting in excess of an
additional 700 kilowatts (``kW'') of power. That number, however, may
be a mere fraction of Users' true demand for additional power at the
MDC, since, due to the existing waitlist procedures, the Exchange may
not accept orders for more than 32 kW of power, and a User and its
Affiliates \8\ may have only one order on the waitlist at a time. Of
the 27 Users on the current waitlist, many have mentioned that they are
actually interested in purchasing much more than 32 kW of power, with
several claiming that they are seeking additional power of several
hundred kilowatts.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ An ``Affiliate'' of a User is defined as ``any other User or
Hosted Customer that is under 50% or greater common ownership or
control of the first User.'' Connectivity Fee Schedule, at 1.
    \9\ Such demand for increased power is not unique to the MDC.
Customers have told the Exchange that available power is in short
supply at several other data centers as well, including the Equinex-
owned data center in Secaucus, New Jersey, the Equinex-owned data
center in Carteret, New Jersey, and the Digital Realty-owned data
center at Cermak, Illinois. Since none of those data centers is
operated by an exchange or regulated by the Commission, the
operators of those data centers are free to ask customers to
indicate their interest in future build-outs by submitting orders
guaranteed by deposits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ICE is currently expanding the amount of colocation space and power
available at the MDC. ICE is already developing a new colocation hall
(i.e., Hall 5) to deliver power that would satisfy all orders currently
on the waitlist with some extra power remaining.
    ICE proposes this rule change to address two issues posed by the
current situation. First, while the development of Hall 5 is underway,
ICE must also evaluate whether customer demand would support additional
expansion projects to provide further power. ICE must anticipate future
demand now because each colocation expansion project is a significant
capital project requiring long lead times, especially given current
supply-chain constraints on equipment, and substantial up-front
investment. It may be possible for ICE to leverage certain efficiencies
and economies of scale by planning for future expansion now.
    Yet ICE currently lacks any real indication of customers' true
demands. As noted above, the current waitlist of 700 kW may represent a
mere fraction of Users' true power requirements, since waitlist orders
are limited to one order of 32 kW per User. On the one hand, ICE does
not know whether the extra power that will be provided in Hall 5 will
be enough to meet Users' needs. On the other hand, ICE cannot justify
the investment of time and expense that it would take to create
additional colocation space based on only casual indications of
interest from customers. Without firm, guaranteed commitments from
Users to purchase the power if it is made available, ICE runs the risk
of underestimating or overestimating Users' true demand for power and
faces the possibility of undersupplying or oversupplying space and
power.
    Second, the existing procedures in the Connectivity Fee Schedule
are not well-tailored to allocating large amounts of power that become
available all at once, such as when a new colocation hall opens. Under
the existing procedures, if less than 350 kW of unallocated power is
available, the Purchasing Limits in Colocation Note 6 restrict all
orders to 32 kW--but any time more than 350 kW of unallocated power is
