[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 242 (Monday, December 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74715-74718]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30323]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68406; File No. SR-Phlx-2012-138]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Strategies

December 11, 2012.
    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 December 3, 2012, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the fee caps applicable to certain
strategies on Multiply Listed Options in Section II, entitled ``Equity
Options Fees.'' \3\ The Exchange also proposes to apply the fee caps to
transactions on certain reversal \4\ and conversion \5\ strategies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section II Equity Options fees include options overlying
equities, ETFs, ETNs and indexes which are Multiply Listed.
    \4\ Reversals are established by combining a short stock
position with a short put and a long call position that shares the
same strike and expiration.
    \5\ Conversions are established by combining a long position in
the underlying stock with a long put and a short call position that
share the same strike and expiration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXfilings, 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 Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set

forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of
such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the fee caps
relating to dividend,\6\ merger \7\ and short stock interest \8\
strategies in Section II of the Pricing Schedule.\9\ The Exchange also
proposes to apply the fee caps to reversal and conversion strategies in
Section II of the Pricing Schedule and modify the application of
reversal and conversion strategies in other parts of the Pricing
Schedule. The Exchange believes the amendments would continue to
incentivize market participants to trade on the Exchange by capping
floor option transaction charges related to various strategies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A dividend strategy is defined as transactions done to
achieve a dividend arbitrage involving the purchase, sale and
exercise of in-the-money options of the same class, executed the
first business day prior to the date on which the underlying stock
goes ex-dividend.
    \7\ A merger strategy is defined as transactions done to achieve
a merger arbitrage involving the purchase, sale and exercise of
options of the same class and expiration date, executed the first
business day prior to the date on which shareholders of record are
required to elect their respective form of consideration, i.e., cash
or stock.
    \8\ A short stock interest strategy is defined as transactions
done to achieve a short stock interest arbitrage involving the
purchase, sale and exercise of in-the-money options of the same
class.
    \9\ While the fee caps are noted in Section II of the Pricing
Schedule, the caps apply to all Multiply Listed Options in Sections
I and II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today, Specialist,\10\ Market Maker,\11\ Professional,\12\ Firm and
Broker-Dealer floor option transaction charges are capped at $1,000 for
dividend, merger and short stock interest strategies executed on the
same trading day in the same options class when such members are
trading in their own proprietary accounts. In addition, floor option
transaction charges for dividend, merger and short stock interest
strategies combined are further capped at the greater of $10,000 per
member or $25,000 per member organization when such members are trading
in their own proprietary account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A ``Specialist'' is an Exchange member who is registered as
an options specialist pursuant to Rule 1020(a).
    \11\ A ``Market Maker'' includes Registered Options Traders
(Rule 1014(b)(i) and (ii)), which includes Streaming Quote Traders
(see Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A)) and Remote Streaming Quote Traders (see
Rule 1014(b)(ii)(B)).
    \12\ The term ``Professional'' is a person or entity that (i) is
not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) places more than 390
orders in listed options per day on average during a calendar month
for its own beneficial account(s). See Rule 1000(b)(14).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to increase the cap for dividend, merger and
short stock interest strategies from $1,000 to $1,250 provided the
strategy is executed on the same trading day in the same options class
when such members are trading in their own proprietary account.
Further, the Exchange proposes to adopt a cap for floor options
transaction charges for reversal and conversion strategies of $750,
provided the reversal and conversion strategy is executed on the same
trading day in the same options class when such members are trading in
their own proprietary account, similar to dividend, merger and short
stock interest strategies. The Exchange also proposes to increase the
cap for floor equity options transaction charges for dividend, merger
and short stock interest strategies combined from the greater of
$10,000 per member or $25,000 per member organization per month to
simply $35,000 per member organization per month provided that such
members are trading in their own proprietary account.\13\ The Exchange
proposes to apply this cap of $35,000 per member organization per month
to reversal and conversion strategies as well and term the cap as the
``Monthly Strategy Cap.''\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The requirement that such members trade in their own
proprietary account would not be amended by this proposal.
    \14\ Reversal and conversion strategies executed on the floor
will be assessed the floor options transaction charge of $0.25 per
contract. Floor QCC Orders are defined in 1064(e). See Section II of
the Pricing Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to define reversal and conversion strategies
within Section II of the Pricing Schedule as follows: ``Reversals and
conversions are transactions that employ calls and puts of the same
strike price and the underlying stock. Reversals are established by
combining a short stock position with a short put and a long call
position that shares the same strike and expiration. Conversions employ
long positions in the underlying stock that accompany long puts and
short calls sharing the same strike and expiration.''
    Further, the Exchange proposes to include Firm reversal and
conversion transactions in the Monthly Firm Fee Cap \15\ and note this
in Section II of the Pricing Schedule. Because of the inclusion of the
Firm reversal and conversion transactions in the Monthly Firm Fee Cap,
the Exchange also proposes to exclude Firm reversal and conversion
transactions from the Monthly Strategy Cap. The reversal and conversion
strategy cap of $750 would apply to Firms, as proposed herein, as it
applies to other market participants. The Exchange also proposes to
note this exception to the Monthly Strategy Cap in Section II of the
Pricing Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Firms are subject to a maximum fee of $75,000 (``Monthly
Firm Fee Cap''). Firm floor option transaction charges and QCC
Transaction Fees, as defined in this section above, in the
aggregate, for one billing month will not exceed the Monthly Firm
Fee Cap per member organization when such members are trading in
their own proprietary account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to exclude reversal and conversion strategy
transactions from the $0.07 per side Service Fee which is applicable
once a Specialist and Market Maker has reached the Monthly Market Maker
Cap.\16\ The Exchange proposes to note in Section II of the Pricing
Schedule that the $0.07 per side Service Fee ``* * *will apply to every
contract side of the QCC Order and Floor QCC Order after a Specialist
or Market Maker has reached the Monthly Market Maker Cap, except for
reversal and conversion strategies executed via QCC.'' Similarly, the
Exchange proposes to exclude reversal and conversion strategy
transactions from the $0.01 per side Service Fee which is applicable
once a Firm has reached the Monthly Firm Fee Cap.\17\ The Exchange
proposes to note in Section II of the Pricing Schedule that the $0.01
per side Service Fee ``* * *will apply once a Firm has reached the
Monthly Firm Fee Cap, except for reversal and conversion strategies
executed via QCC.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Specialists and Market Makers are subject to a ``Monthly
Market Maker Cap'' of $550,000 for: (i) Equity option transaction
fees; (ii) QCC Transaction Fees (as defined in Exchange Rule 1080(o)
and Floor QCC Orders, as defined in 1064(e)); and (iii) fees related
to an order or quote that is contra to a PIXL Order or specifically
responding to a PIXL auction. For QCC Orders as defined in Exchange
Rule 1080(o), and Floor QCC Orders, as defined in 1064(e), a Service
Fee of $0.07 per side will apply once a Specialist and Market Maker
has reached the Monthly Market Maker Cap.
    \17\ Firms are subject to a maximum fee of $75,000 (``Monthly
Firm Fee Cap''). Firm floor option transaction charges and QCC
Transaction Fees, as defined in this section above, in the
aggregate, for one billing month will not exceed the Monthly Firm
Fee Cap per member organization when such members are trading in
their own proprietary account. For QCC Orders as defined in Exchange
Rule 1080(o), and Floor QCC Orders, as defined in 1064(e), a Service
Fee of $0.01 per side will apply once a Firm has reached the Monthly
Firm Fee Cap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For purposes of clarity, the Exchange proposes to add the word
``floor'' when describing the fee caps to indicate that the cap is only
applicable to transactions which originated from the Exchange floor.
This is not a change to the Pricing Schedule but rather a
clarification. In addition, the Exchange proposes to amend the
applicability of the fees caps by further specifying that in order to
qualify for a fee cap, the buy

