[Federal Register: November 17, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 220)]
[Notices]
[Page 59272-59275]
[DOCID:fr17no09-112]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60960; File No. SR-FINRA-2009-061]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change, and
Amendment No. 1 Thereto, To Require Members To Report OTC Transactions
in Equity Securities Within 30 Seconds of Execution

November 6, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on September 16, 2009, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') a proposed rule change SR-FINRA-2009-061 as
described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared
by FINRA. On October 30, 2009, FINRA filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    FINRA is proposing to amend FINRA trade reporting rules to (1)
Require that members report over-the-counter (``OTC'') equity
transactions \3\ to FINRA within 30 seconds of execution; (2) require
that members report secondary market transactions in non-exchange-
listed direct participation program (``DPP'') securities to FINRA
within 30 seconds of execution; and (3) make certain conforming changes
to the rules

relating to the OTC Reporting Facility (``ORF'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Specifically, OTC equity transactions are: (1) transactions
in NMS stocks, as defined in SEC Rule 600(b) of Regulation NMS,
effected otherwise than on an exchange, which are reported through
the Alternative Display Facility (``ADF'') or a Trade Reporting
Facility (``TRF''); and (2) transactions in ``OTC Equity
Securities,'' as defined in FINRA Rule 6420 (e.g., OTC Bulletin
Board and Pink Sheets securities), which are reported through the
OTC Reporting Facility (``ORF''). The ADF, TRFs and ORF are
collectively referred to herein as the ``FINRA Facilities.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA 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, FINRA included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. FINRA has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
30-Second Reporting Requirement
    Under FINRA trade reporting rules, members generally must report
OTC equity transactions that are executed during the hours that the
FINRA Facilities are open within 90 seconds of execution.\4\ Last sale
information for such trades is publicly disseminated on a real-time
basis. There are certain limited exceptions to this general
requirement, including for trades in non-exchange-listed DPP
securities, as discussed below.\5\ The 90-second reporting requirement
has been in effect since 1982, when OTC trading was more manual in
nature. As trading has become increasingly automated, however, the vast
majority of trades are now reported in a much shorter period of time.
For example, during the period of February 23 through February 27,
2009, overall member compliance with the current 90-second reporting
requirement was 99.95% (for all trades submitted to a FINRA Facility
for public dissemination), and 99.90% of trades were reported in 30
seconds or less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See, e.g., FINRA Rules 6282(a), 6380A(a), 6380B(a) and
6622(a).
    \5\ Additionally, FINRA notes that transactions in PORTAL
securities, as defined in FINRA Rule 6631, are not subject to the
90-second reporting requirement, but must be reported to the ORF by
the end of the day. See FINRA Rule 6633.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA is proposing to amend the trade reporting rules to require
that members report OTC equity transactions to FINRA within 30 seconds
of execution. Specifically, the trade reporting rules would be amended
to replace the references to 90 seconds with 30 seconds.\6\ Trades not
reported within 30 seconds, unless expressly subject to a different
reporting requirement or excluded from the trade reporting rules
altogether, would be late. Although members would have 30 seconds to
report, FINRA reiterates that--as is the case today--members must
report trades as soon as practicable and cannot withhold trade reports,
e.g., by programming their systems to delay reporting until the last
permissible second.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See FINRA Rules 6282(a); 6380A(a) and (g); 6380B(a) and (f);
6622(a) and (f); 7130(b); 7230A(b); 7230B(b); and 7330(b).
    FINRA also is proposing to amend FINRA Rules 6181 and 6623 to
replace the reference to 90 seconds with a more general reference to
``the required time period'' to clarify that these provisions also
apply to trades that are subject to a different reporting
requirement (e.g., certain trades executed outside normal market
hours).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because of the automated nature of trade reporting today, FINRA
believes that in the vast majority of circumstances members should have
no difficulty complying with the proposed 30-second reporting
requirement. However, to better understand the potential limitations
some members may face, FINRA is requesting that the SEC solicit
comments specifically on whether there are any categories of trades
(e.g., trades that are manual in nature) or any firm structures (e.g.,
smaller firms that may not have automated systems for trade reporting)
that may justify a longer reporting time frame under FINRA rules.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ FINRA notes that smaller firms that route their orders to
another member firm for handling or execution do not have the trade
reporting obligation under the ``executing party'' trade reporting
structure that became effective on August 3, 2009. For transactions
between members, the ``executing party'' (which is defined as the
member that receives an order for handling or execution or is
presented an order against its quote, does not subsequently re-route
the order, and executes the transaction) has the obligation to
report the trade to FINRA. See Regulatory Notice 09-08 (January
2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change will promote
consistent and timely reporting by all members and enhance market
transparency and price discovery by ensuring that trades are
disseminated closer in time to execution. Timely reporting has become
even more critical with the implementation of Regulation NMS. A delay
in the reporting and dissemination of a transaction could potentially
appear to other market participants as a violation of the Regulation
NMS Order Protection Rule; if a trade is not reported and disseminated
until a full 90 seconds after execution, the best displayed market
could have changed between the time of execution and ultimate
dissemination of the trade. Additionally, the proposed rule change will
ensure that members do not withhold important market information from
investors and other market participants for competitive or other
improper reasons.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ FINRA reiterates the importance of timely reporting and
reminds members that a pattern and practice of late reporting may be
considered inconsistent with high standards of commercial honor and
just and equitable principles of trade in violation of FINRA Rule
2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reporting Requirements Applicable to Trades in Non-Exchange-Listed DPP
Securities
    Pursuant to FINRA Rule 6643(a)(1), members are required to report
trades in non-exchange-listed DPP securities to the ORF by 1:30 p.m.
Eastern Time on the next business day (T+1) after the date of
execution; members that have the operational capability to report
transactions within 90 seconds of execution may do so at their option.
Transaction information for such trades is not disseminated on a real-
time trade-by-trade basis, but is included in end-of-day summary
information disseminated twice daily. By contrast, under FINRA rules,
OTC trades in exchange-listed DPP securities are reported to a TRF or
the ADF and are subject to the 90-second reporting requirement (just
like any other OTC trade in an NMS stock).\9\ The inconsistency in the
reporting and dissemination of DPPs can create confusion for market
participants, especially when an exchange-listed DPP is delisted and
dissemination of trading in the security goes from real-time to only
twice daily.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See FINRA Rules 6282(a), 6380A(a) and 6380B(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA is proposing to amend the trade reporting rules to require
that transactions in non-exchange-listed DPP securities be reported
within 30 seconds of execution to conform to the reporting requirements
applicable to other OTC transactions, including those in exchange-
listed DPP securities. Specifically, the proposed rule change would
delete the FINRA Rule 6640 Series (Reporting Transactions in Direct
Participation Program Securities) in its entirety, and secondary market
transactions in non-exchange-listed DPPs would be reported to FINRA as
any other OTC Equity Security pursuant to the FINRA Rule 6620 and 7300
Series. In addition, the proposed rule change would amend (1) FINRA
Rule 6610 to clarify that secondary market transactions in non-
exchange-listed

