[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 28 (Wednesday, February 11, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7553-7555]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02711]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2014-1075]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone, U.S. Open Golf Championship, South Puget Sound;
University Place, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary security
zone for the U.S. Open Golf Championship at Chambers Bay Golf Course in
South Puget Sound, University Place, WA, from June 14, 2015 through
June 22, 2015. This action is necessary to ensure the safety and
security of participants, spectators, and event officials at the U.S.
Open Golf Championship, and will do so by prohibiting any person or
vessel from entering or remaining in the security zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port or his Designated Representative.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before March 13, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions
on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of
these three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer Ryan Griffin, Coast Guard Sector Puget
Sound, Waterways Management Division; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at
http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when
it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number [USCG-2014-1075] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2014-1075) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES.
Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Regulatory History and Information

    This security zone is necessary to safeguard the U.S. Open Golf
Championship participants and attendees from potential waterborne
threats and hazards. It is also intended to prevent potential
subversive acts that threaten the safety and security of the
participants, spectators, and event officials at this event. The U.S.
Open Golf Championship is an internationally televised event and will
have a daily attendance of approximately 65,000 people. The event
involves a security risk due to the participants' highly recognized
national profiles.

C. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the proposed rule is 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, 160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize
the Coast Guard to establish security zones.
    The Chambers Bay Golf Course, located in the city of University
Place, WA and the County of Pierce, will be the host site for the U.S.
Golf Association 115th Annual U.S. Open Golf Championship from June 15,
2015 through June 21, 2015. This event will have a daily attendance of
approximately 65,000 people and receives international press including
multiple days of live television coverage. Due to the high number of
general public in attendance and press coverage, the U.S. Open Golf
Championship qualifies as a significant special event that requires a
security zone. Based on past incursions at similar events at Chambers
Bay Golf Course, this security zone is necessary for the size detailed
in the regulation section below, 24 hours a day, for the duration of
the event.
    The purpose of this rule is to deter and prevent potential criminal
and terrorist activity against the large gathering of people at the
highly publicized U.S. Open Golf Championship. This action is necessary
to ensure the safety and security of participants, spectators, and
event officials at the U.S. Open Golf Championship, and will do so by
prohibiting any person or vessel from entering or remaining in the
security zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his
Designated Representative.

D. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary security zone on
all waters encompassed by the following points: 47[deg]12'50'' N,
122[deg]35'25'' W; thence southerly to 47[deg]11'14'' N,
122[deg]35'50'' W; thence easterly to the shoreline at 47[deg]11'14''
N, 122[deg]35'03'' W; thence northerly along the shoreline to
47[deg]12'49'' N, 122[deg]34'39'' W; thence westerly back to the point
of origin.
    Vessels wishing to enter the security zone must request permission
for entry by contacting the Joint Harbor Operations Center at (206)
217-6001, or the on-scene patrol craft via VHF-FM Ch 13. If permission
for entry is granted, vessels must proceed at a minimum speed for safe
navigation.

E. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. This proposed rule is
not a significant regulatory action because it would create a security
zone that is minimal in size and short in duration.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit through the established security zone during the
times of enforcement. This proposed rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the
temporary security zone is the minimum size necessary to achieve
intended purpose, maritime traffic would be able to transit around it
and may be permitted to transit them with the permission from the
Captain of the Port or a Designated Representative.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule
would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment
(see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to
what degree this proposed rule would economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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.
We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and determined
that it does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed 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.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would 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.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
involves the establishment of a temporary security zone near Chambers
Bay Golf Course in South Puget Sound, University Place, WA. This
proposed rule is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. A
preliminary environmental analysis checklist supporting this
determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available
in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

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 proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add temporary Sec.  165.T13-281 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T13.281  Security Zone; U.S. Open Golf Championship, South
Puget Sound; University Place, WA.

