[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 19, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47396-47397]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20292]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Flight
Engineers and Flight Navigators

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. This collection involves FAA Form 8400.3, Application for
an Airman Certificate and/or Rating, (for flight engineer and flight
navigator) and applications for approval of related training courses
that are submitted to FAA for evaluation. The information collection is
necessary to determine applicant eligibility for flight engineer or
flight navigator certificates. This collection is also necessary to
determine training course acceptability for those schools training
flight engineers or navigators.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by October 19, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be
addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
[email protected], or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW, Washington,
DC 20503.

PUBLIC COMMENTS INVITED: You are asked to comment on any aspect of this
information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the accuracy of
the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information collection; and (d) ways that the burden
could be minimized without reducing the quality of the collected
information. The agency will summarize and/or include your comments in
the request for OMB's clearance of this information collection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Hall at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0007.
    Title: Flight Engineers and Flight Navigators.
    Form Numbers: 8400-3.
    Type of Review: This is a renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The information collection is necessary to determine
applicant eligibility for flight engineer or flight navigator
certificates. This collection is also necessary to determine training
course acceptability for those schools training flight engineers or
navigators. FAA Form 8400.3, Application for an Airman Certificate and/
or Rating, (for flight engineer and flight navigator) and applications
for approval of related training courses are available online and are
submitted to FAA for evaluation. The information is reviewed to
determine applicant eligibility and compliance with prescribed
provisions of Title 14 CFR part 63, Certification: Flight Crewmembers
Other Than Pilots. Form 8400-3 is multiple-use form also used for
control tower operators and aircraft dispatchers.
    Respondents: 143 certain airmen applicants and training schools.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 1.8 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 268.1 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 8, 2018.
Barbara Hall,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business
Services Division, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2018-20292 Filed 9-18-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


                                 Enclosure 1
                      Facility Questionnaire for Coke Ovens
               I. 	Owner Information
II.		General Facility Information
III.		Regulatory Information
IV.		Process Flow Diagrams and Plot Plans
V.		Emission Points
VI.		Process and Emission Unit Operations
VII.	Air Pollution Control and Monitoring Equipment
VIII.	Economics/Costs
IX.		Startup and Shutdown
X.		Management Practices

Schedule for Submissions  -  From stamped date of EPA letter; due close of business end of week indicated
Group 1: Sections I, II, III  -  by 17 weeks August 1, 2016
Group 2: Sections IV, V -  by 23 weeks September 12, 2016
Group 3: Sections VI, VII  -  by 29 weeks October 24, 2016
Group 4: Sections VIII, IX, X  -  by 37 weeks December 19, 2016

Enclosure 1
Facility Questionnaire for Coke Ovens
I.	Owner Information	1
II.	General Facility Information	2
III.	 Regulatory Information	3
IV.	Process Flow Diagrams, Plot Plans, and ID & Inventory Spreadsheet	4
V.	Emission Points	5
VI.	Process and Emission Unit Operations	7
A.	Coke Oven Batteries.	8
B.	Heat Recovery Steam Generators (HRSG) - Heat Recovery Only	8
C.	Quench Towers	9
D.	Push-Charge Machines (PCM) - Heat Recovery Only	9
E.	Pushing Capture and Control	9
G.	Battery Leaks (Regulated)	11
H.	Cooling Water at HRSG - Heat Recovery Only	12
I.	Postponed Questions from Above	13
VII.	Air Pollution Control and Monitoring Equipment	13
VIII.	Economics/Costs	13
IX.	Startup and Shutdown	14
A.	Planned Shutdowns	14
B.	Unplanned Shutdowns	14
C.	Startups	15
D.	Control Devices	15
X.	Management Practices	16
A.	Operator Training	16
B.	Best Management Procedures	16

	Enclosure 1
                     Facility Questionnaire for Coke Ovens
Submittal Sections and Due Dates
   Submittal #1, Sections I, II, III (Group 1)....................................................................17 weeks*
   Submittal #2, Sections IV and V (Group 2) .................................................. ...............23 weeks*
   Submittal #3, Sections VI and VII (Group 3).................................................................29 weeks*
   Submittal #4, Sections VIIII, IX, X (Group 4)...............................................................37 weeks*
* From stamped date of EPA letter; due close of business end of week indicated
I. Owner Information
 1. Dun and Bradstreet number for your company.
 2.    Legal owner of facility.
      a. Full name of legal owner.
      b. Physical address (physical location) of legal owner of facility.
      c. Mailing address (if different than physical address) of legal owner of facility.
      d. Date of ownership.
      e. Is the legal owner a small entity?
 3.    Legal operator of facility, if different from legal owner.
      a. Full name of legal operator.
      b. Physical address (physical location) of legal operator of facility.
      c. Mailing address (if different than physical address) of legal operator of facility.
      d. Date commenced as operator of this facility.
 4.    Contact(s) able to answer questions about the completed survey.
      a. Name and title of contact.
      b. Contact(s) telephone number.
      c. Contact(s) e-mail address
      d. What are the general work hours of each contact (e.g., 7 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.)
 5.    Contact(s) to receive email updates during ICR process (no more than two contacts)
      a. If same as above, indicate "See above."
      b. If adding a contact, enter additional name and email.
 6.    Are you part of a larger corporate entity or joint venture? (Yes/No)
      a. If yes, is the facility operated under a joint partnership? If yes, provide the following for each partner:
                 i.             Partner name.
                 ii.             Percent ownership.
                 iii.             Number of employees (approximate number of employees including all subsidiaries, branches, and related establishments owned).
      b. If no, provide the following information:
                 i.             Name of parent company.
                 ii.             Total number of employees for the parent company (approximate number of employees including all subsidiaries, branches, and related establishments owned).
                 iii.             List year and provide the current annual revenues for the parent company? (dollars) Current annual revenues should be provided for 2015. If 2015 data are not yet available, provide data for 2014 instead. In lieu of annual revenues, facilities may provide net income as long as total expenses also are included and itemized (e.g., by cost category such as capital purchases, labor, equipment, raw material, services, etc).
                 iv.             Select the statement that best applies (Yes/No):
                     1.                      Facility is fully independent of parent company.
                     2.                      Parent company provides some financial support.
                     3.                      Facility and parent company are fully integrated.

I. General Facility Information
 7.    Facility name.
      a. What is the "official" facility name, i.e., name used on the operating permits?
      b. What is the "nickname" of the facility, if any?
      c. What previous names has the facility been called (include names used under other ownership, if known)?
      d. Is the facility collocated with an integrated iron and steel manufacturing facility? If so, which facility?
      e. If the facility is collocated with an integrated iron and steel manufacturing facility, then provide the percent of total coke, byproduct (where applicable), and steam production (where applicable) dedicated to the iron and steel manufacturing facility, including all coke, byproduct, and steam produced for said facility which does not reach the facility (e.g., due to quality control, malfunction, or other issues).
 8.    Number of employees at the facility
 9.    Facility address (physical location).
 10.    Facility mailing address (if different than physical address).
 11.    Facility location.
      a. Latitude coordinates, in decimal degrees to five decimal places.
      b. Longitude coordinates, in decimal degrees to five decimal places.
 12.    North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code(s) applicable to the facility.
 13.    Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) ID number for facility (if applicable)
 14.    Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool (e-GGRT) ID number for facility (if applicable)
 15.    Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI) ID number for facility (if applicable)
 16.    Is the facility a major source of HAP? (Yes/No/Don't know)
      a. If major source of HAP, list the HAP or HAPS that qualify the facility as a major source using available documents or emission inventories.
      b. If major source of HAP, list each process unit that emits HAP.
      c. If major source of HAP, provide 2014 and 2015 emission inventories for each process unit.
      d. If major source of HAP, is the facility subject to:
                 i.             40 CFR part 63, subpart L for Coke Oven Batteries?
                 ii.             If yes, is the facility on the MACT or LAER track?
                 iii.             40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCC for Pushing, Quenching, and Battery Stacks?
      e. If not a major source of HAP, did the facility take limits in their air permit to keep below major source thresholds for HAP?
 17.    Coke oven batteries
      a. How many functional coke oven batteries are located at the facility?
      b. How many coke ovens are contained in each battery?
      c. How many of the coke oven batteries were operated in 2015? Currently, in 2016?
      d. How many of your batteries are operating normally in 2016 (i.e., not on extended coking)?
 18. Quench towers
      a. How many functional quench towers are located at the facility?
      b. How many of the quench towers are used regularly, i.e., over 40% of total facility operating days?
 19.    Heat recovery steam generators (HRSG) -  Heat Recovery Only
      a. How many functional HRSG are located at the facility?
      b. How many of the HRSG were operated in 2015? Currently, in 2016?

