[Federal Register: April 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 82)]
[Notices]
[Page 22993]
[DOCID:fr28ap08-102]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) has received a request for a waiver of compliance from certain
requirements of its safety standards. The individual petition is
described below, including the party seeking relief, the regulatory
provisions involved, the nature of the relief being requested, and the
petitioner's arguments in favor of relief.

City of Seattle, Washington

(Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-2008-0047)

    The City of Seattle, Washington (City), and the BNSF Railway
Company (BNSF) seek a permanent waiver of compliance from a certain
provision of the Use of Locomotive Horns at Highway-Rail Grade
Crossings, 49 CFR Part 222. The City intends to establish a Pre-Rule
Quiet Zone that it had previously continued under the provisions of 49
CFR Part 222.41(c)(1). The City and BNSF are seeking a waiver to extend
the mailing date for a Notice of Intent as provided in 49 CFR Part
222.41(c)(2)(i)(A) that states that the Notice of Intent must be mailed
by February 24, 2008. The waiver petition requests that the Notice of
Intent that the City mailed on February 27, 2008, be accepted as a
valid Notice of Intent even though it was mailed after February 24,
2008.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-
2008-0047) and may be submitted by any of the following methods:
    Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
    Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
    Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Communications received within 45 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be considered as far as practicable. All
written communications concerning these proceedings are available for
examination during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the above
facility. All documents in the public docket are also available for
inspection and copying on the Internet at the docket facility's Web
site at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 22, 2008.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program
Development.
 [FR Doc. E8-9204 Filed 4-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: September 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 187)]
[Notices]
[Page 56653]
[DOCID:fr28se05-56]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP05-426-001]

Destin Pipeline Company, L.L.C.; Notice of Compliance Filing

September 20, 2005.
    Take notice that on September 14, 2005, Destin Pipeline Company,
L.L.C. (Destin) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff,
Original Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed on Appendix A.
    Destin states that the purpose of this filing is to comply with the
Commission's Letter Order issued August 30, 2005, in Docket No. RP05-
426-000.
    Destin states that copies of this filing are being served on all
parties to the proceedings, affected shippers, and applicable state
regulatory agencies.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing 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. Such protests
must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of
the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest
must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests 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 to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible online 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<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-5259 Filed 9-27-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 114 (Tuesday, June 14, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36028-36030]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12741]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-95073; File No. SR-OCC-2022-007]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Concerning the Implementation of Changes to Settlement Timing
Previously Approved in File No. SR-OCC-2022-004

June 8, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'' or ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice
is hereby given that on May 26, 2022, The Options Clearing Corporation
(``OCC'') 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 primarily by OCC. 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. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    This proposed rule change would amend the By-Laws and Rules to
provide for delayed implementation of the prosed [sic] changes approved
by the Commission in File No. SR-OCC-2022-004.\3\ The proposed changes
to OCC's By-Laws and Rules are attached to File No. SR-OCC-2022-007 as
Exhibit 5a and Exhibit 5b, respectively. Proposed changes to the
Clearing Fund Methodology Policy and Liquidity Risk Management
Framework are attached to File No. SR-OCC-2022-007 as confidential
Exhibit 5c and confidential Exhibit 5d, respectively. Material added by
File No. SR-OCC-2022-004 is marked by underlining and material deleted
is marked with strikethrough text. Material proposed to be added to
OCC's By-Laws and Rules as currently in effect is marked by double
underlining and material proposed to be deleted is marked with double
strikethrough text. All terms with initial capitalization that are not
otherwise defined herein have the same meaning as set forth in the By-
Laws and Rules.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Notice of Filing of Partial Amendment No. 1 and Order
Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified
by Partial Amendment No. 1, by The Options Clearing Corporation
Concerning Settlement Timing, available at https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/occ/2022/34-94950.pdf.
    \4\ OCC's By-Laws and Rules can be found on OCC's public
website: https://www.theocc.com/Company-Information/Documents-and-Archives/By-Laws-and-Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, OCC 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. OCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A),
(B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of these
statements.

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

(1) Purpose
Background
    On May 19, 2022, the Commission approved a proposed rule change by
OCC to change the time frame for collecting margin and Clearing Fund
deficits as well as increases in the Clearing Fund cash requirement. As
OCC announced in Information Memo 50390, OCC currently plans to
implement the changes to the time for collecting margin and general
Clearing Fund deficits on the morning of Monday, June 27, 2022, and
changes to the collection of Clearing Fund deficit resulting from the
monthly re-sizing of the Clearing Fund on the morning of Friday, July
1, 2022.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Information Memo 50390, available at https://infomemo.theocc.com/infomemos?number=50390. Any changes to the dates
announced in that memo would be communicated via a subsequent
Information Memo.