and sell side of a transaction must originate on the Exchange floor.
Today, the Exchange does not restrict the buy and sell sides to floor
transactions. This proposal would require that the cap apply to floor
options transactions charges if both the buy and sell sides originated
on the Exchange floor to receive the benefit of the fee cap. The
Exchange is proposing to add this language to Section II of the Pricing
Schedule.
    For purposes of clarity, the Exchange also proposes to make a
technical correction to Section II of the Pricing Schedule to remove a
reference the term ``Reversal and Conversion Cap'' and replace it with
``reversal and conversion strategy.'' The Exchange also proposes to
substitute the word ``or'' instead of ``and'' to further clarify text
related to the Monthly Market Maker Cap. The Exchange previously
eliminated a former Reversal and Conversion Cap and inadvertently did
not also eliminate a reference to this defined terminology from a prior
rule filing. The Exchange proposes to remove the defined term at this
time and utilize the term ``reversal and conversion strategy.'' The
Exchange also proposes to make a technical amendment to substitute the
term ``equity options transaction fees'' with ``options transaction
charges'' so that the terminology is consistent throughout Section II
of the Pricing Schedule. Finally, the Exchange proposes to add the term
``Multiply Listed Options'' in Section II for clarity to indicate the
strategies apply to all Multiply Listed Options.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Pricing
Schedule is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \18\ in general,
and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \19\ in
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees
and other charges among Exchange members and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to increase the fee cap on floor option
transaction charges for dividend, merger and short stock interest
strategies from $1,000 to $1,250 per month, provided the strategy is
executed on the same trading day in the same options class when such
members are trading in their own proprietary account, is reasonable
because the Exchange seeks to incentivize members to transact a greater
number of strategies on the Exchange to benefit from the fee cap. Also,
this proposal is similar in nature to caps on other exchanges, namely
NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca''),\20\ NYSE Amex, Inc. (``NYSE Amex'')
\21\ and the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (``CBOE'')
\22\ for strategies. The Exchange also believes that the increased fee
cap is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the Exchange
is offering all members, except for Customers,\23\ the same opportunity
to cap their floor option transaction charges in Multiply Listed
Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See NYSE Arca General Options and Trading Permit (OTP)
Fees.
    \21\ See NYSE Amex Options Fee Schedule.
    \22\ See CBOE's Fees Schedule.
    \23\ Customers are not assessed options transaction charges in
Section II of the Pricing Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that its proposal to adopt a $750 per month
fee cap on floor options transaction charges for reversal and
conversion strategies, provided the reversal and conversion strategy is
executed on the same trading day in the same options class when such
members are trading in their own proprietary accounts, is reasonable
because the Exchange seeks to incentivize members to transact a greater
number of strategies on the Exchange to benefit from the fee cap. Also,
this proposal is similar to reversal and conversion fee caps on other
exchanges, namely NYSE Arca,\24\ NYSE Amex \25\ and CBOE.\26\ The
Exchange also believes that the adoption of the fee cap is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory because the Exchange would offer all
members, except for Customers,\27\ the same opportunity to cap floor
option transaction charges in Multiply Listed Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See NYSE Arca General Options and Trading Permit (OTP)
Fees.
    \25\ See NYSE Amex Options Fee Schedule.
    \26\ See CBOE's Fees Schedule.
    \27\ Customers are not assessed options transaction charges in
Section II of the Pricing Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes its proposal to amend and increase fee caps
for floor options transaction charges for dividend, merger and short
stock interest strategies and adopt the cap for reversal and conversion
strategies of $35,000 per member organization per month, provided that
such members are trading in their own proprietary accounts, is
reasonable because the Exchange seeks to incentivize members to
transact a greater number of strategies on the Exchange to benefit from
the fee cap. The Exchange also believes its proposal to increase the
Monthly Strategy Cap is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because the Exchange would offer all members, except for Customers,\28\
the opportunity to cap their floor equity options transaction fees for
dividend, merger and short stock interest strategies. With respect to
reversal and conversion strategies, the Exchange believes that its
proposal to increase the Monthly Strategy Cap is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because the Exchange would offer all members,
except for Customers and Firms,\29\ the opportunity to cap their floor
equity options transaction charges for dividend, merger and short stock
interest strategies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Customers are not assessed options transaction charges in
Section II of the Pricing Schedule.
    \29\ Firms transaction fees are capped at $75,000 per month as
noted in Section II of the Pricing Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to exclude Firm floor options transaction
charges related to reversal and conversion strategies from the Monthly
Strategy Cap is reasonable because these fees would be capped as part
of the Monthly Firm Fee Cap, which applies only to Firms. The Exchange
believes that the exclusion of Firm floor options transaction charges
related to reversal and conversion strategies from the Monthly Strategy
Cap is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because Firms, unlike
other market participants, have the ability to cap transaction fees up
to $75,000 per month. The Exchange would include floor option
transaction charges related to reversal and conversion strategies in
the Monthly Strategy Cap for Professionals, and Broker Dealers because
these market participants are not subject to the Monthly Firm Fee Cap
or other similar Cap. While Specialists and Market Makers are subject
to a Monthly Market Maker Cap on both electronic and floor options
transaction charges, reversal and conversion transactions are excluded
from the Monthly Market Maker Cap.\30\ For the reasons described above,
the Exchange believes including reversal and conversion strategies in
the Monthly Firm Fee Cap is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the cap provides an incentive for Firms to
transact floor transactions on the Exchange, which brings increased
liquidity and order flow to the floor for the benefit of all market
participants.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ The reversal and conversion strategy executions are
excluded from the Monthly Market Maker Cap. See Section II of the
Pricing Schedule.
    \31\ Firms are eligible to cap floor options transactions
charges and QCC Transaction Fees as part of the Monthly Firm Fee
Cap. QCC Transaction Fees apply to QCC Orders as defined in Exchange
Rule 1080(o) and Floor QCC Orders as defined in 1064(e). See Section
II of the Pricing Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend the applicability
of the fee caps to orders originating from the Exchange floor is
reasonable because