III.		Regulatory Information
 20.    Please provide the most recent air permit(s) for all operations at your coke facility AS SOON AS YOU RECEIVE THIS LETTER. Please send the permit(s) electronically via email to Dr. Jones at<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 21.    Indicate (Yes/No) whether or not the following federal regulations apply to your facility, including, but not limited to these listed below:
      a. NESHAP: Benzene Emissions at Coke By-Product Chemical Recovery Plants, part. 61, subpart L
      b. NESHAP: Integrated Iron and Steel NESHAP, part. 63, subpart FFFFF
      c. NSPS: Basic Oxygen Furnaces, part 60, subpart N or Na
      d. NSPS: Coal Preparation Plants, subpart Y
      e. NESHAP: Benzene Emissions from Wastewater, part 61 subpart FF
      f. NESHAP: Emission Standards for Equipment Leaks, part 61, subpart V
      g. NESHAP: Boilers (MACT), subpart DDDDD
      h. Identify any other federal regulations in 40 CFR subpart 60, 61, or 63 that apply to your facility that are not listed above.

 22. List the state environmental regulations that apply to any units at your facility
      a. State regulation name and number
      b. Unit(s) subject to regulation
      c. Air pollutants and/or processes controlled (indicate media: air/water/wastewater)
      d. Requirements (emissions and testing) of state regulations.
 23. Excess Emissions, Malfunctions or Deviations
      a. How many excess emission and deviation reports have you submitted in previous 2 years?
      b. Provide any excess emission and deviation reports submitted in previous 2 years.
 24. Title V or Air Permit deviations
      a. How many Title V deviations have you reported in previous 2 years?
      b. Provide any Title V deviation reports submitted in previous 2 years.

IV.	Process Flow Diagram, Source Table, Plot Plans, and Inventory Data
 25. Simple "Process and Emission Flow Diagram" (P&EFD.
    Please provide a simple block process and emission flow diagram (P&EFD) of all process units at your facility. The simple process flow diagram should provide at least one system of identification codes for all significant process units involved in the production of coke at your facility and corresponding emission points, which are identified in any state or Federal rule, or emission inventory. Include one set of codes on this diagram and indicate the type of code, e.g., facility, permit, inventory, etc. The P&EFD should clearly identify all process units and emission points related to the production of coke, including all control device(s) to which the emissions from these units are routed, from the following list of "Sources of Interest" (as defined in 40 CFR, part 63, subparts CCCCC and L):
         *          Coke oven batteries
         *          Quench towers
         *          Bypass vents and ducting (including common tunnels)
         *          Heat recovery steam generators, and
         *          All pollution control equipment

 26. Detailed "Source Table"
    Please list all of your process and/or emission units relating to the above list of "Sources of Interest" (see question above) at your facility using the "Source Table" provided in the Excel file included with this ICR. If more than one name is used, please provide the additional names. Please provide the information below in the appropriate column on the "Source Table":
      a. Facility ID/identifiers for each process and emission point, as well as all other ID numbers assigned to these process and emission points, e.g., from your air permit, your state agency, and any state or federal emission inventories. All outside ID's assigned to your facility should be listed on this chart. Please add columns for any additional ID systems. For smaller units or emission points not shown on the P&EFD, include name and ID number of the nearest larger unit or emission point shown on the P&EFD. Note: Every process or emission point related to the "Sources of Interest" should be listed on the "Source Table" and show an ID number correspondence to at least one location included on the simple flow diagram (P&EFD), described above
         See spreadsheet
      b. Coking status: Please specify whether each battery is operating under extended coking or normal coking.
         Extended coking
 27.     Plot plan.
    Please provide a copy of an existing plot plan that includes each emission unit listed below at your facility related to the production of coke (as defined in 40 CFR, part 63, subparts CCCCC and L). Separate plot plans may be provided for each emission unit listed below. The plot plan should clearly indicate all the stationary equipment related to coke production or associated activities, e.g., HRSG and boilers, which are located at your facility:
              a.          Coke oven batteries
              b.          Charging/Pushing units
              c.          Quench Towers
              d.          Heat Recovery Steam Generators
              e.          All pollution control equipment at above [(a)  -  (d)] process/emission areas

 28. Inventory Information for all Coke Production Process Units/Emission Points (Coke Battery, Quench Towers, and Heat Recovery Steam Generator) Please provide the following information in the "Source Table" included with your ICR and described above in Question 26 if not already included. All information should reflect current (2016) configurations
         a.          Process unit/emission point name&number (facility ID)
         See spreadsheet
         b.          Process unit/emission point Agency ID No. (if available, as used by your state Agency)
         See spreadsheet
         c.          Process unit/emission point Permit ID No (if different than Agency ID No.)
         See spreadsheet
         d.          Latitude&longitude of each process/emission unit, in decimal degrees to five decimal places (all decimal places due by end of ICR period).
          See spreadsheet
         e.          For each coke oven battery, number of ovens in each battery
         EES Coke, 85 ovens
         f.          Current (2016) coal capacity (dry tons) of each battery
         (Submitted as CBI)
         g.          Coal charging capacity of each coke battery in 2016 (tons per year)
         1,400,000 tons dry coal
         h.          Minimum coal charge requirements and maximum capacities in both a per oven (typical) and per battery basis for 2016
         Minimum (Submitted as CBI)
         Capacity 1,400,000 tons dry coal (2016 battery year), (Submitted as CBI)
         i.          Coke production design capacity of each battery (tons per year) in 2016
         1,085,000 tons coke per year
         j.          Operating status of each process unit (operating, standby/idle, shut down, etc.)
         Operating
         k.          Date operations began for each process unit.
         11-24-1992
         l.          Date of idle or closure for each unit idle or shutdown (if applicable)
         Not applicable
         m.          EPA Source Classification Code (SCC) for each process (see SCC worksheet to look-up SCCs)
         See spreadsheet
 29. Provide the following information for each process and emission release point in the "Source Table" described above in Question 26. Units should be either indicated in the P&EFD, described above, or identified as nearby one of these units in the "Source Table".
         a.          Emission Release Point ID - physical location point from which emissions from the process and/or emission units are released to the atmosphere (e.g., the stack ID associated with the control device.)
         See spreadsheet
         b.          Total capacity and actual production for years 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 (e.g., tons per year). Capacity information should be based on the highest potential production rate of each unit.
Year
Total Capacity
Actual Production
2012
1,085,000
(Submitted as CBI)
2013
1,085,000
(Submitted as CBI)
2014
1,085,000
(Submitted as CBI)
2015
1,085,000
(Submitted as CBI)

         c.          Year that each unit began operating and year purchased (if different).
         EES Coke began operating in 1992, purchased in 1997
         d.          If applicable, provide the following information regarding upgrades made in the last 2 years to each unit that resulted in a material increase or decrease in actual production:
         No upgrades made
                 i.             Description of the upgrade completed, including unit(s) affected and the year the upgrade was made. Your description must identify the unit(s) using the identifiers in the P&EFD described above.
                 ii.             Description of upgrades completed at air pollution control devices associated with each affected process unit and the year the upgrade was completed. Your description must identify the control device using the identifiers in the P&EFD required to be submitted in response to this survey.

