From:
David Ailor<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Monday, August 24, 2020 3:29 PM
To:
Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:
Raymond, Gabrielle<EMAIL_ADDRESS>'Mary Kaplan'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>'Allen Dittenhoefer'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>'Knight, Jeffrey A.'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Abby Anderson<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Benoit, Simonne T<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Bill Osborn<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Brenna Harden<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Brett J Tunno<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Brian Lasko<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Carl, Kendra L<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Chris Hardin<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Chris Potts<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Coleen Davis<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Dave Hacker<EMAIL_ADDRESS>David Ailor<EMAIL_ADDRESS>'David Ailor'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>David Fanning<EMAIL_ADDRESS>David Shelton<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Eric Williams<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Heinichen, Nicole L<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Janis Deitch<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Jay Cornelius<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Joe Hanning<EMAIL_ADDRESS>John Hill<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Jonelle Scheetz<EMAIL_ADDRESS>'Julianne Kurdila'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>'Katie Kistler'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Keith Nagel<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Krista Armentrout<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Marian Gammon<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mark Francis<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mark Mustian<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mathias, Cary<EMAIL_ADDRESS>May, Jeffrey X<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mike Bathe<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mike Dzurinko<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Parker Adams<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Pat Gallo<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Patrick Smith<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Rich Zavoda<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Robert B Sanch<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Robert H Carlin<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Skolnekovich, Danielle L<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Solomon Nyathi<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Tishie Woodwell<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Traci Self<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
RE: followup items from coke/EPA meeting

Hi again, Donna Lee.  Hope you're well.

This e-mail is first of several e-mails that I or someone else acting on behalf of the Coke Oven Environmental Task Force (COETF) will be sending to you in the near term to follow-up on the July 29, 2020, Virtual Meeting (VM) among the COETF, you, and other representatives of EPA-OAQPS.  During that VM, we discussed several topics relative to the upcoming Risk and Technology Review (RTR) Review/Rulemaking for Coke Pushing, Quenching, and Battery Stacks (Subpart CCCCC).

The COETF, which is managed by the American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute (ACCCI) and has been in existence since 1996, represents eight of the nine U.S. "by-product recovery" plants (24 "by-product recovery" batteries), including six by-product recovery plants (20 batteries) owned/operated by three integrated steel companies and two by-product recovery plants (4 batteries) owned/operated by two, independently owned/operated "merchant" coke producers.  The COETF does not currently represent one by-product recovery merchant plant owned/operated by Bluestone Coke, and the five merchant "heat recovery"/"nonrecovery" coke plants (20 batteries) owned/operated by SunCoke.

During the VM and via follow-up e-mail (see e-mail below), you asked that we provide information on the topics we discussed, including battery physical measurements and other information needed to develop emission estimates and modeling files.

Enclosed with this e-mail is a document which provides an overview of the topics discussed on July 29 (see "ENCLOSURE - COETF RESPONSE TO EPA 082420.pdf").  Soon, I or someone else will follow-up with additional emails providing the data and other information that EPA has requested.

Please contact me if you have any questions.  DCA

David C. Ailor, P.E.
President
American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute
25 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20001
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>
eFax.:<PHONE_NUMBER>
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>www.accci.org

<< ENCLOSURE - COETF RESPONSE TO EPA 082420.pdf Proprietary and Company Confidential Information Subject to 40 CFR Part 2, Subpart B >>

From: Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Monday, August 3, 2020 2:34 PM
To: David Ailor<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc: 'Raymond, Gabrielle'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: Re: followup items from coke/EPA meeting

Hello again - Other than a copy of the slides, we recall that it was said the facilities/contractors would specifically send the following:

-1998 data on pushing inlet emissions to potentially use as pushing fugitive emissions profile.
- Data used to develop acute toxicity factor of two (2).
 - Adjusting receptor locations, including property boundaries for each facility.

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


Honeywell’s response to Section 114 letter regarding CFC stocks owned.

Confidential Business Information located at EPA headquarters 1310 L St NW.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 111 (Thursday, June 9, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37170-37175]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13693]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0397: FRL-9947-53-Region 10]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Idaho:
Stationary Source Permitting Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve,
and incorporate by reference, revisions to the Idaho State
Implementation Plan submitted on May 21, 2015. In the submission, Idaho
revised stationary source permitting rules, including the addition of
facility-wide emission limits and nonmetallic mineral processing plant
regulations. Idaho also added an alternative method for stationary
sources to comply with sulfur content of fuels limits, and updated
provisions to account for changes to federal air quality regulations.
The EPA proposes to approve the submitted revisions as consistent with
the Clean Air Act and the EPA's implementing regulations.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 11, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2015-0397, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from http://www.regulations.gov. The EPA may
publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information,
the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically at
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours
at the Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Hall at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. State Submission
III. Analysis of Submitted Revisions
    A. Facility-Wide Emissions Cap Rules
    B. Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plant Rules
    C. Sulfur Content of Fuels Provision
    D. Definitions and Baselines for Fine Particulate Matter
    E. Incorporation by Reference Updates
    F. Effect of Court Decisions Vacating and Remanding Certain
Federal Rules
IV. Proposed Action
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) governs the process by which
a state submits air quality protection requirements to the EPA for
approval into the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP is the
state's plan to implement, maintain and enforce the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) set by the EPA. Idaho regularly updates
the Rules for the Control of Air Pollution in Idaho (IDAPA 58.01.01) to
reflect changes to the NAAQS and to improve implementation, maintenance
and enforcement of those standards. We note that Idaho incorporates by
reference portions of certain federal regulations directly into the
SIP. The state generally submits an annual update to the EPA to keep
rules consistent with federal requirements.

II. State Submission

    On May 21, 2015, Idaho submitted revisions to state air quality
rules at IDAPA 58.01.01 to the EPA for approval into the SIP. Idaho
adopted these rule changes on November 19 and November

21, 2014. The state provided notice and an opportunity for public
comment and hearing on the changes. Notices were published in the Idaho
Administrative Bulletin and public hearings were held on September 9
and October 7, 2014. We have evaluated Idaho's submission and propose
to find the state has met the requirements for reasonable notice and
public hearing under section 110 of the CAA.