members pay floor brokers to execute trades on the Exchange floor. The
Exchange believes that offering fee caps to members executing floor
transactions would defray brokerage costs associated with executing
strategy transactions and continue to incentivize members to utilize
the floor for certain executions.\32\ The Exchange believes that its
proposal to amend the applicability of the fee caps to orders
originating from the Exchange floor is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because today, the fee caps are only applicable for
floor transactions. The Exchange believes that a requirement that both
the buy and sell sides of the order originate from the floor to qualify
for the fee cap would constitute equal treatment of members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ The Exchange's proposal would only apply the fee cap to
options transaction charges where buy and sell sides originate from
the Exchange floor. See proposed rule text in Section II of the
Pricing Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that excluding the reversal and conversion
strategy transactions from both the $0.07 per side Service Fee
applicable to the Monthly Market Maker Cap and the $0.01 per side
Service Fee applicable to the Monthly Firm Fee Cap is reasonable
because the Exchange is not offering members a QCC rebate for floor
transactions executed via QCC.\33\ The Exchange specifically excludes
dividend, merger, short stock interest or reversal or conversion
strategy executions from the QCC rebate and therefore does not desire
to assess the Service Fees for these types of transactions.\34\ The
Exchange believes that excluding the reversal and conversion strategy
transactions from both the $0.07 per side Service Fee applicable to the
Monthly Market Maker Cap and the $0.01 per side Service Fee applicable
to the Monthly Firm Fee Cap is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the Exchange would not assess the Service Fees
described herein on any member executing reversal and conversion
strategies on QCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ QCC Transaction Fees for a Specialist, Market Maker,
Professional, Firm and Broker-Dealer are $0.20 per contract. QCC
Transaction Fees apply to QCC Orders, as defined in Exchange Rule
1080(o), and Floor QCC Orders, as defined in 1064(e). A rebate, as
specified in Section II of the Pricing Schedule is paid pursuant to
the QCC Rebate Schedule on all qualifying executed QCC Orders, as
defined in Exchange Rule 1080(o) and Floor QCC Orders, as defined in
1064(e), except where the transaction is either: (i) Customer-to-
Customer; or (ii) a dividend, merger or short stock interest
strategy or reversal or conversion strategy executions (as defined
in Section II). The proposed rule text relating to reversal and
conversion strategies is included in this explanation.
    \34\ Dividend, merger and short stock interest strategies do not
qualify as QCC Transactions pursuant to Rule 1080(o)(3) because of
the necessity of the stock component.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that removing an outdated reference and
making clarifying changes to the Pricing Schedule, such as adding the
reference to floor and amending ``equity options transaction fees'' to
``options transaction charges,'' adding the term ``Multiply Listed
Options'' to the discussion of strategies and substituting the word
``and'' with ``or'' in the Monthly Market Maker Cap are reasonable,
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory amendments because these
technical amendments would clarify the Pricing Schedule and make it
terms consistent throughout.

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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. To the contrary, the proposed
fees would continue to encourage members to transact strategies on the
exchange because the proposed fee caps are competitive with fee caps at
other options exchanges.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or 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.\35\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2012-138 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2012-138. 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 Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2012-138 and should be
submitted on or before January 7, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\36\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-30323 Filed 12-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 183)]
[Notices]
[Page 57764-57765]
[DOCID:fr22se10-58]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Meeting

September 15, 2010.
    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) hereby gives
notice that members of its staff may attend the meeting noted below.
The meeting will be hosted by Entergy Arkansas, Inc. (EAI) and will
examine, among other things, steps by EAI in exploring future successor
arrangements. Their attendance is part of the Commission's ongoing
outreach efforts.
    September 23, 2010 (9:30 a.m.-4 p.m.), Embassy Suites Hotel, 11301
Financial Center Parkway, Little Rock, AR 72211,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The discussions may address matters at issue in the following
proceedings:

Docket No. OA07-32................  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. OA08-59................  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL00-66................  Louisiana Public Service Commission
                                     v. Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL01-88................  Louisiana Public Service Commission
                                     v. Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL05-15................  Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corp.
                                     v. Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
Docket No. EL07-52................  Louisiana Public Service Commission
                                     v. Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL08-51................  Louisiana Public Service Commission
                                     v. Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL08-60................  Ameren Services Co. v. Entergy
                                     Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL09-43................  Arkansas Public Service Commission
                                     v. Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL09-61................  Louisiana Public Service Commission
                                     v. Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL09-78................  South Mississippi Electric Power
                                     Association v. Entergy Services,
                                     Inc.
Docket No. EL10-55................  Louisiana Public Service Commission
                                     v. Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL10-65................  Louisiana Public Service Commission
                                     v. Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER05-1065..............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER07-682...............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER07-956...............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER08-767...............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER08-1056..............   Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER08-1057..............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER09-636...............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER09-833...............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER09-877...............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER09-882...............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER09-1214..............   Entergy Services, Inc.

Docket No. ER09-1224..............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER10-794...............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER10-879...............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER10-984...............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER10-1350..............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER10-2246..............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER10-2247..............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER10-2267..............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER10-2292..............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER10-2299..............  Entergy Services, Inc.

    These meetings are open to the public.
    For more information, contact Patrick Clarey, Office of Energy
Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at (317) 249-
5937 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-23627 Filed 9-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 4, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 350-351]
[FR Doc No: 2022-28568]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC23-44-000.
    Applicants: Eight Point Wind, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act of Eight Point Wind, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/22/22.
    Accession Number: 20221222-5334.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/23.

    Docket Numbers: EC23-45-000.
    Applicants: St. Paul Cogeneration, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act of St. Paul Cogeneration, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/22/22.
    Accession Number: 20221222-5336.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/23.

    Docket Numbers: EC23-46-000.
    Applicants: Shawville Lessor Genco LLC, GenOn Energy Services, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act of Shawville Lessor Genco LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20221223-5183.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/13/23.

    Docket Numbers: EC23-47-000.
    Applicants: Fresh Air Energy XXIII, LLC, Fresh Air Energy XXXVII,
LLC, Cathcart Solar, LLC, Thigpen Farms Solar, LLC, PGR 2022 Lessee 2,
LLC.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203
of the Federal Power Act of Fresh Air Energy XXIII, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20221223-5185.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/13/23.

