[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 83 (Monday, April 30, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18866-18868]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08995]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83098; File No. SR-FINRA-2018-014]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Temporary Exception That Permits
Aggregate Reporting for Certain ATS Transactions in U.S. Treasury
Securities

April 24, 2018.
    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 April 16, 2018, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') 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 FINRA. 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

    FINRA is proposing to amend FINRA Rule 6730 (Transaction Reporting)
to provide an extension of the temporary exception to permit member
alternative trading systems (``ATSs'') and member subscribers to report
aggregate trade information to TRACE for certain transactions in U.S.
Treasury Securities.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's
website at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    FINRA Rule 6730 sets forth a member's trade reporting obligations
with regard to transactions in TRACE-Eligible Securities,\3\ which
beginning on

July 10, 2017, included U.S. Treasury Securities.\4\ Pursuant to Rule
6730, each FINRA member that is a ``Party to a Transaction'' \5\ in a
TRACE-Eligible Security is obligated to report the transaction to TRACE
within the prescribed period of time. Transaction information in U.S.
Treasury Securities reported to TRACE currently is not subject to
public dissemination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``TRACE-Eligible Security'' generally is defined as a debt
security that is U.S. dollar-denominated and is: (1) Issued by a
U.S. or foreign private issuer, and, if a ``restricted security'' as
defined in Securities Act Rule 144(a)(3), sold pursuant to
Securities Act Rule 144A; (2) issued or guaranteed by an Agency as
defined in paragraph (k) or a Government-Sponsored Enterprise as
defined in paragraph (n); or (3) a U.S. Treasury Security as defined
in paragraph (p). ``TRACE-Eligible Security'' does not include a
debt security that is issued by a foreign sovereign or a Money
Market Instrument as defined in paragraph (o). See Rule 6710(a).
    Rule 6710(p) defines a ``U.S. Treasury Security'' as ``a
security, other than a savings bond, issued by the U.S. Department
of the Treasury to fund the operations of the federal government or
to retire such outstanding securities.'' The term ``U.S. Treasury
Security'' also includes separate principal and interest components
of a U.S. Treasury Security that has been separated pursuant to the
Separate Trading of Registered Interest and Principal of Securities
(``STRIPS'') program operated by the U.S. Department of Treasury.
See Rule 6710(p).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79116 (October 18,
2016), 81 FR 73167 (October 24, 2016) (Notice of Filing of Amendment
No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of File No. SR-FINRA-
2016-027). See also Regulatory Notice 16-39 (October 2016).
    \5\ See Rule 6710(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 23, 2017, FINRA filed a proposed rule change to, on a
temporary basis, adopt Supplementary Material .06 (Temporary Exception
for Aggregate Transaction Reporting of U.S. Treasury Securities
Executed in ATS Trading Sessions) to permit members to report trades
that occurred in a U.S. Treasury Security executed within discrete ATS
trading sessions \6\ (sometimes referred to as ``work-up sessions'')
\7\ on an aggregate, rather than individual, basis (``Aggregation
Exception'').\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ FINRA understands that ATSs that permit subscribers to trade
U.S. Treasury Securities on their platforms may permit subscribers
to initiate a ``trading session,'' which is a discrete or timed
order-matching event during which one or more additional subscribers
can interact with the original order on the opposite side of the
market or add to the initial order on the same side of the market.
Although it is possible that some trading sessions involve a single
transaction between two counterparties like a typical trade, FINRA
understands that most trading sessions include multiple participants
on one or both sides of the market during the time period the
trading session is open.
    \7\ Different members use varying nomenclature to describe
trading sessions. For example, one member ATS refers to these
sessions as ``workups'' or ``workup sessions.'' In addition, the
length of time a session remains open and other characteristics of
how a session is structured may change from member to member. As
used in the proposed rule change, the term ``trading session'' is
meant to capture all variations of such types of sessions that
member ATSs may use.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81018 (June 26,
2017), 82 FR 29956 (June 30, 2017) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of File No. SR-FINRA-2017-023) (``Original Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Aggregation Exception provides relief to members with respect
