[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 197 (Thursday, October 10, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54498-54502]
[FR Doc No: 2019-21956]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0665; FRL-10000-84-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; SC; 2010 1-Hour SO2 NAAQS Transport
Infrastructure

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving South
Carolina's June 25, 2018, State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission
pertaining to the ``good neighbor'' provision of the Clean Air Act (CAA
or Act) for the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2) National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The good neighbor provision
requires each state's implementation plan to address the interstate
transport of air pollution in amounts that contribute significantly to
nonattainment, or interfere with maintenance, of a NAAQS in any other
state. In this action, EPA has determined that South Carolina's SIP
contains adequate provisions to prohibit emissions within the State
from contributing significantly to nonattainment or interfering with

maintenance of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in any other state.

DATES: This rule will be effective November 12, 2019.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0665. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Notarianni can be
reached via phone number<PHONE_NUMBER> or via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On June 2, 2010, EPA promulgated a revised primary SO2
NAAQS with a level of 75 parts per billion (ppb), based on a 3-year
average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum
concentrations. See 75 FR 35520 (June 22, 2010). Pursuant to section
110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to submit SIPs meeting the
applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years after
promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as
EPA may prescribe. These SIPs, which EPA has historically referred to
as ``infrastructure SIPs,'' are to provide for the ``implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS, and the requirements are
designed to ensure that the structural components of each state's air
quality management program are adequate to meet the state's
responsibility under the CAA. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states
to make a SIP submission to EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the
contents of individual state submissions may vary depending upon the
facts and circumstances. The content of the changes in such SIP
submissions may also vary depending upon what provisions the state's
approved SIP already contains. Section 110(a)(2) requires states to
address basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic
program requirements, and legal authority that are designed to assure
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA requires SIPs to include
provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity
in one state from emitting any air pollutant in amounts that will
contribute significantly to nonattainment, or interfere with
maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state. The two clauses of this
section are referred to as prong 1 (significant contribution to
nonattainment) and prong 2 (interference with maintenance of the
NAAQS).
    On June 25, 2018, the South Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control (SC DHEC) submitted a revision to the South
Carolina SIP addressing only prongs 1 and 2 of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. EPA is
approving SC DHEC's June 25, 2018, SIP submission because the State
demonstrated that South Carolina will not contribute significantly to
nonattainment, or interfere with maintenance, of the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS in any other state. All other elements related to
the infrastructure requirements of section 110(a)(2) for the 2010 1-
hour SO2 NAAQS for South Carolina are addressed in separate
rulemakings.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA acted on the other elements of South Carolina's May 8,
2014, infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS on May 24, 2016 (81 FR 32651) and September 24,
2018 (83 FR 48237).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on April 23,
2019, EPA proposed to approve South Carolina's June 25, 2018, SIP
revision on the basis that the State's implementation plan adequately
addresses prong 1 and prong 2 requirements for the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS. See 84 FR 16799. The details of the SIP revision
and the rationale for EPA's action is explained in the NPRM. Comments
on the proposed rulemaking were due on or before May 23, 2019. EPA
received three sets of adverse comments from anonymous commenters.
These comments are included in the docket for this final action. EPA
has summarized the comments and provided responses below.

II. Response to Comments

    Comment 1: A commenter expresses concern about EPA's statement that
the Agency does not have monitoring or modeling data suggesting that
North Carolina is impacted by SO2 emissions from the
Milliken & Co. Magnolia Plant (Magnolia) \2\ or WestRock CP LLC
(WestRock).\3\ The commenter questions why EPA did not model these
facilities and states that EPA must have monitoring data to
``definitively conclude anything about these sources.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Magnolia is a textile and fabric finishing plant located in
Blacksburg, South Carolina.
    \3\ Westrock is a pulp and paper mill located in Florence, South
Carolina.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response 1: EPA disagrees with the commenter's assertion that
monitoring and dispersion modeling are needed for these two sources
before EPA can approve South Carolina's SIP submittal as meeting the
interstate transport requirements in CAA section 110(a)(2)(D). There is
nothing in this section of the CAA suggesting that monitoring or
dispersion modeling is legally required to evaluate good neighbor SIPs,
and EPA has previously found that a weight of evidence (WOE) approach
is sufficient to determine whether or not a state satisfies the good
neighbor provision.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See, e.g., Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals
and Promulgations: Utah; Interstate Transport of Pollution for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, Proposed Rule 78 FR 29314 (May 20,
2013), Final Rule 78 FR 48615 (August 9, 2013); Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of California;
Interstate Transport of Pollution; Significant Contribution to
Nonattainment and Interference With Maintenance Requirements,
Proposed Rule 76 FR 146516 (March 17, 2011), Final Rule 76 FR 34872
(June 15, 2011); Approval and Promulgations of State Implementation
Plans; State of Colorado; Interstate Transport of Pollution for the
2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS, Proposed Rule, 80 FR 27121 (May
12, 2015), Final Rule 80 FR 47862 (August 10, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA continues to believe that the WOE analysis provided in the NPRM
is adequate to determine the potential downwind impact from South
Carolina to neighboring states. EPA's analysis includes the following
factors: (1) SO2 air dispersion modeling results for sources
within 50 kilometers (km) of South Carolina's border both within the
State and in neighboring states, (2) SO2 emissions trends
for sources in South Carolina, (3) SO2 ambient air quality
for monitors for sources within 50 km of South Carolina's border both
within the State and in neighboring states; and (4) South Carolina's
statutes and SIP-