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

Proposed Change
    Because the proposed changes as described in File No. SR-OCC-2022-
004 did not discuss delayed implementation of those proposed rule
changes, OCC is proposing to amend its By-Laws and Rules to retain the
marked changes from File No. SR-OCC-2022-004 in its By-Laws and Rules
until after the settlement time on the business day before the
implementation date, which OCC will announce no less than two weeks
prior to the implementation date. As discussed above, the
implementation date will be no earlier than June 27, 2022. For clarity,
OCC is also proposing a note to be placed before the affected By-Law
and Rules provisions disclosing that the marked changes are not
effective until that time, after which OCC will apply the marked
changes and the notes automatically will be deleted.\6\ At that time,
OCC will also implement the changes to the Clearing Fund Methodology
Policy and the Liquidity Risk Management Framework discussed in File
No. SR-OCC-2022-004. For purposes of this filing, OCC is proposing to
add the same note to those policies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The affected By-Laws are the definition of ``settlement
time'' in Article I, Section 1 and Article XV, Section 1. The
affected Rules are OCC Rules 101, 605, 1002, 1004, 1005, and 1006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(2) Statutory Basis
    OCC believes the proposed rule changes are consistent with Section
17A of the Securities Exchange Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) \7\ of the Exchange Act requires,
among other things, that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to
promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
and derivatives transactions and protect investors and the public
interest. By clarifying that certain By-Laws and Rules changes approved
by the Commission are not yet implemented, the proposed rule changes
facilitate the administration of existing rules intended to promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities and
derivatives transactions and protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1) requires OCC to, among other
things, maintain written policies and procedures reasonably designed to
ensure a well-founded, clear, transparent, and enforceable legal basis
for each aspect of OCC's activities.\8\ By clarifying that the By-Laws
and Rules in effect prior to File No. SR-OCC-2022-004 will remain in
effect until the implementation of the changes approved therein, OCC
would ensure that it maintains a well-founded, clear, transparent and
enforceable legal basis for the collection of margin and Clearing Fund
deficits prior to implementation of the changes approved in File No.
SR-OCC-2022-004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    Section 17A(b)(3)(I) of the Act \9\ requires that the rules of a
clearing agency not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the Act. OCC does not believe that the
proposed rule change would impact or impose any burden on competition.
The proposed rule change would provide for the By-Laws and Rules
governing collection of margin and Clearing Fund deposits that existed
prior to File No. SR-OCC-2022-004 to persist until the changes from
that filing are ready to be implemented. The proposed rule change would
not affect the competitive dynamics between Clearing Members in that it
would apply to all Clearing Members equally. The proposed rule change
also would not inhibit access to OCC's services or disadvantage or
favor any particular user in relationship to another. In this regard,
as described above, the proposed rule change is designed to further
facilitate the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments were not and are not intended to be solicited with
respect to the proposed rule change and none have been received.

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

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) \10\ of the Act, and Rule 19b-
4(f)(1) thereunder,\11\ the proposed rule change is filed for immediate
effectiveness. 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. The proposal shall
not take effect until all regulatory actions required with respect to
the proposal are completed.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1).
    \12\ Notwithstanding its immediate effectiveness, implementation
of this rule change will be delayed until this change is deemed
certified under CFTC Regulation 40.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-OCC-2022-007 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2022-007. 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 such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of OCC and on OCC's website at
https://www.theocc.com/Company-Information/Documents-and-Archives/By-Laws-and-Rules.
    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-OCC-2022-007 and
should be submitted on or before July 5, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-12741 Filed 6-13-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 20 (Friday, January 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5105-5106]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01729]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13994-002]

Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County; Notice of
Technical Meeting

    a. Project Name and Number: Hancock Creek Hydroelectric Project No.
13994.
    b. Date and Time of Meeting: February 5, 2015; 3:30 p.m. Eastern
Time (12:30 p.m. Pacific Time).
    c. Place: Telephone conference with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) and the Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County
(Snohomish PUD).
    d. FERC Contact: Kelly Wolcott<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or (202)
502-6480.
    e. Purpose of Meeting: To discuss the endangered species
consultation under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act relative to
the northern spotted owl; specifically, whether Snohomish PUD's
comments on the environmental assessment and the Commission's
recommendation for blasting restrictions to protect the northern
spotted owl require additional consultation with FWS. Discussion
pertaining to this topic will be limited to Commission staff, Snohomish
PUD, and FWS. Other participants may listen in and provide any germane
information related to this topic.
    f. A summary of the meeting will be prepared and placed in the
project's record.
    g. All local, State, and Federal agencies, Indian tribes, and other
interested parties are invited to participate by phone. Please contact
Kelly Wolcott at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER> by close of
business Tuesday, February 2, 2015, to RSVP and to receive specific
instructions on how to participate.

    Dated: January 22, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-01729 Filed 1-29-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 27, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 227)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 66047-66048]
[DOCID:fr27no07-8]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD08-07-043]

Drawbridge Operating Regulations; Sabine Lake, near Sabine Pass,
Port Arthur, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
State Route 82 (SR 82) swing span bridge across the Sabine Lake at mile
10.0, Port Arthur, Jefferson County, Texas. This deviation provides for
the bridge to remain closed to navigation to repair sections of the
steel truss members of the drawbridge.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 5 a.m. on Monday, December 3,
2007 until 12 p.m. on Friday, December 7, 2007 and from 5 a.m. on
Monday,