DPPs are included in the OTC Equity Security transactions that must be
reported to the ORF; (2) FINRA Rule 6420 to add ``direct participation
program'' as a defined term (the proposed definition is identical to
the definition in current FINRA Rule 6642); (3) FINRA Rule 6622 to
include as Supplementary Material the definitions of ``date of
execution'' and ``time of execution'' for DPP transactions (the
proposed definitions are identical to the definitions in current FINRA
Rule 6642); and (4) FINRA Rules 6530, 6550, 7310, 7330 and 7410 to
delete or replace references to DPPs and the FINRA Rule 6640 Series, as
applicable.
    FINRA notes that transactions in non-exchange-listed DPPs currently
are not subject to regulatory transaction fees under Section 3 of
Schedule A to the FINRA By-Laws (``Section 3'') because they are not
subject to prompt last sale reporting under FINRA rules.\10\ As a
result of the proposed rule change, transactions in non-exchange-listed
DPPs would become subject to Section 3 regulatory transaction fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Pursuant to Section 31 of the Act, FINRA and the national
securities exchanges are required to pay transaction fees and
assessments to the SEC that are designed to recover the costs
related to the government's supervision and regulation of the
securities markets and securities professionals. FINRA obtains its
Section 31 fees and assessments from its membership in accordance
with Section 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes the proposed rule change would enhance market
transparency and promote consistency in trade reporting and
dissemination.
Proposed Conforming Amendments
    The proposal to reduce the reporting time to 30 seconds requires
amendments to a number of subparagraphs within paragraph (a) of FINRA
Rule 6622 relating to the ORF. In this filing, FINRA is proposing
certain additional changes to these subparagraphs to conform, to the
extent practicable, to the rules relating to the ADF and TRFs.
    Specifically, FINRA is proposing to reorganize FINRA Rule 6622(a)
(When and How Transactions are Reported) to conform to the current
format and structure of the rules relating to the ADF and TRFs.\11\ The
requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2), which apply separately to
OTC Market Makers and Non-Market Makers, respectively, would be
combined in paragraph (a)(1) and apply to all ``OTC Reporting Facility
Participants,'' as defined in proposed paragraph (n) of FINRA Rule
6420. Additionally, consistent with the ADF and TRF rules, FINRA is
proposing to amend FINRA Rule 6622(a) to delete the labels (e.g.,
``.W'') for the trade report modifiers that members are required to use
when reporting trades to the ORF. FINRA Rule 6622(a) would identify the
types of transactions that must have a unique modifier associated with
them and such modifiers would be labeled in the ORF technical
specifications rather than in the rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See FINRA Rules 6282(a), 6380A(a) and 6380B(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed paragraph (a)(5) of FINRA Rule 6622 would enumerate the
transactions for which members must use a special trade report modifier
and would clarify that members must include such modifiers on all trade
reports, including reports of ``as/of'' trades.\12\ In addition,
proposed paragraph (a)(5) would expressly provide that in the event
that the rules require multiple modifiers on any given trade report,
members are to report in accordance with guidance published by FINRA
regarding priorities among modifiers.\13\ Members that report in
accordance with such guidance will not be in violation of the trade
reporting rules for failing to use a particular modifier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See, e.g., FINRA Rules 6282(a)(4), 6380A(a)(5) and
6380B(a)(5).
    \13\ See, e.g., FINRA Rules 6380A(a)(5) and 6380B(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA notes that most of the trade report modifiers referred to in
proposed paragraph (a)(5) already are required under current FINRA Rule
6622(a). However, proposed subparagraphs (B) through (D) would require
members to use special trade report modifiers for Seller's Option, Cash
and Next Day trades,\14\ and proposed subparagraph (E) would require
members to use a special trade report modifier for trades that occur at
a price based on an average weighting or another special pricing
formula.\15\ Although not required under current FINRA Rule 6622(a),
members can use these modifiers when reporting to the ORF today. In
addition, a separate modifier would be used for Stop Stock
Transactions, as defined in FINRA Rule 6420, pursuant to proposed
subparagraph (F).\16\ Such transactions would be disseminated to the
public with the weighted average price modifier, which is consistent
with the current dissemination policy with respect to Stop Stock
Transactions that are submitted to the ADF and TRFs. Members currently
are required to report Stop Stock Transactions with the .W trade report
modifier, in accordance with FINRA Rule 6622(a)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See, e.g., FINRA Rules 6282(a)(4)(B)-(D), 6380A(a)(5)(B)-
(D) and 6380B(a)(5)(B)-(D).
    \15\ See, e.g., FINRA Rules 6282(a)(4)(E), 6380A(a)(5)(E) and
6380B(a)(5)(E).
    \16\ See, e.g., FINRA Rules 6282(a)(4)(F), 6380A(a)(5)(F) and
6380B(a)(5)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Current paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(5), (a)(7) and (a)(9) of
FINRA Rule 6622 would be renumbered as paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3),
(a)(4), (a)(6) and (a)(7), respectively, without substantive change.
    In addition to the proposed amendments to FINRA Rule 6622, FINRA is
proposing to amend FINRA Rule 6420 to add ``normal market hours'' and
``OTC Reporting Facility Participant'' as defined terms.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See, e.g., FINRA Rules 6320A and 6320B. The proposed
definition of ``normal market hours'' is identical to the TRF rules,
and the proposed definition of ``OTC Reporting Facility
Participant'' is substantially similar to the definition of ``Trade
Reporting Facility Participant'' in the TRF rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By conforming the trade reporting requirements to the extent
practicable, the proposed rule change will promote more consistent
trade reporting by members and a more complete and accurate audit
trail. FINRA notes that most of the proposed conforming changes to
FINRA Rule 6622(a) are technical in nature; however, some members may
need to make systems changes to comply with some of the requirements
that are not included expressly in the current rule.
    FINRA will announce the effective date of the proposed rule change
in a Regulatory Notice. To allow members sufficient time to make the
necessary systems changes, FINRA is proposing that the implementation
date will be between six and nine months following the date of
Commission approval.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\18\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change will
enhance market transparency and price discovery and promote more
consistent trade reporting by members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA 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.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date 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 such 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 (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2009-061 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-FINRA-2009-061. 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,\19\ 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 such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of FINRA. 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 publicly available. All submissions should refer to File Number
SR-FINRA-2009-061 and should be submitted on or before December 8,
2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov/.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-27463 Filed 11-16-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 10, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 68)]
[Notices]
[Page 17967-17969]
[DOCID:fr10ap07-121]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55571; File No. SR-ISE-2007-21]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change Relating to Fee Changes