to the number of transactions required to be reported, the price
reported, as well as the Time of Execution \9\ reported to TRACE.
Specifically, the exception provided that ATSs and member subscribers
are permitted to report transactions in U.S. Treasury Securities
executed within discrete trading sessions by submitting a transaction
report reflecting the aggregate amount of a U.S. Treasury Security
purchased (sold) to another party during a single trading session at
the average price of such transactions, with the Time of Execution
communicated by the ATS,\10\ irrespective of the number of trades in
the trading session. The Aggregation Exception was intended to provide
members with additional time to complete the systems changes necessary
to accurately report each individual transaction in a U.S. Treasury
Security in the trading session as required by Rule 6730.\11\ Once the
temporary exception sunsets, member ATSs and member subscribers are
required to comply with Rule 6730 by separately reporting each
individual trade that occurs during a trading session as well as the
actual time and price at which each of these individual trades is
executed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Under Rule 6710(d), the ``Time of Execution'' for a
transaction in any TRACE-Eligible Security means ``the time when the
Parties to a Transaction agree to all of the terms of the
transaction that are sufficient to calculate the dollar price of the
trade.''
    \10\ FINRA notes that, even where aggregation is not necessary
because only the ATS and two subscribers ultimately participated in
a trading session resulting in a single cross, the proposed rule
change permits members the flexibility to report a Time of Execution
that is communicated by the ATS to each party. Thus, even where the
trading session involves only one cross, member TRACE reports may
reflect a Time of Execution that is, for example, the beginning of
the trading session or the end of the trading session.
    \11\ See Original Filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA understands from discussions with multiple member ATSs that
are active in the market for U.S. Treasury Securities that the systems
changes necessary to comply with Rule 6730 will require substantial
development and testing to complete and that, further, the systems
changes required by subscriber members also are significant and cannot
be completed by July 10, 2018. While we understand that member ATSs
have begun the development work necessary to report individual
execution information, additional time is necessary, including to
develop an additional data feed to deliver execution level information
to subscribers and vendors. We also understand that member subscribers
require additional time to update their systems to consume the new
execution information to be provided by the ATSs and to systematically
incorporate this information in their TRACE reporting to FINRA. FINRA
believes it is important that both member ATSs and member subscribers
perform the programming and testing necessary to accurately and
consistently report individual executions and the time of execution to
TRACE to avoid inconsistencies in the audit trail. Thus, FINRA is
proposing a nine-month extension of the temporary exception, until
April 12, 2019. As a condition to the exception, a member ATS availing
itself of this exception would continue to be required to provide
individual transaction information for each trade in a U.S. Treasury
Security occurring in a trading session to FINRA upon request. In
addition, FINRA expects that necessary testing of new required
functionality will commence well in advance of the extended deadline of
April 12, 2019, but at a minimum, no later than January 12, 2019.
    FINRA has filed the proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness. The operative date of the proposed rule change will be
July 10, 2018 and it will sunset on April 12, 2019, which FINRA
believes will provide members with the additional time required to
complete necessary systems changes to comply with Rule 6730 and result
in a more accurate and complete TRACE audit trail for U.S. Treasury
Securities.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\12\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. Based on discussions with multiple member ATSs, FINRA
believes that additional time is necessary to permit members to program
systems to comply with Rule 6730. FINRA believes it is appropriate to
provide the proposed relief in recognition of the fact that impacted
members are unable to implement necessary changes by the July 10, 2018.
FINRA believes the proposal strikes an appropriate balance in that
FINRA will continue to receive transaction information for purchases
and sales that occur as part of an ATS trading session, albeit
aggregated. In addition, FINRA notes that transparency will not be
impacted by the proposed temporary relief because transaction
information in U.S. Treasury Securities currently is not subject to
public dissemination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    The proposed rule change should benefit members whose trades are
executed on member ATSs as part of a