    (a) Location. This temporary security zone is established in all
waters encompassed by the following points: 47[deg]12'50'' N,
122[deg]35'25'' W; thence southerly to 47[deg]11'14'' N,
122[deg]35'50'' W; thence easterly to the shoreline at 47[deg]11'14''
N, 122[deg]35'03'' W; thence northerly along the shoreline to
47[deg]12'49'' N, 122[deg]34'39'' W; thence westerly back to the point
of origin.
    (b) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in 33
CFR part 165, subpart C, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the
security zone created by this section without the permission of the
Captain of the Port or his Designated Representative. Designated
Representatives are Coast Guard Personnel authorized by the Captain of
the Port to grant persons or vessels permission to enter or remain in
the security zone created by this section. See 33 CFR part 165, subpart
C, for additional information and requirements. Vessels wishing to
enter the zone must request permission for entry by contacting the
Joint Harbor Operations Center at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or the on-scene
patrol craft via VHF-FM Ch 13. If permission for entry is granted
vessels must proceed at a minimum speed for safe navigation.
    (c) Enforcement Period. This rule will be enforced from 6 a.m. on
June 14, 2015, until 11 p.m. on June 22, 2015, unless canceled sooner
by the Captain of the Port.

    Dated: January 27, 2015.
M.W. Raymond,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. 2015-02711 Filed 2-10-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


C:\ dmautop\ temp\ DCTM_ ARP. wpd MEMORANDUM TO: Record FROM: Lori Weiss DATE: 24 August 2004 SUBJECT: Coalbed Methane Cost Evaluation The attachments to this memorandum outline the basis for the engineering costs for implementing the treatment and discharge options for coalbed methane produced water in the Powder River Basin which is located in Wyoming and Montana. Attachment A discusses surface discharge, reverse osmosis, reinjection wells, and storage ponds. The general assumptions used in each option are discussed followed by a detailed description of the methodology used to compute the costs for each of the treatment options. The detailed cost spreadsheets are also included. Attachment B discusses ion exchange. C:\ dmautop\ temp\ DCTM_ ARP. wpd ATTACHMENT A SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR ENGINEERING COST MODELS: SURFACE DISCHARGE, REVERSE OSMOSIS, STORAGE PONDS, AND INJECTION A. 1 General Assumptions Several of the same unit component costs were used for each water disposal option. One half mile of piping ( 2,640 feet) was assumed to be required for each well. The piping aggregates flow from all wells to the discharge or treatment location. A total installed cost of piping of $ 3.06/ linear foot was assumed, based on information from RS Means Construction Cost Data ( R. S. Means, 2001). Identical indirect cost markups were applied to each option. Insurance was assumed to cost 1.5% of the total direct costs. An additional 5% of the direct costs was added for contingencies. The costs for pumps to transport water to the selected disposal option were not included; it was assumed operators would select a location for the disposal option that would minimize pumping costs.

Operating and maintenance costs for all options included labor and energy costs. Energy costs were obtained from the U. S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration Web site ( U. S. DOE, 2001a). An average electricity cost is $ 0.044 per kW hr, which is the estimated cost of electricity in Wyoming for the year 2000. Labor costs were taken from Camp Dresser & McKee's Technical Support for Antidegradation Review for Barium ( Camp Dresser & McKee, 2000). The annual cost of water monitoring and analysis for water disposal and treatment was excluded because it was assumed that operators would not incur monitoring costs above their current baseline monitoring costs. Information on Wyoming's CBM permitting requirements can be obtained from http:// deq. state. wy. us/ wqd/ index. asp? pageid= 57. Information on Montana's CBM permitting requirements can be found at http:// www. deq. state. mt. us/ CoalBedMethane/ index. asp.

A. 2 Surface Discharge The capital costs associated with surface discharge include piping, riprap and an outfall structure. Rip rap is added near the point of discharge to help precipitate dissolved iron. Ten cubic yards of rip rap is needed at each location. Since there is only one discharge location per pod, the amount of rip rap required will not increase with the increasing number of wells in each scenario. Operating and maintenance costs for this option include only labor hours for inspecting the outfall location. Table A 1 lists the major costs for this option. C:\ dmautop\ temp\ DCTM_ ARP. wpd Table A 1. Major Costs for Surface Discharge Parameter/ Cost Description Value Limestone rock ( rip rap) Cost for 10 cubic yards of rip rap to oxygenate the CBM produced water $ 32.40/ cubic yard Piping Cost for one half mile of piping ( 2,640 feet) for each well. $ 3.06/ linear foot Outfall structure Cost to transfer the CBM produced water from underground pipes to surface water $ 3,500/ structure Final Capital Cost Equation Surface Discharge Cost ($) = 20.911 x Flow ( bpd) + 4,072.6 Labor hours Hours required to operate the surface discharge system 0.1 man years Labor cost Cost of manhours $ 40,000 Final Operating Cost Equation Operating Costs ($) = 4,000 ( for all flow rates)

The detailed cost spreadsheet include an average dollar per barrel capital and operating cost for each well scenario.