available, Users can place unlimited orders that the Exchange must
allocate on a first-come, first-served basis. Regarding Hall 5, the
Exchange anticipates large amounts of unallocated power becoming
available at several intervals. This could create a race condition in
which the largest Users place early orders for many hundreds of
kilowatts of power, effectively shutting out other customers with more
modest power needs. The Exchange therefore believes that it needs a
different procedure when allocating substantial amounts of power at one
time due to a hall expansion or other similar expansion of available
power.
Proposed ``Ordering Window'' Procedure
    The Exchange proposes to solve these issues by providing a
temporary procedure to permit the Exchange to accept unlimited,
deposit-guaranteed orders from Users for a period of 90 days (the
``Ordering Window''). The Colocation Notes in the Connectivity Fee
Schedule would be amended accordingly.
    Based on the total power ordered by Users during the Ordering
Window, ICE would gain insight into whether further expansion beyond
Hall 5 is likely to be required in the future. Requiring Users to
submit deposits with their orders during this Ordering Window would
encourage Users to carefully assess their true power needs and would
protect against Users ordering more power than they actually intend to
purchase. After the Ordering Window closes, the Exchange would allocate
power to Users according to terms described below, which would ensure
that every User submitting an order would receive at least some power
and no Users would be shut out of the allocation. Following the
Ordering Window, the existing purchasing limits and waitlist procedures
in Colocation Notes 6 and 7 would then resume.
    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend the Connectivity Fee
Schedule to add new Colocation Note 8, entitled ``Ordering Window.''
    Paragraph (a) of Colocation Note 8 would provide that the Exchange
may announce, by customer notice, a 90-day Ordering Window during which
the Exchange may accept orders and deposits pursuant to the terms
below. Paragraph (a) would specify that if the Exchange announces an
Ordering Window while the Cabinet and Power Purchasing Limits in
Colocation Note 6 and/or the Cabinet and Combined Waitlist provisions
in Colocation Note 7 are in effect, the terms of the Ordering Window as
set out in Colocation Note 8 would temporarily supersede those
terms.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ During the Ordering Window, any orders submitted by Users
must meet the requirements of Colocation Note 8. The Exchange would
not accept new orders to the waitlist established under Colocation
Note 7 while the Ordering Window is open.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraph (b) of Colocation Note 8 would specify the procedures for
placing orders and paying deposits during the Ordering Window.
Subparagraph (1) would provide that during the Ordering Window, Users
may submit orders for their anticipated power needs, subject to the
following. First, a User and its Affiliates, if any, may finalize only
one order for power during the Ordering Window. Second, the provision
of Colocation Note 7 that prohibits the Exchange from accepting orders
for more than four dedicated cabinets and/or 32 kW of power would not
apply. Third, a User may submit an order during the Ordering Window
even if it already has an order pending on a waitlist pursuant to
Colocation Note 7.
    Subparagraph (2) of paragraph (b) would provide that orders
submitted during the Ordering Window are subject to deposits equal to
two months' worth