trading session, as it provides members with additional time to build
or upgrade systems to enable reporting of individual transactions in
the trading session. While the proposed rule change will temporarily
lessen the requirements on ATSs and their subscribers as compared to
other market participants, FINRA believes the proposed rule change is
appropriate to allow sufficient time to make the technological changes
necessary to comply with the rule and such accommodation will be
limited in duration. Moreover, FINRA retains the right to require a
member ATS availing itself of this exception to provide individual
transaction information for each trade in a U.S. Treasury Security
occurring in a trading session upon request.
    The proposed temporary relief is not expected to undermine the
potential benefits of Rule 6730, as the transaction information
reflecting the aggregate size and average price of such transactions
should still assist the regulators to conduct monitoring and
surveillance of the U.S. Treasury Securities markets, in order to
detect potential disruptive trading practices and risks to market
stability.

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

    Because the foregoing 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 for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, 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 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 Commission has waived the five-day pre-filing requirement in
this case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the 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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2018-014 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-FINRA-2018-014. 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 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of FINRA. 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-FINRA-2018-014 and should be submitted
on or before May 21, 2018.

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

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-08995 Filed 4-27-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 112 (Thursday, June 11, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33264-33265]
[FR Doc No: 2015-14274]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP15-499-000]

Texas Eastern Transmission, LP; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on May 22, 2015, Texas Eastern Transmission, LP
(Texas Eastern), 5400 Westheimer Court, Houston, Texas 77056, filed an
application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act and Part
157 of the Commission's regulations to construct and operate its South
Texas Expansion Project (STEP). Specifically, Texas Eastern requests
authorization to construct and operate the 8400 hp Petronila Compressor
Station in Nueces County, Texas, an additional 8,400 hp compressor unit
at its existing Blessing Compressor Station in Matagorda County, Texas,
and modifications to its existing compressor stations in Brazoria,
Chambers, and Orange Counties, Texas, to increase firm capacity by
400,000 dekatherms per day to high demand downstream, all as more fully
set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and
open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at
http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Berk
Donaldson, General Manager-Rates and Certificates,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by mail at: Texas Eastern Transmission,
LP, P.O. Box 1642, Houston, Texas, 77251-1642.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 7 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to

the party or parties directly involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenter's will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenter's will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentary, will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site (www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-Filing'' link. Persons unable to file
electronically should submit original and 5 copies of the protest or
intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on June 26, 2015.

    Dated: June 5, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-14274 Filed 6-10-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Since our initial ‘Request for Clarification’ document, dated
October 9, 2003, the following additional issues have been identified by
AFS members as items in need of clarification.

17.  Pages 12 and 51 - §§63.7690(b)(3), 63.7732(b)(3) and (c)(3) –
Defining Cupola “Blast” Conditions

The rule requires that the cupola afterburner be operated such that the
combustion zone temperature does not fall below a 1,300 oF average
except for “periods when the cupola is off blast and for 15 minutes
after going on blast.”  Likewise, the rules require that sampling be
conducted “only during times when the cupola is on blast.”  The
industry is concerned that the term “blast” is not defined within
the rule or discussed in the preamble and could be misinterpreted to
mean any period when “blast” air is entering the cupola.  This is
problematic because blast air is often used during non-production
(i.e.,non-representative) periods such as preparing the cupola for
operation.

When a cupola furnace is initially started the equipment must be
properly prepared before melting can commence.  Typically, the procedure
commences with building a sand bed in the bottom of the furnace.  The
sand bed is used to direct the molten metal to the point where it will
be drawn from the furnace.  Next, a bed of coke is added and ignited,
commonly utilizing the blast air, and allowed to burn for approximately
one hour.  When the coke bed is established and the cupola furnace is at
the proper temperature, the blast air is shutdown and the furnace is
charged with metals, coke, and limestone.  After the cupola furnace is
fully charged, the blast air is again introduced and the metal begins to
melt.

It is requested that the Agency confirm that the term “blast” means
those periods when blast air is being introduced to the cupola furnace
and the furnace is capable of producing molten metal.  Specifically, the
term “blast” should not include those periods when blast air is
being introduced to the cupola furnace for purposes of initially heating
the furnace, prior to charging the metals.