December 10, 2007 until 9 p.m. on Friday, December 14, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Materials referred to in this document are available for
inspection or copying at the office of the Eighth Coast Guard District,
Bridge Administration Branch, Hale Boggs Federal Building, Room 1313,
500 Poydras Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70130-3310 between 7 a.m.
and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Bridge Administration Branch
maintains the public docket for this temporary deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kay Wade, Bridge Administration
Branch, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Texas Department of Transportation has
requested a temporary deviation in order to repair sections of the
steel truss members of the SR 82 swing span bridge across the Sabine
Lake at Port Arthur, Jefferson County, Texas. Repair of the steel truss
members is necessary for continued operation of the swing span of the
bridge. This temporary deviation will allow the bridge to remain in the
closed-to-navigation position from 5 a.m. on Monday, December 3, 2007
until 12 p.m. on Friday, December 7, 2007 and from 5 a.m. on Monday,
December 10, 2007 until 9 p.m. on Friday, December 14, 2007. During the
closure period, the draw may be able to open during the scheduled
maintenance period if at least 2 hours' advance notice is given.
Currently, the draw opens on signal; except that, from 9 p.m. to 5
a.m., the draw shall open on signal, if at least 6 hours' notice is
given to the Maintenance Supervisor at the Port Arthur Area Office. The
draw opens on signal at any time for an emergency aboard a vessel.
    The bridge is a swing span bridge with an available vertical
navigational clearance of 9 feet above high water in the closed-to-
navigation position. Navigation on the waterway consists primarily of
recreational craft, although the bridge is occasionally transited by
small tugs with tows transporting sand, gravel and marine shells. Due
to prior experience, as well as coordination with waterway users, it
has been determined that this closure will not have a significant
effect on these vessels. An alternate route is available via the Sabine
Neches Waterway, which is comprised of the Sabine Pass Channel, Port
Arthur Channel and Sabine Neches Canal, thence passage into the lake
from the north side.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: November 19, 2007.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator.
 [FR Doc. E7-23046 Filed 11-26-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 9, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37184-37188]
[FR Doc No: 2017-16691]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0683; FRL 9965-88-OAR]
RIN 2060-AT61

Relaxation of the Federal Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) Gasoline
Volatility Standard for Several Parishes in Louisiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve an April 10, 2017 request from the Louisiana Department of
Environmental Quality (LDEQ) to relax the Federal Reid Vapor Pressure
(RVP) volatility standard applicable to gasoline introduced into
commerce from June 1 to September 15 of each year for the following
parishes: Beauregard, Calcasieu, Jefferson, Lafayette, Lafourche,
Orleans, Pointe Coupee, St. Bernard, St. Charles, St. James, and St.
Mary. For this action, EPA is proposing to amend the regulations to
allow the RVP volatility standard for the 11 named parishes to increase
from 7.8 pounds-per-square-inch (psi) to 9.0 psi for gasoline sold
within those parishes. EPA has preliminarily determined that this
change to the Federal gasoline RVP volatility regulation is consistent
with the applicable provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA). LDEQ has
also requested that EPA relax summertime gasoline volatility
requirements for the 5-parish Baton Rouge area, and EPA will address
that request in a separate rulemaking at a later date.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 8, 2017
unless a public hearing is requested by August 24, 2017. If EPA
receives such a request, we will publish information related to the
timing and location of the hearing and announce a new deadline for
public comment.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2016-0683, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. EPA
may publish any comment received by its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information disclosure of which is
restricted by statute. If you need to include CBI as part of your
comment, please consult the instructions available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make.
    For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, and general guidance on making effective comments, please see
the information available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Sosnowski, Office of
Transportation and Air Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105; telephone number: (734)
214-4823; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may also contact Rudolph Kapichak at the
same address; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: (734) 214-
4052; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    The contents of this preamble are listed in the following outline:

I. General Information
II. Public Participation
III. Background and Proposal
IV. Proposal
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
VI. Legal Authority

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Entities potentially affected by this proposed rule are fuel
producers and distributors who do business in Louisiana.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             NAICS \1\
       Examples of potentially regulated entities              Codes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petroleum refineries....................................          324110
Gasoline Marketers and Distributors.....................          424710
                                                                  424720
Gasoline Retail Stations................................          447110
Gasoline Transporters...................................          484220
                                                                  484230
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.

    The above table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected
by this action. The table lists the types of entities of which EPA is
aware that could be affected by this proposed rule. Other types of
entities not listed on the table could also be affected. To determine
whether your organization may be affected by this proposed rule, you
should carefully examine the regulations in 40 CFR 80.27. If you have
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, call the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this preamble.

B. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    The statutory authority for this action is granted to EPA by
sections 211(h) and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act, as amended; 42 U.S.C.
7545(h) and 7601(a).

II. Public Participation

    EPA will not hold a public hearing on this matter unless a request
is received by the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble by August 24, 2017. If EPA receives
such a request, we will publish information related to the timing and
location of the hearing and announce a new deadline for public comment.

III. Background and Proposal

A. Summary of the Proposal

    EPA is proposing to approve a request from the State of Louisiana
to change the summertime gasoline RVP volatility standard for the
parishes of Beauregard, Calcasieu, Jefferson, Lafayette, Lafourche,
Orleans, Pointe Coupee, St. Bernard, St. Charles, St. James, and St.
Mary from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi by amending EPA's regulations at 40 CFR
80.27(a)(2). EPA is deferring action on

the State's relaxation request for the Baton Rouge area (i.e., the
parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and
West Baton Rouge) pending a revision of Louisiana's SIP to address the
requisite CAA section 110(l) non-interference demonstration that using
the higher RVP fuel will not negatively impact air quality in the area
or interfere with the area's ability to meet any applicable CAA
requirements.
    The preamble for this rulemaking is organized as follows: Section
III.B. provides the history of the federal gasoline volatility
regulation. Section III.C. describes the policy regarding relaxation of
gasoline volatility standards in ozone nonattainment areas that are
redesignated as attainment areas. Section III.D. provides information
specific to Louisiana's request for the 11 parishes, and EPA's
rationale for proposing approval without a CAA section 110(l)
noninterference demonstration from the State.