April 3, 2007.
    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 26, 2007, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially
prepared by the ISE. The ISE has designated this proposal as one
establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge applicable only to
a member under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The ISE is proposing to amend its Schedule of Fees to establish
fees for transactions in options on seven Premium Products.\5\ The text

http://www.iseoptions.com/legal/proposed_rule_changes.asp), at the ISE, and

at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Premium Products'' is defined in the Schedule of Fees as
the products enumerated therein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend its Schedule of Fees to
establish fees for transactions in options on the following seven
Premium Products: iShares Dow Jones U.S. Basic Materials Sector Index
Fund (``IYM''),\6\ iShares MSCI Germany Index Fund (``EWG''), iShares
MSCI Australia Index Fund (``EWA''), iShares S&P 500 Growth Index Fund
(``IVW''), iShares S&P 500 Value Index Fund (``IVE''),\7\ iShares KLD
Select Social Index Fund (``KLD''), and iShares KLD 400 Social Index
Fund (``DSI'').\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ iShares[supreg] is a registered trademark of Barclays Global
Investors, N.A. (``BGI''), a wholly owned subsidiary of Barclays
Bank PLC. ``Dow Jones,'' and ``Dow Jones U.S. Basic Materials Sector
Index Fund'' are trademarks and service marks of Dow Jones &
Company, Inc. (``Dow Jones'') and have been licensed for use for
certain purposes by BGI. All other trademarks and service marks are
the property of their respective owners. IYM is not sponsored,
endorsed, issued, sold or promoted by Dow Jones. BGI and Dow Jones
have not licensed or authorized ISE to: (i) Engage in the creation,
listing, provision of a market for trading, marketing, and promotion
of options on IYM; or (ii) use and refer to any of their trademarks
or service marks in connection with the listing, provision of a
market for trading, marketing, and promotion of options on IYM or
with making disclosures concerning options on IYM under any
applicable federal or state laws, rules or regulations. BGI and Dow
Jones do not sponsor, endorse, or promote such activity by ISE, and
are not affiliated in any manner with ISE.
    \7\ iShares[supreg] is a registered trademark BGI, a wholly
owned subsidiary of Barclays Bank PLC. ``Standard &
Poor's[supreg],'' ``S&P[supreg],'' ``S&P 500[supreg],'' are
trademarks of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (``McGraw-Hill''), and
have been licensed for use for certain purposes by BGI. Neither IVW
nor IVE are sponsored, sold or endorsed by Standard & Poor's,
(``S&P''), a division of McGraw-Hill, and S&P makes no
representation regarding the advisability of investing in IVW and
IVE. ``MSCI Germany Index'' and ``MSCI Australia Index'' are service
marks of Morgan Stanley Capital International (``MSCI'') and have
been licensed for use for certain purposes by BGI. All other
trademarks and service marks are the property of their respective
owners. Neither EWG nor EWA are sponsored, endorsed, issued, sold or
promoted by MSCI. BGI, S&P and MSCI have not licensed or authorized
ISE to: (i) engage in the creation, listing, provision of a market
for trading, marketing, and promotion of options on IVW, IVE, EWG
and EWA; or (ii) use and refer to any of their trademarks or service
marks in connection with the listing, provision of a market for
trading, marketing, and promotion of options on IVW, IVE, EWG and
EWA or with making disclosures concerning options on IVW, IVE, EWG
and EWA under any applicable federal or state laws, rules or
regulations. BGI, S&P and MSCI do not sponsor, endorse, or promote
such activity by ISE, and are not affiliated in any manner with ISE.
    \8\ iShares[supreg] is a registered trademark of BGI, a wholly
owned subsidiary of Barclays Bank PLC. ``KLD Select
SocialSM Index'' and ``Domini 400 SocialSM
Index'' are service marks of KLD Research & Analytics, Inc. and have
been licensed for use for certain purposes by BGI. All other
trademarks and service marks are the property of their respective
owners. Neither KLD nor DSI are sponsored, endorsed, issued, sold or
promoted by KLD Research & Analytics, Inc. BGI and KLD Research &
Analytics, Inc. have not licensed or authorized ISE to: (i) Engage
in the creation, listing, provision of a market for trading,
marketing, and promotion of options on KLD and DSI; or (ii) use and
refer to any of their trademarks or service marks in connection with
the listing, provision of a market for trading, marketing, and
promotion of options on KLD and DSI or with making disclosures
concerning options on KLD and DSI under any applicable federal or
state laws, rules or regulations. BGI and KLD Research & Analytics,
Inc. do not sponsor, endorse, or promote such activity by ISE, and
are not affiliated in any manner with ISE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All of the applicable fees covered by this filing are identical to
fees charged by the Exchange for all other Premium Products.\9\
Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to adopt an execution fee and a
comparison fee for all transactions in options on IYM, EWG, EWA, IVW,
IVE, KLD and DSI.\10\ The amount of the execution fee and comparison
fee for products covered by this filing shall be $0.15 and $0.03 per
contract, respectively, for all Public Customer Orders \11\ and Firm
Proprietary orders. The amount of the execution fee and comparison fee
for all ISE Market Maker transactions shall be equal to the execution
fee and comparison fee currently charged by the Exchange for ISE Market
Maker transactions in equity options.\12\ Finally, the amount of the
execution fee and comparison fee for all non-ISE Market Maker
transactions shall be $0.16 and $0.03 per contract, respectively.
Further, since options on IYM, EWG, EWA, IVW, IVE, KLD and DSI are
multiply-listed, the Payment for Order Flow fee shall also apply. The
Exchange believes the proposed rule change will further the Exchange's
goal of introducing new products to the marketplace that are
competitively priced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange represents that IYM, EWG, EWA, IVW, IVE, KLD
and DSI constitute ``Fund Shares,'' as defined by ISE Rule 502(h).
    \10\ These fees will be charged only to Exchange members. Under
a pilot program that is set to expire on July 31, 2007, these fees
will also be charged to Linkage Orders (as defined in ISE Rule
1900). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54204 (July 25,
2006), 71 FR 43548 (August 1, 2006) (SR-ISE-2006-38).
    \11\ ``Public Customer Order'' is defined in Exchange Rule
100(a)(39) as an order for the account of a Public Customer.
``Public Customer'' is defined in Exchange Rule 100(a)(38) as a
person that is not a broker or dealer in securities.
    \12\ The execution fee is currently between $0.21 and $0.12 per
contract side, depending on the Exchange Average Daily Volume, and
the comparison fee is currently $0.03 per contract side.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\13\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\14\ in particular, in that
it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees and other charges among its members and other persons using
its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    Because the foregoing rule change establishes or changes a due,
fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange, it has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
\16\ thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of such
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 No. SR-ISE-2007-21 on the subject line.