III. Analysis of Submitted Revisions

A. Facility-Wide Emissions Cap Rules

    In the submission, Idaho revised the rules that permit construction
and operation of stationary sources. Idaho's changes give certain minor
sources the option to apply for facility-wide emission limitations.
These limitations, or caps, when incorporated into a minor source
permit to construct or Tier II operating permit, are intended to allow
minor sources to operate more flexibly, without having to request
permit modifications for certain process changes.
    For example, semiconductor manufacturing facilities make many
equipment and process changes as they develop new products and
technologies. However, many equipment and process changes do not
warrant extensive review as a permit modification. The intent of the
facility-wide emissions cap is to set a cap on emissions from a
facility, while allowing process changes under certain conditions that
may increase emissions. As long as facility emissions stay below the
cap and the process changes do not trigger new requirements, the source
may be permitted to construct and operate.
    The new Idaho rules for limiting emissions from minor sources are
called the facility-wide emissions cap rules, or ``FEC'' rules,
codified at IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> through 181. These rules lay out the
requirements a minor source must meet to request a FEC limit, and the
method for determining the limit. A FEC limit is expressed as tons per
year, on a 12-month rolling basis, and may be applied to any criteria
pollutant or hazardous air pollutant. The FEC rules do not provide for
issuance of a stand-alone permit. Rather, owners or operators of
eligible facilities may request a FEC limit be incorporated into a new
or existing permit to construct or Tier II operating permit. As stated
above, only minor sources are eligible. These include sources that
request an emission limit to avoid major source permitting, otherwise
known as synthetic minor sources.
    In our review, we have evaluated the addition of the FEC option to
determine if the revised minor source permit to construct and Tier II
operating permit programs continue to comply with the CAA and the EPA's
implementing regulations. We propose to find that they do, and that the
FEC rules are approvable for the reasons stated below.
    First, the FEC rules contain adequate provisions to prevent sources
operating under a FEC limit from causing or contributing to a violation
of the NAAQS. CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) requires ``. . . regulation of
the modification and construction of any stationary source . . . as
necessary to assure that the [NAAQS] are achieved.'' The EPA's
implementing regulations for minor sources, set forth in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR 51.160 through 164, require a state
to have procedures to prevent construction or modification of a source
if it will result in a violation of a pollution control strategy, or if
it will interfere with the attainment or maintenance of a NAAQS.
    The FEC rules ensure maintenance of the NAAQS by limiting the
option to obtain a FEC limit to minor sources and requiring the
applicant to demonstrate that operating under the FEC limit will not
cause or contribute to a violation of a NAAQS. As stated in IDAPA
<IP_ADDRESS>.02.a, major sources, or sources undergoing a major
modification, cannot obtain a FEC limit. Moreover, by its terms, the
FEC limit is set below major source thresholds. The FEC rules at IDAPA
<IP_ADDRESS>.03 through .04 also require recordkeeping and reporting,
including an annual report, demonstrating compliance with the FEC
limit(s) and maintenance of the NAAQS.
    Second, the addition of the FEC option does not alleviate any of
the application requirements for either the minor source permit to
construct program or the Tier II operating permit program. The EPA has
already approved Idaho's application procedures for both programs. The
EPA approved revisions to Idaho's minor source permit to construct
application procedures most recently on January 16, 2003 (68 FR
2217).\1\ Similarly, the EPA approved revisions to Idaho's Tier II
operating permit program most recently on November 26, 2010 (75 FR
72719).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA did not approve section .03 of IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>
because it is related to toxic air pollutants and not the criteria
pollutants or other requirements of CAA section 110 (January 16,
2003; 68 FR 2217, at page 2221).
    \2\ The EPA did not approve section .01.a and section .04 of
IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>1, related to alternative emission limits and
compliance date extensions (November 26, 2010; 75 FR 72719, at page
72723).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In sum, we are proposing to approve and incorporate by reference
the FEC rules at IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> through 181 into the Idaho SIP,
except as the rules relate to hazardous air pollutants. Hazardous air
pollutants are regulated under CAA section 112, and are not appropriate
for approval into the SIP. The SIP includes provisions related to
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS, and other specific
requirements of CAA section 110. We are also proposing to approve and
incorporate by reference the revisions to IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Permit to
Construct Required and IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>1 Tier II Operating Permit to
appropriately cross-reference the FEC rules. However, consistent with
our previous action on November 26, 2010, we are not approving section
.01.a and section .04 of IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>1 because the provisions
allow for unbounded director's discretion (75 FR 72719).

B. Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plant Rules

    In the submission, Idaho made changes to streamline the permit
process for rock crushers, asphalt plants, and other portable equipment
used to process nonmetallic minerals. Instead of continuing to require
that a regulated rock crusher obtain a permit to construct before
starting operation, Idaho created a permit by rule that establishes
controls and other operating parameters that apply to an eligible
source upon registration with the Idaho Department of Environmental
Quality.
    These requirements are codified at IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>0 through 799
Rules for the Control of Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants. Sources
that register and operate in compliance with the rules are considered
to have a ``permit by rule.'' Only minor sources that operate for less
than twelve consecutive months at a single location are eligible for
the permit by rule. Sources covered by the Federal New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) at 40 CFR part 60, subpart OOO are not
eligible, nor are new and modified major sources. By extension, rock
crushers that are part of a new major source or proposed major
modification are not eligible for the permit by rule.
    The requirements for eligible nonmetallic mineral processing plants
specify that obtaining a permit by rule does not relieve the owner or
operator of an eligible source from the responsibility of complying
with other federal, state and local applicable laws, regulations, and
requirements. The rules make clear that sources subject to the NSPS for
Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants, or the NSPS for