    Docket Numbers: EC23-48-000.
    Applicants: Diablo Winds, LLC.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203
of the Federal Power Act of Diablo Winds, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20221223-5189.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/13/23.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1789-009; ER10-1768-008; ER10-1771-008; ER16-
2725-006.
    Applicants: PSEG Energy Solutions LLC, PSEG Nuclear LLC, Public
Service Electric and Gas Company, PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20221223-5182.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2010-008; ER10-2691-002.
    Applicants: The Narragansett Electric Company, PPL Electric
Utilities Corporation.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of PPL Electric Utilities Corporation, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20221223-5173.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2607-007; ER10-2626-006.
    Applicants: TEC Trading, Inc., Old Dominion Electric Cooperative.

    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Old Dominion Electric Cooperative, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20221223-5181.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4267-020; ER16-2412-008.
    Applicants: Luning Energy LLC, Algonquin Energy Services Inc.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northwest Region
of Algonquin Energy Services Inc., et al.
    Filed Date: 12/28/22.
    Accession Number: 20221228-5053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/27/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1720-022.
    Applicants: Invenergy Energy Management LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northwest Region
of Invenergy Energy Management LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20221227-5252.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/27/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-352-001.
    Applicants: Blue Sky West, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Tariff Revisions to be
effective 11/3/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/28/22.
    Accession Number: 20221228-5089.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-353-001.
    Applicants: Evergreen Wind Power II, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Tariff Revisions to be
effective 11/3/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/28/22.
    Accession Number: 20221228-5092.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-354-001.
    Applicants: Hancock Wind, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Tariff Revisions to be
effective 11/3/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/28/22.
    Accession Number: 20221228-5094.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-355-001.
    Applicants: Mulberry Farm, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Tariff Revisions to be
effective 11/3/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/28/22.
    Accession Number: 20221228-5099.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-356-001.
    Applicants: Selmer Farm, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Tariff Revisions to be
effective 11/3/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/28/22.
    Accession Number: 20221228-5100.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-357-001.
    Applicants: Broad River Energy LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Tariff Revisions to be
effective 11/3/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/28/22.
    Accession Number: 20221228-5090.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-358-001.
    Applicants: KMC Thermo, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Tariff Revisions to be
effective 11/3/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/28/22.
    Accession Number: 20221228-5096.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-731-000.
    Applicants: Horizon West Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: HWT TRBAA 2023 Annual Update
w/Waiver to be effective 1/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 12/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20221227-5154.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-732-000.
    Applicants: California State University Channel Islands Site
Authority.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Request for Authorization of
Daily Surcharge Payment to be effective 12/27/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20221227-5172.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-733-000.
    Applicants: Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation.
    Description: Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation submits Notice of
Cancellation of the Interconnection Agreement with Fibertek Energy,
LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/13/22.
    Accession Number: 20221213-5207.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/3/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-734-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original ISA, Service
Agreement No. 6736; Queue No. AE2-226 to be effective 11/29/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/28/22.
    Accession Number: 20221228-5031.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-735-000.
    Applicants: GridLiance West LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: GLW TRBAA 2023 Annual Update
Filing to be effective 1/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 12/28/22.
    Accession Number: 20221228-5032.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-736-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original ISA, Service
Agreement No. 6725; Queue No. AE2-117 to be effective 11/29/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/28/22.
    Accession Number: 20221228-5050.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-737-000.
    Applicants: North Fork Solar Project, LLC.
    Description: Request for Limited Waiver and Expedited Consideration
of North Fork Solar Project, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/16/22.
    Accession Number: 20221216-5337.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/6/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-738-000.
    Applicants: Trans Bay Cable LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Annual TRBAA Filing--2023 to
be effective 1/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 12/28/22.
    Accession Number: 20221228-5146.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/23.

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

    Docket Numbers: ES23-5-000.
    Applicants: New Hampshire Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to November 3, 2022 Application Under
Section 204 of the Federal Power Act for Authorization to Issue
Securities of New Hampshire Transmission, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/22/22.
    Accession Number: 20221222-5260.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/29/22.

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

    Dated: December 28, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-28568 Filed 1-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 26 (Thursday, February 7, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9016-9020]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02812]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2012-0951; FRL- 9778-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Massachusetts; Revisions to Fossil Fuel Utilization and Source
Registration Regulations and Boiler Industrial Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve several State Implementation
Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Massachusetts. The
revisions add new monitoring, inspection, maintenance and testing
requirements for certain fossil fuel utilization facilities, rename and
clarify stationary source emission reporting requirements, and
establish compliance and certification standards for new boilers. The
intended effect of this action is to propose approval of the state's
revised fossil fuel utilization facility regulation, source
registration regulation, and new industrial performance standards for
boilers. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 11, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R01-OAR-2012-0951 by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``Docket Identification Number EPA-R01-OAR-2012-0951'',
Ida E. McDonnell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits, Toxics
and Indoor Programs Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail Code
OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Ida E.
McDonnell, Manager, Air Permits, Toxics, and Indoor Programs Unit, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office,
Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits, Toxics and Indoor Programs
Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA
02109-3912. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
legal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-
2012-0951. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov, or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, Air Permits, Toxics and Indoor Programs, 5 Post Office
Square--Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible,
you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
legal holidays.
    In addition, copies of the state submittal and EPA's technical
support document are also available for public inspection during normal
business hours, by appointment at the Division of Air Quality Control,
Department of Environmental Protection, One Winter Street, 7th Floor,
Boston, MA 02108.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brendan McCahill, Air Permits, Toxics
and Indoor Programs Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Region 1, 5 Post Office Square--Suite
100, (Mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, Telephone number (617)
918-1652, Fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this preamble.

Table of Contents

I. What action is EPA proposing in this document?
II. What is the background for the action proposed by EPA in this
document?
III. What is EPA's analysis of Massachusetts's SIP revisions?
    A. 310 CMR 7.04: U Fossil Fuel Utilization Facilities
    B. 310 CMR 7.12: U Source Registration
    C. 310 CMR 7.26(30)-(37) Industrial Performance Standard--U
Boilers
    D. Miscellaneous Changes
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA proposing in this document?

    On June 28, 1990 and July 11, 2001, the Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection (MassDEP) submitted SIP amendments revising
310 CMR 7.04 ``U Fossil Fuel Utilization Facilities.'' On July 11,
2001, the MassDEP submitted a SIP amendment revising 310 Code of
Massachusetts Regulations (CMR) 7.12, ``U Source Registration.'' On
September 14, 2006, the MassDEP submitted a SIP amendment adopting 310
CMR 7.26(30)-(37), ``Industrial Performance Standard--U Boilers.'' On
February 13, 2008, the MassDEP submitted an additional amendment to
revise 310 CMR 7.04 ``U Fossil Fuel Utilization

Facilities'' and to correct several typographical errors and to clarify
certain requirements to 310 CMR 7.00, 310 CMR 7.12 and 310 CMR
7.26(30)-(37). On January 18, 2013, the MassDEP submitted a letter
withdrawing outdated and obsolete regulation submittals and replaced
them with effective versions of the above regulations for approval and
inclusion into the SIP.
    EPA is proposing to approve the February 13, 2008 revisions to 310
CMR 7.04; the July 11, 2001 and February 13, 2008 revisions to 310 CMR
7.12; the September 14, 2006 and February 13, 2008 revisions to 310 CMR
7.26(30)-(37); and the February 13, 2008 revisions to the list of
Massachusetts cities and towns that reflect changes in the MassDEP
regional boundaries located at the beginning 310 CMR 7.00.