A. 3 Reverse Osmosis Water volume and TDS concentration were used to compute the fraction of water flow that could bypass the reverse osmosis unit while still achieving the desired effluent quality. The TDS concentration of the raw CBM water was based on the water quality data for the location of the model projects. Because the TDS concentration in the raw water is relatively low, EPA estimated that 90% of the flow entering the reverse osmosis unit will become permeate and that the remaining 10% is concentrated brine. Using this estimate, flows for all streams were determined from the flow from the CBM wells. Reverse osmosis costs were calculated for final effluent TDS concentrations of 500, 750, 1000, and 1500 ppm. Costs were developed for both new and existing projects. In many cases, the model projects met the desired effluent TDS concentration without treatment. In other cases, the fraction of water that needed to be treated to meet the given water quality criteria was minimal ( 1 5 gallons per minute).

The reverse osmosis option consists of a packaged reverse osmosis unit designed to handle the range of flows in the engineering model. Reverse osmosis often requires pretreatment to help prevent fouling of the membranes; therefore, prefilters are included in the reverse osmosis unit. U. S. Filter provided costs for a reverse osmosis unit including pre filters. The system consists of three activated carbon filters, four manganese greensand filters, two cartridge filters, one reverse osmosis unit, two chemical feed systems, and instrumentation and controls. According to information from U. S. Filter, the reverse osmosis unit is capable of treating to 74 ppm TDS. A linear C:\ dmautop\ temp\ DCTM_ ARP. wpd relationship was established between flow in gallons per minute ( gpm) and cost of the reverse osmosis unit using the U. S. Filter information:

Cost of the reverse osmosis unit ($) = 1037.4 x Flow ( gpm) + 90,849 ( 1)

This equation was used to develop total direct costs for the reverse osmosis option. It was assumed that the smallest reverse osmosis unit will cost $ 100,000. If the cost of the reverse osmosis unit calculated from Equation ( 1) is less than $ 100,000, a cost of $ 100,000 was entered in the spreadsheet model.

The reverse osmosis system also includes costs for influent and effluent holding tanks and for the 75 horsepower of electricity required. Tanks would need to hold one hour of flow. Although most oilfield tankage is available only in a range of standard sizes, the costs from Plas Tanks Industries for fiberglass reinforced plastic tanks were used to develop a cost curve relating tank cost to tank capacity in gallons. The cost for tanks is:

Tank cost ($) = 0.6654 x gallons + 3,445 ( 2)

This cost equation was also used in the spreadsheet to develop the reverse osmosis costs.