V.	Emission Points
 30.  Indicate whether facility air emission points are point sources or fugitive sources in the appropriate column of the "Source Table" described above, as described in Question 26, for the "Sources of Interest" of this ICR, as listed in Question 25
    See spreadsheet
 31. Indicate the type of control device used on all emissions points in the appropriate column of the "Source Table" for the "Sources of Interest."
    See spreadsheet
 32. If the emission release point for the "Sources of Interest." is considered a point source, please also provide the following in the appropriate column:
    See spreadsheet
       a. Stack coordinates, in decimal degrees to five decimal places (all decimal places due by end of ICR period):
              i.             Latitude
              ii.             Longitude
       b. Stack height (feet).
       c. Stack diameter (feet).
       d. Average exit stack gas flow rate (actual cubic feet per minute).
       e. Average exit stack gas temperature (degrees Fahrenheit).
       f. List all CEMS installed on stack and the pollutant it measures, e.g., CO, NOx, SO2, PM, opacity, or other (specify)
         Battery heating stack  -  CO, CO2, NOx, SO2, opacity
 33. If the emission point for the "Sources of Interest" is considered a non-point (fugitive) source, please provide:
      a.	Coordinates of the southwest corner of the emission point, in decimal degrees to five decimal places (all decimal places due by end of ICR period).
 i.                Latitude
 ii.                Longitude
                              b.          Length in (x) direction (feet) (see diagram below)
                              c.          Width in (y) direction (feet) (see diagram below)
                              d.          Angle (degrees) from coordinates. Must be between 0 and 90 degrees. See the diagrams below for depiction of how to report angles.
                              e.          Release Height (feet).
                              f.          Average exit stack gas temperature (degrees Fahrenheit, [o]F).
                              g.          Average air flow rate (if known), in actual cubic feet per minute.
 1. If the emission point is considered a volume source[2] (fugitive), please provide:
    See spreadsheet
         a.          Coordinates of the center of the emission point, in decimal degrees to five decimal places (all decimal places due by end of ICR period)
                 i.             Latitude.
                 ii.             Longitude
         b.          Horizontal dimension (x) (assumes a square)
         c.          Height above ground of the center of volume source (half distance from ground to top of source) (feet)
 2. If the emission point is considered a line source[2] (fugitive), please provide:
         a.          Coordinates of one end of the emission line in decimal degrees, to five decimal places (all decimal places due by end of ICR period)
            i.	Latitude
            ii.	Longitude
         b.          Coordinates of other end of the emission line, in decimal degrees to five decimal places (all decimal places due by end of ICR period)
            i.	Latitude
            ii.	Longitude
         c.          Width of line source (feet).
         d.          Release Height (above ground) of line source (feet)
         e.          Line source release temperature (deg-f)
         f.          If line sources are located at a building or other structure, a drawing showing the line source exit point from the building/structure along with the building/structure dimensions must be included.

    The volume release is a square (X = Y), and coordinates are placed at the center of the volume release.
                                      X
                                   Unit ID 1
Y
Angle = 0 degrees
The volume release is a square (X = Y), and coordinates are placed at the center of the volume release.
                                      X
                                   Unit ID 1
Y
Angle = 0 degrees

VI.	Process and Emission Unit Operations
  In the  Source Table described above in Question 26, please provide the following for each coke oven battery, heat recovery steam generator (HRSG), quench tower, push-charge machine (heat recovery only) and flat push hot car (heat recovery only) presently at your facility.
 3. Total production capacity and actual production for years 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 (tons per year) for each individual major production unit, i.e., battery (for coke), HRSG (for steam).
 4. The year that each unit began production and estimate of the remaining useful economic life of the unit, if possible. Note: EPA default value is 20 years for most equipment.
 5. If applicable, provide the following information regarding upgrades made to each production unit (in the last 2 years) that resulted in an increase or decrease in emissions:
         a.          Description of the upgrade made, including emission unit(s) affected and the year the upgrade was made. Include in your description an estimate of annual HAP emissions increase or reduction because of the upgrade and the basis for the estimate, if available. Please identify the emission unit(s) using the identifiers in the P&EFD described in Section IV, above.
         b.          Description of upgrades made to air pollution control devices associated with each affected emission unit and the year the upgrade was made. Include in your description an estimate of annual emission reductions and the basis for the estimate, if available. Your description must identify the control device using the identifiers in the P&EFD submitted in response to this survey.

                                  A.    Coke Oven Batteries.
  Please provide the following current (2015 or 2016) information in the "Source Table" described above in Question 26 for all your coke batteries, if not already included in this table.
 6. Operating status (e.g., operating, under construction or modification, planned future construction, or shut down. [For ovens that are shut down, under construction or modification, or for ovens that are planned for future construction, only answer the questions that you are able in the remainder of the survey.]
 7. Oven manufacturer and design, including oven dimensions: length, width, and height.
 8. Total operating hours, per battery, per day&year (2015).
 9. Number of ovens are pushed each day in each battery.
 10. Average time from charge to push all ovens in the battery for each battery (hours) (2016). If you would like to submit this information as CBI, please indicate in your nonCBI response and send the CBI separately to the EPA CBI officer.
 11. Number and type of charging and pushing units.
 12. How much coal is delivered each day to the facility, on average? If the facility only records truckloads, estimate the amount of coal in a typical truck load. CAN BE POSTPONED to Section VI&VII submittal
 13. Date operation commenced for each battery (i.e., date on which each oven within each battery was fully operational).
 14. Date of last major battery modification, decarburization, refractory repair, or other major modification or repair with description of action(s).
 15. List all fuels combusted by the ovens in 2015; for each fuel, list its total usage volume, and contribution (in percent by heat input) to the total heat input of all fuel combusted by the ovens in 2015, e.g., natural gas (not pre-treated); Natural gas (pre-treated);Coal; Recirculated Coke Oven Gas; Other (specify).
 16. List the factors that in the facility's experience have been found to contribute to length of coking time? Examples: coal type, coal, moisture, volatile content.
                                  A.    Heat Recovery Steam Generators (HRSG) - Heat Recovery Only
   Please provide the following for all your HRSG. In the case of separate HRSG ownership, please request the owner provide this information to the EPA. Reports previously submitted to local agency can be used in lieu of response to the specific questions below.
 17. A piping & instrumentation diagram (P&ID) of each HRSG, including associated dampers. [For HRSG that are shut down, under construction or modification, or for HRSG that are planned for future construction (e.g., redundant HRSG), only answer the questions that you are able in the remainder of the survey.]
 18. Design heat input (million British thermal units per hour) and manufacturer.
 19. Date operation commenced.
 20. Source of feedwater in 2014 and 2015.
 21. Indicate whether or not the HRSG is subject to the Boiler NESHAP (MACT), subpart DDDDD.
 22. Fate of all steam produced in 2014 and 2015. Include a description of all upsets resulting in wasted steam (i.e., steam created by the HRSG which never reached the intended consumer. (For example, the steam produced by each HRSG in 2014 was sent via pipeline to a neighboring facility)
 23. Dates of major tube section, economizer, sootblower, and superheater repairs, including work performed and cost in the last 12 months.
 24. List all streams that pass through the HRSG, e.g. boiler feedwater; waste gas from coke ovens/common coke oven tunnel; or specify other.

