[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 74 (Monday, April 18, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21637-21639]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9256]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0165]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Ford Estate Wedding Fireworks, Lake St. Clair,
Grosse Pointe Shores, MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on
Lake St. Clair, Grosse Pointe Shores, MI. This zone is intended to
restrict vessels from a portion of Lake St. Clair River during the Ford
Estate Wedding Fireworks.

DATES: This rule is effective and enforced, at dusk, from approximately
8:30 p.m. through 9:30 p.m. on June 4, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-0165 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0165 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or e-mail LT Katie Stanko, Prevention Department,
Sector Detroit, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because waiting for a notice and comment
period to run would be impracticable and contrary to the public
interest because it would inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to protect
the public from the hazards associated with maritime fireworks
displays.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest
because it would inhibit the Coast Guard from ensuring the safety of
vessels and the public during the fireworks display.

Background and Purpose

    On June 4, 2011, a private party is holding a land based wedding
that will include fireworks launched from a point on Lake St. Clair.
This temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels
and spectators from hazards associated with that fireworks display.
Such hazards include obstructions to the waterway that may cause marine
casualties, explosive danger of fireworks, debris falling into the
water that may cause death, serious bodily harm or property damage.
Establishing a safety zone to control vessel movement around the
location of the launch platform will help ensure the safety of persons
and property in the vicinity of this event and help minimize the
associated risks.

Discussion of Rule

    A temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of
spectators and vessels during the setup, loading, and launching of the
Ford Estate Wedding Fireworks Display. The fireworks display will occur
between 8:30 p.m. and 9:30 p.m., June 4, 2011.
    The safety zone will encompass all waters on Lake St. Clair within
a 420 foot radius of the fireworks barge launch site located off the
shore of Grosse Pointe Shores, MI at position 42[deg]27'15.06'' N,
082[deg]51'59.01'' W from 8:30 p.m. until 9:30 p.m. on June 4, 2011.
All geographic coordinates are North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
    All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated on-scene patrol
personnel. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Detroit or
his designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his
designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant'' under the
regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS).
    We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action
because we

anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy, will not
interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the budget of
any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel legal or
policy issues. The safety zone around the launch platform will be
relatively small and exist for only a minimal time. Thus, restrictions
on vessel movement within any particular area of Lake St. Clair are
expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions, moreover, vessels may
still transit through the safety zone when permitted by the Captain of
the Port.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners and operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor in this portion of Lake St. Clair between 8:30 p.m.
through 9:30 p.m. on June 4, 2011.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities because vessels can easily transit
around the zone. The Coast Guard will give notice to the public via a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners that the regulation is in effect.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or Tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have Tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of
the Instruction because it involves the establishment of a

temporary safety zone. An environmental analysis checklist and a
categorical exclusion determination will be available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR Part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add section Sec.  165.T09-0165 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0165  Safety zone; Ford Estate Wedding Fireworks, Lake
St. Clair, Grosse Pointe Shores, MI.

    (a) Location. The safety zone will encompass all U.S. navigable
waters on Lake St. Clair within a 420 foot radius of the fireworks
barge launch site located off the shore of Grosse Pointe Shores, MI at
position 42[deg]27'15.06'' N., 082[deg]51'59.01'' W. All geographic
coordinates are North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
    (b) Effective and Enforcement Period. This rule is effective and
will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. (local) through 9:30 p.m. on June 4,
2011.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Section 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring
within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port Detroit, or his designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Detroit or his designated on-
scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port is
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been
designated by the Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The on-
scene representative of the Captain of the Port will be aboard either a
Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The Captain of the Port or
his designated on scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so.
    (5) Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the
safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the
Captain of the Port or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: April 5, 2011.
J.E. Ogden,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. 2011-9256 Filed 4-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: July 26, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 142)]
[Notices]
[Page 43522-43526]
[DOCID:fr26jy10-52]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0133; FRL-9178-3]

Notice of Supplemental Determination for Renewable Fuels Produced
Under the Final RFS2 Program From Canola Oil

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Data Availability (NODA).