After treatment by reverse osmosis, 90 percent of the water could be surface discharged. The remaining 10 percent is a concentrated brine stream that is injected. Therefore, the reverse osmosis option also includes the cost of an injection facility. The injection system consists of one well that can inject the water to a depth of approximately 2,300 feet. Operating and maintenance costs for this option include labor, electricity to run the reverse osmosis pump, membrane cleaning, and membrane replacement. Table A 2 lists the major costs for this option. C:\ dmautop\ temp\ DCTM_ ARP. wpd Table A 2. Major Costs for Reverse Osmosis Parameter/ Cost Description Value Piping Cost for one half mile of piping ( 2,640 feet) for each well. $ 3.06/ linear foot Tanks Cost curve for influent and effluent holding tanks based on information from Plas Tanks Industries Tank cost ($) = 0.6654 x capacity ( gal) + 3,445 Land required Cost for one acre of land were included to house the equipment building. $ 338/ acre Reverse osmosis system Cost for a complete system including pre filters. U. S. Filter provided costs for various size units Variable Equipment building Cost for a 1,000 square foot building to house the reverse osmosis system and injection well $ 32.64/ square foot Injection well Costs for one injection well capable of injecting to a depth of up to 2,300 feet $ 200,000 Final Capital Cost Equation EPA developed costs by model project Labor hours Hours required to operate the reverse osmosis system 0.5 man years Labor cost Cost of manhours $ 40,000 Electrical costs Cost for running the reverse osmosis unit $ 0.044/ kilowatt hour Membrane cleaning Costs to periodically clean the membranes are included. $ 0.011/ 1,000 gallons Membrane replacement Cost to replace the membranes. $ 0.05275/ 1,000 gallons Final Operating Cost Equation EPA developed costs by model project The costs of disposing the concentrated brine stream by contract hauling was compared to injecting the wastes. A cost of $ 2/ gallon of brine disposal was based on information from Advanced Resources, Inc. The detailed costs of reverse osmosis using this brine disposal option are also shown on the attached spreadsheets. Average capital and operating costs in dollars per barrel ($/ bbl) were also calculated. In most of the model project scenarios, only a portion of the flow needed to be treated to meet the final effluent limits. At the higher effluent limits, some model projects required no treatment. Four different average dollar per barrel costs were computed: average $/ bbl across all model projects; average $/ bbl for the treated portion of the flow over all projects; average $/ bbl for only those projects requiring treatment; and average $/ bbl for the treated portion of the projects requiring treatment. All costs are shown in the attached spreadsheets. C:\ dmautop\ temp\ DCTM_ ARP. wpd A. 4 Storage Ponds Pond dimensions were used to determine the land required and the excavation volume. Operating and maintenance costs for this option include only labor hours for inspecting the pond. Table A 3 lists the major costs for this option. Note that fencing around the perimeter of the pond was not included. Fencing was not observed during site visits in the Powder River Basin, and many ponds are used for livestock watering.

Table A 3. Major Costs for Storage Ponds Parameter/ Cost Description Value Piping Cost for one half mile of piping ( 2,640 feet) for each well. $ 3.06/ linear foot Excavation Cost for excavating entire volume of pond $ 0.99/ cubic yard Mobilization Cost for moving excavation equipment to site $ 194 Limestone rock ( rip rap) Cost for 10 cubic yards of rip rap to oxygenate the CBM produced water $ 32.40/ cubic yard Land required Cost for land required for storage pond $ 338/ acre Final Capital Cost Equation Storage Pond Cost ($) = 46.886 x Flow ( bpd)  4312.4 Labor hours Hours required to inspect storage pond. 0.1 man years Labor cost Cost of manhours $ 40,000 Final Operating Cost Equation Operating Costs ($) = 4,000 ( for all flow rates)

The detailed cost spreadsheets show the costs for each model scenario and computes an average dollar per barrel capital and operating cost.

A. 5 Injection In all three well depth scenarios for the injection option, the cost components are the same and include the injection well, piping, tanks and chlorinators, storage tanks, an injection pump, an equipment building and land to house the building. Storage tanks are used to settle sediments in the water before it is injected. The chlorinators are needed to disinfect the water before injection to help prevent fouling. Well workover costs were assumed to be 50 percent of the cost of drilling a new injection well. Table A 4 lists the three different injection scenarios and the cost for drilling a new well or converting an existing well. Based on information from coalbed methane operators, the problems and risks associated with re entering an existing well C:\ dmautop\ temp\ DCTM_ ARP. wpd make using this option unlikely.

Table A 4. Injection Scenarios Depth Scenario Well Depth ( feet) Formation Well Capacity ( gpm/ well) Drilling/ Workover Cost1 Shallow 700 Coal seam 1 250 New well  $ 50,0001 Well workover  $ 25,000 Medium 3,000 Fox Hills 111 693 New well  $ 442,0002 Well workover  $ 221,000 Deep 9,500 Minnelusa 321 3,209 New well  $ 900,0002 Well workover  $ 450,000 1 See the attached spreadsheets.

Data from Camp Dresser & McKee ( CDM, 2000) was used to estimate the costs for tanks and chlorinators to develop a cost curve relating cost to flow in gallons per minute ( gpm). The spreadsheet model used the following equation to compute the injection cost of tanks and chlorinators:

Tanks and chlorinators ($) = 121.72 x gpm + 18,009 Costs were added for a holding tank prior to injection that can hold one hour of CBMproduced water flow. As in the reverse osmosis model, costs from Plas Tanks Industries for fiberglass reinforced plastic tanks were used to develop a cost curve relating tank cost to tank capacity in gallons. The cost for tanks is:

Tank cost ($) = 0.6654 x gallons + 3,445 A cost curve for injection pumps is:

Pump cost ($) = 11.284 x barrels per day + 1222.6 The detailed spreadsheets contain the supporting information for the development of the equations for tanks and pumps.