approved regulations and federal regulations that address
SO2 emissions. As part of its WOE analysis, EPA performed a
qualitative evaluation to assess whether SO2 emissions from
Magnolia and WestRock are impacting North Carolina, the only
neighboring state within 50 km of these sources. Because EPA does not
have monitoring or modeling data for these two sources, EPA evaluated
their 2017 SO2 emissions, distances from the South Carolina
border, and distances from sources in North Carolina with
SO2 emissions greater than 100 tons per year (tpy) in 2017
and not subject to EPA's Data Requirements Rule (DRR) \5\ as summarized
in Table 5 of the NPRM and found that this information supports EPA's
proposed determination that South Carolina has met the good neighbor
provision for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.\6\ The commenter
did not provide a technical analysis that contradicts EPA's proposed
determination that sources in South Carolina such as Magnolia or
Westrock will not significantly contribute to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance in another state. Therefore, EPA continues
to believe that the Agency's analysis of these and other South Carolina
sources in the NPRM, weighed along with other WOE factors described in
the NPRM, support EPA's conclusion that South Carolina has satisfied
the good neighbor provision for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The DRR required state air agencies to characterize air
quality, through air dispersion modeling or monitoring, in areas
associated with sources that emitted 2,000 tpy or more of
SO2, or that have otherwise been listed under the DRR by
EPA or state air agencies. In lieu of modeling or monitoring, state
air agencies, by specified dates, could elect to impose federally-
enforceable emissions limitations on those sources restricting their
annual SO2 emissions to less than 2,000 tpy, or provide
documentation that the sources have been shut down. See 80 FR 51052
(August 21, 2015).
    \6\ With regard to the WestRock facility, EPA continues to
believe that the 68-km distance between the WestRock facility in
South Carolina and the Pilkington facility, the nearest source in
North Carolina with SO2 emissions greater than 100 tpy,
makes it unlikely that SO2 emissions from WestRock could
interact with SO2 emissions from Pilkington in such a way
as to contribute significantly to nonattainment in North Carolina.
See 84 FR 16805 (April 23, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 2: Two commenters expressed concerns regarding the modeling
analysis for Resolute FP US Inc.--Catawba Mill (Resolute). One
commenter questions the use of 2012-2014 actual emissions in the
modeling of Resolute.\7\ The commenter states that ``EPA is hiding
behind 5-7 year old data'' and that EPA should perform the modeling
using maximum allowable potential emissions before concluding that the
source, located 7 km from the North Carolina border, ``does not
contribute to violations in the neighboring state.'' Another commenter
questions the use of a modeling domain for Resolute that extends 4 km
into North Carolina and mentions that EPA should perform ``additional
modeling to confirm that an extended modeling domain would not show an
even higher modeled concentration farther into the state of North
Carolina.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Resolute is a pulp and paper mill located in Catawba, South
Carolina. Resolute opted to conduct air dispersion modeling under
the DRR. EPA summarized these modeling results in the NPRM. See 84
FR at 16803-16804.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response 2: As discussed above, the good neighbor provision does
not require modeling to determine whether a state contributes
significantly to nonattainment or interferes with maintenance of a
specific NAAQS in another state. EPA used a WOE analysis to evaluate
South Carolina's SIP revision under the good neighbor provision and
evaluated all available data, including the modeling submitted by South
Carolina during the DRR process for Resolute.
    As stated in the NPRM, the modeling for Resolute predicts no
violations of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS within 50 km of the
South Carolina border. The modeling results show that SO2
concentrations drop off rapidly with a predicted maximum modeled
concentration of approximately 69 ppb just north of the facility and
concentrations in North Carolina below approximately 18 ppb.\8\ EPA
continues to believe that these results, weighed along with the other
WOE factors discussed in the NPRM, support EPA's proposed conclusion
that sources in South Carolina do not significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS in any other state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Extending the modeling domain more than 4 km into North
Carolina would not alter EPA's conclusions because the modeled
concentrations in North Carolina are well below the NAAQS and, given
the nature of SO2, would likely continue to decrease as
distance increases from the source.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the comment regarding the use of modeling with ``5-7
year old data'' to evaluate South Carolina's June 25, 2018, SIP
submission, EPA has evaluated more recent actual SO2
emissions data for Resolute for the years 2015-2017.\9\ Resolute's
2015-2017 SO2 emissions (2,386 tpy, 2,391 tpy, and 2,211 tpy
in 2015, 2016, and 2017, respectively) are lower than the modeled 2012-
2014 SO2 emissions (4,562 tpy, 4,491 tpy, and 4,780 tpy in
2012, 2013, and 2014, respectively). Because emissions have decreased
from 2012-2014 to 2015-2017, the model results may overpredict current
SO2 concentrations and therefore continue to support the
Agency's conclusion that South Carolina has satisfied the good neighbor
provision with respect to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. EPA
also notes that the commenters did not provide any technical analysis
contradicting EPA's proposed determination that Resolute will not
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance
in another state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/national-emissions-inventory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 3: A commenter notes that EPA analyzed sources that emitted
more than 100 tpy of SO2 within 50 km of the South Carolina
border. The commenter states that EPA should have considered and
modeled sources that emitted less SO2 and are closer to the
border and that EPA evaluated sources emitting 1 tpy when acting on
good neighbor SIP revisions for Delaware and the District of Columbia.
    Response 3: EPA assessed annual emissions data for non-DRR sources
emitting over 100 tons of SO2 in 2017 in South Carolina and
existing dispersion modeling for DRR sources to identify the universe
of sources in the State likely to be responsible for SO2
emissions potentially contributing to interstate transport. After
determining that 89 percent of South Carolina's statewide
SO2 emissions are from point sources based on 2014
emissions, EPA next focused on individual facilities which emitted
above 100 tpy using the most recent year for which point source
emission data was available, i.e., 2017. EPA assessed, using its best
judgment, which sources could have the most serious impact on downwind
states. EPA chose 100 tpy as the emissions threshold for consideration
for interstate transport because South Carolina's universe of point
sources was too large to evaluate every source at a lower threshold
like that used in the Delaware and District of Columbia analyses. South
Carolina's point sources of SO2 emitting 100 tons or less in
2017 comprise only seven percent of the State's total SO2
point source inventory in 2017.\10\ EPA is not precluded from choosing
different thresholds for evaluating interstate transport in different
states because the factual circumstances vary from state to state.
Furthermore, EPA notes that small sources, in particular those emitting
less than 100 tpy of SO2, usually cannot be