II. What is the background for the action proposed by EPA in this
document?

    Section 110 (a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires each state
to submit to EPA a plan which provides for the implementation,
maintenance and enforcement of each national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). These plans, generally referred to as the state
implementation plans or SIPs, include numerous air quality monitoring,
emission inventory, and emission control requirements designed to
obtain and maintain the NAAQS within the state. The CAA requires states
to adopt SIP revisions into the state regulations and to submit the
revisions to EPA for approval. Section 110(l) of the CAA states that
EPA shall not approve a revision to the SIP if the revision would
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment of the
NAAQS and reasonable further progress, or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA. Section 193 of the CAA states that EPA shall
not approve a revision to any control requirement in effect before
November 15, 1990 in an area which is a nonattainment area for any air
pollutant unless the modification ensures equivalent or greater
emission reductions of that air pollutant.
    EPA has over time approved numerous state regulatory revisions into
the Massachusetts SIP. Each regulation performs a different function
specifically required by the CAA or determined by the state to be
necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS. Among other requirements,
the Massachusetts SIP-approved regulations include 310 CMR 7.04,
``Fossil Fuel Utilization Facilities'' and 310 CMR 7.12, ``Source
Registration.''
    310 CMR 7.04 regulates the use of fossil fuels by fossil fuel
utilization facilities in Massachusetts. The regulation establishes
smoke density limits; combustion efficiency requirements; and
inspection, maintenance and testing requirements for fossil fuel fired
facilities. The use of fossil fuels is a significant source of nitrogen
oxides (NOX), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and
particulate matter (PM) emissions. While not specifically required by
the CAA, the fossil fuel control requirements in 310 CMR 7.04 reduce
the emissions of all the pollutants in Massachusetts.
    310 CMR 7.12 requires stationary sources to collect information,
keep records and report emissions on a periodic schedule. The MassDEP
then uses the emission data to develop the state's emissions inventory
and NAAQS emission control planning requirements. Section 182(a)(3)(B)
``Emission Statements'' of the CAA establish the federal requirements
for stationary source emissions reporting. The section requires
permitting agencies to adopt regulations requiring owners and operators
of stationary sources of NOX or VOC to provide a statement
showing the actual emissions of NOX and VOCs from applicable
sources.
    310 CMR 7.26(30)-(37) establishes emission limits and operational
restrictions for new boilers with heat inputs equal to or greater than
10 million British thermal units per hour (MMBtu/hr) and less than 40
MMBtu/hr. Emission increases from the construction of new boilers are
currently subject to the MassDEP's 310 CMR 7.02(4) and (5) ``Plan
Approval and Emission Limitations.'' The MassDEP adopted 310 CMR
7.02(4) and (5) in an effort to comply with Sections 110(a)(2)(C) and
(D) of the CAA. The CAA requires states to adopt procedures that
regulate modification and construction of stationary sources as
necessary to ensure that NAAQS are achieved, and in particular to
prohibit a new stationary source of emissions, such as a new boiler,
from emitting any air pollutant in amounts that would contribute to a
violation of a NAAQS or interfere with a NAAQS control strategy. For
sources that do not meet federal ``major source'' levels, the
requirements for the procedures required by Section 110(a)(2)(C),
typically referred to as the ``minor new source review program,'' are
codified into the federal regulations at 40 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) 51.160-164. The MassDEP currently has a SIP-approved minor NSR
program (currently entitled ``Regulation 2. Plans Approval and
Emissions Limitations,'' approved in 1979), and the state also
implements its minor NSR regulations at 310 CMR 7.02(4) and (5).

III. What is EPA's analysis of Massachusetts's SIP revisions?

    As discussed above, Section 110(l) of the CAA establishes EPA's
standard for approving revisions to a SIP (and, for certain pre-1990
requirements, Section 193 may apply as well). The following analysis
explains how the SIP revisions meet these standards and may be approved
by EPA.

A. 310 CMR 7.04: U Fossil Fuel Utilization Facilities

    The June 28, 1990 SIP amendment includes two new provisions to 310
CMR 7.04(2) ``U Smoke Density Indicator.'' The existing SIP provision
in regulation 4.2.1 prohibits the burning of fossil fuel oil or coal in
any high pressure fossil fuel utilization facility that is not equipped
with a smoke density sensing device. New provision 310 CMR 7.04(2)(a)
establishes a new heat input applicability threshold level of 40 MMBtu/
hr above which fossil fuel utilization facilities are required to
install and operate smoke density sensing instrumentation on or after
June 1, 1990. New provision 310 CMR 7.04(2)(b) provides the MassDEP the
authority to require fuel utilization facility to be equipped with a
smoke density sensing device if, in the opinion of the MassDEP, such a
device is necessary.
    The July 11, 2001 SIP amendment includes two additional provisions
to 310 CMR 7.04(2). New provision 310 CMR 7.04(2)(c) allows fossil fuel
utilization facilities with energy inputs equal to or greater than 10
MMBtu/hr but less than 40 MMBtu/hr to discontinue and remove smoke
density sensing equipment even if required in a previous plan approval.
New provision 310 CMR 7.04(2)(d) states that, notwithstanding the
requirements of 310 CMR 7.04(2)(a) and (c), new or modified fossil fuel
fired facilities may be required to install instrumentation to monitor
opacity if subject to New Source Performance Standards at 40 CFR part
60, subpart D, Da, Db or Dc.
    The February 13, 2008 SIP amendment includes a new provision under
310 CMR 7.04(4)(a) that prohibits the operation of fossil fuel fired
facilities with heat input capacities equal to or greater than 3
million British thermal units per hour (MMBtu/hr) unless the facility
has been inspected and maintained in accordance with manufacturer's
recommendations and been tested for efficient operation at least once
every calendar year. The new

provisions also require facilities to record the results from the
inspection, maintenance and testing and to post the result
conspicuously on or near the facility. The provision also includes
language that excludes combustion turbines and reciprocating engines
from the inspection, maintenance and testing requirements. The
inspection, maintenance and testing requirements for these types of
sources are already established under state's rules at 310 CMR 7.02(8)
and 310 CMR 7.26, ``Industrial Performance Standards.'' Therefore, the
inspection, maintenance and testing requirements under 310 CMR 7.04 are
redundant and not needed for these source types.
    EPA proposes approval of the June 28, 1990, July 11, 2001 and
February 13, 2008 SIP amendments to 310 CMR 7.04. EPA has not
identified any reason why removing the requirement to operate smoke
density sensing devices on small boilers would change how smaller
boilers operate or result in any emission increase. In addition, the
February 13, 2008 SIP amendment requires boilers with heat inputs
capacities over 3 MMBtu/hr to inspect, maintain and test for
operational efficiency. This will improve boiler operation and reduce
overall emissions. The emission decrease will more than offset any
possible emission increase that could result from the June 28, 1990,
July 11, 2001 and February 13, 2008 SIP amendments. The amendment is
also not inconsistent with the CAA since federal technology-based
emission control standards for boilers do not regulate smoke density
but rather opacity. EPA finds the amendments together will improve
operations at fossil fuel fired facilities, lower emissions for all
pollutants, strengthen the SIP, and be consistent with all federal
requirements.