Operating and maintenance costs for injection include labor and chemical costs to disinfect the stream prior to injection. Caribou Land and Livestock provided costs to compute a chemical cost of $ 0.00185 per gallon of CBM produced water. Table A 5 lists the major costs for this option. Additional details are included in the attached spreadsheets including an average dollars per barrel capital and operating cost for each model scenario. C:\ dmautop\ temp\ DCTM_ ARP. wpd Table A 5. Major Costs for Injection Parameter/ Cost Description Value Piping Cost for one half mile of piping ( 2,640 feet) for each well. $ 3.06/ linear foot Land acquisition Cost for 1 acre plot for equipment building $ 338/ acre Equipment building Cost for 1,000 square foot building $ 32.64/ square foot Tanks and chlorinators Cost for tank to aid sediment settling and chlorinators for disinfection Tanks and chlorinators ($) = 121.72 x gpm + 18,009 Well Cost for drilling a new well or converting an existing well See Table D 4 Tank Cost for holding tank prior to injection Tank cost ($) = 0.6654 x gallons + 3,445 Pump Cost for injection pump Pump costs ($) = 11.284 x barrels per day + 1222.6 Final Capital Cost Equations Shallow New Well ($) = 43.134 x Flow ( bpd) + 98,842 Shallow Well Workover ($) = 40.542 x Flow ( bpd) + 79,057 Medium New Well ($) = 37.95 x Flow ( bpd) + 530,003 Medium Well Workover ($) = 37.95 x Flow ( bpd) + 294,638 Deep New Well ($) = 37.95 x Flow ( bpd) + 1,000,000 Deep Well Workover ($) = 37.95 x Flow ( bpd) + 538,523 Labor hours Hours required to run injection system 0.5 man years Labor cost Cost of manhours $ 40,000 Chemicals Cost of biocides and chlorine for disinfection $ 0.00185/ gallon Final Operating Cost Equation Operating Cost ($) = 28.34 x Flow ( bpd) + 20,000 ( for all well types)


From: Wrigley, William<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Friday, April 23, 2021 8:05 AM To: Whitfield, Kaye<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc: Kerwin, Courtney<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Schultz, Eric<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Salahuddin, Diane<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: Please upload ICR No.1750.09 into the FDMS...

Dear Ms. Whitfield:

OEI has completed its review of ICR No.1750.09: National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Architectural Coatings (Renewal). At this time, please upload the ICR statement and all attachments (included with this email), as well as any associated information collection instruments (e.g., public use forms, surveys, questionnaires, etc.), into the appropriate docket via FDMS. This is required so that the public can access the source documents and comment on them during the 30-day comment period, as stipulated in the Paperwork Reduction Act.

If you have any questions about what needs to be uploaded for public review, please contact your ICR Desk Officer. For assistance with FDMS, please contact your docket manager (http://intranet.epa.gov/fdmsinfo/contact.html).


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 180 (Monday, September 19, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57244-57246]
[FR Doc No: 2022-20143]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-95752; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2022-58]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change in Connection With
the iShares[supreg] Gold Trust Micro

September 13, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on August 31, 2022, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes, in connection with the iShares[supreg] Gold
Trust Micro (the ``Trust''), to (1) delete a duplicative
representation, and (2) amend a representation regarding the
availability of gold spot prices on the Trust's website. The proposed
rule change is available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at
the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes, in connection with the Trust, to (1) delete
a duplicative representation, and (2) amend a representation regarding
the availability of gold spot prices on the Trust's website. Shares
(``Shares'') of the Trust are currently listed on the Exchange under
NYSE Arca Rule 8.201-E.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91669 (April 26,
2021), 86 FR 22996 (April 30, 2021) (SR-NYSEArca-2021-25) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To List
and Trade Shares of the iShares[supreg] Gold Trust Micro Under NYSE
Arca Rule 8.201-E (Commodity-Based Trust Shares) (``Notice'')).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the proposed rule change filed with the Commission regarding the
listing and trading of the Shares, the Exchange described the
information available to the public regarding the price of gold and the
gold market information as follows:

    Investors may obtain on a 24-hour basis gold pricing information
based on the spot price for an ounce of gold from various financial
information service providers. Investors may obtain gold pricing
information based on the spot price for an ounce of gold from
various financial information service providers. Current spot

prices also are generally available with bid/ask spreads from gold
bullion dealers. In addition, the Trust's website will provide
pricing information for gold spot prices and the Shares.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See id., 86 FR at 23000.