of the monthly recurring costs of the amount of new power ordered.\11\
The subparagraph would further provide that a User's order would be
finalized when the User's signed order form and deposit are received by
the Exchange, and that orders that are not finalized before the
Ordering Window closes will be considered void. Subparagraph (2) of
paragraph (b) would further provide that the deposit would be applied
to the User's first and subsequent months' invoices after the power is
delivered until the deposit is depleted. If the User withdraws its
order during the Ordering Window, the deposit would be returned.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For instance, the required deposit would be calculated as
the number of kilowatts ordered by the User in its Ordering Window
order, multiplied by the appropriate ``Per kW Monthly Fee'' as
indicated in the Connectivity Fee Schedule. The Per kW Monthly Fee
is a factor of the total number of kilowatts allocated to all of a
User's dedicated cabinets and varies based on the total kilowatts
allocated to a User.
    \12\ In the event that a User wishes to reduce an order that it
placed during the Ordering Window, its deposit would not be reduced
or returned, but rather would be applied against the User's first
and subsequent months' invoices after the power is delivered until
the deposit is depleted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subparagraph (3) of paragraph (b) would provide that a User may
modify its order during the Ordering Window, but such modification
would not be finalized until the User's signed modified order form and
any additional deposit are received by the Exchange.
    Paragraph (c) of Colocation Note 8 would specify the Exchange's
procedure for allocating available power after the Ordering Window
ends. After determining the total amount of power available to
allocate, the Exchange would allocate the available power as follows.
In Step 1, per subparagraph (1) of paragraph (c), the Exchange would
allocate power to fill any orders on any waitlist in effect pursuant to
Colocation Note 7 (e.g., the current waitlist of 32 kW orders totaling
700 kW).
    In Step 2, per subparagraph (2) of paragraph (c), the Exchange
would allocate up to 32 kW of power to each User that finalized an
order during the Ordering Window, subject to the following. If
sufficient power is available, the Exchange would allocate 32 kW of
power to each User, except that orders for less than 32 kW would be
filled only up to the number of kilowatts actually ordered. If
sufficient power is not available to allocate 32 kW of power to each
User, the Exchange would allocate the available power equally among all
Users (rounded to a whole number of kilowatts), except that no User
would be allocated more kilowatts than it actually ordered. If no power
remains to be allocated after Step 2, all orders finalized during the
Ordering Window would be considered to be completed.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ To illustrate, if a User finalized an order for 100 kW
during the Ordering Window and was allocated 32 kW of power during
Step 2 and no further power remained to be allocated after Step 2,
the User's order would be considered completed. The residual 68 kW
ordered would not be transferred to a waitlist. The User would be
free to submit a new order for additional power after the Ordering
Window (subject to the Purchasing Limits, if then in effect).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Step 3, per subparagraph (3) of paragraph (c), if any power
remains to be allocated after Step 2, the Exchange would allocate power
to any orders that were not completely filled during Step 2, as
follows. If sufficient power is available, the Exchange would allocate
power to completely fill all remaining orders finalized during the
Ordering Window. If sufficient power is not available to completely
fill all such orders, the Exchange would allocate power to fill an
identical percentage of each remaining order (rounded to a whole number
of kilowatts). All such orders would then be considered completed.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ To illustrate, if a User finalized an order for 100 kW
during the Ordering Window and was allocated a total of 90 kW of
power in Steps 2 and 3, the order would be considered completed. The
residual 10 kW ordered would not be transferred to a waitlist. The
User would be free to submit a new order for additional power after
the Ordering Window (subject to the Purchasing Limits, if then in
effect).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraph (d) of Colocation Note 8 would specify that any orders
received by the Exchange after the end of the Ordering Window would not
be included in the allocation process described in Colocation Note 8.
Such orders would be subject to the terms of Colocation Notes 6 and 7.
Application and Impact of the Proposed Changes
    The Exchange currently anticipates invoking the proposed Ordering
Window procedure to assist in determining Users' power needs and to
allocate power in Hall 5. The procedure could also be used in the
future each time the Exchange or ICE must assess customer demand for
additional space and power in the MDC or allocate large amounts of
power that become available at one time.
    The Exchange does not propose to eliminate or alter the existing
purchasing limits and waitlist procedures in Colocation Notes 6 and 7.
Rather, those procedures would be temporarily superseded during the
Ordering Window and would resume immediately after the Ordering Window
ends.
    The Exchange expects that the proposed changes would apply equally
to all types and sizes of market participants. All Users would receive
equal notice of the opening of the Ordering Window; the Ordering Window
dates would be the same for all Users; and each order during the
Ordering Window would be secured with a deposit equal to two months of
the monthly recurring costs of the power ordered during the Ordering
Window.
    The proposed Ordering Window procedure would not disadvantage Users
on the current waitlist pursuant to Colocation Note 7, since power
would be allocated to those orders first under the Ordering Window
procedure.
    Smaller Users with more modest power needs would not be
disadvantaged by the proposed changes. In Step 2, each User that
finalized an order during the Ordering Window would be allocated up to
32 kW of power (subject to sufficient power being available) before any
User's order for more than 32 kW would be filled. This would ensure
that all Users that participate in the Ordering Window would receive at
least some power and no Users would be shut out of the allocation. In
addition, because the deposit is proportional to the size of the order,
and not a fixed amount, smaller Users would not be disproportionately
affected by the deposit requirement.
    The proposed changes are not otherwise intended to address any
other issues relating to colocation services and/or related fees, and
the Exchange is not aware of any problems that Users would have in
complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b) of the Act,\15\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\16\ in particular, because it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest
and because it is not designed to permit unfair

discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change is designed to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system by creating an alternative procedure by which the Exchange can
allocate power in the MDC. The current procedures provide for only two
allocation methods: orders that must be limited to 32 kW when the
Purchasing Limits are in effect, and unlimited orders that the Exchange
must fill on a first-come, first-served basis when the Purchasing
Limits are not in effect. Neither of those current procedures gives the
Exchange a way to obtain accurate information from Users about their
actual and anticipated power needs--information that the Exchange
requires in order to properly plan for future hall expansions at the
MDC. The current procedures are not well-tailored to allocating large
amounts of power that become available all at once, such as when a new
colocation hall opens. When a large amount of power becomes available
at one time, such as through a hall expansion, the current procedures
could create a race condition in which the largest Users place early
orders for many hundreds of kilowatts of power that the Exchange must
fill on a first-come, first-served basis, effectively shutting out
other customers with more modest power needs. In contrast, the proposed
alternative procedure would remove impediments and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system by
permitting the Exchange to allocate up to 32 kW of power (subject to
sufficient power being available) to each User before any User's order
for more than 32 kW would be filled. This would ensure that each User
submitting a finalized order during the Ordering Window would be
guaranteed to receive at least some power and no Users would be shut
out of the allocation.
    The proposed requirement that orders submitted during the Ordering
Window be guaranteed by a deposit is also designed to remove
impediments and to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system. The current procedures give the Exchange no
way to accurately measure User demand for additional power. The
existing waitlist is no indication of Users' actual demand, since
waitlist orders are capped at 32 kW. Users' comments that they are
interested in purchasing hundreds more kilowatts of power are mere
casual mentions, which, in the Exchange's experience, Users sometimes
walk back when the power actually becomes available. Without firm,
guaranteed commitments from Users to purchase the power if it is made
available, the Exchange runs the risk of underestimating or
overestimating Users' true demand for power. The proposed deposit
requirement would address these issues by discouraging Users from
submitting orders for more power than they actually intend to purchase
and would indicate the true amount of additional power that each User
would agree to purchase if it were made available. The proposed deposit
requirement of two months' worth of the monthly recurring costs of the
amount of new power ordered during the Ordering Window is reasonable
because, on the one hand, it is not so onerous as to dissuade Users
from submitting orders, and, on the other hand, it is not so trivial
that it would fail to deter Users from submitting exaggerated
orders.\17\ The Exchange requires market participants to submit
deposits in other contexts, and as such, the deposit requirement here
would not be novel.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ To illustrate, for a large User ordering an additional 300
kW of power, the deposit required would be $540,000 (i.e., two times
the monthly recurring cost of $270,000), while a smaller User
ordering an additional 32 kW of power would pay an estimated deposit
of $60,000 (i.e., two times the monthly recurring cost of $30,000),
depending on how much power it already had at the MDC.
    \18\ For example, since 2012, the Exchange has required
prospective issuers to pay a $25,000 initial application fee as part
of the process for listing a new security on the exchange. This fee
functions as a deposit that is credited toward the issuer's listing
fees after it is listed on the exchange. The deposit functions as
``a disincentive for impractical applications by issuers.'' The
deposit is forfeited if the issuer does not ultimately list on the
exchange. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68470 (December
19, 20212), 77 FR 76116 at 76117 (December 26, 2012) (SR-NYSE-2012-
68).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposed procedure, if a User wishes to reduce an order
that it placed during the Ordering Window, its deposit would not be
reduced or returned, but rather would be applied against the User's
first and subsequent months' invoices after the power is delivered
until the deposit is completely depleted. The Exchange believes that
this would remove impediments and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market system because it would ensure that a
User would be reimbursed for all of its deposit even if it reduces its
order after the Ordering Window closes. This would remove any incentive
a User otherwise might have to understate its needs for power out of a
concern that it would not be reimbursed for the full amount of its
deposit.
    The proposed rule change would protect investors and the public
interest in that it would provide the Exchange with accurate insight
into Users' true power requirements. It is in the public interest for
the Exchange to take User demand into account and to make reasoned,
informed decisions about whether and how to expand the MDC.
    The proposed rule change is not designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. The
proposed changes would apply equally to all types and sizes of market
participants. All Users would receive equal notice of the opening of
the Ordering Window; the Ordering Window dates would be the same for
all Users; and each order during the Ordering Window would be secured
with a deposit equal to two months of the monthly recurring costs of
the power ordered. Smaller Users with more modest power needs would not
be disadvantaged by the proposed changes. In Step 2, each User that
finalized an order during the Ordering Window would be allocated up to
32 kW of power (subject to sufficient power being available) before any
User's order for more than 32 kW would be filled. This would ensure
that all Users that participate in the Ordering Window would receive at
least some power and no Users would be shut out of the allocation. In
addition, because the deposit is proportional to the size of the order
and not a fixed amount, smaller Users would not be disproportionately
affected by the deposit requirement. Finally, the proposed Ordering
Window procedure would not disadvantage Users on the current waitlist
pursuant to Colocation Note 7, since power would be allocated to those
orders first under the Ordering Window procedure.
    For all these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\19\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would not place
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change would
provide an alternative procedure by which the Exchange can allocate
power in the MDC that both provides the Exchange with reliable
information about Users' true power needs and allows all Users