characterized accurately because the level of detail about the source
and the data needed for such an analysis is not as often readily
available as for the larger sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The 2017 South Carolina SO2 point source
emissions data which SC DHEC reported to EPA is included in the
docket for this action under Docket ID: EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0665.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the statement about modeling, EPA notes that it did not
independently model any sources as part of its evaluation of South
Carolina's good neighbor SIP submission, including sources emitting
more than 100 tpy of SO2 within 50 km from the South
Carolina border. EPA did, however, evaluate all available information
for sources that emitted more than 100 tpy of SO2 within 50
km of the border, including any available air dispersion modeling, and
continues to believe that its WOE analysis demonstrates that South
Carolina has satisfied the good neighbor provision for the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS. The commenter did not provide a technical
analysis indicating that sources emitting less than or equal to 100 tpy
within 50 km of the border may have downwind impacts that violate the
good neighbor provision.
    Comment 4: A commenter states that three sources in South Carolina
(i.e., W.S. Lee Station, McMeekin Station, and WestRock) were ``able to
escape nonattainment designation status'' by accepting federally-
enforceable permit limits ``to exempt them from complying with the
DRR.'' The commenter states that accepting these limits does not mean
that these sources are not ``causing or contributing to nonattainment
or maintenance'' in another state and questions why EPA did not perform
modeling to determine if these sources are impacting neighboring states
for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
    Response 4: Regarding the commenter's reference to the
SO2 designations signed on December 21, 2017 (83 FR 1098),
to the extent commenter is taking issue with those designations, those
designations and the federally-enforceable emission limits taken to
comply with the DRR are outside the scope of this action to approve
South Carolina's SIP revision to address interstate transport for the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Regarding the comment concerning
modeling, EPA does not agree that modeling is necessary to demonstrate
that these sources do not significantly contribute to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in
another state. As discussed above, there is nothing in the interstate
transport requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D) suggesting that
dispersion modeling is legally required to evaluate good neighbor SIPs,
and EPA used its long-standing WOE approach to evaluate South
Carolina's SIP revision under the good neighbor provision. EPA also
notes that the commenter did not provide a technical analysis that
contradicts EPA's proposed determination that W.S. Lee Station,
McMeekin Station, and WestRock will not significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance in another state.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving South Carolina's June 25, 2018, SIP submission as
demonstrating that South Carolina's SIP has adequate provisions
prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in the State
from emitting any air pollutant in amounts that will contribute
significantly to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in another state.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. This action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:

     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    In addition, this action for South Carolina does not have Tribal
implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000) because it does not have substantial direct effects
on an Indian Tribe. The Catawba Indian Nation Reservation is located
within the boundary of York County, South Carolina. Pursuant to the
Catawba Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code Ann. 27-16-120, ``all
state and local environmental laws and regulations apply to the Catawba
Indian Nation and Reservation and are fully enforceable by all relevant
state and local agencies and authorities.'' However, EPA has determined
that this rule does not have substantial direct effects on an Indian
Tribe because this action is not approving any specific rule, but
rather has determined that South Carolina's already approved SIP meets
certain CAA requirements. EPA notes that this action will not impose
substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this

action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by December 9, 2019. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: September 25, 2019.
Mary S. Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart PP-South Carolina

0
2. In Sec.  52.2120, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding
the entry ``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010
1-hour SO2 NAAQS'' at the end of the table to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.2120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               State
                Provision                 effective date       EPA approval date              Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure               6/25/2018  10/10/2019, [insert         Addressing Prongs 1 and 2
 Requirements for the 2010 1-hour SO2                      Federal Register            of section
 NAAQS.                                                    citation].                  110(a)(2)(D)(i) only.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2019-21956 Filed 10-9-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 76 (Tuesday, April 21, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 22097]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09277]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2015-0092]

Great Steam Boat Race/Kentucky Derby Festival, Louisville, KY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce ``the Great Steam Boat Race''
safety zone for all waters of the Ohio River, beginning at mile marker
596.8 and ending at 604.3, Louisville, KY. This rule is effective from
6 p.m. to 8 p.m. on April 29, 2015. This action is necessary to protect
person, property, and infrastructure from potential damage and safety
hazards associated with ``the Great Steam Boat Race.'' During the
enforcement period, deviation from the safety zone is prohibited unless
specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Ohio Valley
or a designated representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 100.801, Table no. 1, Line no. 3 will
be enforced from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. on April 29, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email Petty Officer Stephen F. McConnell, U.S. Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone
for ``the Great Steam Boat Race'' in 33 CFR 100.801, Table no. 1, Line
no. 3 on 04/29/2015 from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. These regulations can be
found in the Code of Federal Regulations at 33 CFR 100.801 or in the
Federal Register (77 FR 12460).
    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 100, a vessel may not enter the
regulated area, unless it receives permission from the COTP Ohio Valley
or a designated representative. Additionally, no person or vessel may
enter or remain within 200 yards ahead of the lead vessel, within 200
yards astern of the last vessel, or within 200 yards on either side of
any vessel. Spectator vessels may safely transit outside the regulated
area but may not anchor, block, loiter in, or impede the transit of
race participants or official patrol vessels. The Coast Guard may be
assisted by other Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies in
enforcing this regulation.
    This rule is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100 and 5 U.S.C. 552
(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the Coast
Guard will provide the maritime community with extensive advance
notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to
Mariners (LNM) and Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM). If the COTP Ohio
Valley determines that the regulated area need not be enforced for the
full duration stated in the notice, he or she may use a BNM to grant
general permission to enter the regulated area.

    Dated: March 27, 2015.
R.V. Timme,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Ohio Valley.
[FR Doc. 2015-09277 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: October 6, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 193)]
[Notices]
[Page 61733-61736]
[DOCID:fr06oc10-69]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