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

SUMMARY: On March 26, 2010, the Environmental Protection Agency
published changes to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program as
required by the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007.
EISA increased the volume of renewable fuel required to be blended into
transportation fuel to 36 billion gallons by 2022. Furthermore, the Act
established new eligibility requirements for four types of renewable
fuel, each with their own annual volume mandates. The eligibility
requirements include minimum lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction
thresholds for each type of renewable fuel. EPA conducted lifecycle GHG
analyses for a number of biofuel feedstocks and production pathways as
part of its March 26, 2010 final rule but, as indicated in the final
rule, we did not have time to complete all the planned lifecycle GHG
assessments for several specific renewable fuel pathways. Since the
final rule, we have completed an assessment for an additional renewable
fuel pathway, canola oil biodiesel. This Notice of Data Availability
provides interested parties with information and an opportunity to
comment on our proposed lifecycle analysis of canola oil biodiesel.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 25, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2010-0133, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T,

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington DC 20004. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2010-0133. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the 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_ADDRESS>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 e-mail comment directly to EPA
without going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail 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.
     Docket: 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 Air and Radiation
Docket and Information Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. The 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
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202)
566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doris Wu, Office of Transportation and
Air Quality, Transportation and Climate Division, Environmental
Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Entities potentially affected by this action are those involved
with the production, distribution, and sale of transportation fuels,
including gasoline and diesel fuel or renewable fuels such as ethanol
and biodiesel. Regulated categories include:
    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by the RFS2
program. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
of that could potentially be regulated under the program. To determine
whether your activities would be regulated, you should carefully
examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR part 80, Subpart M. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed in the preceding section.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk
or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
     Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background on Lifecycle GHG Threshold Determinations

A. Methodology

1. Scope of Analysis
    On March 26, 2010, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
published changes to the Renewable Fuel Standard program as required by
the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007. This
rulemaking is commonly referred to as the ``RFS2'' final rule. As part
of the RFS2 final rule we analyzed various categories of biofuels to
determine if the complete lifecycle emissions associated with the
production, distribution, and use of those fuels met minimum lifecycle
greenhouse gas reduction thresholds as specified by EISA (i.e., 60% for
cellulosic biofuel, 50% for biomass-based diesel and advanced biofuel,
and 20% for other renewable fuels). Our final rule had focused our
lifecycle analyses on fuels that were anticipated to contribute
relatively large volumes of renewable fuel by 2022, and thus did not
cover all fuels that either are contributing or could potentially
contribute to the program. In the final RFS2 rule we indicated that we
did not have enough time to complete a lifecycle analysis for several
specific pathways but would do so this year as a supplemental to the
final rule. Since the final rule was issued, we have continued to
examine several additional

pathways not analyzed for the final rule released in March. This Notice
of Data Availability (``NODA'') focuses on our recent modeling of the
canola oil biodiesel pathway. The modeling approach EPA used in this
effort is the same approach used in the final RFS2 rule for lifecycle
analyses of other biofuels. Refer to the RFS2 final rule preamble and
Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for further discussion on our
approach.
2. Models Used
    The proposed analysis EPA has prepared for canola oil biodiesel
uses the same set of models that was used for the final RFS2 rule: the
Forestry and Agricultural Sector Optimization Model (FASOM) developed
by Texas A&M University and others and the Food and Agricultural Policy
and Research Institute international models as maintained by the Center
for Agricultural and Rural Development (FAPRI-CARD) at Iowa State
University. For details on the models used refer to the RFS2 final rule
preamble or Regulatory Impact Analysis. These documents are available
in the docket or online at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/
renewablefuels/regulations.htm. The models require a number of inputs
that are specific to the pathway being analyzed, including projected
yield of feedstock per acre planted, projected fertilizer use, energy
use in feedstock processing and energy use in fuel production. The
docket includes detailed information on model inputs, assumptions,
calculations, and the results of our proposed modeling for canola oil
biodiesel.
3. Scenarios Modeled
    To assess the impacts of an increase in renewable fuel volume from
business-as-usual (what is likely to have occurred without EISA), we
established reference and control cases for the RFS2 final rulemaking
published in March 2010. The reference cases are projections of
renewable fuel volumes without the enactment of EISA. The control cases
are projections of the volumes of renewable fuel that might be used in
the future to comply with the EISA volume mandates. The final rule
reference case volumes were based on the Energy Information
Administration's (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2007 reference case
projections. Our control case volumes were based on our projections of
a feasible set of fuel types and feedstocks. Although actual volumes
could be different, we believe the projections made for our control
cases allow for a reasonable assessment of the potential GHG impacts
per gallon of fuel for volumes of renewable fuel likely resulting from
implementation of the RFS2 program.
    For a number of fuel pathways such as ethanol from corn starch or
biodiesel from soybean oil our reference case projected the business as
usual volumes from EIA projections for that pathway which we were then
able to compare to the control case volumes estimated to increase due
to the EISA mandates. This incremental volume increase in renewable
fuel volume was used to calculate lifecycle emissions per gallon or
million British Thermal Units (mmBTU) of renewable fuel. Since our
analysis normalizes the greenhouse gas emissions impacts on a per BTU
basis, the effect of using different incremental volumes in our
calculations is minimized.
    We based our control case projection of 200 million gallons of
biodiesel from canola per year in 2022 on a few factors, including
historical volumes, potential feedstock availability and competitive
uses (e.g., for food or export instead of for domestic fuel), potential
increases in crop acreage, and potential increases in crop and
conversion yields. Our assessment is described further in the inputs
and assumptions document that is available through the docket. Based in
part on consultation with experts at the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) and industry representatives, we believe that these
volumes are realistic for the purpose of evaluating the impacts of
producing biodiesel from canola oil. For biodiesel from canola oil, we
do not have reference case predictions of business as usual volumes
from EIA like we did for other fuels. We modeled the impact of an
increase of 200 million gallons of biodiesel from canola per year by
2022 compared to the final RFS2 control case (from the March 2010
analysis) which assumed no biodiesel from canola oil. While we
recognize that some canola oil has historically been used to make
biodiesel for domestic use, this range of production (zero to 200
million gallons) covers the range of production likely by 2022. We
believe that this modeled change in canola oil production for biodiesel
provides an assessment of lifecycle GHG emissions per gallon of canola
biodiesel which reasonably represents the per gallon impact over the
likely range of canola biodiesel volumes expected through 2022.