B. History of the Gasoline Volatility Requirement

    On August 19, 1987 (52 FR 31274), EPA determined that gasoline
nationwide was becoming increasingly volatile, causing an increase in
evaporative emissions from gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment.
Evaporative emissions from gasoline, referred to as volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), are precursors to the formation of tropospheric ozone
and contribute to the nation's ground-level ozone problem. Exposure to
ground-level ozone can reduce lung function, thereby aggravating asthma
and other respiratory conditions, increase susceptibility to
respiratory infection, and may contribute to premature death in people
with heart and lung disease.
    The most common measure of fuel volatility that is useful in
evaluating gasoline evaporative emissions is RVP, which is measured in
pounds-per-square-inch or psi. Under CAA section 211(c), EPA
promulgated regulations on March 22, 1989 (54 FR 11868) that set
maximum limits for the RVP of gasoline sold during the regulatory
control periods that were established on a state-by-state basis in the
final rule. The regulatory control periods addressed the portion of the
year when peak ozone concentrations were expected. These regulations
constituted Phase I of a two-phase nationwide program, which was
designed to reduce the volatility of gasoline during the high ozone
season. On June 11, 1990 (55 FR 23658), EPA promulgated more stringent
volatility controls as Phase II of the volatility control program.
These requirements established maximum RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8
psi (depending on the state, the month, and the area's initial ozone
attainment designation with respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS).
    The 1990 CAA Amendments established a new CAA section 211(h) to
address fuel volatility. CAA section 211(h) requires EPA to promulgate
regulations making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, dispense,
supply, offer for supply, transport, or introduce into commerce
gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 9.0 psi during the high ozone
season. CAA section 211(h) also prohibits EPA from establishing a
volatility standard more stringent than 9.0 psi in an attainment area,
except that EPA may impose a lower (more stringent) standard in any
former ozone nonattainment area redesignated to attainment.
    On December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), EPA modified the Phase II
volatility regulations to be consistent with CAA section 211(h). The
modified regulations prohibited the sale of gasoline with an RVP above
9.0 psi in all areas designated attainment for ozone, effective January
13, 1992. For areas designated as nonattainment, the regulations
retained the original Phase II standards published on June 11, 1990 (55
FR 23658), which included the 7.8 psi ozone season limitation for
certain areas. As stated in the preamble to the Phase II volatility
controls and reiterated in the proposed change to the volatility
standards published in 1991, EPA will rely on states to initiate
requests to change volatility requirements applicable to them. EPA's
policy for approving such changes is described below in Section III.C.
    Because these 11 parishes are no longer within the timeframe
covered by any approved maintenance plan for ozone the State does not
need to submit and EPA does not need to approve either a revision to an
approved maintenance plan or a non-interference demonstration under CAA
section 110(l). CAA section 110(l) states that the ``Administrator
shall not approve a revision of a plan, if the revision would interfere
with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress (as defined in section 7501 of this title), or any
other applicable requirement of this chapter'' [emphasis added]. CAA
section 110(l) applies when the Administrator approves a revision to a
plan. In the case of the 11 parishes and the request to relax the
federal summertime gasoline volatility limit, there is no plan to
revise and the action, if finalized, would result in a change to the
Federal gasoline volatility regulation as opposed to a change to any
approved state plan. EPA's reasons for proposing to approve the State's
request are discussed in Section III.D.

C. EPA's Policy Regarding Relaxation of Federal Gasoline Volatility
Standards

    As stated in the preamble for EPA's amended Phase II volatility
standards (See 56 FR 64706, December 12, 1991), any change in the
gasoline volatility standard for a nonattainment area that was
subsequently redesignated as an attainment area must be accomplished
through a separate rulemaking that revises the applicable standard for
that area. Thus, for former 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas where EPA
mandated a Phase II summertime volatility standard of 7.8 psi RVP in
the December 12, 1991 rulemaking, the federal 7.8 psi gasoline RVP
requirement remains in effect, even after such an area is redesignated
to attainment, until a separate rulemaking is completed that relaxes
the federal summertime gasoline RVP volatility standard in that area
from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi.
    As explained in the December 12, 1991 rulemaking, EPA believes that
relaxation of an applicable gasoline RVP standard is best accomplished
in conjunction with the redesignation process. In order for an ozone
nonattainment area to be redesignated as an attainment area, CAA
section 107(d)(3) requires the state to make a showing, pursuant to CAA
section 175A, that the area is capable of maintaining attainment for
the ozone NAAQS for ten years. Depending on the area's circumstances,
this maintenance plan will either demonstrate that the area is capable
of maintaining attainment for ten years without the more stringent
volatility standard or that the more stringent volatility standard may
be necessary for the area to maintain its attainment with the ozone
NAAQS. Therefore, in the context of a request for redesignation, EPA
will not relax the summertime gasoline volatility standard unless the
state requests a relaxation and the maintenance plan demonstrates to
the satisfaction of EPA that the area will maintain attainment for ten
years without the need for the more stringent summertime volatility
standard.
    Some former 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas that remain subject to
the federal summertime RVP limit of 7.8 psi have been designated as
attainment areas for both the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS and based on
the latest available air quality data are also attaining the more
stringent 2015 ozone NAAQS.