                                  A.    Quench Towers
 25. Design maximum and minimum coke quenching capacity, according to coke product specifications.
 26. Source of quench water.
 27. Number of gallons of quench water used in 2014 and 2015, if recorded.
 28. List the design type and model number of each type of tower.
 29. Describe design/shape of baffles, e.g. "chevron," including number of baffles.
 30. How many quench towers have controls (e.g., baffles)? Please identify the type of control(s).
 31. Is there a wastewater treatment facility on-site used for the quench water?
 32. Date operation commenced
 33. Dates of major repairs, including work performed and cost, if known.
 34. List the coke oven batteries that produce coke which is cooled in each quench tower
 35. Any exceedances of the total dissolved solids limit from 40 CFR, part 63, subpart CCCCC in the last 2 years? If so, specify or provide previous reports. Please do not include any information not relevant to this question.
      a. Date of exceedance
      b. Days to restore compliance
      c. Reason, if any, for exceedance?

                                  A.    Push-Charge Machines (PCM) - Heat Recovery Only
 36. Design coal and coke capacity of PCM.
 37. Description of PCM control equipment, including date operation commenced.
 38. Total tons of coal charged by each PCM in 2014 and 2015.
 39. Total tons of coke pushed by each PCM or in 2014 and 2015.
 40. Dates of major outages and repairs of your PCMs, including repair work performed and cost, if known.

                                  A.    Pushing Capture and Control
 41. Identify equipment used at your facility from list below (include all present and indicate on which battery equipment is used, if applicable
         a.          duct
         b.          fabric filter (portable)
         c.          fabric filter (stationary)
         d.          guide
         e.          hood
         f.          hood and duct
         g.          push/charge machine with controls (indicate type)
         h.          scrubber (stationary)
                                                                    (continued)
         i.          scrubber car
         j.          shed
 42. What is the typical range in elapsed time from opening door(s) to push out coke to closing doors (low, average, and high, in minutes)? If the time differs by battery, please specify battery name&ID#.
 43. For equipment identified above, indicate the percent capture or control if known. Report whether the information is from source tests, manufacturer information, or engineering judgement. If source tests are indicated, please send EPA a copy of your most recent report in the case that there are more than one report.
 44. List the top parameters that effect timing of push, i.e., the end of coking period? Some examples are: control device/PCM availability; quench tower availability; and operator readiness. Indicate how much the timing of push can vary (low, average, and high, in minutes) with each parameter or, if not known, an overall range of variability.
 45. For by-product plants, how many times in the last 12 months did you have green pushes from any oven at your facility? Indicate oven # and battery name/#.
 46. For all of the green pushes in last 12 months, please describe the event, including reason for green push.
 47. For heat and nonrecovery plants, list the number of times in the last 12 months that during visual inspect of each oven prior to pushing by opening the door damper and observing the bed of coke you observed there was smoke in the open space above the coke bed and/or an unobstructed view of the door on the opposite side of the oven. You can provide reports that record these determinations along with any non-compliance and deviation reports.

                                  A.    HRSG Systems - Heat Recovery Only
Please provide the information listed below on your HRSG. Alternatively, you may provide tables or sections of reports submitted to your local agency that contain the same information. Please do not send the entire report if any of the other information is not applicable to these questions:
 48. Specify the type of HRSG system design, e.g., once-through cooling water system; natural draft cooling tower; induced draft (fans at outlet) cooling tower; forced draft (fans for inlet air) cooling tower; or specify other.
 49. How many bypass vents are at the facility?
 50. What is the cooling water discharge rate for once-through systems (gallons per minute and per year)
 51. For recirculating systems
      a. What is the cooling water recirculation rate (gallons per minute)
      b. What is the source of make-up water?
      c. Estimate how much make-up water is used (gallons per day or per month/year , as appropriate)
 52. Provide the total number of HRSG serviced by the HRSG system (including redundant HRSG where applicable).
 53. Specify if each HRSG system is subject to permit or other regulatory requirements.
 54. Describe the monitoring performed for detecting tube leaks in each HRSG system and indicate if required in your permit or if voluntary:
         a.          Monitor for leaks by entire HRSG system.
                 i.             Are simplifying assumptions for entrance mean concentration being used?
                 ii.             What is current frequency of monitoring, e.g. hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually, or specify other.
                 iii.             Describe the method used to determine the concentration of the monitored substance in the cooling water.
         b.          Monitor for leaks by a combination of HRSG.
                 i.             Are simplifying assumptions for entrance mean concentration are being used?
                 ii.             What is current frequency of monitoring, e.g. hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually, or specify other.
                 iii.             Describe the method used to determine the concentration of the monitored pollutant in the cooling water.
                 iv.             Identify each group of heat exchangers and provide the number of HRSG in each group.
         c.          Monitor for leaks by sampling at the inlet and outlet of each heat exchanger.
                 i.             Are simplifying assumptions for entrance mean concentration are being used? (Yes/No)
                 ii.             What is current frequency of monitoring?
                 iii.             Describe the method used to determine the concentration of the monitored substance in the cooling water.
                 iv.             Number of HRSG in HRSG system.
         d.          Monitor for leaks using a surrogate indicator of leaks.
                 i.             Select what surrogate indicator is being used:
                     1.                      Ion specific electrode monitoring.
                     2.                      pH.
                     3.                      Conductivity.
                     4.                      Other (specify).
                 ii.             Submit the monitoring plan as required by your permit or if voluntary action.

                                  A.    Battery Leaks (Regulated)
  Please address the following information for your coke oven batteries
 55. Identify the equipment subject to subpart L below, as per the following list:
         a.          Battery name&number
         b.          Number of lids per oven (average estimate)
         c.          Number of offtakes per oven
         d.          Total number of doors
         e.          Total number of lids
         f.          Total number of offtakes
         g.          Charges per year, per oven (average estimate)
         h.          Total charges per year (2015)
         i.          Typical charging cycle time (total hours)

 56.    Method 303/303A Inspection Data Summary for 2015  -  Monthly and Rolling Monthly Averages  -  For By-Product and H&NR, as applicable. Please complete the following for the period January 1, 2015  -  December 31, 2015. If you report a shorter period, please specify. If a battery was not operating in all or any of 2015 but is operating in 2016, use your reported information for 2016 to comprise 12 months of data as much as possible.
         a.          Battery name/number

         b.          Average seconds per charge (s/chg), by-product batteries

         c.          Average percent leaking doors (PLD), by-product and H&NR batteries

         d.          Average percent leaking lids (PLL), by-product batteries

         e.          Average percent leaking offtakes (PLO), by-product batteries

         f.          Average percent leaking collecting main, by-product batteries

 57. List your charging (s/chg) and leaking (PLD, PLL, PLO) limits under subpart L for each battery. If the limit is same as per EPA rule, you can just specify EPA rule either "MACT" or "LAER". If "foundry" doors, please specify. If a lower state limit, please specify numeric value.
         a.          Battery name/number

         b.          Foundry doors?

         c.          MACT or LAER or Other?

         d.          Specify exact limit(s) for "Other": s/chg, PLD, PLL, PLO

 58. For each detected leak or charge rate above your facility's limit (above) for doors, lids, or offtakes in the last 2 years (2014 & 2015) subject to subpart L, please provide the information listed below. Alternatively, you can provide tables or sections of reports submitted to your local agency which contain the same information. Please do not send the entire report if any of the other information is not applicable to this question:
         a.          Date(s) exceedance detected and reported.

         b.          Type of exceedance: charge, lid, doors, offtake.

         c.          Battery name and oven number

         d.          Date repaired

         e.          Total number of days to repair

         f.          For each repair taking longer than 45 calendar days, explain reason for delay. For example: leaking equipment needed to be isolated from the process; repair was technically infeasible without a shutdown; the necessary equipment, parts or personnel were not available.

 59. Do you own or have ready access to an optical or thermal imaging device for detecting oven door, lid, and offtake leaks? (Yes/No) If yes:
      a. Provide the manufacturer and model number.
      b. Which of the following best describes the use of the imaging device by the facility? (Select all that apply.)
              *             At the frequency required by a federal, state, or other air regulation in order to demonstrate compliance. Specify the regulation and provide the rule citation that requires use of the imaging device.
              *             To voluntarily check for leaks on a routine basis (quarterly or more frequently).
              *             To voluntarily check for leaks on an occasional basis (less frequently than quarterly).
              *             To voluntarily check for leaks following non-routine operations.
              *             Other (specify).