Portland Cement Plants or Hot Mix Asphalt Plants, must continue to
comply with the NSPS limits and controls, as applicable. Provisions in
the rules related to NSPS and title V source operating permits (IDAPA
<IP_ADDRESS>2 and IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>4.04) are generally not appropriate
for SIP approval because they are not intended to implement the
requirements of CAA section 110. Moreover, the NSPS for Nonmetallic
Mineral Processing Plants, codified at 40 CFR part 60, subpart OOO,
applies to affected facilities by its terms regardless of Idaho's rule.
See 40 CFR 60.670.
    The nonmetallic mineral processing plant rules set out the
registration process and operating parameters for rock crushers and
other eligible sources, including limits on the hours of operation,
fuel consumptions rates, best management practices, and general
controls designed to ensure compliance with the NAAQS. The registration
procedures for the permit by rule are contained in IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>5
through 799. Owners and operators may choose to operate an eligible
plant under the permit by rule by registering the new or modified
processing plant fifteen days prior to commencing operation or
modification. As part of the registration, the owner or operator must
supply information, such as manufacturer, model, and throughput
capacity, on the rock crushers, screen decks, and electric generators
proposed to be part of the processing plant.
    Owners and operators who register their nonmetallic mineral
processing plants are deemed to have a permit by rule if they operate
the plants in accordance with the applicable substantive requirements.
In general, the rules prohibit emissions that would be injurious to
human health or welfare, animal or plant life, or property, or that
would interfere unreasonably with the enjoyment of life or property. In
addition, owners and operators of eligible sources must take all
reasonable precautions to prevent the generation of fugitive dust, in
addition to meeting specific opacity standards spelled out for
categories of activities at areas of operation.
    Specific requirements sources must meet include fuel restrictions,
limits on operating hours, and monitoring and recordkeeping
requirements for electrical generators at a source. For example,
electrical generators must run on American Society of Testing and
Materials (ASTM) Grade 1 or 2 fuel oil and must also meet specific
sulfur content in fuel restrictions. Sources also must restrict visible
emissions from various activities to 20% opacity or less, aggregating
more than three minutes in any sixty minute period. NSPS-regulated
processing plants are held to stricter opacity limits.
    In addition to meeting opacity limits, sources must use best
management practices to limit fugitive dust from the operation,
including controls on paved public roads, unpaved haul roads, transfer
points, screening operations, stacks and vents, crushers and grinding
mills, and stockpiles. These best management practices are triggered
during the course of operations, for instance when observed visible
emissions from vehicle traffic approaches the opacity limit, or when
citizen complaints come in that have merit. Sources must maintain a
daily record of observing the operation, including when events trigger
required control strategies and the corrective actions taken.
    Idaho also amended IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> to include new terms
supporting the nonmetallic mineral processing plant rules. The new
definitions include: ``Best Management Practice,'' ``Control Strategy
Trigger,'' ``Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plant,'' ``NSPS Regulated
Facility or Plant,'' ``Permit by Rule,'' ``Progressive Control
Strategy,'' and ``Site of Operations.''
    The EPA proposes to determine that the permit by rule provisions
for rock crushers and other nonmetallic mineral processing plants are
consistent with the types of permit terms and conditions that are
generally used when issuing source-specific permits to sources in this
category, and may in fact be more prescriptive. We also propose to
conclude that the addition of the nonmetallic mineral processing rules
are consistent with the CAA and the EPA's implementing regulations at
40 CFR 51.160 through 164. We are therefore proposing to approve IDAPA
<IP_ADDRESS> and IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>0 through 799 into the Idaho SIP,
except IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>2, and IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>4.04 because they are
not related to the requirements of CAA section 110 and are
inappropriate for SIP approval.

C. Sulfur Content of Fuels Provision

    The Idaho sulfur content of fuels provision regulates the sulfur
dioxide emissions from stationary sources by setting limits on the
sulfur content of residual fuel oil, distillate fuel oil, and coal that
is sold, distributed, used, or made available in Idaho. The provision
is located in IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>5 Rules for Sulfur Content of Fuels. In
the submission, Idaho revised the rule provision to allow a stationary
source--when applying for a permit to construct or operate--to request
an alternative method to comply with sulfur in fuel limits. The
revision specifies that the alternative may only be allowed if the
applicant demonstrates that sulfur dioxide emissions would be equal to
or less than emissions would be under the prescribed sulfur content of
fuel limits. In other words, to get approval to use a fuel with higher
sulfur content, a stationary source must show that, by installing a
control device, the source can reduce hourly controlled emissions to
less than the maximum hourly emissions from combusting complying fuels.
    If a demonstration meets the rule requirements, the Idaho
Department of Environmental Quality may approve the alternative
compliance method into a stationary source permit to construct or
operating permit. Any permit issued must contain the appropriate source
monitoring, record-keeping and reporting requirements, for ensuring
compliance, in accordance with Idaho's federally-approved permit to
construct and operating permit programs.
    We note that this rule revision alone does not allow the Idaho
Department of Environmental Quality to relax any existing permit limits
or conditions without also ensuring compliance with existing permit
rules. In addition, any modification required for a stationary source
to combust higher sulfur fuels, even without increasing allowable
emissions, may be subject to preconstruction permitting rules.
    Based on the information above, we conclude that the rule change is
designed to protect the NAAQS, and we propose to approve and
incorporate by reference the revision to IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>5 Rules for
Sulfur Content of Fuels.

D. Definitions and Baselines for Fine Particulate Matter

    In the submission, Idaho revised IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> General
Definitions to clarify that the definition of ``Criteria Air
Pollutant'' includes fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and
added specific definitions for PM2.5 and PM2.5
emissions. Idaho also updated the Baselines for Prevention of
Significant Deterioration rule section to add major and minor source
baseline dates for PM2.5. We propose to approve these
revisions as consistent with the CAA, the EPA's fine particulate matter
standards set forth at 40 CFR 50.18, and major and minor source
baseline dates and area requirements detailed at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)
and (15). We note that, consistent with our previous action on March 3,
2014, we are not approving

the terms defined in sections .49, .50, .51, .66, .67, .68.b, .114, and
.116 because these terms relate to toxic air pollutants, not the
criteria pollutants and the requirements of CAA section 110 (79 FR
11711).

E. Incorporation by Reference Updates

    Idaho revised section .03 of IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Incorporations by
Reference by updating the citation dates that incorporate federal
provisions effective as of that date. Paragraph .a incorporates by
reference the Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans, 40 CFR part 51, with the exception of certain
visibility-related provisions, effective July 1, 2014. We note that
Idaho did not submit updates to the incorporation of federal provisions
relied on as part of the State's nonattainment area major stationary
source preconstruction permitting program.
    Paragraphs .b, .d, and .e of the same section incorporate the
following provisions effective July 1, 2014: .b National Primary and
Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards, 40 CFR part 50; .d Ambient Air
Monitoring Reference and Equivalent Methods, 40 CFR part 53; and .e
Ambient Air Quality Surveillance, 40 CFR part 58. We propose to find
that paragraphs .b, .d, and .e are consistent with CAA requirements.
Idaho did not submit paragraphs .f through .n for approval because the
provisions are not related to CAA section 110 and the criteria
pollutants, and are inappropriate for SIP approval.
    Paragraph .c incorporates the Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans, 40 CFR part 52 subparts A and N, and appendices D
and E. This includes the Federal Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) permitting rules at 40 CFR 52.21, effective July 1,
2014. We propose to find that paragraph .c is consistent with CAA
requirements. We note that specific federal PSD permitting rules have
been vacated and remanded by the courts to the EPA. Idaho has responded
by submitting rule changes to align the Idaho SIP with the court
decisions. Please see Section III. F. below.