    The Exchange proposes two changes to these representations, as
follows.
    First, the Exchange proposes the non-substantive change of deleting
the following representation: ``Investors may obtain gold pricing
information based on the spot price for an ounce of gold from various
financial information service providers'' as duplicative of the first
sentence.
    Second, the Exchange proposes to amend the representation regarding
the availability of gold spot prices on the Trust's website
(www.ishares.com). Specifically, the Notice stated that the Trust's
website would provide pricing information for gold spot prices and the
Shares. Currently, the website provides the London Bullion Market
Association (``LBMA'') Gold Price PM, the price utilized by the Trustee
to value the Trust's gold as described in the prospectus, free of
charge to anyone accessing the website. The LBMA Gold Price PM is also
available, free of charge to the public, on LBMA's website.\6\ Given
the availability of information regarding the delayed spot price of
gold from various sources that are also free of charge, the Trust will
no longer provide delayed pricing information for gold spot prices free
of charge on its website.\7\ The Exchange accordingly proposes to
delete the reference to the Trust's website providing pricing
information for gold spot prices. The Exchange believes that removing
the delayed spot gold prices from the website will not harm investors
because the same information is currently available to investors from
other sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See https://www.lbma.org.uk/prices-and-data/precious-metal-prices#/table.
    \7\ As noted, the Trust's website currently provides delayed
information regarding the spot price of gold.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other than the proposed changes to the two representations as
described herein, the Trust would continue to comply with all other
requirements set forth in the Notice and in NYSE Arca Rule 8.201-E,
respectively.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(1) \9\ in particular, in that it enables the
Exchange to be so organized as to have the capacity to be able to carry
out the purposes of the Act and to comply, and to enforce compliance by
its exchange members and persons associated with its exchange members,
with the provisions of the Act, the rules and regulations thereunder,
and the rules of the Exchange. The Exchange also believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\
in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to delete a duplicative representation and
amend a representation to reflect that that the Trust will no longer
provide delayed pricing information for gold spot prices free of charge
on its website. The Exchange believes that these proposed non-
substantive clarifying changes would contribute to the orderly
operation of the Exchange and would enable the Exchange to be so
organized as to have the capacity to carry out the purposes of the Act
and comply with the provisions of the Act by its members and persons
associated with members by adding clarity, transparency and consistency
to the Exchange's rules with respect to the listing requirements for
the Shares. The Exchange believes that the change would be consistent
with the public interest and the protection of investors because
investors will not be harmed and in fact would benefit from the
increased clarity and transparency that the changes would introduce,
thereby reducing potential confusion.
    In addition, the Exchange believes that amending the Notice to
reflect that the Trust will no longer provide delayed pricing
information for gold spot prices free of charge on its website would be
consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors
because the same information that the Trust posts on its website (i.e.,
the delayed spot price of gold) is currently available to investors in
the same form and equally free of charge on the LBMA's website. As
noted, there is a considerable amount of gold price and gold market
information available on public websites and through professional as
well as subscription services, including the spot price of gold.
Specifically, investors may obtain on a 24-hour basis gold pricing
information based on the spot price for an ounce of gold from various
financial information service providers. Current spot prices also are
generally available with bid/ask spreads from gold bullion dealers. The
delayed spot price of gold available to investors directly from the
LBMA's website would be the same as that currently available on the
Trust's website and would be equally free of charge.\11\ The Exchange
accordingly believes that, given the widespread availability of delayed
information on the spot price of gold and gold prices at no charge,
investors will continue to have ready access to the same information on
the spot price of gold that the Trust currently provides on its website
and investors will not be harmed by the Trust no longer providing the
spot price of gold on its website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See note 6, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. The proposed change is not
designed to address any competitive issue but rather to delete a
duplicative representation and amend a representation regarding the
availability of information on the spot price of gold on the website of
the Trust whose Shares are currently listed on the Exchange based on
the availability of the same information in the same format and equally
free of charge from other sources.