B. Results of Lifecycle Analysis for Biodiesel From Canola Oil

    As with other EPA analyses of fuel pathways with a significant land
use impact, the proposed analysis for canola oil biodiesel includes a
best estimate as well as a range of possible lifecycle greenhouse gas
emission results based on formal uncertainty analysis conducted by the
Agency.
    EPA believes that its analysis of canola oil biodiesel represents
the most up to date information currently available on the GHG
emissions associated with each element of the full fuel lifecycle.
Notably the analysis includes an assessment of uncertainty for key
parameters. The graph included in the discussion below depicts the
results of our analysis (including the uncertainty in the modeling) for
a typical pathway for canola oil biodiesel.
    We analyzed the lifecycle GHG emission impacts of producing
biodiesel using canola oil as a feedstock assuming the same biodiesel
production facility designs and conversion efficiencies as modeled for
biodiesel produced from soybean oil. Canola oil biodiesel is produced
using the same methods as soybean oil biodiesel, therefore plant
designs are assumed to not significantly differ between these two
feedstocks. Refer to the docket for more details on our key model
inputs and assumptions, e.g., crop yields, biofuel conversion yields,
and agricultural energy use. These inputs and assumptions are based on
our analysis of peer-reviewed literature and reflect our consideration
of recommendations of experts within the canola and biodiesel
industries and those from USDA as well as the experts at Texas A&M and
Iowa State Universities who have designed the FASOM and FAPRI models.
    As was the case for soybean oil biodiesel, production technology
for canola oil biodiesel is mature and we have not projected in our
assessment of canola oil biodiesel any significant improvements in
plant technology; unanticipated energy saving improvements would
further improve GHG performance of the fuel pathway. Additionally,
similar to soybean oil biodiesel production, we assumed that the co-
product glycerin would displace residual oil as a fuel source on an
energy equivalent basis. This is based on the assumption that the
glycerin market would be saturated in 2022 and that glycerin produced
from biodiesel would not displace any additional petroleum glycerin
production. However, the biodiesel glycerin would not be a waste and a
low value use would be to use the glycerin as a fuel source. The fuel
source assumed to be replaced by the glycerin is residual oil.
    Figure II-1 shows the results of our proposed modeling. It shows
the percent difference between lifecycle GHG emissions for the typical
2022 canola oil biodiesel as compared to the