                                  A.    Cooling Water at HRSG - Heat Recovery Only

 60. Is the HRSG subject to a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit?
 61. If yes:
     a.          Do either of the following apply?
                 i.             Allowable discharge of 1 part per million by volume or less above influent concentration? (Yes/No)
                 ii.             Allowable discharge of 10 percent or less above influent concentration? (Yes/No)
     b.          Does the permit require monitoring for detection of leaks of process fluid into cooling water? (Yes/No) If yes, select all that apply:
                 i.             Permit specifies normal range of the parameter or condition.
                 ii.             Permit requires monthly or more frequent monitoring.
                 iii.             Permit requires reporting and correction of leaks.
     c.          Please submit a copy of your NPDES permit.

                                  I.    Postponed Questions from Above
 62. (from Q. 16.a): If your facility (includes all sources and processes within the property boundary or "fence line") is a major source of HAP, list the HAP or HAPS that qualify the facility as a major source using available documents or emission inventories.
 63. (from Q. 45) How much coal is delivered each day to the facility, on average? If the facility only records truckloads, estimate the amount of coal in a typical truck load.
 64. (from Q. 23) Excess Emissions, Malfunctions or Deviations
      a. How many excess emission and deviation reports have you submitted in previous 2 years?
      b.	Provide any excess emission and deviation reports submitted in previous 2 years.
 65. (from Q, 24.b) Title V or Air Permit deviations
      b.	Provide the Title V deviation reports submitted in previous 2 years.

VII.	Air Pollution Control and Monitoring Equipment
 66. Identify each emission monitoring device that monitors emissions from each process area or emissions point and each control device that captures and/or controls emissions from each process or emissions point (use emission release point ID #s, both facility and permit/state, from the P&EFD and plot plans) and include the information below:
 a.          Type of monitor or control device.
 b.          Year installed
 c.          Does this device monitor or control HAP emissions or surrogates for HAP emissions?
 d.          Identify ALL the pollutants monitored or controlled
 e.          Identify the process or emissions point this device monitors or controls (use P&EFD codes)
 f.          What year was the monitor or control originally installed?
 g.          List any upgrades to each piece of monitoring or control equipment in the last 2 years. Include year, reason for upgrade, and cost (approximate, if available)
 h.          Type of stack or release point.
 i.          Longitude coordinates, in decimal degrees to five decimal places (by end of ICR process).
 j.          Latitude coordinates, in decimal degrees to five decimal places (by end of ICR process).

VIII.	Economics/Costs
 1. Please provide the following information for your coke, chemical, and energy production processes to help us create an economic profile of the industry. We will be using this information to run our model to determine the economic impacts of our rules. Estimates can be labeled as such.
         a.          Identify each process located your facility, among the following (add other processes not listed):
                 i.               Coke production (from coal transport, to coking, to quenching)
                 ii.               By-product chemical recovery (as applicable)
                 iii.               Heat recovery (HRSG)
                 iv.             Energy recovery for use or sale
         b.          Amounts and cost of raw materials used in manufacturing coke
         c.          Labor costs ($/hr, average by worker class)
         d.          Energy requirements for facility (BTU/hr or BTU/ton coke produced)
         e.          Operating and Maintenance Costs ($/ton coke produced)
         f.          Cost benefit of energy sales ($/ton coke produced, $/yr, as appropriate)
IX.	Startup and Shutdown
  Please provide a copy of your Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction Plan (SSMP). If you have a separate Malfunction or Emergency Response Plan, please also add this to your submittal.
A.	Planned Shutdowns
  The following questions apply to cokemaking operations and include all units that are air emission points themselves or (directly or indirectly) affect other cokemaking emission points. For the purposes of this survey, a planned shutdown event means a routine shutdown, scheduled in advance, for preventative maintenance, which are typically scheduled and budgeted for multiple months in advance.
 2. Frequency of planned shutdown events (last 2 years).

 3. Average amount of time required to shutdown during a planned event (hours).

 4. Describe steps, work-practices, processes, or techniques the facility uses to minimize emissions during planned shutdown events.

 5. Have you ever collected HAP emissions data during a planned shutdown event? (Yes/No) If yes, explain the type of HAP emissions data collected.

 6. Do you expect HAP emissions to be higher, lower, or unchanged during planned shutdown events compared to normal operations? Provide an explanation for your answer.

 7. For the last planned shutdown provide:
 a.          Date of last planned shutdown.
 b.          Amount of time required to shutdown during the event (hours).
 c.          Provide a description of the last planned shutdown.
 d.          Identify each HAP released (name and CAS number) during the event, the amount released (pounds), and a basis for the amount released.
 e.          Identify the surveyed process units associated with the event (select all that apply).
 f.          Identify the other process units associated with the event (select all that apply).
 g.          Identify additional coke manufacturing or non-coke manufacturing related process units (if applicable) that were associated with the event that were not covered and identified above.

B.	Unplanned Shutdowns
  The following questions address coke manufacturing and include all ancillary units, as appropriate for only those ancillary units that are air emission points or directly or indirectly affect other air emission points. For the purposes of this survey, an unplanned shutdown event is due to external events outside the control of the operator (i.e., natural disaster or power failure).
 1. Average frequency of unplanned shutdown events (last 2 years).

 2. Average amount of time required to shutdown, including time required to redirect coke oven gases through bypass vents, during an unplanned event (hours).

 3. Describe steps, work-practices, processes, or techniques the facility uses to minimize emissions during unplanned shutdown events.

 4. Have you ever collected emissions data during an unplanned shutdown event? (Yes/No) If yes, explain the type of emissions data collected.

 5. Do you expect emissions to be higher, lower, or unchanged during unplanned shutdown events compared to normal operations? Provide an explanation for your answer.

 6. For the last unplanned shutdown provide:
 a.          Date of last unplanned shutdown.
 b.          Amount of time required to shutdown and reroute coke oven gases through bypass vents during the event (hours).
 c.          Provide a description of the last unplanned shutdown.
 d.          Identify each HAP released (name and CAS number) during the event, the amount released (pounds), and a basis for the amount released.
 e.          Identify the surveyed process units (from section above) associated with the event (select all that apply).
 f.          Identify the other process units (from section above) associated with the event (select all that apply).
 g.          Identify additional coke manufacturing or non-coke manufacturing related process units (if applicable) that were associated with the event that were not covered and identified (in sections above).

C.	Startups
   Based on information for the last 2 years (2014&2015), please answer the following questions as they pertain to each emission unit related to coke operations within the coke facility property.
 1.    Are there process differences between startup events and normal operations? (Yes/No) If yes:

 a.          Provide an explanation of the differences.
 b.          Do the differences present increased safety risks to workers or testers? (Provide an explanation.)
 1. Have you ever collected emissions data during a startup event? (Yes/No) If yes, explain the type of emissions data collected.

 2. Do you expect emissions to be higher, lower, or unchanged during startup events compared to normal operations? Provide an explanation for your answer.

 3.    For the last startup provide:
 a.          Date of last startup.
 b.          Amount of time required to startup during the event (hours).
 c.          Provide a description of the last startup.
 d.          Identify each HAP released (name and CAS number) during the event, the amount released (pounds), and a basis for the amount released.
 e.          Identify the surveyed process units (from section above) associated with the event (select all that apply).
 f.          Identify the other process units (from section above) associated with the event (select all that apply).
 g.          Identify additional coke manufacturing or non-coke manufacturing related process units (if applicable) that were associated with the event that were not covered and identified in sections above.

D.	Control Devices
 1. For the control devices identified in section above, specify which (if any) control devices are used during startup, shutdown, or malfunction events.