September 28, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG10-71-000.
    Applicants: Sundevil Power Holdings, LLC.
    Description: Sundevil Power Holdings, LLC, Notice of Self-
Certification as an Exempt Wholesale Generator.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5364.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER93-3-008.
    Applicants: The United Illuminating Company.
    Description: United Illuminating submits a revised MBR Tariff
making the required change.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-0206.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER96-719-029; ER97-2801-031; ER07-1236-006; ER99-
2156-022.
    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Company; PacifiCorp; Yuma
Cogeneration Associates; Cordova Energy Company LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of PacifiCorp.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5188.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER98-1643-018.
    Applicants: Portland General Electric Company.
    Description: Clarification of June 29, 2010 Triennial Market Power
Update Filing of Portland General Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5269.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER99-1005-013; ER09-304-004.
    Applicants: Kansas City Power & Light Company, KCP&L Greater
Missouri Operations Company.
    Description: Supplement to Notice of Non-Material Change in Status
of Kansas City Power & Light Company, et al.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5191.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2071-001.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota Corporation
    Description: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota Corporation
submits tariff filing per 35: 2010-09-28 NSPM Amend Concur to be
effective 7/30/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5283.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2075-001.
    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.
    Description: Southwestern Public Service Company submits tariff
filing per 35: 2010-09-28 SPS Amend Concur to be effective 7/30/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5287.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2622-001.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minneso.
    Description: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.17(b): 2010--09--28 NSP Amendment Rate
Schedule 602 to be effective 1/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5321.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2978-001.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Company submits tariff filing
per 35.17(b): Amendment to Filing to Revise CAISO Black Start Agreement
to be effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5264
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3034-000.
    Applicants: TC Energy Trading, LLC.
    Description: TC Energy Trading, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: TC Energy Trading FERC Electric Tariff to be effective 9/27/
2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5187.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3035-000.
    Applicants: Twin Cities Energy, LLC.
    Description: Twin Cities Energy, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: Twin Cities Energy FERC Electric Tariff to be effective 9/27/
2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5189.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3036-000.
    Applicants: WPS Power Development, LLC.
    Description: WPS Power Development, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: WPS Power Development Market Based Rate Baseline Tariff to be
effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5193.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3037-000.
    Applicants: Twin Cities Power, LLC.
    Description: Twin Cities Power, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: Twin Cities Power FERC Electric Tariff to be effective 9/27/
2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5196.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3038-000.
    Applicants: WPS Beaver Falls Generation, LLC.
    Description: WPS Beaver Falls Generation, LLC submits tariff filing
per 35.12: WPS Beaver Falls Market Based Rate Baseline Tariff to be
effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5199.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3039-000.
    Applicants: Quest Energy, LLC.
    Description: Quest Energy, LLC submits tariff filing per 35.12:
Quest Energy Market Based Rate Baseline Tariff to be effective 9/27/
2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5203.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3040-000.
    Applicants: WPS Syracuse Generation, LLC.
    Description: WPS Syracuse Generation, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: WPS Syracuse Market Based Rate Baseline Tariff to be effective
9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5215.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3041-000.
    Applicants: WPS Westwood Generation, LLC.
    Description: WPS Westwood Generation, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: WPS Westwood Gen Market Based Rate Baseline Tariff to be
effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5219.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3042-000.
    Applicants: Combined Locks Energy Center, LLC.
    Description: Combined Locks Energy Center, LLC submits tariff
filing per 35.12: Combined Locks Market Based Rate Baseline Tariff to
be effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5220.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3043-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: New York Independent System Operator, Inc. submits
tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 205 Filing--ICAP In-City Buyer Side
Mitigation Measure 09/27/10 to be effective 9/28/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5221.