An improper interpretation of the term “blast” could result in the
unnecessary requirement to maintain a 1,300 oF afterburner temperature
during the latter phase of the startup period, when the emissions lack
an adequate concentration of carbon monoxide (CO) to sustain combustion.
 Likewise, an improper interpretation of this term could allow sources
to include within their performance test results those startup periods
where emissions are unnaturally minimal.

18.  Page 11 - §§63.7690(b), 63.7710(b)(2), 63.7733, 63.7743(b),
(d)-(f), and 63.7765 – Definition of “Deviation”

The rule requires that operating limits be established during
performance testing for each capture system and for each of the various
control devices (e.g., pressure drop and water flow for a wet scrubber,
flow rate for an acid scrubber, and temperature for a combustion
device).  Foundries are then required to operate these capture systems
and control devices at levels that meet these operating limits at all
times.  The rule defines a “deviation” to include “any instance”
in which a source “fails to meet any requirement or obligation”
including operating limits.  The industry is concerned that the rule
could be interpreted such that any deviation from an operating limit is
required to be identified as a “violation.”  We do not believe that
this is an appropriate application of the operating limits and request
that the Agency clarify their use.

Specifically, the industry requests that the Agency adopt the approach
taken in the recently signed NESHAP for Industrial Boilers and Process
Heaters.  In this rulemaking the definition of ‘deviation’ includes
the statement:

A deviation is not always a violation.  The determination of whether a
deviation constitutes a violation of the standard is up to the
discretion of the entity responsible for enforcement of the standards.

Alternately, the Agency is encouraged to adopt into the Foundry NESHAP
the position that exceedances of the operating limits are to trigger
corrective actions and that, only if the corrective actions are not
taken promptly, or if the corrective actions are not successful in
returning the operating parameter to within the specified range, has a
deviation occurred.  This approach is consistent with the NESHAP for
Coke Ovens [68 FR 18009, April 14, 2003].

If the corrective action is not successful, the owner or operator must
take additional corrective actions.  If the second attempt to fix the
problem is not successful, the failure must be reported as a deviation.
[68 FR at 18009].

This approach is also consistent with the previously published Agency
statement:

… a change in a control device’s operating parameter does not
directly correlate with an increase in emissions and does not provide a
reasonable assurance that the emission limitation was exceeded when the
parameter changed.  …  In other words, the operating parameter may be
outside the limit established during the performance test while
emissions are still below the applicable limit.  The primary value of
monitoring the control device parameters is to detect a potential
problem with the device’s operation as soon as possible and to
promptly investigate and correct the cause.  [Primary Aluminum NESHAP,
Proposed Rule, 61 FR 50590].

Because several NESHAPs have adopted varying interpretations of the
requirement to maintain operating limitations, and because the Iron and
Steel Foundry NESHAP is silent on this issue, the industry requests that
the Agency provide clarification.

19.  Page 134 – §63.7731(b) and §63.7750(d) – Notification of
Subsequent Opacity Tests

The rule, at §63.7731(b), requires a performance test to demonstrate
compliance with the opacity limit be conducted no less frequently than
once every 6 months.  In addition, §63.7750(d), requires that a
“notification of intent to conduct a performance test” must be
submitted at least 60 days prior to performing the test.  The industry
group requests that the Agency reconsider the applicability of the
notification requirement to opacity testing events.

Specifically, due to the ease of preparation prior to conducting an
opacity test, the brief period of the test, the effect of weather
conditions on performing such a test, and the ability to readily repeat
an opacity test, the industry group does not believe that a notification
is necessary.  In those instances when an enforcement official seeks to
monitor an opacity performance test, the test can readily be repeated in
their presence.  In fact, any agency inspection of a foundry will likely
include an informal, and if deemed appropriate a formal, opacity review.
 As such, the notification requirement presents a reporting burden with
no benefit and a great potential for administrative noncompliance.