 2.    For each control device, provide the following information:
      a. Is the control device operation at all times, including during startup, shutdown, and malfunction events? (Yes/No) If no, describe when the control device is activated (or deactivated) during startup (shutdown).

      b. Is there any expected change in control device efficiency during startup, shutdown, and malfunction events? (Yes/No) If yes, explain the expected change in efficiency.

      c. Is the vent gas flow rate to the control device typically higher, lower, or unchanged during startup, shutdown, and malfunction events?

E.	Malfunctions
 3. Identify each malfunction event during the last 2 years (2014&2015) where emissions from equipment regulated by 40 CFR 63 Subparts CCCCC or L exceeded normal emissions, normal controls were bypassed, or the effectiveness of the normal control was reduced where normal is defined by the limits promulgated in 40 CFR 63 Subparts CCCCC and L and provide the following: (in lieu of entering your data in the provided spreadsheet, you may reference official reports submitted to local agencies or EPA)
         a.          Date of event.
         b.          Duration of the event (hours).
         c.          Description of the event.
         d.          Identify the surveyed process or emission units (from section above) associated with each malfunction (select all that apply).
         e.          Identify the other process or emission units (from section above) associated with each malfunction (select all that apply).
         f.          Identify additional coke manufacturing or non-coke manufacturing related process emission units (if applicable) that were associated with each malfunction that were not covered and identified in sections above.
         g.          For each HAP released during the event, provide the following:
                 i.             HAP name and CAS number (See Appendix B).
                 ii.             Amount of HAP released during the event (pounds).
                 iii.             Description of method used to estimate the amount of HAP that was released during the event.

X.	Management Practices
A.	Operator Training
 4. For each battery that you operate, is operator training required by a local or state agency as a condition of plant operation?

 5.    If yes, please name the battery/type training/frequency and agency(s).
 6. List any company training (battery/type training/frequency)

 7. For each battery that you operate please estimate how many hours of formal training are conducted in each of the following areas? Prior to Starting Work, During First Year of Employment, After First Year of Employment.

 8. Who conducts the operator training? In-house personnel, Private contractor. State or local agency, other (specify

B.	Best Management Procedures
 9. Does the facility make written Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) available to all operators? (Yes/No)

 10. Does the facility keep Operations and Maintenance manuals from the equipment manufacturer near operator locations? (Yes/No)

 11. Does the facility employ additional practices that ensure operation of the battery is consistent from one shift to another?

 12. If yes, please explain.


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6302-6303]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02856]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82645; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2018-004]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related
to Fees for Use on the Exchange's Equity Options Platform

February 7, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 31, 2018, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable
to Members \5\ and non-Members of the Exchange pursuant to EDGX Rules
15.1(a) and (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or
dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See
Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at www.markets.cboe.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the 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 parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule for its equity
options platform (``EDGX Options'') to decrease the Exchange's standard
rebate for Customer \6\ orders. Fee codes PC and NC are currently
appended to all Customer orders in Penny Pilot Securities \7\ and Non-
Penny Pilot Securities,\8\ respectively, and result in a standard
rebate of $0.05 per contract. The Exchange proposes to decrease the
standard rebate for all Customer orders in Penny Pilot Securities and
Non-Penny Pilot Securities to a standard rebate of $0.01 per contract.
In addition to reflecting the increase in the Fee Codes and Associated
Fees portion of the Exchange's fee schedule for fee codes PC and NC,
the Exchange proposes to replace references to the $0.05 rebate with
$0.01 rebate on the Standard Rates table with respect to fee codes PC
and NC. The Standard Rates table provides a range of rebates and fees
applicable to executions on the Exchange in summary form.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The term ``Customer'' applies to any transaction identified
by a Member for clearing in the Customer range at the Options
Clearing Corporation (``OCC''), excluding any transaction for a
Broker Dealer or a ``Professional'' as defined in Exchange Rule
16.1.
    \7\ The term ``Penny Pilot Security'' applies to those issues
that are quoted pursuant to Exchange Rule 21.5, Interpretation and
Policy .01.
    \8\ The term ``Non-Penny Pilot Security'' applies to those
issues that are not Penny Pilot Securities quoted pursuant to
Exchange Rule 21.5, Interpretation and Policy .01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to implement these amendments to its fee
schedule on February 1, 2018.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and,
in particular, with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act.\9\
Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\10\ in that it provides for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among members and other persons using any facility or system which the
Exchange operates or controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that its proposal to reduce the rebate
provided by fee code PF [sic] is fair and equitable and reasonable
because the proposed rebate remains consistent with pricing previously
offered by the Exchange as well as its competitors and does not
represent a significant departure from the Exchange's general pricing
structure. Specifically, the Exchange notes that it previously provided
a rebate of $0.01 per share to orders that yielded fee codes PC and NC
prior to increasing the rebate to its current level.\11\ In addition,
the lower rebate is more than that offered by Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``BX''),
which does not provide a standard rebate for similar orders.\12\
Therefore, the Exchange believes the rebate for Customer orders remains
consistent with pricing previously offered by the Exchange as well as
other options exchanges and does not represent a significant departure
from such pricing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78062 (June 14,
2016), 81 FR 39981 (June 20, 2016) (SR-BatsEDGX-2016-21).
    \12\ See Section 2 of the BX fee schedule available at http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Micro.aspx?id=BXOptionsPricing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange believes the proposed amendments to its fee schedule
would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
does not believe that the proposed changes represent a significant
departure from previous pricing offered by the Exchange or pricing
offered by the Exchange's competitors. Members may opt to disfavor the
Exchange's pricing if they believe that alternatives offer them better
value. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed
change will impair the ability of Members or competing venues to
maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

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

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

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) of the Act \13\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\14\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2018-004 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2018-004. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2018-004 and should be
submitted on or before March 6, 2018.

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

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-02856 Filed 2-12-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 248 (Monday, December 28, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 84449-84451]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28515]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90731; File No. SR-LTSE-2020-22]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Long-Term Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Rules Related to
Promotional Services and Listing Ceremonies for Listed Companies

December 18, 2020.
    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 10, 2020, Long-Term Stock Exchange, Inc. (``LTSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been 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

    LTSE proposes to adopt Rule 14.602 to provide for promotional
services and listing ceremonies that will be offered by the Exchange in
connection with a Company's approval for listing on the Exchange.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at https://longtermstockexchange.com/, at the principal office
of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 14.602 to provide for
promotional services and listing ceremonies that will be offered by the
Exchange in connection with a Company's \3\ approval for listing on the
Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Company'' means the issuer of a security listed or
applying to list on the Exchange. See LTSE Rule 14.002(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed LTSE Rule 14.602 states that in connection with a
Company's approval for listing, the Exchange offers promotional
services (including press releases, articles, videos, and podcasts) and
invites the Company to participate in listing ceremonies.\4\ The
promotional services would be tailored to meet the needs of the
Company, and would allow the Company access to media services that
would support the creation of press releases, articles, videos, and
podcasts featuring the Company and its personnel. These promotional
services also would include assistance with distributing such content
on traditional and social media platforms, including websites operated
by the Exchange.\5\ A full suite of promotional services will be
offered to each Company approved to list on the Exchange. Some
Companies may choose to avail themselves of all promotional services,
whereas others may choose only a subset of services or none.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ If the Exchange expands the menu of promotional services
offered, or elects to provide new products or services to listed
Companies, the Exchange will incorporate such changes in a new
proposed rule change.
    \5\ Such promotional services appear to be commonly provided by
listing exchanges. See, e.g., The NYSE Listed Company Network, New
York Stock Exchange LLC, available at https://www.nyse.com/network
(last visited December 6, 2020) (featuring blog posts and videos
about listed companies on NYSE).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the Exchange is only accepting dual-listings at the
present time, it believes that the decision of a Company to list on the
Exchange and adopt Long-Term Policies consistent with LTSE Rule 14.425
is a significant event for which a listing ceremony would be
appropriate. Accordingly, the Exchange will establish a listing
ceremony to commemorate a Company becoming listed on the Exchange. The