B. 310 CMR 7.12: U Source Registration

    The July 11, 2001 SIP amendment includes numerous revisions to 310
CMR 7.12. The amendment renames the regulation from ``Certificate
Record Keeping and Reporting'' to ``Source Registration.'' The
amendment clarifies the regulation's applicability requirements,
reporting deadlines, and information submission requirements. The
amendment also includes the addition of new source categories and
pollutants subject to the regulation's reporting requirements. Finally,
the amendment establishes reporting procedures for sources who had not
previously filed reports.
    The February 13, 2008 SIP amendment includes new provisions that
require a facility to file a source registration if it operates under
the following: (1) a restricted emission status pursuant to 310 CMR
7.02(9), ``U Restricted emissions Status'' or 7.02(10), ``U
Modification of Restricted Emissions Status'' issued since January 1,
1990, or (2) a federal operating permit approval issued under 310 CMR
7.00, Appendix C.
    EPA proposes to approve the July 11, 2001 and February 13, 2008
amendments into the SIP. The amendments do not change the underlying
SIP-approved requirements but rather strengthens the state regulations
by adding new requirements, expanding the applicability requirements,
and reorganizing and clarifying current requirements. The Technical
Support Document (TSD) for this proposed rulemaking provides a complete
list of revisions proposed by MassDEP and how they comply with federal
requirements.

C. 310 CMR 7.26(30)-(37): Industrial Performance Standard--U Boilers

    310 CMR 7.26(30)-(37) establishes emission limits and operational
restrictions for new boilers with heat inputs equal to or greater than
10 MMBtu/hr and less than 40 MMBtu/hr. Emission increases from the
construction of new boilers are currently subject to the MassDEP's 310
CMR 7.02(4) and (5) ``Plan Approval and Emission Limitations.'' As
noted above, the MassDEP currently has a SIP-approved minor NSR program
(currently entitled ``Regulation 2. Plans Approval and Emissions
Limitations,'' approved in 1979), and the state also implements its
minor NSR regulations at 310 CMR 7.02(4) and (5).
    In July, 2000, the MassDEP proposed to replace the existing plan
approval procedures for new boilers with heat inputs equal to or
greater than 10 MMBtu/hr and less than 40 MMBtu/hr with new performance
standards and compliance certifications requirements adopted under the
state's Environmental Result Program (ERP). As described in the state's
July 2000 Technical Support and Background Document (TSBD) for the
proposed amendment, the purpose of the ERP is to develop process-
specific performance standards and compliance certifications that
simplify the regulatory process, reduce cost and time for compliance
while maintaining effective standards and improving environmental
results. On September 14, 2006, the MassDEP submitted the proposed
performance standards and compliance certifications requirements for
boilers under 310 CMR 7.26(30)-(37) ``Industrial Performance
Standards--U Boilers'' to EPA as a formal SIP submittal.
    The new industrial performance standard establishes emission limits
and operational restrictions for new natural gas and/or distillate oil
fired boilers. In lieu of obtaining a plan approval under 310 CMR 7.02,
owners and operators of a new boiler with heat inputs equal to or
greater than 10 MMBtu/hr and less than 40 MMBtu/hr must submit a
certification to the MassDEP stating that the new boiler complies with
the emission and operational requirements in 310 CMR 7.26(30)-(37).
    On February 13, 2008, the MassDEP submitted a SIP amendment
revising 310 CMR 7.26(30)-(37). The 2008 SIP amendment includes a new
provision that requires an owner or operator of a new boiler subject to
310 CMR 7.26(30)-(37) to submit the certification to the MassDEP prior
to installation and operation of the boiler.
    The amendments to 310 CMR 7.26(30)-(37) effectively revise
Regulation 2, which was approved into the Massachusetts SIP in 1979 in
an area that is designated as nonattainment. Consequently, these
amendments cannot be approved unless they will ensure equal or greater
emission reductions as compared to the existing SIP-approved rules.
These rules (specifically, the minor NSR program) must meet the federal
minor NSR program requirements at 40 CFR 51.160-164, including the
applicability requirements at 40 CFR 51.160(e). Section 51.160(e)
requires the MassDEP to describe the types of sources subject to minor
NSR and to discuss the basis for determining which facilities will be
subject to review.
    As discussed in the MassDEP's July 2000 TSBD Document, the proposed
Industrial Performance Standard requires the same emission limits, fuel
requirements and operational limitations as compared to boilers
currently undergoing case-by-case review under 310 CMR 7.02. In
addition, the emission limits meet or exceed the requirements for
boilers under the federal NSPS and National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) programs.
    The proposed boiler regulation also provides protection, similar to
310 CMR 7.02(4) and (5), that ensures the construction of new boilers
will not cause or contribute to a violation of an applicable NAAQS or
other control strategy. To ensure emissions disperse properly, 310 CMR
7.26(35) requires minimum stack heights for subject boilers. If the
stack height is below minimum height requirements, the provision
requires the use of an EPA