NESHAP for Iron and Steel Foundries

Request for Clarification

Prepared by American Foundry Society

Submitted to EPA on April 1, 2004


Meeting Notes

EPA and Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers’ Organization

May 5, 2004

On May 5, 2004, EPA/HWID met with representatives of SOCMA to discuss
their comments on the Definition of Solid Waste rulemaking. In
attendance:

Ingrid Rosencrantz		EPA/HWID

Eric Clark			SOCMA

Bill Turetsky			ISP

Jeff Gunnulfsen		SOCMA

Janet Weller			Cleary

Dave Fagan			EPA/HWID

Charlotte Mooney		EPA/HWID

Seth Levine			Cambrex

Bob Dellinger			EPA/HWID

Janice Bryant			EPA/OPEI

SOCMA met with EPA to discuss comments on the proposed rulemaking.
Particularly, they discussed doing the NAICS option with 3-digits, the
possibility of a conditional exemption for specialty batch chemicals,
their support for keeping legitimacy as guidance, and the particulars of
toll manufacturing.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 107 (Monday, June 5, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36472-36475]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11758]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

23 CFR Part 490

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

23 CFR Part 1300

[Docket No. NHTSA-2022-0036]
RIN 2127-AM45

Uniform Procedures for State Highway Safety Grant Programs

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Department of Transportation
(DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the uniform procedures implementing the
State Highway Safety Grant Program to waive, for fiscal year 2024, the
requirement that targets for the common performance measures be
identical to targets in the State Highway Safety Improvement Plan. This
final rule makes a corresponding change to a similar requirement in the
Federal Highway Administration's performance management regulation.

DATES: This final rule is effective on June 5, 2023.

ADDRESSES: This document may be viewed online through the Federal
eRulemaking portal at www.regulations.gov using the docket number
listed above. Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are available on
the website. It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. An
electronic copy of this document may also be downloaded by accessing
the Office of the Federal Register's website at:
www.federalregister.gov and the Government Publishing Office's website
at: www.GovInfo.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For NHTSA: Program issues: Barbara Sauers, Associate Administrator,
Regional Operations and Program Delivery, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration; Telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email:
[email protected]. Legal issues: Megan Brown, Attorney-Advisor,
Office of the Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590;
Telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email: [email protected].
    For FHWA: Kelly Morton, Office of Safety,<PHONE_NUMBER> or via
email at [email protected] or Dawn Horan, Office of the Chief
Counsel,<PHONE_NUMBER> or via email at [email protected]. Office
hours are from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., E.T., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Waiver of Identical Targets for Common Performance Measures
III. Waiver of Notice and Comment
IV. Regulatory Analyses and Notices

I. Background

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) share three common performance
measures in their highway safety programs--total fatalities, rate of
fatalities, and total serious injuries--and have shared these common
performance measure for many years. Both NHTSA and FHWA regulations
require States to submit identical targets for the three common
performance measures--in NHTSA's triennial Highway Safety Plan (HSP)
and in FHWA's Highway Safety Improvement Plan (HSIP) annual report. See
23 CFR 1300.11(b)(3)(ii)(C) and 23 CFR 490.209(a)(1), respectively.
    On November 15, 2021, the President signed into law the
``Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act'' (known also as the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, or BIL), Public Law 117-58. The BIL
provided additional grant funds to States and changed several
requirements to support States in their efforts to strengthen their
highway safety programs. Among other things, the BIL required that all
performance targets submitted to NHTSA in the triennial HSP demonstrate
constant or improved performance. 23 U.S.C. 402(d)(4)(A)(ii).
    NHTSA published a final rule implementing the Highway Safety Grant
Program under the BIL on February 6, 2023, at 88 FR 7780. The rule
provides

direction to States on procedures for meeting the statutory
requirements governing their highway safety grant programs and
applications. Among other things, the rule requires States to submit
constant or improved targets for the common performance measures and
that these targets be identical to the targets that are reported by the
State DOT in the HSIP annual report. See 23 CFR 1300.11(b)(3)(ii)(B).
Stakeholders have raised questions about the interplay between NHTSA's
and FHWA's current regulations. Additionally, FHWA has not yet
completed a new regulation implementing any changes to its performance
measures since the passage of the BIL. Therefore, States have not had
the opportunity to comment on proposed FHWA requirements that may be
affected by the NHTSA regulation's requirement for identical targets.
FHWA will soon release a notice of proposed rulemaking concerning its
performance measures that will address this issue.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202210&RIN=2125-AG06.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Waiver of Identical Targets for Common Performance Measures