Paper Comments:

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2007-21. 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. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the ISE. 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-ISE-2007-21 and should be submitted on or before May 1,
2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-6672 Filed 4-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 16 (Friday, January 24, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4199-4201]
[FR Doc No: 2020-01044]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0723; Product Identifier 2019-NM-147-AD; Amendment
39-21023; AD 2019-26-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. This AD was
prompted by reports of sealant bead damage caused by rotation of the
attachment fitting bearing assembly of a trimmable horizontal
stabilizer (THS). This AD requires repetitive detailed inspections, and
applicable corrective action(s) if necessary, as specified in a
European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated
by reference. In addition, as specified in the EASA AD, this AD
provides an optional modification that would terminate the inspections.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective February 28, 2020.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of February 28,
2020.

ADDRESSES: For the material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD,
contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 89990 1000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR material on the EASA website
at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this IBR material 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. It is also available in the AD docket on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2019-0723.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0723; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations is 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: Kathleen Arrigotti, Aerospace
Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0206, dated August 20, 2019
(``EASA AD 2019-0206'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus SAS
Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on October 28, 2019 (84 FR 57655). The NPRM was prompted by
reports of sealant bead damage caused by rotation of the attachment
fitting bearing assembly of a THS. The NPRM proposed to require
repetitive detailed inspections, and applicable corrective action(s) if
necessary. In addition, as specified in the EASA AD, the NPRM provided
an optional modification that would terminate the inspections.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address possible water ingress due to
sealant bead damage, which could result in corrosion damage in the
aluminum corner fitting. This condition, if not addressed, could lead
to detachment and loss of the THS, possibly resulting in loss of
control of the airplane and injury to persons on the ground. See the
MCAI for additional background information.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule and has considered the comment received. Air
Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA), indicated its support
for the NPRM.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest
require adopting this final rule as proposed, except for minor
editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0206 describes procedures for repetitive detailed
inspections for damage of the fillet sealant and corrosion on aluminum
in the lower and upper corner fittings and bearing assembly attachment
interface at frame (FR) 102, left-hand and right-hand sides. EASA AD
2019-0206 also describes procedures for an optional modification
(application of new corrosion protection in the THS upper and lower
attachment fitting bearing assembly) that would eliminate the need for
the repetitive inspections. This material 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

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 11 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 work-hours x $85 per hour = $2,550........................              $0           $2,550          $28,050
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

                   Estimated Costs of Optional Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
34 work-hours x $85 per hour = $2,890.              $0           $2,890
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the
agency to provide cost estimates for the repair specified in this AD.

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.
    The FAA is 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 and
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    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) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) 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):

2019-26-01 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-21023; Docket No. FAA-2019-0723;
Product Identifier 2019-NM-147-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective February 28, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041
airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in European
Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-0206, dated August 20,
2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0206'').

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of sealant bead damage caused by
rotation of the attachment fitting bearing assembly of a trimmable
horizontal stabilizer (THS). The FAA is issuing this AD to address
possible water ingress due to sealant bead damage, which could
result in corrosion damage in the aluminum corner fitting. This
condition, if not addressed, could lead to detachment and loss of
the THS, possibly resulting in loss of control of the airplane and
injury to persons on the ground.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2019-0206.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0206

    For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of
this AD:

    (1) Where EASA AD 2019-0206 refers to February 21, 2018, this AD
requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0206 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards 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 International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD. Information may
be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the
approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any service information
referenced in EASA AD 2019-0206 that contains RC procedures and
tests: Except as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, RC
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Kathleen Arrigotti,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) 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) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-0206,
dated August 20, 2019.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For information about EASA AD 2019-0206, contact the EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
89990 6017; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet www.easa.europa.eu.
You may find this EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this material 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>. This
material may be found in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2019-0723.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on January 10, 2020.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-01044 Filed 1-23-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 40 (Thursday, February 28, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 6740]
[FR Doc No: C1-2019-00787]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0418; FRL-9970-24]
RIN 2070-ZA16

Fenoxaprop-ethyl, Flufenpyr-ethyl, Imazapyr, Maleic hydrazide,
Pyrazon, Quinclorac, Triflumizole, et al.; Proposed Tolerance and
Tolerance Exemption Actions

Correction

    In proposed rule document 2019-00787, appearing on pages 1691
through 1697 in the issue of Tuesday, February 5, 2019, make the
following correction:
    On page 1691, in the first column, under the DATES heading,
``February 5, 2019'' should read ``April 8, 2019''.

[FR Doc. C1-2019-00787 Filed 2-27-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 1301-00-D


[Federal Register: March 18, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 52)] [Rules and Regulations]                [Page 13009-13011] [DOCID:fr18mr10-17]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

49 CFR Part 40

[Docket DOT-OST-2008-0088] RIN OST 2105-AD84

  Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing  Programs

Correction

    In rule document 2010-3731 beginning on page 8528 in the issue of  Thursday, February 25, 2010, make the following corrections:

Sec. 40.225  [Corrected]

    1. On page 8529, in Sec. 40.225, in the first column, amendatory  instructions 2 and 3 are corrected to read as follows:

0 2. Section 40.225 (a) is amended by removing the words ``beginning  February 1, 2002''. 0 3. Appendix G is revised to read as follows:

Appendix G to Part 40  [Corrected]

    2. On page 8530 and 8531, in Appendix G to Part 40, the graphics  are reprinted to read as follows:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25FE10.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25FE10.002

[FR Doc. C1-2010-3731 Filed 3-17-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1301-00-D


Site Visit Report

Ginna Station

	1503 Lake Road

	Ontario, NY 14519

April 3, 2008

Background and Objectives

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is in the process of
developing 316(b) cooling water intake structure requirements that
reflect the best technology available (BTA) for minimizing adverse
environmental impact for all existing power plants and manufacturing
facilities. As part of this process, EPA staff is visiting electric
generators and manufacturers to better understand the cooling water
intake structure (CWIS) technologies in use at facilities, including the
site-specific characteristics of each facility and how these affect the
selection and performance of CWIS technologies.  EPA is also visiting
facilities to better understand cooling water use and specific issues or
technologies that can affect 316(b) compliance.  Ginna Station (Ginna)
was selected for a site visit due to its use of an offshore intake
location (with a velocity cap) and its large intake flows.

Facility Description

The R.E. Ginna nuclear facility is operated by Constellation Energy and
consists of one pressurized water reactor (PWR) located in Ontario, NY,
20 miles east of Rochester. The existing facility is on a large
industrially-zoned site approximately 500 acres in total size on the
southern shore of Lake Ontario. Approximately 25 percent of the site is
dedicated to buildings, roads and other improvements associated with
facility operations; the remaining portion is undeveloped with large
portions leased to agricultural operations. New housing developments
have been constructed near the property border to the southwest (see
Attachment B).