F. Effect of Court Decisions Vacating and Remanding Certain Federal
Rules

1. PM2.5 PSD Provisions
    As discussed above, Idaho incorporates by reference federal PSD
permitting requirements. The current Idaho SIP incorporates these
rules, codified at 40 CFR 52.21, as of July 1, 2012, except revisions
to 40 CFR 52.21(i) (relating to the significant monitoring
concentration (SMC)) and 40 CFR 52.21(k) (relating to the significant
impact level (SIL)) that added a SMC and SIL for PM2.5 as
part of the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Implementation Rule (October 20,
2010, 75 FR 64864). We partially disapproved Idaho's previous submittal
incorporating these provisions because they were vacated by a court
after Idaho had already adopted and submitted them to the EPA (April 7,
2015, 80 FR 18526).
    On January 22, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia, in Sierra Club v. EPA,\3\ issued, with respect to the SMC, a
judgment that, among other things, vacated the provisions adding the
PM2.5 SMC to the federal regulations at 40 CFR
51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c). In its decision, the Court
held that the EPA did not have the authority to use SMCs to exempt
permit applicants from the statutory requirement in section 165(e)(2)
of the CAA that ambient monitoring data for PM2.5 be
included in all PSD permit applications. Thus, although the
PM2.5 SMC was not a required element of a state's PSD
program, where a state PSD program contains such a provision and allows
issuance of new permits without requiring ambient PM2.5
monitoring data, such application of the vacated SMC would be
inconsistent with the Court's opinion and the requirements of section
165(e)(2) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 703 F.3d 458 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the EPA's request, the decision also vacated and remanded the
portions of the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Implementation Rule that
revised 40 CFR 51.166 and 40 CFR 52.21 related to SILs for
PM2.5. The EPA requested this vacatur and remand of two of
the three provisions in the EPA regulations that contain SILs for
PM2.5 because the wording of these two SIL provisions (40
CFR 51.166(k)(2) and 40 CFR 52.21(k)(2)) is inconsistent with the
explanation of when and how SILs should be used by permitting
authorities that we provided in the preamble to the Federal Register
publication when we promulgated these provisions. The third SIL
provision (40 CFR 51.165(b)(2)) was not vacated and remains in effect.
We also note that the Court's decision does not affect the PSD
increments for PM2.5 promulgated as part of the 2010 PSD
PM2.5 Implementation Rule.
    On December 9, 2013, the EPA amended its regulations to remove the
vacated PM2.5 SILs and SMC provisions from the federal PSD
regulations (78 FR 73698). In response, Idaho updated the incorporation
by reference of federal PSD regulations to July 1, 2014, capturing the
EPA's removal of the vacated provisions. Idaho also revised the ambient
air quality analysis requirements for major sources seeking PSD permits
(IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Permit to Construct, at section .01) to clarify the
appropriate use of a SIL and reference the federal PSD regulation
listing SILs. We propose to find that these revisions are consistent
with the Court's opinion and current EPA PSD regulations.
2. PSD Deferral of Certain Emissions From Biogenic Sources
    In 2011, the EPA revised the definition of ``subject to
regulation'' at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(ii)(a). The intent was to defer for
three years (until July 21, 2014) PSD permitting for carbon dioxide
(CO2) emissions from bioenergy and other biogenic stationary
sources (Deferral for CO2 Emissions from Bioenergy and Other
Biogenic Sources under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) and Title V Programs; Final Rule (July 20, 2011, 76 FR 43490)
(Biogenic CO2 Deferral Rule)). Idaho's SIP incorporates by
reference federal PSD permitting rules and includes this deferral
provision.
    On July 12, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia, in Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA,\4\ vacated the
Biogenic CO2 Deferral Rule. The deferral expired on July 21,
2014, and by its terms is no longer in effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 722 F.3d 401 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. PSD Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule
    On June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme Court, in Utility Air
Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency,\5\ issued a
decision addressing the application of PSD permitting to greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions. The Supreme Court said that the EPA may not treat GHGs
as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a source is a
major source (or modification thereof) required to obtain a PSD permit.
The Court also said that the EPA could continue to require that PSD
permits, otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than
GHGs, contain limits on GHG emissions based on the application of Best
Available Control Technology (BACT).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 134 S.Ct. 2427 (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to act consistently with its understanding of the Court's
decision, pending further judicial action before the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia to effectuate the decision, the
EPA is not continuing to apply the EPA regulations that would require
SIPs to include permitting requirements that the Supreme Court found

impermissible. Specifically, the EPA is not applying the requirement
that a state's SIP-approved PSD program require that sources obtain PSD
permits when GHGs are the only pollutant (i) that the source emits or
has the potential to emit above the major source thresholds, or (ii)
for which there is a significant emissions increase and a significant
net emissions increase from a modification (e.g., 40 CFR
51.166(b)(48)(v)).
    The EPA recently revised federal PSD rules in light of the Supreme
Court decision (May 7, 2015, 80 FR 26183). In addition, we anticipate
that many states will revise their existing SIP-approved PSD programs
in light of the Supreme Court's decision. We do not expect that all
states have revised their existing PSD program regulations yet,
however, we are evaluating submitted PSD program revision to ensure
that the state's program correctly addresses GHGs, consistent with the
Court's decision.
    Idaho's current SIP contains the GHG permitting requirements
reflected in 40 CFR 52.21, as amended in the Tailoring Rule. As a
result, the PSD permitting program in Idaho, previously approved into
the SIP, continues to require that PSD permits (otherwise required
based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs) contain limits on GHG
emissions, based on the application of BACT, when sources emit or
increase GHGs in the amount of 75,000 tons per year (measured as carbon
dioxide equivalent).
    Although the approved Idaho PSD permitting program may also
currently contain provisions that are no longer necessary in light of
the Supreme Court decision, this does not prevent the EPA from
approving this SIP submission. Idaho's submission does not add any GHG
permitting requirements that are inconsistent with the Supreme Court
decision. While Idaho's submission incorporates all of 40 CFR 52.21 for
completeness, the submission reincorporates PSD requirements for GHGs
already in the Idaho SIP.

IV. Proposed Action

    We propose to approve, and incorporate by reference into the Idaho
SIP, changes to the following provisions submitted on May 21, 2015:
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> General Definitions, except .49, .50,
.51, .66, .67, .68.b, .114, and .116 (State effective 4/11/2014);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Definitions for the Purposes of
Sections 790 through 799 (State effective 3/15/2002);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Incorporations by Reference, except
.03.f through .n, and with respect to .a, the incorporation by
reference of 40 CFR 51.165 (State effective 4/11/2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Test Methods and Procedures (State
effective 4/11/2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Procedures and Requirements for Permits
Establishing a Facility Emissions Cap (State effective 4/11/2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Facility Emissions Cap, except for
provisions relating to hazardous air pollutants (State effective 4/11/
2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Application Procedures (State effective
4/11/2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Standard Contents of Permits
Establishing a Facility Emissions Cap (State effective 4/11/2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Procedures for Issuing Permits
Establishing a Facility Emissions Cap (State effective 4/11/2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Revisions to Permits Establishing a
Facility Emissions Cap (State effective 4/11/2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Notice and Record-Keeping of Estimates
of Ambient Concentrations (State effective 4/11/2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Permit to Construct Required (State
effective 4/11/2006);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS> Application Procedures (State effective
4/11/2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>1 Tier II Operating Permit, except .01.a
and .04, (State effective 4/11/2006);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>9 Baselines for Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (State effective 4/11/2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>5 Rules for Sulfur Content of Fuels
(State effective 4/11/2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>0 Rules for the Control of Nonmetallic
Mineral Processing Plants (State effective 3/15/2002);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>1 General Control Requirements, (State
effective 3/15/2002);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>3 Emissions Standards for Nonmetallic
Mineral Processing Plants not Subject to 40 CFR 60, Subpart OOO (State
effective 3/15/2002);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>4 Permit Requirements, except .04 (State
effective 4/11/2015);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>5 Permit by Rule Requirements (State
effective 3/15/2002);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>6 Applicability (State effective 3/15/
2002);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>7 Registration for Permit by Rule (State
effective 3/15/2002);
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>8 Electrical Generators (State effective
3/15/2002); and
     IDAPA <IP_ADDRESS>9 Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plan
Fugitive Dust Best Management Practice (State effective 3/15/2002).