Exchange does not have a trading floor or a market site and thus will
work with each Company to design and plan a listing ceremony that
reflects the Company's values and mission. The listing ceremony would
be comparable to ``ringing a bell'' by gathering Company and Exchange
personnel to celebrate that the Company has listed on the Exchange. The
listing ceremony may be conducted in-person or remotely. Moreover, the
absence of a LTSE trading floor or dedicated market site allows the
Exchange to be flexible in providing listing ceremonies that can be
more inclusive in terms of the number of Company personnel who may
attend and the location of the ceremony.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ As noted in the order approving LTSE as a national
securities exchange, LTSE maintains a commercial relationship with
LTSE Services to leverage the company's technological expertise to
support the Exchange's software needs. See In the Matter of the
Application of Long Term Stock Exchange, Inc.; for Registration as a
National Securities Exchange; Findings, Opinion, and Order of the
Commission, Exchange Act Release No. 85828 (May 10, 2019), 84 FR
21841, 21842 (May 15, 2019). LTSE Services also provides
communications and marketing services to the Exchange. The Exchange
anticipates that it will use LTSE Services, among other things, to
draft marketing content for review by the Exchange and the Company,
produce and edit videos and podcasts, and coordinate listing
ceremonies, whether done as in-person or remote events.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The listing ceremonies in the proposed rule change would be
comparable to provisions in New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'')
Listed Company Manual Section 106.03,\7\ though tailored to address the
fact that a Company listing on LTSE may be a public company and
therefore is already trading on LTSE (as well as other national
securities exchanges). Additionally, the Exchange proposes that its
listing ceremonies be more inclusive, and does not plan to limit
listing ceremonies to a particular physical location or solely to a
Company's directors and officers. The Exchange believes that the
Company should determine where such ceremonies should take place and
who should participate in the ceremonies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See NYSE Listed Company Manual Section 106.03 (``The
Exchange invites the company's directors and officers to participate
in listing ceremonies on the first day of trading. . . . The
Exchange has a public relations area which will coordinate the
publicity for the event including picture taking on the trading
floor.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\8\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\9\ in
particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among the
Exchange's members and issuers and other persons using its facilities.
The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \10\ in that it is not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is fair and reasonable to offer
promotional services and listing ceremonies. The Exchange believes that
the existing U.S. exchange listing market for operating companies is
essentially a duopoly with the vast majority of operating companies
listed on U.S. securities exchanges listing on NYSE or Nasdaq Stock
Market LLC (``Nasdaq''). The Exchange expects to face competition from
NYSE and Nasdaq as a new entrant into the exchange listing market, and
believes that offering promotional services and listing ceremonies for
Companies listing on the Exchange would allow the Exchange to more
effectively attract Companies to list on the Exchange. The Exchange
believes that to the extent the Exchange's listing program is
successful, it will provide a competitive alternative, which will
thereby benefit companies and investors, and remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest.
    The Exchange believes that its proposed offer of promotional
services and listing ceremonies for listed Companies is fair and not
unfairly discriminatory because the promotional services and listing
ceremonies will be offered to all listed Companies on the same terms
and conditions without differentiation. The scope of promotional
services and listing ceremonies provided by the Exchange to each
Company ultimately will depend on which services the Company selects
insofar as these are optional services for the Company.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. To the contrary,
and as discussed in the Statutory Basis section, LTSE believes that the
proposed rule change will enhance competition by facilitating LTSE's
listing program which will allow the Exchange to provide companies with
another listing option, thereby promoting intermarket competition
between exchanges in furtherance of the principles of Section 11A(a)(1)
of the Act \11\ in that it is designed to promote fair competition
between exchange markets by offering a new listing market to compete
with Nasdaq and NYSE. Moreover, as a dual listing venue, LTSE expects
to face competition from existing exchanges because companies have a
choice to list their securities solely on a primary listing venue.
Consequently, the degree to which LTSE's promotional services and
listing ceremonies for listed Companies could impose any burden on
intermarket competition is extremely limited, and LTSE does not believe
that such offerings would impose any burden on competing venues that is
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    LTSE also does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on intramarket competition since LTSE will offer
the promotional services and listing ceremonies for all listed
Companies on the same terms and conditions without differentiation.
Consequently, LTSE does not believe that the proposal will impose any
burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission shall: (a) by order approve
or disapprove such proposed rule change, or (b) institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.

Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-LTSE-2020-22 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-LTSE-2020-22. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-LTSE-2020-22, and should be submitted on
or before January 19, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-28515 Filed 12-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


December 2018
MEMORANDUM
TO:		Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0417
FROM:	Nathan Topham, Environmental Engineer, U.S. EPA
SUBJECT:	HCl RTR Modeling File Data Source Documentation

1. Data Sources Used to Generate List of Facilities and Emissions Data to be Modeled
	The list of facilities subject to the NESHAP was created through searching the EPA's ECHO database, the 2014 National Emissions Inventory (NEI), and state databases of title V permits. Further discussion of the facility list can be found in "Industry Characterization for the Hydrochloric Acid Production NESHAP Residual Risk and Technology Review," available in docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0417. Once the facility list was finalized, available emissions data were pulled from the NEI. Title V permits were used to determine which emission points at each facility are subject to the HCl NESHAP. These emission points were matched to entries in the NEI. Some NEI entries did not include unit or process descriptions that allowed for matching with units identified in title V permits. As described in section 2 below, emission estimates were used to fill in gaps present in the NEI data for sources listed as subject to the NESHAP in title V permits.
2. Process Used to Develop Emissions Estimates for Gap Filling
      The NEI was examined to separate any emission points subject to the HCl NESHAP from other emission points at the facilities identified in "Industry Characterization for the Hydrochloric Acid Production NESHAP Residual Risk and Technology Review." Once identified, emission points subject to the NESHAP were categorized based on emission point type (process vent, storage tanks, material transfer and loading, and equipment leaks). The categorized data were used to calculate average values for the following emission point parameters: HCl emissions, Cl2 emissions, stack height, stack diameter, stack velocity, stack temperature, stack flow rate, and fugitive height. The data used to calculate these averages are available in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet that has been placed in the docket for this proposal. Table 1 presents the average values used for gap filling.
      Table 1 Average Emission Point Characteristics Used for Gap Filling

HCl Emissions (tpy)
Cl2 Emissions (tpy)
Stack Height (ft)
Stack Temperature (°F)
Stack Diameter (ft)
Stack Velocity (ft/sec)
Stack Flow Rate (ft[3]/sec)
Uncategorized Data
0.114