that submit deposit-guaranteed orders during the Ordering Window to be
assured of receiving at least some additional power. The Exchange does
not expect the proposed rule change to impact intra-market or
intermarket competition between exchanges, Users, or any other market
participants.

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

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

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) by order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-NYSEAMER-2023-39 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-NYSEAMER-2023-39. 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 (https://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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number SR-NYSEAMER-2023-39 and should
be submitted on or before September 12, 2023.

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

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

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-17981 Filed 8-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 160 (Wednesday, August 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 50347]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20414]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75697; File No. SR-FINRA-2015-020]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for
Commission Action on a Proposed Rule Change To Expand FINRA's
Alternative Trading System (``ATS'') Transparency Initiative To Publish
OTC Equity Volume Executed Outside ATSs

August 13, 2015.
    On June 23, 2015, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to expand FINRA's alternative trading system
transparency initiative to publish the remaining equity volume executed
over-the-counter by FINRA members, including, among other trading
activity, non-ATS electronic trading systems and internalized trades.
The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on July 9, 2015.\3\ The Commission received two comments on
the proposal.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75356 (July 2,
2015), 80 FR 39463 (July 9, 2015) (``Notice'').
    \4\ See letter from Kerry Baker Relf, Head of Content
Acquisition and Rights Management, Thomson Reuters to Brent J.
Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated July 20, 2015 and letter from
Theodore R. Lazo, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel,
Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, to Brent J.
Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated July 30, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \5\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day for this filing is August 23, 2015. The Commission is
extending this 45-day time period. The Commission finds that it is
appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on
the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the
proposed rule change, comments received, and any response to comments
submitted by FINRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\6\ designates October 7, 2015, as the date by which the Commission
shall approve, disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine
whether to disapprove the proposed rule change (File Number SR-FINRA-
2015-020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-20414 Filed 8-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 20, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28536-28538]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13125]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-1247; Product Identifier 2017-NM-085-AD; Amendment
39-19316; AD 2018-13-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-100-1A10 airplanes. This AD was prompted by
a report indicating that certain lanyards for the passenger oxygen
masks located in the airplane's entry area are too long. This AD
requires replacement of certain oxygen mask lanyards with shorter
lanyards. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: This AD is effective July 25, 2018.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of July 25,
2018.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 514-855-
7401; email: [email protected]; internet: http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this referenced service information at
the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1247.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1247; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600
Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc.,
Model BD-100-1A10 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register
on January 17, 2018 (83 FR 2373) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted
by a report indicating that certain lanyards for the passenger oxygen
masks located in the airplane's entry area are too long. The NPRM
proposed to require replacement of certain oxygen mask lanyards with
shorter lanyards. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct lanyards
that are too long, which might result in difficulties starting the flow
of oxygen in an emergency.
    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2017-22, dated June 23,
2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for
certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-100-1A10 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Bombardier, Inc., has discovered that the entry area passenger
oxygen mask lanyards are too long. Upon deployment during an
emergency, this may result in difficulties to start the oxygen flow
for tall individuals. This [Canadian] AD mandates the replacement of
the existing entry area passenger oxygen mask lanyards with shorter
ones for proper operation.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1247.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Match Compliance Time in the Service Information

    Bombardier noted that the compliance time in paragraph (g) of the
proposed AD was ``Within 36 months after the effective date of this
AD,'' whereas Bombardier Service Bulletin 100-35-08, dated April 11,
2017, includes a compliance time of within ``36 months from this
Service Bulletin release date (Basic Issue)''. We infer that the
commenter is requesting that the compliance time in paragraph (g) of
the proposed AD be changed to match what is in the service information.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. In developing an
appropriate compliance time for this AD, we considered the degree of
urgency associated with addressing the unsafe condition and the
manufacturer's recommendation for an appropriate compliance time, as
well as the time required for the rulemaking process. In consideration
of these factors, we find that the compliance time, as proposed,
represents an appropriate interval in which to replace the affected
oxygen mask lanyards, while still maintaining an adequate level of
safety. Operators are always permitted to accomplish the requirements
of an AD at a time earlier than the specified compliance time. We have
not changed this AD regarding this issue.

Request To Correct Typographical Error

    Bombardier requested that a part number in paragraph (g) of the
proposed AD be corrected. Paragraph (g) of the proposed AD specified
the replacement of lanyards having a certain part number with new
lanyards having part number P/N 289-65-10. The correct part number for
the new lanyards is P/N 289-165-10.
    We agree with the commenter's request and have revised paragraph
(g) of this AD to include the correct part number for the new lanyards,
P/N 289-165-10, which is specified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 100-
35-08, dated April 11, 2017.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and

     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin 100-35-08, dated April 11,
2017. This service information describes procedures for replacing the
lanyards in the passenger oxygen masks located in the passenger entry
area. This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 187 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85.............................           (\1\)              $85          $15,895
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We have received no definitive data that will enable us to provide cost estimates for the required parts.