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 proposed rule change does not: (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
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, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)

of the Act \12\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of
its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \14\ permits the Commission
to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has
requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The
Commission notes that the Exchange represents that the delayed spot
price of gold is widely available, including from public websites, and
through professional and subscription services, and investors may
obtain on a 24-hour basis gold pricing information based on the spot
price for an ounce of gold from various financial information service
providers. The Exchange further represents that the delayed spot price
of gold available to investors directly from the LBMA's website would
be the same as that currently available on the Trust's website and
would be equally free of charge. Thus, the Commission believes that
waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest because the proposed rule change
does not raise any new or novel issues. Accordingly, the Commission
hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposed
rule change operative upon filing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2022-58 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2022-58. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m.
Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying
at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be
posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that
we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NYSEARCA-2022-58 and should be submitted on or before October 11, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12), (59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-20143 Filed 9-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 30 (Wednesday, February 15, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 10711]
[FR Doc No: 2017-03063]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0382; FRL-9959-43-OAR]
RIN 2060-AT15

Revisions to Procedure 2--Quality Assurance Requirements for
Particulate Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary
Sources

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Because the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received an
adverse comment, we are withdrawing the direct final rule titled,
``Revisions to Procedure 2--Quality Assurance Requirements for
Particulate Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary
Sources.''

DATES: Effective February 15, 2017, the EPA withdraws the direct final
rule published at 81 FR 83160, on November 21, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions concerning this action
should be addressed to Ms. Kimberly Garnett, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air
Quality Assessment Division, Measurement Technology Group (E143-02),
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The direct final rule, ``Revisions to
Procedure 2--Quality Assurance Requirements for Particulate Matter
Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources,''
published on November 21, 2016, at 81 FR 83160. We stated in that
direct final rule that if we received adverse comment by December 21,
2016, the direct final rule would not take effect and we would publish
a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register. We subsequently received
adverse comment on that direct final rule requesting that the EPA
delete or reserve section(s) in the rule that conflict with the
intended revisions. We will address the comment in a subsequent final
action, which will be based on the parallel proposed rule also
published on November 21, 2016, at 81 FR 83189. As stated in the direct
final rule and the parallel proposed rule, we will not institute a
second comment period on this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Continuous emission monitoring systems,
Particulate matter, Procedures.

    Dated: February 8, 2017.
Sarah Dunham,
Acting Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-03063 Filed 2-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Code of Federal Regulations]

[Title 21, Volume 6]

[Revised as of April 1, 2008]

[CITE: 21CFR556.360]

TITLE 21--FOOD AND DRUGS

CHAPTER I--FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

SUBCHAPTER E--ANIMAL DRUGS, FEEDS, AND RELATED PRODUCTS

  HYPERLINK "http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?C FRPart=556"  PART 556 -- TOLERANCES FOR RESIDUES OF NEW ANIMAL DRUGS IN FOOD

Subpart B--Specific Tolerances for Residues of New Animal Drugs

Sec. 556.360 Lincomycin.

(a)Acceptable daily intake (ADI) . The ADI for total residues of lincomycin is 25 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day.

(b)Chickens . A tolerance for residues of lincomycin in chickens is not required.

(c)Swine . Tolerances for lincomycin of 0.6 part per million in liver and 0.1 part per million in muscle are established.

[64 FR 13342, Mar. 18, 1999]


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 77 (Friday, April 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 24644]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08422]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-408, OMB Control No. 3235-0464]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Extension: Rule 101

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

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (``OMB'') a request for approval of extension of the
previously approved collection of information provided for in Rule 101
of Regulation M (17 CFR 242.101), under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.).
    Rule 101 prohibits distribution participants from purchasing
activities at specified times during a distribution of securities.
Persons otherwise covered by this rule may seek to use several
applicable exceptions such as a calculation of the average daily
trading volume of the securities in distribution, the maintenance of
policies regarding information barriers between their affiliates, and
the maintenance of a written policy regarding general compliance with
Regulation M for de minimus transactions.
    There are approximately 2,002 respondents per year that require an
aggregate total of approximately 27,901 hours to comply with this rule.
Each respondent makes an estimated 1 annual response. Each response
takes on average approximately 13.936563 hours to complete. Thus, the
total hour burden per year is approximately 27,901 hours. The total
estimated internal compliance cost for the respondents is approximately
$2,259,981 resulting in an internal cost of compliance for each
respondent per response of approximately $1,128.86 (i.e., $2,259,981/
2,002 responses).
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    The public may view background documentation for this information
collection at the following website: www.reginfo.gov. Find this
particular information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day
Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information
collection should be sent by May 22, 2023 to (i) www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain and (ii) David Bottom, Director/Chief Information
Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o John Pezzullo, 100 F
Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an email to:
[email protected].