Cooling water withdrawals from and discharges to Lake Ontario for Unit 1
are permitted under SPDES Permit No. NY000493.

Electricity Generation and Transmission

Ginna Unit 1, a PWR nuclear unit, came online in 1970 and has a rated
capacity of 490 MW. The unit is a baseload facility providing
electricity to the Niagara-Mohawk grid. As a baseload facility,
Ginna’s capacity utilization rate is high with recent years averaging
more than 90 percent.

Refueling outages occur every 18 to 24 months and last approximately 30
days. Because outages are routine, facility-wide maintenance activities,
including those related to the intake structure, are scheduled to occur
at the same time.

Cooling Water Intake Structure

The intake structure for Unit 1 is located approximately 3,000 ft
offshore in Lake Ontario.  The terminal end of the intake conduit is
fitted with an octagonally-shaped concrete velocity cap, the top of
which rises 11 feet off the lakebed and is approximately 15 feet below
the lake surface.  The velocity cap measures 50 feet in total diameter.
Each of the eight sides has three water inlet slots totaling 3 feet high
by 17 feet wide. Galvanized steel bars spaced 10 inches apart prevent
large objects from entering the system. Intake velocity at the velocity
cap is approximately 0.6 feet per second (fps) (see Attachment A).

Two circulating water pumps draw water through a 120-inch concrete
tunnel to the onshore pump house at a maximum velocity of 7 feet per
second. Trash racks remove larger debris from the instream flow. The
intake divides into four channels in the screen house, each fitted a
vertical traveling screen with 3/8-inch mesh panels. The approach
velocity to the screens is 0.8 fps. Screens are rotated periodically
based on a pressure differential between the upstream and downstream
faces and washed with a high-pressure spray. Screen washings, including
impinged fish, are discharged to a separate debris trough that empties
into the discharge canal.

The maximum design flow rate is 510 million gallons per day (mgd). As a
baseload facility, Ginna Unit 1 withdraws water at its maximum capacity
during normal operations and does not moderate flows based on climate or
operating conditions. The facility does moderate intake water
temperatures during winter months by recirculating a portion of the
heated discharge water to the intake to maintain the desired condenser
water temperature (approximately 41-44º F). This reduces the total
volume of water withdrawn from Lake Ontario by as much as 10 percent
depending on water temperatures.

Water passing through the surface condenser is discharged into the
discharge canal, a surface outfall located at the shoreline. The normal
temperature increase over the ambient water temperature at the point of
discharge is about 44º with a distinct thermal plume approximately 175
acres in total area.

The auxiliary cooling system includes service water, fire protection,
and other uses, and draws water from the main cooling water intake in
the screen house. These systems use approximately 14,600 gpm, or 21 mgd.
The service water system circulates lake water from the screen house to
various heat exchangers and systems inside the containment building as
well as the auxiliary, intermediate, turbine, and diesel generator
buildings.

Impingement and Entrainment Information

Constellation Energy has conducted weekly impingement and entrainment
sampling at the Unit 1 intake and surrounding locations as part of its
Comprehensive Demonstration Study to meet Phase II and SPDES
re-application requirements. The sampling will also allow Constellation
Energy to evaluate the relative effectiveness of its current intake
configuration (offshore with velocity cap) to an estimated baseline
configuration that would be representative of a nearshore, unprotected
intake structure.

The in-plant portion of impingement sampling involves collection and
identification of fish and macroinvertebrates impinged on the traveling
screens on a weekly basis over a two-year period. To establish a
calculation baseline, gill nets are set at several locations in the
nearshore area and at offshore locations near the velocity cap (at
sufficient depth in the water column). Gill nets are set for a 24-hour
period and compared to the in-plant impingement rates.

Entrainment sampling is conducted in a similar manner as impingement
sampling on the same weekly schedule. In-plant samples are collected in
the screen house prior to the traveling screens using 4-foot diameter
bongo nets. To establish a calculation baseline, entrainment is
simulated at a nearshore location using the same equipment.

A final analysis of all collected data has not been completed, but
preliminary findings show a significant difference in the number and
relative species abundance between the actual intake and the offshore
location (see Attachment E).

Facility representatives indicated that Lake Ontario’s aquatic
biology, specifically the number and relative abundance of various fish
species, has changed dramatically over the last 10-15 years.
Biologically-productive areas have moved further offshore from their
historical settings, with invasive and introduced species playing a
significant role in these shifts.

In the mid-1970s, a salmonid introduction program, designed to increase
recreational fishing in the lake, contributed to a precipitous drop in
the impingement rates of many target species at Ginna, particularly
alewife. Pre-introduction impingement rates ranged as high as 950,000
individuals per year (total) dropping to less than 200,000 in years
immediately following introduction (see Attachment C).

Cooling Tower Feasibility

Facility representatives stated that retrofitting to closed-cycle would
be difficult given the available space and additional aesthetic impacts.
 They noted that the Ginna facility is located in an area where
aesthetic impacts are a significant consideration; over the years, the
facility has taken steps to minimize its visual impact by maintaining a
low profile with all buildings and a large buffer zone around the active
site.

Facility representatives also noted that the existing condenser may not
have sufficient capacity to handle the water volume necessary to reject
the required thermal load.  The placement of the Unit 1 condenser
(directly below the turbine in the main building) and the confined area
would likely require substantial modifications to the condenser itself
and the surrounding superstructure.

Facility representatives stated that impacts to the unit’s thermal
performance would increase the operating heat rate.  Any generating
shortfall would have to be obtained from other sources, potentially
increasing air emissions if fossil fuel plants are used.

Facility representatives also stated that a nuclear plant retrofit would
involve significant downtime.

Attachments

Attachment A		List of Attendees

Attachment B		Aerial Photo

Attachment C		CWIS Schematic

Attachment D		Facility Layout

Attachment E		Impingement Rates 1973-2004

Attachment F		Site Photo

Attachment G		Impingement Comparison

Attachment A--List of Attendees

Paul Shriner, EPA

Jan Matuszko, EPA

Tim Havey, Tetra Tech

Mary Ellen Dangler, Constellation Energy

Michael Bodine, Constellation Energy

E. John Fischer, Constellation Energy

John Walden, Constellation Energy

Dean Discenza, Constellation Energy

Mary Burgess, Constellation Energy

Tom Harding, Constellation Energy

Paul Miller, Constellation Energy

Attachment B—Aerial Photo

Please see DCN 10-6508A accompanying this document.

Attachment F—Site Photo

Please see DCN 10-6508B accompanying this document.

Attachment C--CWIS Schematic

Attachment D--Ginna Site Layout

Attachment E--Impingement Rates 1973-2004

Attachment G--Impingement Comparison

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 227 (Monday, November 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70297-70298]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28079]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC14-28-000.
    Applicants: Black Bear Hydro Partners, LLC, Black Bear Development
Holdings, LLC, Black Bear SO, LLC, Black Bear Holding LLC.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203
of Black Bear Hydro Partners, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 11/14/13.
    Accession Number: 20131114-5188.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/13/14.