    In this rulemaking, NHTSA amends 23 CFR 1300.11 to insert paragraph
(b)(3)(iv), which waives, for fiscal year 2024, the requirement that
performance targets submitted for common performance measures be
identical to the State DOT targets reported in the HSIP annual report.
NHTSA also makes a conforming amendment to 23 CFR 1300.11(b)(3)(ii)(C).
FHWA makes a similar change to its regulation. With these changes,
State Highway Safety Offices (HSOs) and State DOTs have the flexibility
to submit non-identical targets for the common performance measures for
fiscal year 2024. However, States must still submit targets for these
common performance measures along with the other targets they are
required to submit, and all targets submitted to NHTSA for all
performance measures must show constant or improved performance
compared to the current safety levels, as required by statute. See 23
U.S.C. 402(k)(4)(A)(ii) and 23 CFR 1300.11(b)(3)(ii)(B)(2).
    While NHTSA and FHWA are affording States flexibility not to submit
identical targets for fiscal year 2024 highway safety programs, HSOs
are nevertheless encouraged to continue setting identical targets in
collaboration with their colleagues in State Departments of
Transportation as they work together to implement a Safe System
Approach and reduce deaths and injuries on our roadways.

III. Waiver of Notice and Comment

    NHTSA and FHWA find good cause to issue, without notice and
comment, and to make effective immediately, this time-limited waiver of
the requirement for identical targets, in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B) and (d)(1). The Administrative Procedure Act provides that
when an agency, for good cause, finds that notice and public comment
are impractical, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, the
agency may issue a final rule without providing notice and an
opportunity for public comment (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)). For the same
reason, the rule can become effective immediately. See 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(1). The safety programs of NHTSA and FHWA are governed by
different statutory provisions, and FHWA has not completed its notice
and comment rulemaking on the National Performance Management Measures
since the passage of BIL. NHTSA and FHWA recognize the importance of
allowing time for States to provide comments on the FHWA program, but
also recognize that HSOs must meet the upcoming statutory July 1
deadline to submit their triennial Highway Safety Plans for the NHTSA
program and State DOTs must meet the August 31 deadline to submit their
safety performance targets in their HSIP annual reports. States'
efforts to develop their triennial Highway Safety Plans are well
underway at this time, and it is critical that States be provided
certainty about application criteria. With these considerations in
mind, NHTSA finds it in the public interest to waive, for fiscal year
2024 Highway Safety Programs, the regulatory requirement in 23 CFR
1300.11(b)(3)(ii)(C) that performance targets submitted for the common
performance measures (fatalities, fatality rate, and serious injuries)
in the triennial Highway Safety Plan be identical to the targets
submitted by the State DOT in the Highway Safety Improvement Program
report, and to make this waiver effective immediately. Likewise, FHWA
finds it in the public interest to waive the regulatory requirement in
23 CFR 490.209(a)(1) that the State DOT targets shall be identical to
the targets established by the State Highway Safety Office for the
common performance measures, and to make this waiver effective
immediately.

IV. Regulatory Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O.
13563, and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA and FHWA have considered the impact of this rulemaking action
under Executive Order 12866 (as amended by Executive Order 14094),
Executive Order 13563, and the Department of Transportation's
regulatory policies and procedures. This rulemaking document was not
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive
Order 12866. This action is not expected to impose any costs because it
makes limited revisions to the uniform procedures implementing State
highway safety grant programs. This rulemaking has been determined to
be not ``significant'' under the Department of Transportation's
regulatory policies and procedures and the policies of OMB.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
requires agencies to evaluate the potential effects of their proposed
and final rules on small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. Section 605 of the RFA allows an agency to
certify a rule, in lieu of preparing an analysis, if the rulemaking is
not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act (SBREFA) amended the RFA to require Federal agencies to
provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying that an action
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    This final rule makes limited revisions to the uniform procedures
implementing State highway safety grant programs, which were previously
determined to not have a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities. The grant programs impacted by this rule will affect
only State governments, which are not considered to be small entities
as that term is defined by the RFA. Therefore, we certify that this
action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities and find that the preparation of a Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis is unnecessary.