    As required by the Phase 1 implementation rule for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS, states submitted, and EPA approved, CAA section 110(a)(1)
maintenance plans for these areas. These CAA section 110(a)(1)
maintenance plans were required to provide for maintenance of the 1997
ozone NAAQS for a period of 10 years after areas were designated for
that NAAQS in 2004. (See 69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004.) Such areas were
not required by the implementation rule for the 2008 ozone NAAQS to
submit a maintenance plan for that NAAQS. (See 80 FR 12264, March 6,
2015.) These areas are not currently within the timeframe addressed by
any maintenance plans for any ozone NAAQS.
    EPA has concluded that there is neither an implementation plan
revision nor a CAA section 110(l) demonstration required in order for
EPA to approve a state's request to relax the federal summertime
gasoline RVP limit under the circumstances described above for such
areas including the 11 parishes that are the subject of this proposal.
In order for EPA to approve a request to relax the federal RVP limit
for such areas, the Governor or his/her designee must request that the
Administrator revise the federal gasoline RVP regulations to remove the
subject areas from the list of required areas in 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2).
The state may provide any relevant supporting information such as
recent air quality data, designation status for ozone and information
on previously approved ozone maintenance plans. The Administrator's
decision on whether to grant a state's request to revise the federal
gasoline RVP regulations in such cases would be documented through
notice and comment rulemaking.

D. Louisiana's Request To Relax the Federal Summertime Gasoline RVP
Volatility Requirement for Several Parishes in the State

    On April 10, 2017, LDEQ requested that EPA relax the current
summertime gasoline RVP volatility standard of 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi for
16 Louisiana parishes, the 5 parishes of the Baton Rouge area, and 11
other parishes: Beauregard, Calcasieu, Jefferson, Lafayette, Lafourche,
Orleans, Pointe Coupee, St. Bernard, St. Charles, St. James, and St.
Mary. These other 11 parishes attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and were
redesignated to attainment with approved CAA section 175A maintenance
plans. They were then designated as attainment for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS. As such, the State was required by EPA's Phase 1 rule, which
implemented the 1997 ozone NAAQS, to submit CAA section 110(a)(1)
maintenance plans for these parishes that addressed the 10-year period
from 2004 to 2014.\2\ (See 69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004.) For more
information on Louisiana's section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans for the
1997 ozone NAAQS, please refer to the following Federal Register
notices approving the maintenance plans for the parishes listed
parenthetically after the citation: 72 FR 62579 (Beauregard and St.
Mary Parishes); 73 FR 15411 (Lafayette and Lafourche Parishes); 78 FR
57058 (Pointe Coupee Parish); 73 FR 53403 (New Orleans Parish); and 73
FR 59518 (Calcasieu and St. James Parishes). Louisiana was not required
to submit second 10-year CAA section 175A maintenance plans for the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS for these parishes. In 2012, all 11 parishes were
designated as attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Because they were
designated as attainment for both the 2008 and 1997 ozone NAAQS, they
were not required to submit a CAA section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, these parishes are no longer
within the timeframe that was addressed by any approved maintenance
plan for any ozone NAAQS. The 11 parishes that are the subject of
today's proposal are all attaining the more stringent 2015 ozone NAAQS,
and the State did not recommend that any of these 11 parishes be
designated as nonattainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Phase 1 implementation rule for the 1997 ozone NAAQS did
not require the submission of a second 10-year maintenance plan for
the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
    \3\ On September 29, 2015 Louisiana submitted a letter to EPA
recommending designations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The State
recommended that all of the 11 parishes addressed in this proposed
action be designated as unclassifiable/attainment. The letter is
available at: https://www.epa.gov/ozone-designations/ozone-designations-2015-standards-louisiana-state-recommendations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current ozone design values for the parishes in question, based
upon 2013-2015 air quality data are well below the 2015 ozone NAAQS of
70 parts-per-billion (ppb) as shown in Table 1 below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Beauregard and St. Mary Parishes were allowed to discontinue
their ozone monitors in 2006. Beauregard Parish sits just north of
Calcasieu Parish and Calcasieu Parish is meeting the 2015 ozone
NAAQS with a 2013-2015 ozone design value of 68 ppb. St. Mary Parish
sits between Lafayette and Lafourche Parishes, which both are
currently meeting the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Lafayette has a 2013-2015
ozone design value of 67 ppb and Lafourche Parish has a 2013-2015
ozone design value of 65 ppb. Orleans and St. Charles Parishes were
allowed to discontinue their ozone monitors at the end of 2014.
Thus, the design values in the table for these two parishes are
based on data from 2012-2014. Orleans and St. Charles Parishes are
in the New Orleans metropolitan area. Jefferson and St. Bernard
Parishes are also in the New Orleans area. Both of these parishes
are meeting the 2015 ozone NAAQS with design values of 68 ppb and 65
ppb, respectively.