    Docket Numbers: EC14-29-000.
    Applicants: Condon Wind Power, LLC, Lake Benton Power Partners LLC,
Storm Lake Power Partners II, LLC, ALLETE Clean Energy, Inc.
    Description: Application of Condon Wind Power, LLC, et al. for
Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act and Request
for Expedited Action.
    Filed Date: 11/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20131115-5148.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/6/13.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1246-005; ER10-1982-006; ER10-1253-005; ER10-
1252-005; ER13-764-005; ER12-2498-005; ER12-2499-005.
    Applicants: Consolidated Edison Energy, Inc., Consolidated Edison
Company of New York, Inc., Consolidated Edison Solutions Inc, Orange
and Rockland Utilities, Inc., CED White River Solar, LLC, Alpaugh 50,
LLC, Alpaugh North, LLC.
    Description: Notice of non-material change status of Consolidated
Edison Energy, Inc., et al.
    Filed Date: 11/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20131115-5127.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/6/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-193-003.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., New England Power Pool
Participants Committee.
    Description: Amend to ISO Tariff and TOA in Compliance with Order
to be effective 12/31/2050.
    Filed Date: 11/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20131115-5075.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/16/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-196-002.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., Bangor Hydro Electric Company,
Central Maine Power Company, Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc.,
Vermont Transco, LLC.
    Description: Amendments to ISO-NE TOA in Compliance with Order to
be effective 12/31/2050.
    Filed Date: 11/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20131115-5093.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/16/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-232-001.
    Applicants: AEP Generation Resources Inc.
    Description: Ohio Power Supply Agreement Amendment to be effective
1/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20131115-5118.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/6/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1210-002.
    Applicants: Westar Generating, Inc.
    Description: Response to Deficiency Filing, Purchase Power
Agreement to be effective 7/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20131115-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/6/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-2229-001.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: OATT Order No. 764 Compliance Filing to be effective
11/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20131115-5063.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/6/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-120-001.
    Applicants: BTG Pactual Commodities (US) LLC.
    Description: BTG Pactual Commodities (US) LLC Supplement to MBR
Application to be effective 11/18/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/14/13.
    Accession Number: 20131114-5147.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-406-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: 2013-11-14--CDWRAmendedPLA to be effective 11/15/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/14/13.
    Accession Number: 20131114-5164.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/5/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-407-000.
    Applicants: Capacity Markets Partners, LLC.
    Description: Application for Market-Based Rate Tariff, Blanket
Authority and Waivers to be effective 12/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20131115-5042.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/6/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-408-000.
    Applicants: Tampa Electric Company.
    Description: OATT Order No. 784 Compliance Filing to be effective
12/27/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20131115-5090.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/6/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-409-000.
    Applicants: Grain Belt Express Clean Line LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization to Sell Transmission
Service Rights at Negotiated Rates, Request for Approval of Capacity
Allocation Process, and Request for Waivers of Grain Belt Express Clean
Line LLC.
    Filed Date: 11/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20131115-5096.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/6/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-410-000.
    Applicants: Tampa Electric Company.
    Description: Revision of Agreement for Interchange Service
(Schedule J under RS 21) to be effective 11/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20131115-5099.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/6/13.

    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 comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 15, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-28079 Filed 11-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 85 (Tuesday, May 3, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24813-24815]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10662]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0034]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Fourth Annual Offshore Challenge, Sunny Isles Beach,
FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the
Atlantic Ocean east of Sunny Isles Beach, Florida for the Fourth Annual
Offshore Challenge. The Fourth Annual Offshore Challenge will consist
of a series of high-speed boat races. The boat races are scheduled to
take place from Friday, June 17, 2011 through Sunday, June 19, 2011.
The temporary safety zone is necessary for the safety of race
participants, participant vessels, spectators, and the general public
during the races. Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the safety zone
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Miami or a designated
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8 a.m. on June 17, 2011 through 5
p.m. on June 19, 2011. This rule will be enforced daily from 8 a.m.
until 5 p.m. on June 17, 2011 through June 19, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket USCG-2011-0034 and are available online by going to
http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0034 in the ``Keyword''
box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is 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 final rule, call or e-mail Lieutenant Paul A. Steiner, Sector
Miami Prevention Department, 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<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On February 17, 2011, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Safety Zone; Fourth Annual Offshore Challenge, Sunny
Isles Beach, FL in the Federal Register (76 FR 9278). We received no
comments on the proposed rule. A public meeting was not requested, and
none was held.

Background and Purpose

    Offshore Events, LLC is hosting the Fourth Annual Offshore
Challenge, a series of high-speed boat races. The Fourth Annual
Offshore Challenge will commence on June 17, 2011 and conclude on June
19, 2011. The boat races will be held in the Atlantic Ocean offshore of
Sunny Isles Beach, Florida. Approximately 50 offshore power boats will
be participating in the boat races. These vessels will be traveling at
high speeds. Approximately 200 spectator vessels are expected to
observe the races. The high speed of the participant vessels poses a
safety hazard to race participants, participant vessels, spectators,
and the general public. The temporary safety zone is necessary to
protect race participants, participant vessels, spectators, and the
general public from the hazards associated with the high-speed boat
races.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    There were no comments to the NPRM, and we made no changes to the
regulation.

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.
    The economic impact of this rule is not significant for the
following reasons: (1) The rule will be in effect for three days but
will only be enforced for a total of nine hours each day; (2) although
persons and vessels will not be able to enter, transit through, anchor
in, or remain within the safety zone without authorization from the
Captain of the Port Miami or a designated representative, they may
operate in the surrounding area during the enforcement period; (3)
persons and vessels may still enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the safety zone if authorized by the Captain of the Port
Miami or a designated representative; and (4) advance notification of
the safety zone will be made to the local maritime community via local
notice to mariners, marine safety information bulletins, and broadcast
notice to mariners.

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 for the reasons discussed in the Regulatory Planning and
Review section above.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could
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 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 effect 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). We are also issuing a
marine event permit for this event. Because the issuance of the marine
permit for this event is not an action that is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment, we conducted an environmental
assessment for both the issuance of the marine event permit and the
establishment of this temporary safety zone. After conducting the
environmental assessment for the issuance of the marine event permit
and the establishment of this temporary safety zone, we have concluded
these actions will not significantly affect the human environment. The
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact are
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. 1226, 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, 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add a temporary Sec.  165.T07-0034 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-0034  Safety Zone; Fourth Annual Offshore Challenge,
Sunny Isles Beach, FL.