    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3044-000.
    Applicants: Williams Flexible Generation, LLC.
    Description: Williams Flexible Generation, LLC submits tariff
filing per 35.12: Baseline Electronic Tariff Filing to be effective 9/
27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5224.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3045-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2010-09-27 CAISO Service
Agreement 1464, LGIA for PGE Collinsville Wind Project to be effective
10/9/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5225.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3046-000.
    Applicants: Camp Grove Wind Farm LLC.
    Description: Camp Grove Wind Farm LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: Camp Grove MBR Baseline to be effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5227.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3048-000.
    Applicants: Longview Fibre Paper and Packaging, Inc.
    Description: Longview Fibre Paper and Packaging, Inc. submits
tariff filing per 35.12: Longview Fibre Paper and Packaging, Inc.
Baseline Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5243.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3049-000.
    Applicants: Champion Energy Services, LLC.
    Description: Champion Energy Services, LLC submits tariff filing
per 35.12: MBR application to be effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5244.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3050-000.
    Applicants: Cabazon Wind Partners, LLC.
    Description: Cabazon Wind Partners, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: Cabazon Wind Partners, LLC MBR Tariff to be effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5247.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.
    Docket Numbers: ER10-3051-000.
    Applicants: Champion Energy, LLC.
    Description: Champion Energy, LLC submits tariff filing per 35.12:
MBR application to be effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5249.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3052-000.
    Applicants: Rock River I, LLC.
    Description: Rock River I, LLC submits tariff filing per 35.12:
Rock River I, LLC MBR Tariff to be effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5250.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3053-000.
    Applicants: Whitewater Hill Wind Partners, LLC.
    Description: Whitewater Hill Wind Partners, LLC submits tariff
filing per 35.12: Whitewater Hill Wind Partners, LLC MBR Tariff to be
effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5253.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3054-000.
    Applicants: Peaker LLC.
    Description: Peaker LLC submits tariff filing per 35.12: Peaker LLC
MBR Tariff to be effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5259.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3055-000.
    Applicants: Eagle Creek Hydro Power, LLC.
    Description: Eagle Creek Hydro Power, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: Baseline Filing for Eagle Creek MBR Tariff to be effective 9/27/
2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5260.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3056-000.
    Applicants: Grays Ferry Cogeneration Partners.
    Description: Grays Ferry Cogeneration Partners submits tariff
filing per 35.12: Grays Ferry Cogeneration Partnership MBR Tariff to be
effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100927-5263.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3057-000.
    Applicants: Dow Pipeline Company.
    Description: Dow Pipeline Company submits tariff filing per 35.12:
DPL Baseline MBR Filing to be effective 9/28/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5139.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3058-000.
    Applicants: Pinelawn Power, LLC.
    Description: Pinelawn Power, LLC submits tariff filing per 35.12:
Pinelawn Power Market Based Rate Baseline Tariff to be effective 9/28/
2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5140.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3059-000.
    Applicants: Equus Power I, L.P.
    Description: Equus Power I, L.P. submits tariff filing per 35.12:
Equus Power I Market Based Rate Baseline Tariff to be effective 9/28/
2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5141.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3060-000.
    Applicants: Powerex Corp.
    Description: Powerex Corp submits the First Revised Rate Schedule
No. 5.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-0205.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3061-000.
    Applicants: Orange Grove Energy, L.P.
    Description: Orange Grove Energy, L.P. submits tariff filing per
35.12: Orange Grove Energy Market Based Rate Baseline Tariff to be
effective 9/28/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5146.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3062-000.
    Applicants: Maine Public Service Company.
    Description: Maine Public Service Co submits notices of
cancellation of tariffs and rate schedules.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-0204.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3063-000.
    Applicants: Green Country Energy, LLC.
    Description: Green Country Energy, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: Green Country Market Based Rate Baseline Tariff to be effective
9/28/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5147.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3064-000.
    Applicants: Maine Public Service Company.
    Description: Maine Public Service Company submits notice of
cancellation for certain service agreements.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-0203.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3065-000.
    Applicants: Shoreham Energy, LLC.
    Description: Shoreham Energy, LLC submits tariff filing per 35.12:
Shoreham Energy Market Based Rate Baseline Tariff to be effective 9/28/
2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5148.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3066-000.
    Applicants: Edgewood Energy, LLC.
    Description: Edgewood Energy, LLC submits tariff filing per 35.12:
Edgewood Energy Market Based Rate Baseline Tariff to be effective 9/28/
2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5149.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3067-000.
    Applicants: Trigen-St. Louis Energy Corporation.
    Description: Trigen-St. Louis Energy Corporation submits tariff
filing per 35.12: Trigen-St. Louis Energy Corporation MBR Tariff to be
effective 9/28/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5151.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3068-000.
    Applicants: American Transmission Company LLC.
    Description: American Transmission Company LLC submits filing to
cancel its Open Access Transmission Tariff, FERC Electric Tariff 1.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-0202
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3069-000.
    Applicants: Alcoa Power Generating Inc.
    Description: Alcoa Power Generating Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.12: APGI MBR Baseline Filing to be effective 8/31/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5183.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3070-000.
    Applicants: Alcoa Power Marketing LLC.
    Description: Alcoa Power Marketing LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: APM MBR Baseline Filing to be effective 8/31/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5185.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3071-000.
    Applicants: CalPeak Power--Border LLC.
    Description: CalPeak Power--Border LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: CalPeak Power--Border FERC Electric Tariff to be effective 9/28/
2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5193.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3072-000.
    Applicants: CalPeak Power--El Cajon LLC.
    Description: CalPeak Power--El Cajon LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: CalPeak Power--El Cajon FERC Electric Tariff to be effective 9/
28/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5194.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3074-000.
    Applicants: CalPeak Power--Enterprise LLC.
    Description: CalPeak Power--Enterprise LLC submits tariff filing
per 35.12: CalPeak Power--Enterprise FERC Electric Tariff to be
effective 9/28/2010.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100928-5197.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings 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) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. 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. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of
self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not
institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice
of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides
notification that the entity making the filing has determined the
facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets
that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-
recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to
notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications
and self-recertifications.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also 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>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-25095 Filed 10-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 75 (Tuesday, April 19, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22971-22972]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08924]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP16-828-000.
    Applicants: SG Resources Mississippi, L.L.C.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: SG Resources Mississippi,
L.L.C.--Filing of Housekeeping Tariff Changes to be effective 5/7/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/7/16.
    Accession Number: 20160407-5143.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/19/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-829-000.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Revised Hourly Nomination
Deadline to be effective 5/7/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/7/16.
    Accession Number: 20160407-5169.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/19/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-830-000.
    Applicants: Enable Mississippi River Transmission, L.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Filing to
Amend LER 5680's Attachment A_4_7_16 to be effective 4/7/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/7/16.
    Accession Number: 20160407-5205.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/19/16.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP16-567-001.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing NAESB Version 3.0 Compliance to
Order No. 587-W--Revised Sheet 313A to be effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/7/16.
    Accession Number: 20160407-5168.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/19/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-413-001.
    Applicants: Granite State Gas Transmission, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing Compliance filing for March 29th
Order to be effective 4/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 4/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160408-5137.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-439-001.
    Applicants: Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing NAESB 3.0 Compliance Filing to be
effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160408-5091.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-489-001.
    Applicants: East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing ETNG RP16-489-000 Compliance Filing
to be effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160408-5110.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-490-001.
    Applicants: Egan Hub Storage, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing Egan RP16-490-000 Compliance Filing
to be effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160408-5119.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-491-001.
    Applicants: Ozark Gas Transmission, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing OGT RP16-491-000 Compliance Filing
to be effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160408-5121.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-493-001.
    Applicants: Saltville Gas Storage Company L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing SGSC RP16-493-000 Compliance Filing
to be effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160408-5122.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-505-002.
    Applicants: Portland General Electric Company.
    Description: Compliance filing NAESB V3 Standards Compliance Final
Filing to be effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160408-5157.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/20/16.