                     Table 1--Ozone Design Values 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             2013-2015
                         Parish                            Ozone design
                                                            value (ppb)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beauregard..............................................             N/A
Calcasieu...............................................              68
Jefferson...............................................              68
Lafayette...............................................              67
Lafourche...............................................              65
Orleans.................................................              67
Pointe Coupee...........................................              68
St. Bernard.............................................              65
St. Charles.............................................              65
St. James...............................................              65
St. Mary................................................             N/A
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As previously explained, because these 11 parishes are no longer
within the timeframe addressed by any ozone maintenance plan and are
not subject to any additional ozone planning requirement under the Act,
the proposed change from the more stringent federal RVP gasoline
volatility requirement of 7.8 psi to the less stringent 9.0 psi
gasoline RVP requirement in these areas does not trigger a requirement
that the State provide a non-interference demonstration under CAA
section 110(l) for these parishes, as would otherwise be required if
the areas in question were still within the time period addressed by a
CAA section 175A or CAA section 110(a) maintenance plan or were
currently designated as nonattainment for any ozone NAAQS. Moreover,
the projections for VOC emissions (i.e., the ozone precursor controlled
through RVP limitations) from the previously approved CAA section
110(a)(1) maintenance plans for the 1997 ozone NAAQS for the areas
covered by the State's request show relatively flat or downward trends
through 2014, as illustrated in Table 2 below.

                               Table 2--Maintenance Plan VOC Emission Projections
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Parish                               2002 (tpd) \5\    2014 (tpd)     Change (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beauregard......................................................           13.91           14.02            0.11
Calcasieu.......................................................           49.59           48.93           -0.66
Lafayette.......................................................           27.23           19.75           -7.48
Lafourche.......................................................            24.2           17.95           -6.25
New Orleans.....................................................          161.83          129.71          -32.12
Pointe Coupee...................................................            8.63            7.66           -0.97
St. James.......................................................            7.81            8.28            0.47
St. Mary........................................................           18.74           15.01           -3.73
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are several reasons why these trends are expected to continue
regardless of EPA's proposed approval of the State's request to relax
federal summertime gasoline RVP volatility requirements in these 11
parishes. For example, the maintenance plan projections listed in Table
2 do not include the emissions impacts from several national rules that
will reduce actual VOC and/or oxides of nitrogen (NOX)
emissions from point sources, area sources, as well as on-road and
nonroad mobile sources. The national rules that result in VOC and/or
NOX emission reductions not included in the above projection
include: EPA's national rules for VOC emission standards for Consumer
and Commercial Products (71 FR 58745, 72 FR 57215, 73 FR 40230, 73 FR
58481); Locomotive and Marine Compression-Ignition Engines rule (73 FR
16435); Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources (72 FR
8428); Control of Emissions from Non-road Spark-Ignition Engines and
Equipment (73 FR 59034); Control of Air Pollution From Aircraft and
Aircraft Engines; Emission Standards and Test Procedures (77 FR 36342);
and Control of Emissions from New Marine Compression-Ignition Engines
at or Above 30 Liters per Cylinder (75 FR 22896). Each of these rules
was adopted either at the time that Louisiana submitted the CAA section
110(a) maintenance plans for the 11 parishes or after those plans were
submitted to EPA for approval. These rules all result in reductions of
VOCs and/or NOX that will ensure the downward trends seen in
the maintenance plans for the covered areas continue into the future
and that the parishes continue to maintain all of the ozone NAAQS
including the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ tpd = tons per day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    VOC and NOX emissions from on-road mobile sources are
also projected to decrease as the in-use fleet turns over to newer,
cleaner vehicles. In this vein, it is worth noting that the
implementation of EPA's Tier 3 Vehicle and Fuel Standards should also
help to continue the downward trend in ozone precursors well into the
future. (See 79 FR 23414, April 28, 2014.) The Tier 3 motor vehicle
emissions standards and gasoline standards went into effect on January
1, 2017. The rule is designed to produce an immediate decrease in
emissions of VOCs and NOX due to both the cleaner new
vehicles but also because the gasoline required under the Tier 3 rule
contains less sulfur. Gasoline sulfur controls like those included in
the Tier 3 fuel standards are necessary for the introduction of
advanced clean technologies on vehicles, which emit at very low levels.
Less sulfur in the gasoline allows the catalytic converters on vehicles
in the existing fleet to function better for a longer period of time
providing a reduction in NOX and VOC emissions from the
existing fleet that starts immediately.
    Lastly, while relaxing the federal gasoline RVP volatility
requirement in the areas covered by the State's request could, if
considered in isolation, result in a slight increase in VOCs, it is not
appropriate to consider the relaxation in these parishes in isolation.
The RVP relaxation must be considered in context with the emissions
reductions that are attributable to recent regulations on a wide range
of sources including the Tier 3 vehicle emission and fuel regulations,
which have been implemented since the State last submitted maintenance
plans for these areas. When considered with those other recent
regulations, the RVP relaxation is not likely to interfere with the 11
parishes' ability to continue meeting the applicable ozone standards.
For the reasons cited above, EPA does not believe that the RVP
relaxation will translate into measurable ground-level ozone
concentration changes.
    Therefore and given that: (1) The design values for the areas
covered by the request are already well below even the most recent and
stringent 2015 ozone NAAQS of 70 ppb, and (2) any increase in VOC
emissions are expected to be offset by continued fleet turnover and
national rules aimed at reducing VOC and NOX emissions from
numerous sources, EPA has concluded that a relaxation of the federal
RVP fuel requirement will not have an appreciable impact on ozone
levels and that these 11 parishes will remain in attainment of the
ozone NAAQS. EPA is therefore proposing to approve Louisiana's
relaxation request for the 11 parishes included in the State's request.