petroleum diesel fuel 2005 baseline. Lifecycle GHG emissions equivalent
to the diesel fuel baseline are represented on the graph by the zero on
the X-axis. The results for canola biodiesel are that the midpoint of
the range of results is a 50% reduction in GHG emissions compared to
the diesel fuel baseline. The 95% confidence interval around that
midpoint results in range of a 20% reduction to a 75% reduction
compared to the diesel fuel 2005 baseline. These results, if finalized,
would justify authorizing the generation of biomass-based diesel RINs
for fuel produced by the canola oil biodiesel pathway modeled, assuming
that the fuel meets the other definitional criteria for renewable fuel
(e.g., produced from renewable biomass, and used to reduce or replace
transportation fuel) specified in EISA.
    The material in the docket includes detailed information on the
assumptions and modeling inputs used. As was the case for analyses of
other crop-based biofuels, EPA projected increases in canola crop yield
based on long term trends. Yield improvement rates recommended by
industry were higher and were based on recent shorter term trends.
While we have not modeled what specific impact a higher crop yield
assumption would have on the resulting lifecycle GHG assessment, higher
projected yields would tend to reduce land use impacts which could
result in some improvement in projected GHG performance of canola
biodiesel. EPA invites comment on all aspects of its proposed modeling
of the canola oil biodiesel pathway, including all assumptions made and
modeling inputs.
    Table II-1 breaks down by stage the lifecycle GHG emissions for
canola oil biodiesel and the 2005 diesel baseline. The biodiesel
production process reflected in this table assumes that natural gas is
used for process energy and accounts for co-product glycerin displacing
residual oil. This table demonstrates the contribution of each stage
and its relative significance. The docket also includes pathway
analyses assuming coal or biomass is used instead of natural gas for
process energy.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26JY10.081

   Table II-1--Lifecycle GHG Emissions for Canola Oil Biodiesel, 2022
                             [kgCO2e/mmBTU]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Canola oil        2005 Diesel
              Fuel type                   biodiesel         baseline
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net Domestic Agriculture (w/o land                   8
 use change)........................
Net International Agriculture (w/o                   0
 land use change)...................
Domestic Land Use Change............                 3
International Land Use Change, Mean          31 (7/61)
 (Low/High).........................
Fuel Production.....................                 3                18
Fuel and Feedstock Transport........                 2                 *
Tailpipe Emissions..................                 1                79
                                     -----------------------------------
    Total Emissions, Mean (Low/High)        48 (25/78)                97
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Emissions included in fuel production stage.

    Refer to the docket for more detailed outputs from our proposed
lifecycle modeling. The docket includes a useful memorandum which
summarizes relevant materials used for the canola biodiesel pathways
analysis. Described in the memorandum, for example, are the input and
assumptions document and detailed results spreadsheets (e.g., foreign
agricultural impacts, foreign agricultural energy use, FASOM and FAPRI
model results) used to generate the results presented above. These
additional materials are also available through the docket.

    Dated: July 13, 2010.
Margo T. Oge,
Director, Office of Transportation & Air Quality.
 [FR Doc. 2010-18227 Filed 7-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Agenda for the May 31, 2006 Call with AASHTO and AMPO on the SAFETEA-LU

Conformity Rulemaking

Introductions

Opportunity for questions on the February 14, 2006 interim SAFETEA-LU
conformity guidance

How EPA is planning to address:

Conformity Redeterminations

Frequency

Lapse Grace Period

Conformity SIPs

Horizons

TCM Substitution

Feedback on our plans

Opportunity to clarify other provisions of the conformity rule

General Plans for the Rulemaking

Major Topics of  Discussion During the May 31, 2006 Call with AASHTO,
AMPO and Their Members on the SAFETEA-LU Conformity Rulemaking

Participants: EPA, FHWA, AASHTO, AMPO, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New
York, Kentucky, Delaware, Maryland, Washington, DC, Virginia, Georgia,
Florida, Texas, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio,
Tennessee, Montana, Alaska, Washington, NYMTC, Syracuse, WASHCOG, ARC,
HGAC, NCTCOG, Fort Collins, DRCOG, MAG, MTC, EWCOG, CTS, Southwest WI
RPC, MSP, SEMCOG, Missoula, Billings, Baltimore, Boise, Portland Metro,
and Salem, OR.

Major Topics of Discussion:

Overview of the transportation conformity-related Clean Air Act
amendments made by SAFETEA-LU

General plans and timeline for the SAFETEA-LU conformity rulemaking

Questions asked by the participants:

Does the rule still allow an MPO six months to make a conformity
determination on their TIP after determining conformity on an updated
plan?

Does EPA intend to amend 40 CFR 93.104(d) to require that project-level
conformity be re-determined if four years elapse between major steps
because plan and TIP updates are now required every four years?

Other than the inability to determine conformity in the out years are
there other reasons to shorten the conformity timeframe?

When will EPA complete the process to delegate concurrence on TCM
substitutions to the Regional Administrators?

Does the lapse grace period apply now?

Is there a fixed percentage of the inventory to be used when determining
if on-road emissions are significant to an area’s pollution problem?