    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 11, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-08924 Filed 4-18-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 23 (Friday, February 3, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5418-5420]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2421]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0085; Directorate Identifier 2011-SW-004-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky) Model S-61A, D, E, L, N, NM,
R, and V helicopters to require replacing each forward and aft fuel
system 40 micron fuel filter element with a 10 micron fuel filter
element. This proposed AD is prompted by a National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB) review of in-service events where engine
performance degradation occurred and the review determined that some of
these events were caused by contaminants larger than 10 microns present
in the engine fuel control units (FCUs). The proposed actions are
intended to prevent particulate contamination in the FCU, which could
lead to malfunction of an internal valve(s), power loss at a critical
phase of flight, and loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 3, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket Operations Office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the economic
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Attn: Manager, Commercial Technical
Support, mailstop s581a, 6900 Main St., Stratford, CT; telephone (203)
383-4866; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or at http://www.sikorsky.com.
You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region,

2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirk Gustafson, Aerospace Engineer,
Boston Aircraft Certification Office, Engine and Propeller Directorate,
FAA, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; telephone
(781) 238-7190; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to
the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might
result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed
electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as
a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Discussion

    We propose to adopt a new AD for the Sikorsky Model S-61A, D, E, L,
N, NM, R, and V helicopters with a fuel system 40 micron fuel filter
element, part number (P/N) 52-0505-2 or 52-01064-1. This proposed AD
would require replacing each forward and aft fuel system 40 micron fuel
filter element with a 10 micron fuel filter element. This proposed AD
was prompted by an NTSB review of in-service events involving Sikorsky
S-61 model helicopters where engine performance degradation occurred.
The review determined that contaminants larger than 10 microns entering
the engine FCU can migrate to the internal servo valves and the
pressuring regulating valve, causing them to malfunction. Malfunction
of these valves can result in abnormal engine operation and loss of
power. The NTSB conducted this review as a part of its investigation of
an accident involving a Sikorsky S-61 model helicopter. During
disassembly and examination of the FCUs in the accident helicopter, the
NTSB found trace levels of contamination in each FCU, indicating the
filters in the fuel supply system did not completely filter
contaminants from the fuel. The NTSB stated that no evidence exists
that contamination contributed to the accident, but concluded that
using fuel system 10 micron fuel filters could reduce the risk of
engine performance degradation occurring due to fuel contamination.
This condition of particulate contamination in the FCU, if not
corrected, could lead to malfunction of an internal valve, power loss
at a critical phase of flight, and loss of control of the helicopter.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all known relevant
information and determined that an unsafe condition exists and is
likely to exist or develop on other products of these same type
designs.

Related Service Information

    We reviewed Sikorsky Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. 61B30-16,
dated February 2, 2010 (ASB No. 61B30-16), which supersedes ASB No.
61B28-1, dated January 15, 2010 (ASB No. 61B28-1). ASB No. 61B28-1
specified replacing the forward and aft fuel system 40 micron fuel
filter elements with 10 micron fuel filter elements at the next
scheduled inspection or within 150 flight hours from the issuance of
the ASB. ASB 61B30-16 retains the same instructions as ASB 61B28-1, but
deletes the compliance time ``at the next scheduled preventative
maintenance inspection.'' Also, ASB No. 61B30-16 was issued because ASB
No. 61B28-1 was incorrectly numbered.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require, within 150 hours time-in-service
(TIS), replacing each forward and aft fuel system 40 micron fuel filter
element with a 10 micron fuel filter element. Thereafter, operators
would only be permitted to install a fuel system 10 micron fuel filter
element when replacing the forward or aft fuel system fuel filter
element. This proposed AD would also require re-identifying the fuel
filter and the fuel control assembly.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    ASB 61B30-16 specifies complying with the instructions within 150
flight hours from the issuance of the ASB, but this proposed AD
requires complying with the instructions within 150 hours TIS from the
effective date of the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 78 helicopters of
U.S. Registry. We estimate that operators may incur the following costs
in order to comply with this AD. It would take approximately 4 work-
hours to replace the fuel system fuel filters and re-identify the fuel
tank fuel filter and fuel control assembly bracket. The average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour and required parts will cost about $370 per
helicopter. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators would be $710 per helicopter and the
total cost of this AD on U.S. operators would be $55,380.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed, I certify this proposed regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and

    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new
Airworthiness Directive (AD):

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation: Docket No. FAA-2012-0085; Directorate
Identifier 2011-SW-004-AD.