    (a) Regulated Area. The following regulated area is a safety zone.
All waters of the Atlantic Ocean east of Sunny Isles Beach, FL
encompassed within an imaginary line connecting the following points:
starting at Point 1 in position 25[deg]57[min]45'' N,
80[deg]07[min]05'' W; thence east to Point 2 in position
25[deg]57[min]43'' N, 80[deg]05[min]59'' W; thence south to Point 3 in
25[deg]54[min]03'' N, 80[deg]05[min]59'' W; thence west to Point 4 in
position 25[deg]54[min]04'' N, 80[deg]07[min]18'' W; thence north back
to origin. All coordinates are North American Datum 1983.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard

Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers, and
other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and Federal, State, and
local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Miami
in the enforcement of the regulated area.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the
regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Miami or a
designated representative.
    (2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor
in, or remain within the regulated area may contact the Captain of the
Port Miami via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated
representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to seek permission. If
permission to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the
regulated area is granted by the Captain of the Port Miami or a
designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such
permission must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port
Miami or a designated representative.
    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area via
local notice to mariners, marine safety information bulletins,
broadcast notice to mariners, and by on-scene designated
representatives.
    (d) Effective Date and Enforcement Periods. The rule is effective
from 8 a.m. on June 17, 2011 through 5 p.m. on June 19, 2011. The rule
will be enforced daily from 8 a.m. until 5 p.m. on June 17, 2011
through June 19, 2011.

    Dated: March 25, 2011.
C.P. Scraba,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Miami.
[FR Doc. 2011-10662 Filed 5-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


                                 Docket Index
Notice of Proposed and Final Rulemaking  -  Clean Data Determination for the 1997 PM2.5 Standards; California  -  South Coast; Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements (Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0708)

      A.  Rulemaking Documents
       Clean Data Determination for the Los Angeles - South Coast Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Fine Particle Standards; California; Determination Regarding Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements (Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0708) prepublication version, signed November 20, 2014.
       79 FR 72999, Clean Data Determination for the Los Angeles - South Coast Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Fine Particle Standards; California; Determination Regarding Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements, proposed rule (December 9, 2014).
       80 FR 449, Clean Data Determination for 1997 PM2.5 Standards; California - South Coast; Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements; Extension of Comment Period, proposed rule, extension of comment period (January 6, 2015).
       Clean Data Determination for the Los Angeles - South Coast Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Fine Particle Standards; California; Determination Regarding Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements (Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0708) prepublication version, signed July 8, 2016.
 Federal Register Notices and EPA Guidance Documents
        52 FR 24634, Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter, final rule (July 1, 1987).

       57 FR 13498, State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, general preamble for future proposed rulemakings (April 16, 1992).

       Memorandum, John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard," dated May 10, 1995.

       62 FR 38652, National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter, final rule (July 18, 1997).

       Memorandum, Stephen Page, Director, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards" (December 14, 2004).

       70 FR 944, Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the Fine Particles (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards, final rule (January 5, 2005).

       70 FR 71612, Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard--Phase 2 (Phase 2 Final Rule)," final rule (November 29, 2005).

       71 FR 6352, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Arizona; Finding of Attainment for Ajo Particulate Matter 10 Microns or Less (PM10) Nonattainment Area; Determination Regarding Applicability of Certain Clean Air Act Requirements, direct final rule (February 8, 2006).

       71 FR 13021, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Arizona; Particulate Matter 10 Microns or Less; Finding of Attainment for Yuma Nonattainment Area; Determination Regarding Applicability of Certain Clean Air Act Requirements, direct final rule (March 14, 2006).

       71 FR 40952, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of California; PM - 10; Determination of Attainment for the San Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area; Determination Regarding Applicability of Certain Clean Air Act Requirements, proposed rule (July 19, 2006)

       71 FR 44920, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Arizona; Finding of Attainment for Rillito Particulate Matter of 10 Microns or Less (PM10) Nonattainment Area; Determination Regarding Applicability of Certain Clean Air Act Requirements, direct final rule (August 8, 2006)

       71 FR 61144, National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter, final rule (October 17, 2006).

       71 FR 63642, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of California; PM - 10; Determination of Attainment for the San Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area; Determination Regarding Applicability of Certain Clean Air Act Requirements, final rule (October 30, 2006).

       72 FR 14422, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Arizona; Boundary Redesignation; Finding of Attainment for Miami Particulate Matter of 10 Microns or Less (PM10) Nonattainment Area; Determination Regarding Applicability of Certain Clean Air Act Requirements; Correction; direct final rule (March 28, 2007)

       72 FR 20586, Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule, final rule (April 25, 2007).

       73 FR 28321, Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5), final rule (May 16, 2008).

       75 FR 13710, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of California; PM - 10; Determination of Attainment for the Coso Junction Nonattainment Area; Determination Regarding Applicability of Certain Clean Air Act Requirements, proposed rule (March 23, 2010).

       75 FR 27944, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of California; PM - 10; Determination of Attainment for the Coso Junction Nonattainment Area; Determination Regarding Applicability of Certain Clean Air Act Requirements, final rule (May 19, 2010).

       76 FR 69928, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California; South Coast; Attainment Plan for 1997 PM2.5 Standards, final rule (November 9, 2011).

       78 FR 3086, National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter, final rule (January 15, 2013).
       Memorandum, Richard A. Wayland, Director, Air Quality Assessment Division (MD C304-02), to Regional Air Division Directors, "Update on Use of PM2.5 Continuous FEMs", dated April 20, 2013, plus attachment.
 Attachment, "Instructions and Template for Requesting that data from PM2.5 Continuous FEMs are not compared to the NAAQS," dated April 15, 2013.
       78 FR 41901, Determination of Attainment for the West Central Pinal Nonattainment Area for the 2006 Fine Particle Standard; Arizona; Determination Regarding Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements, proposed rule (July 12, 2013).

       78 FR 54394, Determination of Attainment for the West Central Pinal Nonattainment Area for the 2006 Fine Particle Standard; Arizona; Determination Regarding Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements, final rule (September 4, 2013).

       78 FR 59249, Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South Coast Air Quality Management District, final rule (September 26, 2013).

       78 FR 64402, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California; South Coast; Contingency Measures for 1997 PM2.5 Standards, final rule (October 29, 2013).

       79 FR 31566, Identification of Nonattainment Classification and Deadlines for Submission of State Implementation Plan (SIP) Provisions for the 1997 Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, final rule (June 2, 2014).

       80 FR 2206, Air Quality Designations for the 2012 Primary Annual Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), final rule (January 15, 2015).

       81 FR 1514, Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California; South Coast; Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, final rule (January 13, 2016).

       EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Technical Note  -  PM2.5 Continuous Monitor Comparability Assessment, February 22, 2012.

       EPA, Quality Assurance Guidance Document 2.12, Monitoring PM2.5 in Ambient Air Using Designated Reference or Class I Equivalent Methods, November 1998.