General comments:

EPA should consider adding projects to the exempt project list.

Alternatively, EPA should issue guidance to clarify what types of
projects fall under the categories listed in the rule:

Intersection channelizations?

Incident management under an intelligent transportation system?

Does the hazard elimination program include removing falling rocks?

Does the hazard elimination program include installing traffic signals?


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 110 (Thursday, June 7, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33746-33748]
[FR Doc No: 2012-13832]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0110]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Medical Device
Reporting: Manufacturer, Importer, User Facility, and Distributor
Reporting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by July 9,
2012.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0437.
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Gittleson, Office of
Information Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr.,
PI50-400B, Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Medical Device Reporting: Manufacturer, Importer, User Facility, and
Distributor Reporting--21 CFR Part 803 (OMB Control Number 0910-0437)--
Extension

    Section 519(a)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C
Act) (21 U.S.C. 360i(a)(1)) requires every manufacturer or importer to
report ``whenever the manufacturer or importer receives or otherwise
becomes aware of information that reasonably suggests that one of its
marketed devices: (A) May have caused or contributed to a death or
serious injury, or (B) has malfunctioned and that such device or a
similar device marketed by the manufacturer or importer would be likely
to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if the malfunction
were to recur.''
    Section 519(b)(1)(A) of the FD&C Act requires ``whenever a device
user facility receives or otherwise becomes aware of information that
reasonably suggests that a device has or may have caused or contributed
to the death or serious illness, of a patient of the facility, the
facility shall, as soon as practicable but not later than 10 working
days after becoming aware of the information, report the information to
the Secretary and, if the identity of the manufacturer is known, to the
manufacturer of the device.''
    Section 519(b)(1)(B) of the FD&C Act requires ``whenever a device
user facility receives or otherwise becomes aware of: (i) Information
that reasonably suggests that a device has or may have caused or
contributed to the serious illness of, or serious injury to, a patient
of the facility * * *, shall, as soon as practicable but not later than
10 working days after becoming aware of the information, report the
information to the manufacturer of the device or to the Secretary if
the identity of the manufacturer is not known.''
    Complete, accurate, and timely adverse event information is
necessary for the identification of emerging device problems.
Information from these

reports will be used to evaluate risks associated with medical devices
which will enable FDA to take appropriate regulatory measures in
protection of the public health under section 519 of the FD&C Act. Thus
FDA is requesting approval for these information collection
requirements which are being implemented under part 803 (21 CFR part
803).
    Respondents to this collection of information are businesses or
other for-profit and nonprofit organizations including user facilities,
manufacturers, and importers of medical devices.
    Part 803 requires user facilities to report to the device
manufacturer and to FDA in case of a death, incidents where a medical
device caused or contributed to a death or serious injury.
Additionally, user facilities are required to annually submit the
number and summary of advents reported during the calendar year, using
Form FDA 3419. Manufacturers of medical devices are required to report
to FDA when they become aware of information indicating that one of
their devices may have caused or contributed to death or serious injury
or has malfunctioned in such a way that should the malfunction recur it
would be likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury.
Device importers report deaths and serious injuries to the
manufacturers and FDA. Importers report malfunctions only to the
manufacturers, unless they are unknown, then the reports are sent to
FDA.
    The number of respondents for each CFR section in table 1 of this
document is based upon the number of respondents entered into FDA's
internal databases. FDA estimates, based on its experience and
interaction with the medical device community, that all reporting CFR
sections are expected to take 1 hour to complete, with the exception of
Sec.  803.19. Section 803.19 is expected to take approximately 3 hours
to complete, but is only required for reporting the summarized data
quarterly to FDA. By summarizing events, the total time used to report
for this section is reduced because the respondents do not submit a
full report for each event they report in a quarterly summary report.
    The Agency believes that the majority of manufacturers, user
facilities, and importers have already established written procedures
to document complaints and information to meet the MDR requirements as
part of their internal quality control system. There are an estimated
30,000 medical device distributors. Although they do not submit MDR
reports, they must maintain records of complaints, under Sec.
803.18(d).
    The Agency has estimated that on average 220 user facilities,
importers, and manufacturers would annually be required to establish
new procedures, or revise existing procedures, in order to comply with
this provision.
    Therefore, FDA estimates the one-time burden to respondents for
establishing or revising procedures under Sec.  803.17 to be 2,200
hours (220 respondents x 10 hours). For those entities, a one-time
burden of 10 hours is estimated for establishing written MDR
procedures. The remaining manufacturers, user facilities, and
importers, not required to revise their written procedures to comply
with this provision, are excluded from the burden because the
recordkeeping activities needed to comply with this provision are
considered ``usual and customary'' under 5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2).
    Under Sec.  803.18, 30,000 respondents represent distributors,
importers, and other respondents to this information collection. FDA
estimates that it should take them approximately 1.5 hours to complete
the recordkeeping requirement for this section. Total hours for this
section equal 45,000 hours.
    In the Federal Register of February 14, 2012 (77 FR 8260), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. No comments were received.
    Subsequent to publication of the 60-day notice, FDA performed an
additional inspection of the data and consulted with the MDR program
staff. Per this extra review, FDA has updated the estimated burden
hours to more accurately reflect the burden.