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, we are proposing to include in a final rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are proposing to incorporate by
reference the provisions described above in Section IV. Proposed
Action. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available electronically through http://www.regulations.gov
and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES
section of this preamble for more information).

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves state law as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);

     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because it does not involve technical standards; and
     does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: May 26, 2016.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2016-13693 Filed 6-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: June 3, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 106)]
[Notices]
[Page 31496-31499]
[DOCID:fr03jn10-102]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62167; File No. SR-NYSE-2010-37]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Add Certain Violations of Its Communications and Give-Up Policies to
Its MRVP

May 25, 2010.
    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 May 12, 2010, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rule 476A to add Rule 36
(Communications Between Exchange and Members' Offices) to its List of
Exchange Rule Violations and Fines Applicable Thereto (``Minor Rule
Violation Plan'').\3\ The text of the proposed rule change is available
on NYSE's Web site at http://www.nyse.com, on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.sec.gov, at NYSE, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange's corporate affiliate, NYSE Amex LLC (``NYSE
Amex''), submitted a companion rule filing proposing corresponding
amendments to NYSE Amex Disciplinary Rule 476A. See SR-NYSEAmex-
2010-44.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

 1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rule 476A to add Rule 36
(Communications Between Exchange and Members' Offices) to its Minor
Rule Violation Plan.
Background
    Effective October 1, 2008, the Exchange's parent company, NYSE
Euronext, acquired the parent company of NYSE Amex pursuant to an
Agreement and Plan of Merger (the ``Merger'').\4\ In connection with
the

Merger, on December 1, 2008, NYSE Amex relocated all equities trading
conducted on its legacy trading systems and facilities located at 86
Trinity Place, New York, New York to systems and facilities located at
11 Wall Street, New York, New York (the ``Equities Relocation'').\5\
Similarly, on March 2, 2009, NYSE Amex relocated all its options
trading to trading systems and facilities located at 11 Wall Street,
New York, New York (the ``Options Relocation'').\6\ As a result of the
Equities and Options Relocations, the NYSE and NYSE Amex Equities
Trading Floors are located within the 11 Wall Street building in a room
adjacent to the NYSE Amex Options Trading Floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58673 (September 29,
2008), 73 FR 57707 (October 3, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-60 and SR-Amex-
2008-62) (order approving the Merger).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58705 (October 1,
2008), 73 FR 58995 (October 8, 2008) (SR-Amex-2008-63) (order
approving the Equities Relocation).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59472 (February 27,
2009), 74 FR 9843 (March 6, 2009) (SR-NYSEALTR-2008-14) (order
approving the Options Relocation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current NYSE Rule 36
    NYSE Rule 36 governs two primary areas: (i) Communications between
the Floor and other locations, and (ii) the use and/or possession of
portable or wireless communication or trading devices.
    First, Rule 36 broadly prohibits members and member organizations
from establishing or maintaining any telephonic or electronic
communication between the Floor and any other location without Exchange
approval. In addition, there are several supplementary provisions that
provide more detailed prescriptions for members and member firms.
    Rule 36.10 advises members and member organizations that the phone
company will not install or disconnect any line between the Floor and
any other location without Exchange approval and that such requests
should be sent to the Exchange's Market Operations Division. Rule 36.60
further prohibits members and member organizations from listing a phone
line in the name of a non-member.
    Rule 36.20 provides that Floor brokers may maintain a phone line at
their booth locations on the Floor, or use an Exchange issued and
authorized portable phone, to communicate with non-members off the
Floor. Only Exchange issued and authorized portable phones may be used
on the Floor in accordance with the prescriptions of Rule 36.21, and
the use of personal phones is expressly prohibited.\7\ Rule 36.21
provides that Floor brokers using an Exchange issued and authorized
portable phone may communicate directly from the point of sale on the
Floor with someone off-Floor. In addition to processing orders, Floor
brokers may also provide ``market look'' observations over the phone.
When taking orders over the phone, Floor brokers must comply with Rule
123(e), which requires entry of the order into an electronic system, as
well as any and all other record retention requirements under Exchange
Rules and the federal securities laws. Exchange issued phones do not
permit call-forwarding or call-waiting and may not block a caller's
identification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Although the Exchange does not currently trade ``basket''
securities, as defined in Rule 800, Rule 36 provides that Floor
brokers trading such securities may establish phone lines at the
basket trading location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Notwithstanding the prescriptions of Rule 36.20, Rule 36.23
provides that members and employees of member organizations may use
personal portable or wireless communications devices, including phones,
outside the Exchange Trading Floor.\8\ In addition, members and
employees of member organizations may not use personal portable or
wireless communication devices on the NYSE Amex Options Trading Floor
unless they are also registered to trade options on NYSE Amex.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Rule 6A defines ``Trading Floor'' as the restricted-access
physical areas designated by the Exchange for the trading of
equities securities, commonly known as the ``Main Room'' and the
``Garage.'' The Exchange's Trading Floor does not include the areas
where NYSE Amex-listed options are traded, commonly known as the
``Blue Room'' and the ``Extended Blue Room,'' also known as the
``NYSE Amex Options Trading Floor.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 36.30 provides that, subject to Exchange approval, a DMM Unit
may maintain a phone line at its post to communicate with its off-Floor
business operations and/or its clearing firm. For trading purposes, a
DMM Unit's phone line may only be used to enter hedging orders through
the firm's off-Floor office or clearing firm, or through a member of an
options or futures exchange as permitted under Rules 98 and 105.
    Under Rule 36.30, a DMM Unit may also maintain a wired or wireless
device that has been registered with the Exchange, such as a computer
terminal or laptop, to communicate with the DMM Unit's off-Floor
algorithms. A DMM Unit using such a wired or wireless device must
certify that the device operates in accordance with all SEC and
Exchange rules, policies, and procedures. In addition, the DMM Unit
must create and maintain records of all messages generated by the wired
or wireless device in compliance with NYSE Rule 440 and SEC Rules 17a-3
and 17a-4.
    In addition, a DMM Unit registered in an Investment Company Unit
(as defined in Section 703.16 of the Listed Company Manual) or a Trust
Issued Receipt (as defined in Rule 1200) may use a telephone connection
or order entry terminal at its post to enter proprietary orders in (i)
the Investment Company Unit or Trust Issued Receipt in another market
center, (ii) a component security of such a Unit or Receipt, or (iii)
options or futures related to such Unit or Receipt, and may also use
the phone to obtain market information with respect to such securities.
Any such order executed on the Exchange must be entered and executed in
compliance with Exchange Rule 112.20 and SEC Rule 11a2-2(T) and may
only be entered for hedging purposes.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange does not currently list or trade any Investment
Company Units or Trust Issued Receipts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To address concerns regarding improper information sharing between
the Exchange's Trading Floor and the adjacent NYSE Amex Options Trading
Floor, Rule 36.70 prohibits members and member firm employees from (i)
using or possessing any wireless trading device that may be used to
view or enter orders into the Exchange's trading systems while on the
NYSE Amex Options Trading Floor, and (ii) using or possessing any
wireless trading device that may be used to view or enter orders into
the NYSE Amex Options trading systems while on the Exchange's Trading
Floor. These prohibitions apply to any and all wireless trading
devices, including devices issued by the Exchange or NYSE Amex, as well
as devices that are proprietary to a member, member organization or
other entity.
    Finally, Rules 36.40 and 36.50 prescribe certain timing and
handling requirements for ``give-up'' or ``step out'' transactions,
whereby a member or member organization executes a customer trade on
behalf of another member. While not directly related to member or
member organization communications or the use and/or possession of
portable or wireless communication or trading devices, these
requirements are important for ensuring that members and member
organizations properly document these types of transactions.
Proposed Rule Change
    As noted above, the Exchange proposes to add NYSE Rule 36 to its