       EPA, Quality Assurance Guidance Document 2.12, Monitoring PM2.5 in Ambient Air Using Designated Reference or Class I Equivalent Methods, EPA-454/B-16-001, January 2016.
   C. Relevant State Submittals
       Letter, James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB, to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, November 16, 2007.
             California Air Resources Board, Proposed State Strategy for California's 2007 State Implementation Plan, adopted September 27, 2007. (9 files)
             CARB Resolution No. 07-28, September 27, 2007 with attachments A & B (3 files).
             State of California, Air Resource Board, Executive Order No. S-07-002, November 15, 2007.
       Letter, James Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, November 28, 2007 (transmitting South Coast 2007 AQMP).
             South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2007 AQMP, June 1, 2007 + 10 Appendices.
             SCAQMD Governing Board Resolution No. 07-9 (June 1, 2007).
             CARB, Staff Report, Analysis of the South Coast 2007 AQMP, September 21, 2007 (Report and 3 appendices).
             CARB Resolution No. 07-41 (September 27, 2007).
       Letter from Dr. Matt Miyasato, Ph.D., Deputy Executive Officer, Science and Technology Advancement, SCAQMD to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, dated May 1, 2014 certifying the ambient air quality data and quality assurance data collected for year 2013.
       Letter from Dr. Matt Miyasato, Ph.D., Deputy Executive Officer, Science and Technology Advancement, SCAQMD to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, dated May 1, 2015 certifying the ambient air quality data and quality assurance data collected for year 2014.
       Letter from Laki Tisopulos, Ph.D., P.E., Assistant Deputy Executive Officer, SCAQMD to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, dated April 29, 2016 certifying the ambient air quality data and quality assurance data collected for year 2015.
       SCAQMD Annual Air Quality Monitoring Network Plan (July, 2013) with appendices.

       SCAQMD Annual Air Quality Monitoring Network Plan (July, 2014) with appendices.

       Letter from Rene M. Bermudez, Principal Air Quality Instrument Specialist, SCAQMD, to Meredith Kurpius, Ph.D., EPA Region IX, dated July 1, 2015, transmitting the SCAQMD Annual Air Quality Monitoring Network Plan (July, 2015) with appendices.
D. Other Documents
       EPA maintains a list of designated FRMs and FEMs on the web at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/criteria.html.
       US EPA (2011). Policy Assessment for the Review of the Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA 452/R-11-003. April 2011. Available: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/s_pm_2007_pa.html.
       Letter, Melissa Lin Perrella, Senior Attorney, Natural Resources Defense Council, to Rene M. Bermudez, Principal Air Quality Instrument Specialist, SCAQMD, dated June 29, 2013.
       Letter, Jason C. Low, Atmospheric Measurements Manager, SCAQMD, to Melissa Lin Perrella, Senior Attorney, Natural Resources Defense Council, dated January 30, 2014.
       EPA Region 9, "EPA FEM Assessment Tool Results," dated September 3, 2014. (file entitled FEM_AssessmentToolResults_EPA_2014-09-03.pdf).
       Letter, Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, Air Division, EPA Region 9, to Jason Low, PhD, South Coast Air Quality Management District, dated September 9, 2014.
       Letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Dr. Matt Miyasato, Deputy Executive Officer, SCAQMD, dated September 30, 2014.
       Region 9 Technical System Audit Report, South Coast Air Quality Management District, September 24-25, 2013. Conducted by Air Quality Analysis Office and Quality Assurance Office, US EPA Region 9, dated September 2014.
       EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) Design Value Report, 2007-2013, dated October 6, 2014.
       EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) Design Value Report, 2001-2006, dated October 7, 2014.
 EPA Region 9, "1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS: Pasadena & Nearby Monitor Trends 2001-2013," undated; and EPA Region 9, "1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS: South Coast Nonattainment Area Trends 2001-2013," undated.
       EPA Region 9, "Maximum Quarterly Value Data Substitution Test for the 24-hour 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS," (file entitled SouthCoast_24hour_1997_PM2.5_TDV.pdf).
       EPA Region 9, "Maximum Quarterly Value Data Substitution Test for the Annual 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS" (file entitled SouthCoast_Annual_1997_PM2.5_TDV.pdf).
       Memorandum to docket EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0708 from Richard A. Wayland, Director, Air Quality Assessment Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Data Handling for the Proposed Clean Data Determination for the South Coast Air Basin Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Annual and 24-hour PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards," dated November 20, 2014.
       EPA, Region IX, Spreadsheet, "South Coast PM2.5 Ambient Monitoring Summary, 2001-2013, undated.
       EPA's Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems, Volume II, May, 2013 (EPA-454/B-13-003), available at the following URL: https://www3.epa.gov/ttnamti1/files/ambient/pm25/qa/QA-Handbook-Vol-II.pdf.
       Physicians for Social Responsibility  -  Los Angeles v. EPA, No 12-70079 (9th Cir., June 9, 2015 (Memorandum Opinion)).
       Letter and enclosures from Gretchen Busterud, Acting Deputy Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX, to Matt Miyasato, Deputy Executive Officer, Science and Technology Advancement, SCAQMD, dated October 29, 2015, with enclosures.
       2014 Raw Data Report (AMP 350, April 14, 2016, file entitled SouthCoast_PM2.5_RawDataReport_2014.pdf).
       Letter, Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, Air Division, EPA Region 9, to Jason Low, PhD, South Coast Air Quality Management District, dated May 2, 2016.
       2014 Raw Data Report, AMP 350, May 5, 2016, (file entitled SouthCoast_PM2.5_RawDataReport_PostSample_Removed.pdf).
       2015 Raw Data Report, AMP 350, May 5, 2016, (file entitled SouthCoast_PM2.5_RawDataReport_PostSample_Removed.pdf).
       EPA, Region IX, Spreadsheet, "South Coast PM2.5 Ambient Monitoring Summary, 2001-2015, undated.
       2015 Raw Data Report (AMP 350, May 24, 2016).
       Combined Site Sample Values Report (AMP355, May 24, 2016).
       EPA Region 9, "Mira Loma (Van Buren) Annual Trends," undated.
D-28.	Email from Michael Flagg, EPA Region IX, to Jefferson Wehling, Meredith Kurpius, Matthew Lakin, Wienke Tax, EPA Region IX, dated March 18, 2016.
E. Public Comments
       Letter from Elizabeth Forsyth, Earthjustice, and Maya Golden-Krasner, Communities for a Better Environment, on behalf of Communities for a Better Environment, Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, WildEarth Guardians, Medical Advocates for Healthy Air, and Physicians for Social Responsibility  -  Los Angeles, to Wienke Tax, US EPA Region 9, dated January 22, 2015.
       Letter from Maya Golden-Krasner, Staff Attorney, Communities for a Better Environment, to Wienke Tax, EPA Region IX, dated December 16, 2014.