C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132 on ``Federalism'' requires NHTSA and FHWA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials

in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.'' 64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999). ``Policies that have
federalism implications'' are defined in the Executive order to include
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, an agency may not issue a
regulation with federalism implications that imposes substantial direct
compliance costs and that is not required by statute unless the Federal
Government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local governments or the agency consults
with State and local governments in the process of developing the
regulation. An agency also may not issue a regulation with federalism
implications that preempts a State law without consulting with State
and local officials.
    The agencies have analyzed this rulemaking action in accordance
with the principles and criteria set forth in Executive Order 13132.
The limited revisions made by this rulemaking provide flexibility to
State applicants. The agencies have therefore determined that this
final rule would not have sufficient federalism implications as defined
in the order to warrant formal consultation with State and local
officials or the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement.

D. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    Pursuant to Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996)),
``Civil Justice Reform,'' the agency has considered whether this rule
would have any retroactive effect. We conclude that it would not have
any retroactive or preemptive effect, and judicial review of it may be
obtained pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 702. That section does not require that a
petition for reconsideration be filed prior to seeking judicial review.
This action 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.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (PRA), a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information by a Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. This rulemaking
does not establish any new information collection requirements.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires
agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and
other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in expenditures by State, local or tribal governments,
in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million
annually (adjusted annually for inflation with base year of 1995). This
rulemaking would not meet the definition of a Federal mandate because
any potential resulting annual State expenditures would not exceed the
minimum threshold. The program is voluntary and States that choose to
apply and qualify would receive grant funds.

G. National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA and FHWA have considered the impacts of this rulemaking
action for the purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act. The
agencies have determined that this rulemaking would not have a
significant impact on the quality of the human environment and
qualifies for the categorical exclusion at 23 CFR 771.117(c)(20).

H. Executive Order 13211

    Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 18, 2001) applies to any
rulemaking that: (1) is determined to be economically significant as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and is likely to have a
significantly adverse effect on the supply of, distribution of, or use
of energy; or (2) that is designated by the Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action.
This rulemaking is not likely to have a significantly adverse effect on
the supply of, distribution of, or use of energy. This rulemaking has
not been designated as a significant energy action. Accordingly, this
rulemaking is not subject to Executive Order 13211.

I. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribes)

    The agencies have analyzed this rulemaking under Executive Order
13175 and have determined that this action would not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, would not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal governments, and
would not preempt tribal law. Therefore, a tribal summary impact
statement is not required.

J. Privacy Act

    Please note that anyone is able to search the electronic form of
all 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 DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit DOT's
Privacy Policy website at https://www.transportation.gov/dot-website-privacy-policy.

List of Subjects

23 CFR Part 490

    Bridges, Highway safety, Highways and roads, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

23 CFR Part 1300

    Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse,
Grant programs--transportation, Highway safety, Intergovernmental
relations, Motor vehicles--motorcycles, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.81, 1.85, and 1.95.
Andrew Rogers,
Deputy Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
Sophie Shulman,
Deputy Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA and FHWA amend 23 CFR
parts 490 and 1300 as follows:

Title 23--Highways

PART 490--NATIONAL PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT MEASURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 490 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  23 U.S.C. 134, 135, 148(i) and 150; 49 CFR 1.85.

Subpart B--National Performance Management Measures for the Highway
Safety Improvement Program

0
2. Amend Sec.  490.209 by adding a sentence at the end of paragraph
(a)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  490.209  Establishment of performance targets.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * * For fiscal year 2024 only, the performance targets
submitted under this paragraph are not required to be identical to the
targets established by

the State Highway Safety Office for the common performance measures.
* * * * *

PART 1300--UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR STATE HIGHWAY SAFETY GRANT
PROGRAMS

0
3. The authority citation for part 1300 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  23 U.S.C. 402; 23 U.S.C. 405; Sec. 1906, Pub. L.
109-59, 119 Stat. 1468, as amended by Sec. 25024, Pub. L. 117-58,
135 Stat. 879; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.