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all available costs in our
cost estimate.

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to
the Director of the System Oversight Division.

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.

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 airworthiness
directive (AD):

2018-13-04 Bombardier, Inc. Amendment 39-19316; Docket No. FAA-2017-
1247; Product Identifier 2017-NM-085-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective July 25, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-100-1A10
airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 20003
through 20424 inclusive and 20426 through 20500 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 35, Oxygen.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating that certain
lanyards for the passenger oxygen masks located in the airplane's
entry area are too long. The length of the oxygen mask lanyard might
cause the safety pin tethered to the opposite end of the lanyard to
remain engaged in the oxygen flow mechanism when the mask is pulled
to the passenger's face. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct lanyards that are too long, which might result in
difficulties starting the flow of oxygen in an emergency.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Lanyard Replacement

    Within 36 months after the effective date of this AD: For any
entry area passenger oxygen mask dispensing unit (POMDU) having part
number (P/N) 833-830-01, replace the lanyards in the POMDU with new
lanyards having P/N 289-165-10, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 100-35-
08, dated April 11, 2017.

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO

Branch, 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 manager of the certification office,
send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational Safety,
FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury,
NY 11590; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. 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.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2017-22, dated June 23, 2017, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2017-1247.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Cesar Gomez,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Section, FAA,
New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 100-35-08, dated April 11, 2017.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 514-
855-7401; email: [email protected]; internet: http://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on June 8, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-13125 Filed 6-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 126 (Friday, June 29, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38799-38801]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16027]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2012-0459; FRL-9695-1]

Draft Toxicological Review of 1,2,3-, 1,2,4-, and 1,3,5-
Trimethylbenzene: In Support of the Summary Information in the
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public comment period and listening session.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing a 60-day public comment period and a public
listening session for the external review draft human health assessment
titled ``Toxicological Review of 1,2,3-, 1,2,4-, and 1,3,5-
Trimethylbenzene: In Support of Summary Information on the Integrated
Risk Information System (IRIS)'' (EPA/635/R-11/012A). The draft
assessment was prepared by the National Center for Environmental
Assessment (NCEA) within the EPA Office of Research and Development
(ORD). EPA is releasing this draft assessment for the purposes of
public comment and peer review. This draft assessment is not final as
described in EPA's information quality guidelines, and it does not
represent and should not be construed to represent Agency policy or
views.
    EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) will convene an expert panel for
independent external peer review of the draft assessment. The EPA SAB
is a body established under the Federal Advisory Committee Act with a
broad mandate to advise the Agency on scientific matters. The public
comment period and the SAB peer review are separate processes that
provide opportunities for all interested parties to comment on the
document. The SAB will schedule one or more public peer review
meetings, which will be announced in the Federal Register at a later
date.
    EPA is also announcing a listening session to be held on Wednesday,
August 1, 2012, during the public comment period. The purpose of the
listening session is to allow all interested parties to present
scientific and technical comments on the draft IRIS health assessment
to EPA and other interested parties attending the listening session.
EPA welcomes the scientific and technical comments that will be
provided to the Agency by the listening session participants. The
comments will be considered by the Agency as it revises the draft
assessment after the independent external peer review.

DATES: The public comment period begins, June 29, 2012, and ends August
28, 2012. Technical comments should be in writing and must be received
by EPA by August 28, 2012.
    The listening session on the draft IRIS health assessment for
1,2,3-, 1,2,4-, and 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene (TMB) will be held on August
1, 2012, beginning at 9 a.m. and ending at 4 p.m., Eastern Time, or
when the last presentation has been completed. If you would like to
make a presentation at the listening session, you should register by
July 25, 2012, following the detailed instructions below under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