Minor Rule Violation Plan under Rule 476A.
    Under the Exchange's Minor Rule Violation Plan, the Exchange may
impose a fine, not to exceed $5,000, on any member, member
organization, allied member, approved person, or registered or non-
registered employee of a member or member organization for a minor
violation of specified Exchange rules. Such fines provide a meaningful
sanction for rule violations where the facts and circumstances of the
violation do not warrant the initiation of a formal disciplinary
procedure under Rule 476, but do require a regulatory response that is
more significant than an admonition letter.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange's Minor Rule Violation Plan was originally
adopted by the Exchange and approved by the Commission in 1985. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-21688 (January 25, 1985), 50
FR 5025-01 (February 5, 1985) (SR-NYSE-84-27). It has been amended
numerous times since its adoption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, because Rule 36 is not part of the Exchange's Minor Rule
Violation Plan, if a member or member firm employee were to violate the
prohibitions set forth in Rule 36 the Exchange would be limited to
issuing either an admonition letter or initiating formal proceedings
under Rule 476. This is the case whether or not the member or member
firm employee violated the rule once or many times, and regardless of
whether he or she made an inadvertent error or an intentional one.
    The Exchange believes that the current regulatory approach for
dealing with Rule 36 violations is too inflexible. The Exchange
recognizes that members or member firm employees may violate the
prescriptions of Rule 36 intentionally, as well as accidentally or
inadvertently. When a violation is intentional, formal disciplinary
measures in accordance with Rule 476 may be warranted. However, while
an admonition letter might be appropriate for an isolated accidental or
inadvertent violation, in other cases an admonition letter would be
inadequate even though a formal proceeding may not be warranted. The
Exchange believes that the addition of Rule 36 to its Minor Rule
Violation Plan under Rule 476A will provide a more flexible and
appropriate enforcement tool that preserves the Exchange's discretion
to seek formal discipline under appropriate circumstances.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with, and furthers the objectives of, Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\
in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. The proposed rule change also furthers the objectives
of Section 6(b)(6) of the Act,\12\ in that it provides for appropriate
discipline for violations of Exchange rules and regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will provide
the Exchange with greater regulatory flexibility to enforce the
prescriptions of NYSE Rule 36 in a more informal manner while also
preserving the Exchange's discretion to seek formal discipline for more
serious transgressions as warranted.

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

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

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change: (i) Does not
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) does not impose any significant burden on competition;
and (iii) by its terms, does not become operative for 30 days from the
date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may
designate, if consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the self-regulatory organization to submit to the
Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule
change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule
change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of
the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2010-37 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-NYSE-2010-37. 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 Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. 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-
NYSE-2010-37 and should be submitted on or before June 24, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12) and 200.30-3(a)(44).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-13338 Filed 6-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 163 (Thursday, August 26, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47649-47650]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18317]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2021-D-0691]

Pharmacokinetic-Based Criteria for Supporting Alternative Dosing
Regimens of Programmed Cell Death Receptor-1 or Programmed Cell Death-
Ligand 1 Blocking Antibodies for Treatment of Patients With Cancer;
Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled
``Pharmacokinetic-Based Criteria for Supporting Alternative Dosing
Regimens of Programmed Cell Death Receptor-1 (PD-1) or Programmed Cell
Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1) Blocking Antibodies for Treatment of Patients
with Cancer.'' This draft guidance provides recommendations for
sponsors of investigational new drug applications (INDs) and biologics
license applications (BLAs) on the use of pharmacokinetic (PK)-based
criteria to support the approval of alternative dosing regimens for
programmed cell death receptor-1 (PD-1) or programmed cell death-ligand
1 (PD-L1) blocking antibodies. This draft guidance is based on
accumulated scientific and regulatory experience for PD-1 and PD-L1
drugs, and as such, does not address development of alternative dosing
regimens for any other drugs or biologics, changes in route of
administration, or novel formulations of previously approved PD-1/PD-L1
products.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by October 25, 2021 to ensure that the Agency considers your
comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final
version of the guidance.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as
follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2021-D-0691 for ``Pharmacokinetic-Based Criteria for Supporting
Alternative Dosing Regimens of Programmed Cell Death Receptor-1 (PD-1)
or Programmed Cell Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1) Blocking Antibodies for
Treatment of Patients with Cancer.'' Received comments will be placed
in the docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential
Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at
the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential

with a heading or cover note that states ``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will review this copy, including
the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments.
The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information
redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted
on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets
Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information
to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the
cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify
this information as ``confidential.'' Any information marked as
``confidential'' will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR
10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about
FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September
18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to
the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave.,
Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one
self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your
request. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the draft guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Booth, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 2186, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-
1508.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry
entitled ``Pharmacokinetic-Based Criteria for Supporting Alternative
Dosing Regimens of Programmed Cell Death Receptor-1 (PD-1) or
Programmed Cell Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1) Blocking Antibodies for
Treatment of Patients with Cancer.'' This draft guidance provides
recommendations for sponsors of INDs and BLAs on the use of PK-based
criteria to support the approval of alternative dosing regimens for PD-
1 or PD-L1 blocking antibodies. The draft guidance is based on
accumulated scientific and regulatory experience for PD-1 and PD-L1
drugs and, as such, does not address development of alternative dosing
regimens for any other drugs or biologics, changes in route of
administration, or novel formulations of previously approved PD-1/PD-L1
products.
    Sponsors may seek approval of alternative intravenous (IV) dosing
regimens that are different from those tested in clinical efficacy and
safety trials. These alternative IV dosing regimens are typically
designed to change doses (e.g., body weight adjusted doses to flat
doses) and/or dosing intervals (e.g., once every 3 weeks to once every
6 weeks). Longer dosing interval periods can minimize patient burden
and reduce risks associated with more frequent administration (e.g.,
infusion reactions), as well as exposure to communicable diseases
(e.g., SARS-CoV-2) associated with visits to hospitals or infusion
centers. The draft guidance describes the criteria for using the PK-
based approach and the documents that should be included in the
submissions seeking approval.
    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on
``Pharmacokinetic-Based Criteria for Supporting Alternative Dosing
Regimens of Programmed Cell Death Receptor-1 (PD-1) or Programmed Cell
Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1) Blocking Antibodies for Treatment of Patients
with Cancer.'' It does not establish any rights for any person and is
not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach
if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and
regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does
refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not
required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of
information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA. The collections
of information in 21 CFR part 312 have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0014 and the collections of information in 21 CFR part 601
have been approved under 0910-0338.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance
at either https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information/guidances-drugs, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents, or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: August 17, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-18317 Filed 8-25-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 120 (Friday, June 25, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33718-33719]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13593]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2021-N-0492]

Watson Laboratories, Inc. et al.; Withdrawal of Approval of 36
Abbreviated New Drug Applications

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is
withdrawing approval of 36 abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs)
from multiple applicants. The applicants notified the Agency in writing
that the drug products were no longer marketed and requested that the
approval of the applications be withdrawn.

DATES: Approval is withdrawn as of July 26, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martha Nguyen, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 75, Rm. 1676, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-
402-6980<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The applicants listed in the table have
informed FDA that these drug products are no longer marketed and have
requested that FDA withdraw approval of the applications under the
process described in Sec.  314.150(c) (21 CFR 314.150(c)). The
applicants have also, by their requests, waived their opportunity for a
hearing. Withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated
application under Sec.  314.150(c) is without prejudice to refiling.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Application  No.                Drug                Applicant
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANDA 062142.................  Doxycycline Hyclate   Watson Laboratories,
                               Capsules,             Inc. (an indirect,
                               Equivalent to (EQ)    wholly owned
                               50 milligrams (mg)    subsidiary of Teva
                               base and EQ 200 mg    Pharmaceuticals
                               base.                 USA, Inc.), 400
                                                     Interpace Pkwy.,
                                                     Building A,
                                                     Parsippany, NJ
                                                     07054.
ANDA 062497.................  Doxycycline Hyclate   Teva Pharmaceuticals
                               Capsules, EQ 50 mg    USA, Inc. 400
                               base and EQ 100 mg    Interpace Pkwy.,
                               base.                 Building A,
                                                     Parsippany, NJ
                                                     07054.
ANDA 065152.................  Cephalexin Capsules,  Yung Shin
                               EQ 250 mg base and    Pharmaceutical Ind.
                               EQ 500 mg base.       Co. Ltd.,
                                                     authorized U.S.
                                                     agent, Carlsbad
                                                     Technology, Inc./
                                                     Simon Law, 5922
                                                     Farnsworth Ct.,
                                                     Suite 101,
                                                     Carlsbad, CA 92008.
ANDA 070550.................  Propranolol           Watson Laboratories,
                               Hydrochloride (HCl)   Inc.
                               Tablets, 40 mg.
ANDA 070551.................  Propranolol HCl       Do.
                               Tablets, 80 mg.
ANDA 070943.................  Oxazepam Capsules,    IVAX Pharmaceuticals
                               10 mg.                Inc. (an indirect
                                                     wholly owned
                                                     subsidiary of Teva
                                                     Pharmaceuticals
                                                     USA, Inc.), 400
                                                     Interpace Pkwy.,
                                                     Building A,
                                                     Parsippany, NJ
                                                     07054.
ANDA 070945.................  Oxazepam Capsules,    Do.
                               30 mg.
ANDA 071446.................  Temazepam Capsules,   Watson Laboratories,
                               15 mg.                Inc.
ANDA 071447.................  Temazepam Capsules,   Do.
                               30 mg.
ANDA 072952.................  Oxazepam Capsules,    Do.
                               10 mg.
ANDA 073092.................  Baclofen Tablets, 10  Do.
                               mg.