    Dated: April 17, 2023.
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-08422 Filed 4-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 4, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 172)]
[Notices]
[Page 51670-51672]
[DOCID:fr04se08-70]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58435; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2008-070]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Regarding Fees and Credits for Members Using the Nasdaq Crossing
Network

August 27, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\, and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on August 15, 2008, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which
Items have been prepared by Nasdaq. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii)
of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ Nasdaq has
designated this proposal as establishing or changing a due, fee, or
other charge, which renders the proposed rule change effective upon
filing. This rule proposal, which is effective upon filing with the

Commission, shall become operative on September 1, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.

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

    Nasdaq is adopting a fee and credit schedule for the Nasdaq
Crossing Network.
    The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new
language is in italics; proposed deletions are in brackets [sic].\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Changes are marked to the rule text that appears in the
electronic Nasdaq Manual found at http://nasdaq.complinet.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

7018. Nasdaq Market Center Order Execution and Routing
    (a)-(e) No change.
    (f) Crossing Network

------------------------------------------------------------------------
All orders executed in the Nasdaq Crossing
                  Network                      No charge for execution
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credit for eligible executions through the  $0.0010 per share
 Crossing Network from September 1, 2008
 through September 30, 2008.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the purposes of this subsection ``eligible executions'' are all
executions of trades through the Nasdaq Crossing Network other than
those executions that have the same market participant on both sides of
the trade.
    (f)-(h) Current subsections (f) through (h) will be renumbered as
(g) through (i) without other modification.
* * * * *

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

    In its filing with the Commission, Nasdaq 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. Nasdaq 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
    Nasdaq is adopting a fee and credit schedule for the Nasdaq
Crossing Network. The Commission approved the Nasdaq Crossing Network
on July 5, 2006.\6\ The Nasdaq Crossing Network provides an execution
option to market participants trading in Nasdaq and other exchange-
listed securities that facilitates the execution of block trades
quickly and anonymously, while minimizing market impact and associated
price movements. The Nasdaq Crossing Network consists of a series of
trading day (``Intraday'') and after hours (``Post-Close'') Reference
Price Crosses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54248 (July 31,
2006) (SR-NASDAQ-2006-019). Prior to the effective date of Nasdaq's
operation as an exchange for Nasdaq-listed securities, the rule
governing the Nasdaq Crossing Network had been approved as an NASD
rule (NASD Rule 4716). Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54101
(July 5, 2006), 71 FR 39382 (July 12, 2006) (SR-NASD-2005-140).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since Nasdaq launched the Crossing Network, Nasdaq has not charged
a fee to members for executing orders through the Intraday or Post-
Close Crosses. Under the rule change, although there will continue to
be no fee associated with trading through the Crossing Network, member
firms will be eligible for a credit of $0.0010 per share for orders
executed through the Crossing Network during the month of September.
The credit will not be subject to volume or use requirements. Trades
that involve the same market participant on both sides of the
transaction, however, will not be eligible for the credit.
    After the expiration of the promotional pricing on September 30,
2008, order executions through the Crossing Network will continue to be
offered to members at no charge.
2. Statutory Basis
    Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\7\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\8\ in particular, in that it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among
members and issuers and other persons using any facility or system
which Nasdaq operates or controls. The promotional pricing for the
Crossing Network is an equitable allocation of fees because the credit
will apply equally to all members who execute orders through the
Crossing Network. Furthermore, the credit is reasonable because it is
intended to encourage participation in the Crossing Network, which
would provide additional data to Nasdaq to evaluate the need for any
future changes to the product or the relevant fee schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \9\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2008-070 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2008-070. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will

post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public
Reference Room 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549 on official
business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the self-regulatory organization. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2008-070, and should
be submitted on or before September 25, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-20516 Filed 9-3-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P