ADDRESSES: The draft ``Toxicological Review of 1,2,3-, 1,2,4-, and
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene: In Support of Summary Information on the
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)'' is available primarily via
the Internet on the NCEA home page under the Recent Additions and
Publications menus at http://www.epa.gov/ncea. A limited number of
paper copies are available from the Information Management Team, NCEA;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you request a
paper copy, please provide your name, mailing address, and the document
title.
    The listening session on the draft assessment of TMB will be held
at the EPA offices at Two Potomac Yard (North Building), 7th Floor,
Room 7100, 2733 South Crystal Drive, Arlington, Virginia, 22202. There
are two buildings at Potomac Yard, please be sure you go to Building
Two, the North Building. Please note that to gain entrance to this EPA
building, attendees must register at

the guard's desk in the lobby and present photo identification. The
guard will retain your photo identification and provide you with a
visitor's badge. At the guard's desk, attendees should give the name
Christine Ross and the telephone number,<PHONE_NUMBER>, to the guard on
duty. The guard will contact Ms. Ross who will meet you in the
reception area to escort you to the meeting room. When you leave the
building, please return your visitor's badge to the guard and you will
receive your photo identification.
    A teleconference line will also be available for registered
attendees/speakers. The teleconference number is<PHONE_NUMBER> and the
access code is<PHONE_NUMBER>, followed by the pound sign ().
The teleconference line will be activated at 8:45 a.m., and you will be
asked to identify yourself and your affiliation at the beginning of the
call.
    Information on Services for Individuals with Disabilities: EPA
welcomes public attendance at the TMB Listening Session and will make
every effort to accommodate persons with disabilities. For information
on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact
Christine Ross at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To
request accommodation of a disability, please contact Ms. Ross,
preferably at least 10 days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much
time as possible to process your request.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Information about IRIS

    IRIS is a database that contains potential adverse human health
effects information that may result from chronic (or lifetime) exposure
to specific chemical substances found in the environment. The database
(available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/iris) contains
qualitative and quantitative health effects information for more than
540 chemical substances that may be used to support the first two steps
(hazard identification and dose-response evaluation) of a risk
assessment process. When supported by available data, the database
provides oral reference doses (RfDs) and inhalation reference
concentrations (RfCs) for chronic health effects, and oral slope
factors and inhalation unit risks for carcinogenic effects. Combined
with specific exposure information, IRIS data are used by government
and private entities to help characterize public health risks of
chemical substances in site-specific situations and thereby support
risk management decisions designed to protect public health.

II. How To Register for the Listening Session

    To attend the August 1, 2012, listening session, register by July
25, 2012, by sending an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(subject
line: TMB Listening Session); by calling Christine Ross at 703-347-
8592; or by faxing a registration request to<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please
reference the ``TMB Listening Session'' and include your name, title,
affiliation, sponsoring organization, if any, full address, and contact
information. To present at the listening session, indicate in your
registration that you would like to make oral comments and provide the
length of your presentation. When you register, please indicate if you
will need audio-visual aid (e.g., lap top and slide projector). In
general, each presentation should be no more than 30 minutes. If,
however, there are more requests for presentations than the allotted
time allows, then the time limit for each presentation will be
adjusted. A copy of the agenda for the listening session will be
available at the meeting. If no speakers have registered by July 25,
2012, the listening session will be cancelled and EPA will notify those
registered of the cancellation.

III. How To Submit Technical Comments to the Docket at http://www.regulations.gov

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2012-
0459 by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket
(Mail Code: 28221T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460. The phone number is 202-
566-1752.
     Hand Delivery: The OEI Docket is located in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center's Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Deliveries are only accepted during the
docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information. If you provide comments by
mail or hand delivery, please submit one unbound original with pages
numbered consecutively, and three copies of the comments. For
attachments, provide an index, number pages consecutively with the
comments, and submit an unbound original and three copies.
    Instructions for submitting comments to the EPA Docket: Direct your
comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2012-0459. Please ensure that your
comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments
received after the closing date will be marked ``late,'' and may only
be considered if time permits. It is EPA's policy to include all
comments it receives in the public docket without change and to make
the comments available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided, unless a comment includes
information claimed to be confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not
submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected
through http://www.regulations.gov or email. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the OEI Docket in the
EPA Headquarters Docket Center.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the federal docket,
contact the Office of Environmental Information Docket; telephone: 202-
566-1752; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For information on the public listening session, please contact
Christine Ross, IRIS Staff, National Center for Environmental
Assessment, (8601P), U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    If you have questions about the document, contact Allen Davis,
National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA); telephone: 919-
541-3789; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: June 12, 2012.
Darrell A. Winner,
Director, National Center for Environmental Assessment.
[FR Doc. 2012-16027 Filed 6-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P