IV. Proposal

    In this action, EPA is proposing to approve Louisiana's request to
relax the summertime ozone season gasoline RVP volatility standard for
Beauregard, Calcasieu, Jefferson, Lafayette, Lafourche, Orleans, Pointe
Coupee, St. Bernard, St. Charles, St. James, and St. Mary parishes from
7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. Specifically, EPA is proposing to amend the
applicable gasoline RVP standard to allow the gasoline RVP requirements
to rise from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi as provided for at 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2)
for the 11 named parishes. This proposal to approve Louisiana's request
to relax the summertime ozone season gasoline RVP volatility standard
for the 11 parishes from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi is based on the
redesignation of the named areas to attainment of the 1-hour ozone
standard and their designation as attainment for the 1997 and 2008
ozone NAAQS. Additionally, the recent air quality data from monitors in
the parishes demonstrates that they are attaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS
of 70 ppb. And lastly, emission reductions from national rules aimed at
reducing VOCs and NOX that were not previously claimed or
accounted for in the State's projection of VOC trends for its
maintenance plans will ensure continued attainment of the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. EPA intends to examine whether there is ``good cause,'' under 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3), to designate the publication date of the final rule
(based on today's proposal) as the effective date for implementation of
the final rule.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563.
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., and therefore is not subject to these requirements.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. The small entities subject to the
requirements of this action are refiners, importers or blenders of
gasoline that choose to produce or import low RVP gasoline for sale in
Louisiana and gasoline distributers and retail stations in Louisiana.
This action relaxes the federal RVP standard for gasoline sold in the
Louisiana parishes of Beauregard, Calcasieu, Jefferson, Lafayette,
Lafourche, Orleans, Pointe Coupee, St. Bernard, St. Charles, St. James,
and St. Mary during the summertime ozone season (June 1 to September 15
of each year) to allow the RVP for gasoline sold in the named parishes
to rise from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. This rule does not impose any
requirements or create impacts on small entities beyond those, if any,
already required by or resulting from the CAA section 211(h) Volatility
Control program. We have therefore concluded that this action will have
no net regulatory burden for all directly regulated small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This final rule does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100
million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action
implements mandates specifically and explicitly set forth in CAA
section 211(h) without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA.

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This proposal
affects only those refiners, importers or blenders of gasoline that
choose to produce or import low RVP gasoline for sale in Louisiana and
gasoline distributers and retail stations in Louisiana. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children,
per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of
the Executive Order. EPA has no reason to believe that this action may
disproportionately affect children based on available ozone air quality
data and VOC and NOX emissions information. EPA has
preliminarily concluded that a relaxation of the gasoline RVP will not
interfere with the attainment of the ozone NAAQS, or any other
applicable CAA requirement in these 11 Louisiana parishes.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    This action does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed by
this action will not have potential disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income, or
indigenous populations because it does not affect the applicable ozone
NAAQS which establish the level of protection provided to human health
or the environment. This rule would relax the applicable volatility
standard of gasoline during the summer, though it is unlikely that the
relaxation would cause a measurable increase in ozone concentrations
and therefore it would not result in the named parishes exceeding
either the original ozone standard that triggered the low RVP
requirement or any subsequent ozone standard, including the most recent
ozone standard promulgated in 2015 based upon EPA's previous
experiences with ozone attainment areas that have relaxed fuel RVP
requirements.

VI. Legal Authority

    The statutory authority for this action is granted to EPA by
sections 211(h) and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act, as amended; 42 U.S.C.
7545(h) and 7601(a).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Fuel additives, Gasoline, Motor vehicle and
motor vehicle engines, Motor vehicle pollution, Penalties, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 1, 2017.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-16691 Filed 8-8-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 15, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 50)]
[Notices]
[Page 13375]
[DOCID:fr15mr06-94]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-256-000]

Trunkline Gas Company, LLC; Notice of Tariff Filing

March 8, 2006.
    Take notice that on February 28, 2006, Trunkline Gas Company, LLC
(Trunkline) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third
Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed on Appendix A to the
filing, to become effective April 1, 2006.
    Trunkline states that the purpose of this filing is to update the
fuel reimbursement percentages proposed to be effective April 1, 2006.
    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 and 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 in accordance with the provisions of
section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not 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<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-3679 Filed 3-14-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 8624]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03141]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94203; File No. SR-NSCC-2021-803]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Extension of Review Period of Advance Notice To
Establish the Securities Financing Transaction Clearing Service and
Make Other Changes