Subpart B--Triennial Highway Safety Plan and Annual Grant
Application

0
4. Amend Sec.  1300.11 by:
0
a. Adding ``Except as provided in paragraph (b)(3)(iv) of this
section,'' at the beginning of paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C); and
0
b. Adding paragraph (b)(3)(iv).
    The addition reads as follows:

Sec.  1300.11  Triennial Highway Safety Plan.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (iv) For fiscal year 2024 only, the performance targets submitted
for common performance measures under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this
section are not required to be identical to the State DOT targets
reported in the HSIP annual report.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-11758 Filed 6-2-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 126 (Monday, July 3, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42713-42714]
[FR Doc No: 2023-14060]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER23-2237-000]

Flat Ridge 4 Wind Holdings LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Flat Ridge 4 Wind Holdings LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is July 17, 2023.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed proceedings should be
delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225 Wilkins Avenue,
Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: June 27, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-14060 Filed 6-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


"Bromberg, Kevin L."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
02/09/2007 11:41 AM

To

"'Flynn, Amy E.'"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Jeff Cohen/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Subject

FW: 134A transition Issues

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 11:40 AM

To<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Subject: 134A transiton Issues

Mr. Bromberg;

Per our conversation today,  I want to state for the record that the
change from R22 to 134A requires much more then than the “hand
holding” that some foam producers have indicated.  I am having first
hand and experience with this today.

Our company licensed our patented PRISMA technology to two divisions of
a major boat builder.  The first division (BB-134) was licensed in early
2005 and was already using 134A.  The second division (BB-R22) was
licensed in the summer of 2005 and was using R22 foam.

Our supplier, BASF produces the foam for all three companies (Compsys,
BB-134, and BB-R22).   We ran parts for BB-134 and BB-R22 at our plant
using our R22 system.  We were able to successfully produce parts using
our R22 system.

BB-R22 had the tools transferred from our plant to their plant.  Within
24 hours BB-R22 was successfully producing parts with R22 foam.

BB-134 could not use R22 foam so our supplier produced what we were told
was the 134A version of our foam.  They sent this foam to BB-134.
BB-134 had no success with that 134A formulation or with numerous other
134A formulations sent in by the suppler.   To prove that it was a foam
issue we sent the tool back to us at Compsys.  We performed trials with
our R22 systems and once again we were able to produce good parts.   The
suppler has spent over 14 months working with BB-134 and Compsys to
develop a 134A foam system that will work.

The issue is so severe that we have had to ship tools from our plant to
our foam suppler so that they could work in their laboratories to
develop a workable 134A formulation.  The effort continues without
success to this date.

This single experience caused great expense and hardship on both our
company and BB-134.  Keep in mind we are working with BB-134 on only 4
different tool configurations.  COMPSYS has over 2000 different parts
that we produce and the holding company of BB-134 and BB-R22 produces
tens of thousands of boats.

Also keep in mind when the foam suppliers say they have qualified a 134A
system, they have done so in their laboratories.  Here conditions are
ideal.  In the boat factories we do not have nearly the ideal conditions
of the labs.  The process sensitivity of 134A vs R22 is not known,
however based on our experience to date and the experience of other boat
builders we very concerned.

It is completely un-realistic to expect successful industry transition
in only 10 short months.   Our industry needs to have until 2010 as
agreed or the change will cause undo hardship on our company and on the
entire boating industry.

Thank you for your further consideration on this issue

Scott Lewit

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

Scott M. Lewit

Compsys, Inc.

Structural Composites, Inc

7705 Technology Drive

W. Melbourne, FL 32904

321-951-9464

321-728-9071 (f)

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
  HYPERLINK "http://www.structuralcomposites.com/_"
www.structuralcomposites.com

www.preforms.com