guideline air quality model to show that the operations of the boiler
will not cause the exceedance of a NAAQS. To provide additional
safeguards to protect the public, 310 CMR 7.26(35) restricts a subject
boiler to the use of inherently low emitting natural gas if the boiler
is locating on property adjacent to a street or sidewalk. Section
7.26(35) also provides that ``Stacks shall not be equipped with rain
protection of a type that restricts the vertical exhaust flow of the
combustion gases as they are emitted to the ambient air. `Shanty caps',
`egg beaters' and the like are prohibited.'' The terms ``shanty caps''
and ``egg beaters'' refer to devices that are used to prevent
precipitation from entering the stack but which restrict the vertical
flow of the exhaust gas stream.\1\ In accordance with this
understanding, EPA proposes that, for purposes of the federal SIP, the
prohibition in Section 7.26(35) should be interpreted to apply to any
device for stack rain protection that restricts the vertical exhaust
flow of the exhaust stream.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For example, the MassDEP's ``Boiler Environmental
Certification Workbook'' explains that ``Stack heads, devices used
to prevent precipitation from entering the stack, must not restrict
the vertical flow of the exhaust gas stream. Devices such as `shanty
caps' and `egg beaters' are prohibited. Coning of the top of the
stack and rain sleeves are acceptable. '' See MassDEP, Boiler
Environmental Certification Workbook, page 11, available at http://www.mass.gov/dep/service/online/boilwbk.pdf. EPA has added this
document to the administrative record for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting provisions
throughout 310 CMR 7.26(30)-(37) provides adequate compliance
requirements for all emission and operational requirements.
    Finally, 310 CMR 7.26(32)(b) requires owners or operators of
subject boilers to submit a compliance certification before a new
boiler is installed and operational. This provision provides the
ability for the MassDEP to prevent installation of a boiler if it may
violate a NAAQS or other state emission requirement as required by the
federal NSR requirements.
    Together, these provisions demonstrate that the proposed SIP
amendments will not result in increases in emissions above the current
SIP-approved rules or interfere with any attainment strategy. In
addition, since 310 CMR 7.26(30)-(37) applies equivalent emission and
operational limitations as compared to boilers currently undergoing
case by case review under the current SIP-approved requirements, the
amendment ensures equivalent (or greater) emission reductions than the
current SIP-approved minor NSR program. EPA concludes the amendments
are consistent with federal requirements and should be approved into
the SIP.

D. Miscellaneous Changes

    On February 13, 2008, the MassDEP also submitted amendment updating
the list of Massachusetts cities and towns to reflect changes in the
MassDEP regional boundaries located at the beginning 310 CMR 7.00. EPA
is proposing to approve the updated list.

IV. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the June 28, 1990 and July 11, 2001 SIP
amendments to 310 CMR 7.04 ``U Fossil Fuel Utilization Facilities.''
EPA is also proposing to approve the July 11, 2001 SIP amendment to 310
CMR 7.12, ``U Source Registration'' and the September 14, 2006 SIP
amendment to 310 CMR 7.26(30)-(37), ``Industrial Performance
Standards--U Boiler.'' Finally, EPA is proposing to approve the
February 13, 2008 SIP amendment that revises 310 CMR 7.04 ``U Fossil
Fuel Utilization Facilities,'' corrects several typographical errors
and clarifies certain requirements to 310 CMR 7.12 and 310 CMR
7.26(30)-(37) and updates the list of Massachusetts cities in 310 CMR
7.00.
    EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
proposal or on other relevant matters. These comments will be
considered before EPA takes final action. Interested parties may
participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure by submitting written
comments to the EPA New England Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this Federal Register, or by submitting comments
electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/courier following the
directions in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal Register.
    The Agency has reviewed this request for revision of the Federally-
approved State implementation plan for conformance with the provisions
of the 1990 amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The Agency has
determined that this action conforms with those requirements
irrespective of the fact that the submittal preceded the date of
enactment.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and does not provide EPA with the discretionary
authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: January 31, 2013.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 2013-02812 Filed 2-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 28, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29238-29239]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13454]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2017-0324]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; City of Oswego Independence Day Celebration; Lake
Ontario, Oswego, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
Lake Ontario, Oswego, NY. This safety zone is intended to restrict
vessels from a portion of Lake Ontario during the Independence Day
Celebration fireworks display. This temporary safety zone is necessary
to protect mariners and vessels from the navigational hazards
associated with a fireworks display.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9:30 p.m. until 10:15 p.m. on July
2, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2017-0324 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LT Michael Collet, Chief of Waterways Management, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector Buffalo; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable. The
final details of this event were not known to the Coast Guard until
there was insufficient time remaining before the event to publish an
NPRM. Thus, delaying the effective date of this rule to wait for a
comment period to run would be impracticable because it would inhibit
the Coast Guard's ability to protect mariners and vessels from the
hazards associated with a fireworks show. For the same reason, under 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard also finds that good cause exists for
making this temporary rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The Captain of the Port Buffalo (COTP) has determined that a
maritime fireworks show presents significant risks to public safety and
property. Such hazards include premature and accidental detonations,
dangerous projectiles, and falling or burning debris. This rule is
needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the
navigable waters within the safety zone while the fireworks show is
taking place.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone on July 2, 2017 from 9:30 p.m.
until 10:15 p.m. The safety zone will encompass all waters of Lake
Ontario, Oswego, NY contained within a 350-foot radius of position
43[deg]27'56.82'' N. and 076[deg]30'59.02'' W. (NAD 83).
    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his
designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive order related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
    As this rule is not a significant regulatory action, this rule is
exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. See OMB's
Memorandum titled ``Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the
Executive Order of January 30, 2017 titled `Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (February 2, 2017).
    We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action
because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy,
will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the
budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel
legal or policy issues. The safety zone created by this rule will be
relatively small and enforced for a relatively short time. Also, the
safety zone is designed to minimize its impact on navigable waters.
Thus, restrictions on vessel movement within that particular area are
expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions, moreover, vessels may
still transit through the safety zone when permitted by the Captain of
the Port.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 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 rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This
safety zone would be effective, and thus subject to enforcement for
only forty-five minutes late in the evening. Traffic may be allowed to
pass through the zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port.
The Captain of the Port can be reached via VHF channel 16. Before the
enforcement of the zone, we would issue local Broadcast Notice to
Mariners.
    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 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
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    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 rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that it
is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves the establishment of a safety zone and, therefore it is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. A Record of Environmental
Consideration (REC) supporting this determination is available in the
docket where indicated in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. 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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record
keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0324 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0324  Safety Zone; City of Oswego Independence Day
Celebration; Lake Ontario, Oswego, NY.