February 9, 2022.
    On July 22, 2021, National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') advance notice SR-NSCC-2021-803 (``Advance Notice''),
pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act entitled the Payment,
Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 (``Clearing
Supervision Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'').\2\ The Advance Notice was
published for comment in the Federal Register on August 12, 2021.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i).
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92568 (August 5, 2021),
86 FR 44530 (August 12, 2021) (SR-NSCC-2021-803).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sections 806(e)(1)(E)(ii) and (G)(ii) of the Clearing Supervision
Act \4\ provide that if the Commission requests additional information,
the Commission's period of review of the Advance Notice is tolled, and
an additional 60-day review period begins on the date any further
information requested for consideration is received. On August 30,
2021, the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant
to delegated authority,\5\ requested additional information from NSCC
under Section 806(e)(1)(D) of the Clearing Supervision Act.\6\ On
December 13, 2021, the Commission received NSCC's response to the
Commission's request for additional information. Accordingly, pursuant
to Sections 806(e)(1)(E)(ii) and (G)(ii),\7\ the Commission shall
notify NSCC of any objection regarding the Advance Notice no later than
February 11, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(E)(ii) and (G)(ii).
    \5\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(93).
    \6\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(D).
    \7\ See 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(E)(ii) and (G)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 806(e)(1)(H) of the Clearing Supervision Act \8\ provides
that the Commission may extend the review period of an advance notice
for an additional 60 days, if the changes proposed in the advance
notice raise novel or complex issues, subject to the Commission
providing the clearing agency with prompt written notice of the
extension. Here, the Commission is extending the review period of the
Advance Notice for an additional 60 days pursuant to that authority
because the Commission finds that the Advance Notice raises both novel
and complex issues, as discussed further below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(H).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the proposed changes described in the Advance Notice
would establish new membership categories and requirements, and
establish a new central clearing service for equity securities
financing transactions (``SFTs''). NSCC described SFTs as, broadly
speaking, securities lending transactions where parties exchange equity
securities against cash and simultaneously agree to exchange the same
securities and cash, plus or minus a rate payment, on a future date. In
particular, the Advance Notice would expand central clearing at NSCC to
include SFTs with a one business day term (i.e., overnight SFTs) in
eligible equity securities that are entered into either by Members,
institutional firms that are sponsored into NSCC by a sponsoring
member, or agent clearing members on behalf of Customers. Currently,
such SFTs are not centrally cleared at NSCC and, instead, are settled
bilaterally.
    The establishment of a central clearing service for SFTs requires a
number of changes to the NSCC Rules & Procedures to effectuate and
manage the risks arising from this new service. For example, the
proposed changes would encompass new membership categories, including
agent clearing and sponsored clearing models that do not currently
exist at NSCC. In addition, the proposed changes would establish new
risk management features to allow NSCC to measure and monitor the risk
arising from the SFT transactions, including a methodology to provide
mark-to-market payments and to close out a defaulted member's
portfolio. NSCC would institute rules governing buy-in, recall, and
accelerated settlement, which are generally designed to be consistent
with how SFTs operate when settled bilaterally. Taken together, the
rules that NSCC would establish to administer this new central clearing
service for SFTs raise novel and complex issues for NSCC.
    Accordingly, pursuant to 806(e)(1)(H) of the Clearing Supervision
Act,\9\ the Commission is extending the review period of the Advance
Notice for an additional 60 days so that the Commission shall have
until April 12, 2022 to issue an objection or non-objection to the
Advance Notice, unless the Commission requests further information for
consideration of the Advance Notice (SR-NSCC-2021-803).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal shall not take effect until all regulatory actions
required with respect to the proposal are completed.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(94).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-03141 Filed 2-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 238 (Tuesday, December 11, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73647-73648]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29810]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP12-501-000]

Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC; Notice of Availability of
the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed I-595 Replacement Project

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for the I-595
Replacement Project, proposed by the Florida Gas Transmission Company,
LLC (FGT) in the above-referenced docket. FGT is requesting
authorization to abandon in place approximately 1,618 feet of existing,
36-inch-diameter natural gas transmission pipeline located along the
east side of the Florida Turnpike (State Road 91) near the Interstate-
595 interchange in Broward County, Florida; and replace this pipe with
approximately 2,261 feet of new, 36-inch-diameter natural gas
transmission pipeline to be located east of the existing pipe,
partially within existing utility rights-of-way and entirely across
previously disturbed/developed lands.
    The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the
abandonment, construction and operation of the I-595 Replacement
Project in accordance with the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The FERC staff concludes that approval
of the proposed project, with appropriate mitigating measures, would
not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the
quality of the human environment.
    The FERC staff mailed copies of the EA to federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes;
potentially affected landowners and other interested individuals and
groups; and parties to this proceeding. In addition, the EA is
available for public viewing on the FERC's Web site (www.ferc.gov)
using the eLibrary link. A limited number of copies of the EA are
available for distribution and public inspection at: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Public Reference Room, 888 First Street NE.,
Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. Your comments
should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable
alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts.
The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To
ensure that the Commission has the opportunity to consider your
comments prior to making its decision on this project, it is important
that we receive your comments in Washington, DC on or before December
31, 2012.
    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to file
your comments to the Commission. In all instances, please reference the
project docket number (CP12-501-000) with your submission. The
Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert
staff available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief,
text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can also file your comments electronically using the
eFiling feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the
link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments
in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You must select the type of filing you are making. If
you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select
``Comment on a Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC
20426.
    Any person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a
motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.214).\1\ Only intervenors have the
right to seek rehearing of the Commission's decision. The Commission
grants affected landowners and others with environmental concerns
intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they have a
clear and direct interest in this proceeding which no other party can
adequately represent. Simply filing environmental comments will not
give you intervenor status, but

you do not need intervenor status to have your comments considered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the previous discussion on the methods for filing
comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search,'' and enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP12-
501). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.

    Dated: November 30, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-29810 Filed 12-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P