0.079

81.461

81.289

1.461

45.996

77.127

Process Vents
0.515

0.659

85.762

180.955

1.355

16.609

23.936

Material Transfer and Loading
0.031
N/A
20.286

87.286

0.564

33.407

8.355

Storage Tanks
0.297

N/A

18

81.571

0.486

1.45

0.269

Equipment Leaks
1.146

N/A

	We compared the NEI data to title V permits to determine whether the NEI included all emission points listed as subject to the NESHAP according to the permit. When gaps in the NEI data were identified, the average values calculated for missing emission point parameters were used to fill gaps.
	We evaluated latitudes and longitudes listed in the NEI to ensure their accuracy. For some emission points, we determined that slight corrections were necessary (for example, if a latitude/longitude for a tank was located near the tank but not on it). In these cases, we used our best judgment based on the type of emission point and proximity of other emission points related to HCl production to refine the latitude/longitude estimates. All of the latitudes and longitudes used in our dispersion modeling are in the modeling file used for the proposed rule, which is available in docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0417.
3. Wastewater, Acute emissions, and Allowable Emissions
      Wastewater emissions were estimated for two facilities. These two facilities were Arkema Inc. in Calvert City, KY and Honeywell in Geismar, LA. These two facilities were chosen because they represented the highest overall HCl emissions (Arkema Inc.) and the facility with the highest chronic inhalation risk results for the source category, excluding wastewater (Honeywell Inc.). The only wastewater emissions data available were from the original NESHAP support documents. At that time, based on the limited data available to the Agency, we estimated that wastewater emissions comprised roughly 0.5% of the total source category emissions. For the residual risk review, we assumed that wastewater emissions comprise roughly 1% of total source category emissions at each of the two facilities modeled.
As discussed in Section III of the preamble to the proposed rule, we used a factor of 10 times actual emissions to estimate short-term emissions from process vents, HCl storage tanks, HCl transfer operations, and equipment leaks for the acute assessment. We used a factor of 10 times actual emissions for allowable emissions estimates from process vents, HCl storage tanks, and HCl transfer operations while the allowable emission rates for equipment leaks were set equal to actual emission rates. We estimated facility-wide emission rates using data pulled from the 2014 NEI.
4. Uncertainties in Emissions Estimates
	We recognize that there are uncertainties associated with the emissions estimates developed for this proposed rule. Some possible areas of uncertainty include the following:
 Accuracy of the emission point parameters entered into the NEI.
 Possible overestimation of source category emissions if emissions subject to the HCl Production NESHAP are combined with non-category emissions in NEI entries.
 Uncertainty associated with estimating facility boundaries using satellite imagery.
      While these uncertainties may have a small effect on dispersion modeling results, we expect that it would likely bias the results towards a more conservative estimate of risk. We included a review tool to allow stakeholders to provide corrections to the parameters used in our dispersion modeling to support the proposed rule in docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0417.
5. Facility-Specific Emissions Estimate Adjustments
Evonik  -  Theodore, Al
	Data from NEI appear to include all sources listed in the facility's title V permit as subject to the NESHAP. NEI data do not include information about specific source type (process vent, tank, etc.). No changes were made to the NEI data.
BASF  -  Macintosh, Al
	The NEI includes one entry for the unit listed in the facility's title V permit as subject to the NESHAP. There are HCl emissions associated with this emission point but no chlorine emissions. The emission point in the NEI appears to correspond to emission point: IG-EP-01A (Caustic Scrubber) from the facility's title V permit. There is a single 10,000 gallon HCl storage tank listed in the title V permit (emission point: 771-V-07). This tank is controlled via the caustic scrubber mentioned above. There was no entry in the NEI for material transfer and loading or equipment leaks. These two sources were added based on the emissions estimates described above in section 2.
Dow  -  Pittsburg, CA
	The HCl and Cl2 emissions for this facility in the NEI appear to be pulled from the TRI. There are entries for HCl and Cl2 for stacks and fugitives. The estimates included in the NEI may be conservative since it is unclear that they are limited to sources subject to the HCl Production NESHAP. The facility provided updates to the NEI data. The TRI emissions were apportioned to individual emission points at the facility. In two instances, the stack parameters provided by the facility yielded stack velocities that were abnormally high (i.e. over 2000 feet/second). In these two cases, we assumed the facility had provided stack flow rates in cubic feet per minute rather than cubic feet per second and converted the calculated velocity into feet per second. This conversion resulted in values that were more in line with other sources at the facility.
BASF  -  Kankakee, IL
	According to the facility's title V permit, "Area 90, CSA Process" is subject to the NESHAP. There is no NEI entry with this description. Therefore, emissions estimates described in section 2 were used for process vents, tanks, material transfer and loading, and leaks.
Arkema  -  Calvert City, KY
	The NEI data include emissions estimates for all sources subject to emission standards in the HCl Production NESHAP. No changes to the NEI data were made. Missing stack velocity for emission point 4000 was calculated from stack diameter and flow rate found in the NEI data.
Chemours  -  Louisville, KY
	The NEI data appear to include HCl emissions for all sources subject to the HCl Production NESHAP. However, none of these sources had Cl2 emissions included in the NEI data. Therefore, we added Cl2 emissions for process vents using the emissions estimates described in section 2.
Honeywell  -  Geismar, LA
	The NEI data appear to include HCl and Cl2 emissions for all emission units subject to the NESHAP. No changes were made to the NEI data.
Rubicon  -  Geismar, LA
	Some emission points were found in the NEI. However, a number of emission points of all types were not matched. Emission factors were used to add emissions from process vents, tanks, material transfer and loading, and equipment leaks. Missing stack flow rate for emission point "MDI Fume Scrubber AS-4303 was calculated using stack diameter and velocity from the NEI data.
BASF  -  Geismar, LA
	Some emission points were found in the NEI. However, a process vent and tank emission points were not matched. Emission factors were used to add emissions from process vents and tanks.
Honeywell  -  Baton Rouge LA
	The NEI appears to include HCl and Cl2 emissions for all emission units subject to the NESHAP. No changes were made to the NEI data.
Dow  -  Plaquemine LA
	The NEI data appear to include HCl and Cl2 emissions for all emission units subject to the NESHAP except for one emission point. There are no HCl or Cl2 emissions for EQT1303  -  CE-Scrubber C-501. Emission factors were used to add emissions of HCl and Cl2 from this process vent.
Hexion  -  Norco LA
	The NEI data appear to include HCl emissions for all emission units subject to the NESHAP except for tanks. There are no HCl data for tanks and no Cl2 data for process vents.
Dow  -  Midland MI
	The NEI data appear to include HCl data for all emission units subject to the NESHAP. However, there are no Cl2 emissions in the NEI data for the emission points subject to the NESHAP. Emission factors were used to add emissions of Cl2 from process vents.
Polymer Additives  -  Bridgeport NJ
	The NEI data do not include unit descriptions that allow for matching with any emission units listed in the facility's title V permit as subject to the HCl NESHAP. Only one entry for HCl and Cl2 were found in the NEI data and these entries did not include unit descriptions or stack parameters. Emission factors were used to add emissions of HCl and Cl2 from process vents and HCl emissions from storage tanks, material transfer and loading, and equipment leaks.
Momentive Performance Materials  -  Waterford NY
      The NEI data do not include unit descriptions that allow for matching with any emission units listed in the facility's title V permit as subject to the HCl NESHAP. Emission factors were used to add emissions of from process vents, storage tanks, material transfer and loading, and equipment leaks.
Chemours  -  Washington WV
	The NEI data do not include unit descriptions that allow for matching with any emission units listed in the facility's title V permit as subject to the HCl Production NESHAP. Emission factors were used to add emissions from process vents, storage tanks, material transfer and loading, and equipment leaks.
Dow  -  Freeport TX
	Some emission points were found in the NEI. However, a process vent was not matched. Emission factors were used to add emissions from process vents.
Cabot Corporation  -  Tuscola IL
	Some emission points were found in the NEI. However, a process vent and equipment leaks were not matched. Emission factors were used to add emissions from process vents and equipment leaks.
PPG South  -  Barberton OH
      The HCl and Cl2 emissions for this facility in the NEI appear to be pulled from the TRI. There are entries for HCl and Cl2 for stacks and fugitives. The estimates included in the NEI may be conservative since it is unclear that they are limited to sources subject to the HCl Production NESHAP. No changes to the NEI data were made.


[Federal Register: February 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 33)]
[Notices]
[Page 9114-9115]
[DOCID:fr19fe08-45]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER08-499-000]

Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Filing

February 8, 2008.
    Take notice that on January 31, 2008, Pacific Gas and Electric
Company (PG&E) and Sierra Pacific Power Company tendered for filing a
replacement Interconnection Agreement between both parties and a Notice
of Termination of PG&E First Revised Rate Schedule No. 72, the existing
Interconnection Agreement.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC

Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call (866)
208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 pm Eastern Time on February 21, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-2972 Filed 2-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P