Reporting Requirements

    21 CFR part 803 requires user facilities to report incidents where
a medical device caused or contributed a death or serious injury to the
device manufacturer and to FDA in the case of a death. Manufacturers of
medical devices are required to report to FDA when they become aware of
information indicating that one of their devices may have caused or
contributed to death or serious injury or has malfunctioned in such a
way that, should the malfunction recur, it would be likely to cause or
contribute to a death or serious injury. Device importers report deaths
and serious injuries to the manufacturers and FDA. Importers report
malfunctions only to the manufacturers (see third-party disclosure
burden table), unless the manufacturers are unknown, then the reports
are sent to FDA.
    FDA estimates, based on its experience and interaction with the
medical device community, that all reporting CFR sections are expected
to take 1 hour to complete with the exception of 21 CFR 803.19. Section
803.19 is expected to take approximately 3 hours to complete, but is
only required to report the summarized data quarterly to FDA. By
summarizing events, the total time used to report for this section is
reduced because the respondents do not submit a full report for each
event they report in a quarterly summary report.

Recordkeeping Requirements

    The agency believes that the majority of manufacturers, user
facilities, and importers have already established written procedures
to document complaints and information to meet the MDR requirements as
part of their internal quality control system. There are an estimated
30,000 medical device distributors. Although they do not submit MDR
reports, they must maintain records of complaints under 21 CFR
803.18(d). We estimate that it will take each respondent 1.5 hours
annually to maintain the records.
    The agency has estimated that on average, 220 user facilities,
importers, and manufacturers would annually be required, under 21 CFR
803.17, to establish new procedures, or revise existing procedures, in
order to comply with this provision. We estimate that it will take each
respondent 10 hours annually to establish new procedures, or revise
existing procedures.

Third-Party Disclosure Burden

    Under 21 CFR 803.40 and 803.42, device importers report deaths and
serious injuries to the manufacturers and FDA. Importers report
malfunctions only to the manufacturers, unless they are unknown, then
the reports are sent to FDA. We estimate that it will take respondents
1 hour annually to report the information.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                       Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Annual
                       CFR Section                         FDA Form No.      Number of     frequency of    Total annual      Hours per      Total hours
                                                                            respondents      response        responses       response
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exemptions--803.19......................................  ..............              57               4             228               3             684
User Facility Reporting--803.30 and 803.32..............  ..............             544               9           4,896               1           4,896
User Facility Annual Reporting--803.33..................   FDA Form 3419             195               1             195               1             195
Importer Reporting, Death and Serious Injury--803.40 and  ..............               1               1               1               1               1
 803.42.................................................
Manufacturer Reporting--803.50, through 803.53..........  ..............           1,239             243         301,077               1         301,077
Supplemental Reports--803.56............................  ..............             124             302          37,448               1          37,448
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............         344,301
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 Table 2--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Annual
         21 CFR Section              Number of     frequency of    Total annual      Hours per      Total hours
                                   recordkeepers   recordkeeping      records      recordkeeper
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MDR Procedures--803.17..........             220               1             220              10           2,200
MDR Files--803.18...............          30,000               1          30,000             1.5          45,000
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............          47,200
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                 Table 3--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                           21 CFR Section                               Number of     disclosures per    Total annual    Average burden    Total hours
                                                                       respondents       respondent      disclosures     per disclosure
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Importer Reporting, Malfunctions--803.40 and 803.42................               1               25               25                1               25
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: June 1, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-13832 Filed 6-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7198-7199]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02550]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2007-0008]

National Advisory Council

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Solicitation; request for applicants for appointment to the
National Advisory Council; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published a
document in the Federal Register of January 31, 2022, concerning a
request for applicants for appointment to the National Advisory
Council. The document contained an incorrect link.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob Long, Designated Federal Officer,
Office of the National Advisory Council, Federal Emergency Management
Agency; [email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Correction