    (a) Location. This zone will encompass all waters of Lake Ontario,
Oswego, NY contained within a 350-foot radius of position
43[deg]27'56.82'' N. and 076[deg]30'59.02'' W. (NAD 83).
    (b) Enforcement Period. This rule is effective on July 2, 2017 from
9:30 p.m. until 10:15 p.m.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within
this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Buffalo or his designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-
scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port
Buffalo is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who
has been designated by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act on his
behalf.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety
zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of
the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: June 21, 2017.
J.S. DuFresne,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2017-13454 Filed 6-27-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: October 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 207)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 55451-55452]
[DOCID:fr28oc09-7]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 30692 Amdt. No 3344]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports.
These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or
revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National
Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective October 28, 2009. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of October 28, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located;
    3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur
Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_
federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free
of charge. Visit http://www.nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally,
individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained
from:
    1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building,
800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; or
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harry J. Hodges, Flight Procedure
Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Division,
Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing,
amending, suspending, or revoking SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPs.
The complete regulators description of each SIAP and its associated
Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form
documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5
U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part 97.20. The applicable FAA
Forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when
required by an entry on 8260-15A.
    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, in addition
to their complex nature and the need for a special format, make
publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical.
Furthermore, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs,
Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead refer to their depiction on
charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. The advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on
FAA forms is unnecessary. This

amendment provides the affected CFR sections and specifies the types of
SIAPs and the effective dates of the associated Takeoff Minimums and
ODPs. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the
procedure, and the amendment number.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as contained in the
transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments
may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center
(FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate
flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts. The
circumstances which created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums
and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less than 30
days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an
effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.
    Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPs). In developing these SIAPs and
Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPs criteria were applied to the
conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of
the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and
public procedures before adopting these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and
ODPs are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, that good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in
less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,1979); and
(3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 16, 2009.
John M. Allen,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by
establishing, amending, suspending, or revoking Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and/or Obstacle Departure
Procedures effective at 0902 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

Effective 19 November 2009

Atlanta, GA, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 27L,
ILS RWY 27L (CAT II), Amdt 16
Atlanta, GA, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl, ILS PRM RWY 27L, ILS
PRM RWY 27L (CAT II) (Simultaneous Close Parallel), Amdt 1
Atlanta, GA, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 27L,
Amdt 3
Atlanta, GA, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 27L,
Amdt 1
Cochran, GA, Cochran, RNAV (GPS) RWY 11, Orig
Sterling, PA, Spring Hill, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1
Aberdeen, SD, Aberdeen Rgnl, VOR/DME RWY 13, Amdt 13A
Orange, TX, Orange County, VOR/DME RWY 22, Amdt 2

Effective 17 December 2009

Nogales, AZ, Nogales Intl, NOGALES ONE Graphic Obstacle DP
Scottsdale, AZ, Scottsdale, RNAV (GPS)-E, Orig
Meeker, CO, Meeker, RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Orig-B
Telluride, CO, Telluride Rgnl, LOC/DME RWY 9, Amdt 1
Oxford, CT, Waterbury-Oxford, NDB RWY 18, Amdt 6, CANCELLED
Naples, FL, Naples Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Amdt 2
Naples, FL, Naples Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 1
West Palm Beach, FL, Palm Beach Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle
DP, Amdt 3
Boise, ID, Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Fld, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 10L, Orig-
A
Boise, ID, Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Fld, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 10R, Orig-
A
Boise, ID, Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Fld, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 28L, Orig-
A
Boise, ID, Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Fld, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 28R, Orig-
A
Mountain Home, ID, Mountain Home Muni, NDB RWY 28, Amdt 3
Mountain Home, ID, Mountain Home Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Orig
Pocatello, ID, Pocatello Rgnl, KNURL ONE Graphic Obstacle DP
Twin Falls, ID, Joslin Field-Magic Valley Rgnl, ILS OR LOC RWY 25,
Amdt 9
Alma, MI, Gratiot Community, SDF RWY 9, Amdt 8, CANCELLED
Alma, MI, Gratiot Community, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Brookfield, MO, North Central Missouri Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt
1
Brookfield, MO, North Central Missouri Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt
1
Brookfield, MO, North Central Missouri Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle DP, Amdt 1
Cut Bank, MT, Cut Bank Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Cross Keys, NJ, Cross Keys, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1
Perkasie, PA, Pennridge, RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Amdt 1
Cheraw, SC, Cheraw Muni/Lynch Bellinger Field, NDB RWY 26, Amdt 2,
CANCELLED
Odessa, TX, Odessa-Schlemeyer Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle
DP, Amdt 1
Logan, UT, Logan-Cache, LOGAN ONE Graphic Obstacle DP
Logan, UT, Logan-Cache, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 8
Barre/Montpelier, VT, Edward F. Knapp State, GPS RWY 35, Orig-A,
CANCELLED
Barre/Montpelier, VT, Edward F. Knapp State, RNAV(GPS) RWY 35, Orig
Everett, WA, Snohomish County (Paine Fld), RNAV (GPS) RWY 16R, Orig-
A
Yakima, WA, Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister Field, ILS Y RWY 27, Orig
Yakima, WA, Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister Field, ILS Z RWY 27, Amdt
27
Yakima, WA, Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister Field, LOC/DME BC-B, Amdt
3
Yakima, WA, Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister Field, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY
27, Orig
Yakima, WA, Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister Field, RNAV (GPS) Z RWY
27, Orig
Yakima, WA, Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister Field, VOR-A, Amdt 7
Yakima, WA, Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister Field, VOR/DME OR TACAN
RWY 27, Amdt 8

[FR Doc. E9-25488 Filed 10-27-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 148 (Thursday, August 5, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42976-42977]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16741]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2020-0013]

Petition for Approval Extension: CSX Transportation

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of petition for an extension of approval of track
inspection test program.

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

SUMMARY: This document provides the public notice that on July 27,
2021, CSX Transportation (CSX) petitioned the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) to extend an existing temporary suspension of some
visual track inspections to allow for a continuation of a previously
approved Test Program designed to test track inspection technologies
(i.e., an autonomous track geometry measurement system) and new
operational approaches to track inspections (i.e., combinations of
autonomous inspection and traditional visual inspections).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yu-Jiang Zhang, Staff Director, Track
and Structures Division, at<PHONE_NUMBER>

or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Aaron Moore, Attorney, Office of the Chief
Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 3, 2020, FRA conditionally approved
the Test Program and CSX's petition under 49 CFR 211.51 to suspend
213.233(c) as applied to operations under the Test Program. A copy of
the Test Program, FRA's conditional approval of the Test Program, and a
previously published Federal Register notice explaining FRA's rationale
for approving the Test Program and related suspension are available for
review in the docket.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2020-0013-0002
(Test Program); https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2020-0013-0001 (FRA's approval decision); https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2020-0013-0004 (FRA's published notice of approval).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As approved, the Test Program included three separate phases over
18 months as outlined in Exhibit C of the Program.\2\ CSX began the
Test Program on March 16, 2020, and it is currently set to expire on
September 15, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2020-0013-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CSX is requesting to extend the Test Program until April 1, 2022.
CSX states that the Test Program has taken longer than anticipated due
to delays automating CSX's data analysis and reporting as well as
complications from the COVID-19 pandemic. In support of its request,
CSX states that it will continue to comply with all other conditions
and requirements of FRA's March 3, 2020, approval letter.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, if any, are available for review online at
www.regulations.gov.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Website: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
    Communications received by September 7, 2021 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered if practicable. Anyone can search the electronic
form of any written communications and comments received into any of
our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the document, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its processes. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacy-notice for the privacy notice of regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
John Karl Alexy,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2021-16741 Filed 8-4-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P