ANDA 074400.................  Diflunisal Tablets,   Do.
                               250 mg and 500 mg.
ANDA 074432.................  Diclofenac Sodium     Pliva, Inc. (an
                               Delayed Release       indirect, wholly
                               Tablets, 50 mg and    owned subsidiary of
                               75 mg.                Teva
                                                     Pharmaceuticals
                                                     USA, Inc.), 400
                                                     Interpace Pkwy.,
                                                     Building A,
                                                     Parsippany, NJ
                                                     07054.
ANDA 074460.................  Piroxicam Capsules,   Watson Laboratories,
                               10 mg and 20 mg.      Inc.
ANDA 074585.................  Indapamide Tablets,   Do.
                               1.25 mg and 2.5 mg.
ANDA 074698.................  Baclofen Tablets, 10  Do.
                               mg and 20 mg.
ANDA 074711.................  Mexiletine HCl        Do.
                               Capsules, 150 mg,
                               200 mg and 250 mg.
ANDA 074723.................  Diclofenac Sodium     Teva Pharmaceuticals
                               Delayed Release       USA, Inc.
                               Tablets, 50 mg.
ANDA 074852.................  Diltiazem HCl         Actavis Laboratories
                               Extended Release      FL, Inc. (an
                               Capsules, 120 mg,     indirect, wholly
                               180 mg, and 240 mg.   owned subsidiary of
                                                     Teva
                                                     Pharmaceuticals
                                                     USA, Inc.), 400
                                                     Interpace Pkwy.,
                                                     Building A,
                                                     Parsippany, NJ
                                                     07054.
ANDA 074865.................  Mexiletine HCl        Watson Laboratories,
                               Capsules, 150 mg,     Inc.
                               200 mg, and 250 mg.
ANDA 074870.................  Acyclovir Tablets,    Actavis Elizabeth
                               400 mg and 800 mg.    LLC (an indirect,
                                                     wholly owned
                                                     subsidiary of Teva
                                                     Pharmaceuticals
                                                     USA, Inc.), 400
                                                     Interpace Pkwy.,
                                                     Building A,
                                                     Parsippany, NJ
                                                     07054.
ANDA 075101.................  Acyclovir Capsules,   Watson Laboratories,
                               200 mg.               Inc.
ANDA 076022.................  Fluoxetine HCl        Carlsbad Technology,
                               Capsules, EQ 10 mg    Inc., 5922
                               base and EQ 20 mg     Farnsworth Ct.,
                               base.                 Carlsbad, CA 92008.
ANDA 078345.................  Prednisolone Sodium   Amneal
                               Phosphate Solution,   Pharmaceuticals, 85
                               EQ 15 mg base/5       Adams Ave.,
                               milliliters (mL).     Hauppauge, NY
                                                     11788.
ANDA 080521.................  Isoniazid Tablets,    Watson Laboratories,
                               300 mg.               Inc.
ANDA 086537.................  Nitroglycerin         Lumara Health, Inc.,
                               Controlled-Release    1100 Winter St.,
                               Capsules, 6.5 mg.     Suite 3000,
                                                     Waltham, MA 02451.
ANDA 086889.................  Disulfiram Tablets,   Watson Laboratories,
                               250 mg.               Inc.
ANDA 086890.................  Disulfiram Tablets,   Watson Laboratories,
                               500 mg.               Inc.
ANDA 087975.................  Nitroglycerin         Sandoz Inc., 100
                               Controlled-Release    College Rd. West,
                               Capsules, 2.5 mg.     Princeton, NJ
                                                     08540.
ANDA 087976.................  Nitroglycerin         Do.
                               Controlled-Release
                               Capsules, 6.5 mg.
ANDA 088509.................  Nitroglycerin         Do.
                               Controlled-Release
                               Capsules, 9 mg.
ANDA 090833.................  Carbidopa/Levodopa    Morton Grove
                               and Entacapone        Pharmaceuticals
                               Tablets, 18.75 mg/    Inc./Wockhardt USA
                               200 mg/75 mg, 25 mg/  LLC., 6451 Main
                               200 mg/100 mg,        St., Morton Grove,
                               31.25 mg/200 mg/125   IL 60053.
                               mg, 37.5 mg/200 mg/
                               150 mg, and 50 mg/
                               200 mg/200 mg.
ANDA 200771.................  Irinotecan HCl        Heritage
                               Injection, 40 mg/2    Pharmaceuticals
                               mL (20 mg/mL) and     Inc. d/b/a/Avet
                               100 mg/5 mL (20 mg/   Pharmaceuticals
                               mL).                  Inc. U.S. Agent for
                                                     Emcure
                                                     Pharmaceuticals
                                                     Limited, One Tower
                                                     Center Blvd., East
                                                     Brunswick, NJ
                                                     08816.
ANDA 202063.................  Gemcitabine HCl for   Do.
                               Injection, EQ 200
                               mg base/vial; EQ 1
                               gram base/vial.
ANDA 204437.................  Sodium Fluoride 18    UCSF
                               Injection, 10-200     Radiopharmaceutical
                               millicurie (mCi)/mL.  Facility, 185 Berry
                                                     St., Suite 350, San
                                                     Francisco, CA
                                                     94107.
ANDA 208444.................  Choline C-11          Do.
                               Injection, 4-33.1
                               mCi/mL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, approval of the applications listed in the table, and
all amendments and supplements thereto, is hereby withdrawn as of July
26, 2021. Approval of each entire application is withdrawn, including
any strengths and dosage forms inadvertently missing from the table.
Introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of
products without approved new drug applications violates section 301(a)
and (d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 331(a)
and (d)). Drug products that are listed in the table that are in
inventory on July 26, 2021 may continue to be dispensed until the
inventories have been depleted or the drug products have reached their
expiration dates or otherwise become violative, whichever occurs first.

    Dated: June 21, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-13593 Filed 6-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 165 (Monday, August 30, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 48420]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18615]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP21-1044-000.
    Applicants: International Paper Company.
    Description: Joint Petition for Temporary Waiver of Capacity
Release Regulations, et al. of International Paper Company.
    Filed Date: 8/23/21.
    Accession Number: 20210823-5236.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/2/21.

    Docket Numbers: RP21-1045-000.
    Applicants: Colorado Interstate Gas Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing: Penalties Assessed Compliance
Filing 2021 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 8/24/21.
    Accession Number: 20210824-5030.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/7/21.

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

    Dated: August 24, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-18615 Filed 8-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 231 (Monday, December 2, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66033-66034]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25967]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87621; File No. SR-MIAX-2019-035]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange, LLC; Notice of Withdrawal of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Its Options Regulatory Fee

November 25, 2019.
    On August 1, 2019, Miami International Securities Exchange LLC
(``MIAX Options'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change (File No. SR-MIAX-2019-035) to amend its Options
Regulatory Fee (``ORF'').\3\ The proposed rule change was immediately
effective upon filing with the Commission pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act.\4\ The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on August 14, 2019.\5\ The Commission
received one comment letter on the proposal.\6\ On September 30, 2019,
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission temporarily
suspended the proposed rule change and instituted proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act to determine whether to approve or
disapprove the proposed rule change.\7\ On November 20, 2019, the
Exchange withdrew the proposed rule change (SR-MIAX-2019-035).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86608 (August 8,
2019), 84 FR 40456 (``Notice'').
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). A proposed rule change may take
effect upon filing with the Commission if it is designated by the
exchange as ``establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by the self-regulatory organization on any person, whether
or not the person is a member of the self-regulatory organization.''
15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \5\ See Notice, supra note 3.
    \6\ See Letter to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission,
from Ellen Greene, Managing Director, Securities Industry and
Financial Markets Association, dated August 27, 2019.
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87169, 84 FR 53195
(October 4, 2019).
    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-25967 Filed 11-29-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 161 (Monday, August 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50094-50095]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20333]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER12-2432-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Notice of Termination of Energy 2001 SGIA, WD Tariff
Service Agreement No. 61 to be effective 8/3/2012.
    Filed Date: 8/10/12.
    Accession Number: 20120810-5004.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/31/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2434-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Informational Filing to be effective 10/5/2012.
    Filed Date: 8/9/12.
    Accession Number: 20120809-5131.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/30/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2438-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: RTEP Clean Up Filing to be effective 7/31/2012.
    Filed Date: 8/10/12.
    Accession Number: 20120810-5122.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/31/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2440-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Revisions to Schedule 12--Appendix to be effective 11/
8/2012.
    Filed Date: 8/10/12.
    Accession Number: 20120810-5152.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/10/12.

    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
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: August 13, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-20333 Filed 8-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P