    In the Federal Register of January 31, 2022, in FR Doc. 87-4900, on
page 4900, in the second column, correct the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
caption to read:
    The NAC is an advisory council established in accordance with the
provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C.
Appendix. As required by PKEMRA, the Secretary of Homeland Security
established the NAC to ensure effective and ongoing coordination of
federal preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation
for natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters.
FEMA is requesting that individuals who are interested in and qualified
to serve on the NAC apply for appointment to an open position in one of
the following discipline areas: Climate Change (Special Government
Employee (SGE)); Cybersecurity (SGE); Disabilities, Access, and
Functional Needs (Representative (Rep.)); Elected State Officials
(Rep.); Emergency Management (Rep.); Emergency Medical Provider (Rep.);
Non-Elected Local Official (Rep.); Non-Elected State Government
Officials (Rep.); Public Health (SGE); and two (2) Standards Setting
and Accrediting (Rep.).The Administrator may appoint up to three (3)
additional candidates to serve as FEMA Administrator Selections (as SGE
appointments). Please visit: https://www.fema.gov/about/offices/national-advisory-council/meetings/membership-applications for further
information on expertise required to fill these positions. Appointments
will be for 3-year terms, or for the remainder of an existing term that
is open. Appointments begin in December 2022.
    The NAC Charter contains more information and can be found at:
https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_nac-amended-charter_102921.pdf.
    If you are interested, qualified, and want FEMA to consider
appointing you to fill an open position on the NAC, please submit an
application package to the Office of the NAC as listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this notice. There is no application form; however, each
application package MUST include the following information:
     Cover letter, addressed to the Office of the NAC, that
includes or indicates: Current position title and employer or
organization you represent, home and work addresses, and preferred
telephone number and email address; the discipline area position(s) for
which you would like consideration; why you are interested in serving
on the NAC; and how you heard about the solicitation for NAC members;
     A summary of the most important accomplishments that
qualify you to serve on the NAC, in the form of three to five bullets
in less than 75 words total;
     Resume or Curriculum Vitae (CV); and
     One Letter of Recommendation addressed to the Office of
the NAC.
    Your application package must be less than eight total pages to be
considered by FEMA. Information contained in your application package
should clearly indicate your qualifications to serve on the NAC and
fill one of the current open positions. FEMA will not consider
incomplete applications. FEMA will review the information contained in
application packages and make selections based on: (1) Leadership
attributes; (2) emergency management experience; (3) expert knowledge
in

identified discipline area; and (4) ability to meet NAC member
expectations. FEMA will also consider overall NAC composition,
including diversity (including, but not limited to geographic,
demographic, and experience) and a mix of officials, emergency
managers, and emergency response providers from state, local, tribal,
and territorial governments, when selecting members.
    Appointees may be designated as a Special Government Employee (SGE)
as defined in section 202(a) of Title 18, U.S.C., as a Representative
member, or as a Regular Government Employee (RGE). SGEs speak in a
personal capacity as experts in their field and Representative members
speak for the stakeholder group they represent. Candidates selected for
appointment as SGEs are required to complete a new entrant Confidential
Financial Disclosure Form (Office of Government Ethics (OGE) Form 450)
each year. You can find this form at the Office of Government Ethics
website (http://www.oge.gov). However, please do not submit this form
with your application.
    The NAC generally meets in person twice per year. FEMA does not pay
NAC members for their time, but may reimburse travel expenses such as
airfare, hotel lodging, and other transportation costs within Federal
Travel Regulations when pre-approved by the Designated Federal Officer.
NAC members must serve on one of the NAC subcommittees, which meet
regularly by virtual means, usually teleconference call. FEMA estimates
the total time commitment for subcommittee participation to be 2 hours
per week (more for NAC leadership).
    DHS does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion,
sex, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital
status, political affiliation, disability and genetic information, age,
membership in an employee organization, or other non-merit factor. In
order for the Administrator to fully leverage broad-ranging experience
and education, the NAC must be diverse with regard to professional and
technical expertise. The Administrator will also pursue opportunities,
consistent with applicable law, to compose a committee that reflects
the diversity of the nation's people, and will strive to achieve a
widely diverse candidate pool for all NAC recruitment actions. Current
DHS and FEMA employees, including FEMA Reservists, are not eligible for
membership. Federally registered lobbyists may apply for positions
designated as Representative appointments but are not eligible for
positions that are designated as SGE appointments.

    Dated: February 2, 2022.
Shabnaum Q. Amjad,
Acting Associate Chief Counsel, Regulatory Affairs Division, Office of
Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2022-02550 Filed 2-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-48-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 102 (Wednesday, May 27, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 31759]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11331]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP20-874-000.
    Applicants: Rover Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Capacity Release Provision to
be effective 6/19/2020.
    Filed Date: 5/19/20.
    Accession Number: 20200519-5013.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/1/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-875-000.
    Applicants: ETC Tiger Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Capacity Release Provision to
be effective 6/19/2020.
    Filed Date: 5/19/20.
    Accession Number: 20200519-5015.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/1/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-877-000.
    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing REX 2020 Annual Penalty Revenue
Reconciliation.
    Filed Date: 5/19/20.
    Accession Number: 20200519-5133.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/1/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-878-000.
    Applicants: Tallgrass Interstate Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing TIGT 2020 Annual Penalty Revenue
Reconciliation.
    Filed Date: 5/19/20.
    Accession Number: 20200519-5134.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/1/20.

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

    Dated: May 20, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-11331 Filed 5-26-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: March 17, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 50)]
[Notices]
[Page 11387-11389]
[DOCID:fr17mr09-69]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59549; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2009-021]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by the NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
Regarding a Clerical Change to Nasdaq Rules

March 10, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 4, 2009, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'') 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 Nasdaq. Nasdaq proposes to

make a clerical correction to the Nasdaq rulebook under Rule 19b-
4(f)(3) under the Act,\3\ which renders the proposal effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Nasdaq proposes to make clerical corrections to Nasdaq Rule 7050.
Nasdaq proposes to implement the proposed rule change immediately.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on Nasdaq's Web
site (http://www.complinet.com/nasdaq), at Nasdaq's principal office,
and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
    The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new
language is underlined; proposed deletions are in [brackets].\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Changes are marked to the rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market
LLC as set forth in SR-NASDAQ-2009-008. The proposed changes will be
reflected in the NASDAQ Online manual found at http://
nasdaq.complinet.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

7050. NASDAQ Options Market

    The following charges shall apply to the use of the order execution
and routing services of the NASDAQ Options Market [by members] for all
securities [that it trades].
    (1) Fees for Execution of Contracts on the NASDAQ Options Market

Except as specified below, the charge to     $0.45 per executed
 member entering order that executes in the   contract.
 NASDAQ Options Market.
For a pilot period ending July 31, 2009,     $0.45 per executed
 charge for members or non-members entering   contract.
 order via the Options Intermarket Linkage
 that executes in the Nasdaq Options Market.
Charge to members entering orders in         No fee.
 options on QQQQ, SPY, DIA, IWM, AAPL BAC,
 C, GS, JPM, RIMM, XLE, XLF, and XOM with
 an account type ``Customer'' that executes
 and remove liquidity entered by another
 member.
Credit to member providing liquidity         $0.30 per executed
 through the NASDAQ Options Market.           contract.
Credit to member providing liquidity using   $0.35 per executed
 price-improving orders through the NASDAQ    contract.
 Options Market.

    (2)-(4) No change.
* * * * *

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 and is set forth in sections A,
B, and C below.

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

1. Purpose
    Nasdaq proposes to make clerical corrections to Nasdaq Rule 7050.
Nasdaq proposes to modify the prefatory language of Rule 7050 to
eliminate the phrases ``by members'' and ``that it trades'' to reflect
the fact that Rule 7050 contains fees applicable to non-members and to
options that Nasdaq routes but does not trade. These changes had
previously been proposed by Nasdaq, but were not reflected in
subsequent Nasdaq filings.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Exchange Act Release No. 58298, 73 FR 46695 (Aug. 11,
2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2008-055); Exchange Act Release No. 58081, 73 FR
39755 (July 10, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2008-058).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\6\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that the proposal is designed
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions
in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. The proposed rule change
makes a minor clerical change to an existing Nasdaq rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(3)
thereunder,\9\ Nasdaq has designated this proposal as one that is
concerned solely with the administration of the self-regulatory
organization. Accordingly, Nasdaq believes that its proposal should
become immediately effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

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

Number SR-NASDAQ-2009-021 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2009-021. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying 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 will also be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the self-regulatory
organization. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NASDAQ-2009-021 and should be submitted on or before April 7, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-5715 Filed 3-16-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P