 (a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky)
Model S-61A, D, E, L, N, NM, R, and V helicopters with a fuel system
40 micron fuel filter element, part number (P/N) 52-0505-2 or 52-
01064-1, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as contaminants present in
the engine fuel control units (FCUs). This AD was prompted by a
National Transportation Safety Board review of in-service events
where engine performance degradation occurred. This condition could
result in particulate contamination in the FCU, which could lead to
malfunction of an internal valve, power loss at a critical phase of
flight, and loss of control of the helicopter.

(c) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(d) Required Actions

    (1) Within 150 hours time-in-service, do the following:
    (i) Replace each forward and aft fuel system 40 micron fuel
filter element with a 10 micron fuel filter element, P/N AM52-01064-
1.
    (ii) Re-identify the fuel filter, P/N 52-2145-009, and fuel
control assembly bracket as follows:
    (A) On the fuel filter identification plate, cross out the last
two digits (``09'') of the existing fuel filter P/N 52-2145-009, and
replace those last two digits with ``14'' to re-identify the fuel
filter as P/N 52-2145-014.
    (B) Change the existing fuel control assembly part number on the
fuel control assembly bracket to re-identify it as follows:
    (1) Change fuel control assembly P/N S6130-63209-001 to P/N
S6130-63209-041.
    (2) Change fuel control assembly P/N S6130-63209-002 to P/N
S6130-63209-042.
    (3) Change fuel control assembly P/N S6130-63209-003 to P/N
S6130-63209-043.
    (4) Change fuel control assembly P/N S6130-63209-004 to P/N
S6130-63209-044.

(e) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)

    (1) The Manager, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, may
approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Kirk Gustafson,
Aerospace Engineer, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, Engine and
Propeller Directorate, FAA,12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA 01803; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a Part 119 operating
certificate or under Part 91, Subpart K, we suggest that you notify
your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the
manager of the local flight standards district office or certificate
holding district office before operating any aircraft complying with
this AD through an AMOC.

(f) Additional Information

    Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Alert Service Bulletin No. 61B30-
16, dated February 2, 1010, which is not incorporated by reference,
contains additional information about the subject of this AD. For
this service information, contact Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation,
Attn: Manager, Commercial Technical Support, mailstop s581a, 6900
Main St., Stratford, CT; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or at http://www.sikorsky.com. You may
review copies of this information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,
Texas 76137.

(g) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 2800, Fuel system.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 23, 2012.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-2421 Filed 2-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 7, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 151)]
[Notices]
[Page 44680-44681]
[DOCID:fr07au06-56]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP06-422-000]

Cameron LNG, LLC, Notice of Application

July 28, 2006.
    Take notice that on July 18, 2006, as supplemented on July 27,
2006, Cameron LNG, LLC (Cameron LNG) filed an application pursuant to
section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 153 of the Commission's
Rules and Regulations for approval of proposed expansion and
modifications of its liquefied natural gas (LNG) import terminal. The
Commission has previously granted approvals for Cameron LNG's import
terminal, which is now under construction.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Hackberry LNG Terminal, L.L.C., 101 FERC 61,294 (2002)
and Cameron LNG, LLC; 104 FERC 61,269 (2003); 111 FERC 61,018
(2005), and 115 FERC 61,229 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov
 using the ``eLibrary link. Enter the docket number

excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,

contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding the application may be directed to Stacy
Van Goor, Director, Federal Regulatory Affairs, Sempra Global, 101 Ash
Street HQ08C, San Diego, California 92101. Telephone number is 619-696-
2264. Facsimile number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. E-mail address is
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    The application seeks authority to expand the LNG terminal
facilities previously approved and, in particular: (i) To increase the
sendout rate of the terminal to 2,650,000 Mcf/d from the previously
authorized send out rate of 1,500,000 Dth/d; (ii) to increase LNG
storage tank capacity from 480,000 m\3\ to 640,000 m\3\ through the
addition of a fourth storage tank; (iii) to increase the LNG unloading
rate at each ship berth; (iv) to increase the send out rate to
1,800,000 Mcf/d from the previously certificated send out rate of
1,500,000 Dth/d, on an interim basis, while the proposed expansion
facilities are being constructed, and (v) to modify the Btu control
unit to include an option for diluting the send out gas with an inert
gas stream composed of nitrogen and oxygen in addition to, or as an
alternative to the liquids-stripping facility previously identified by
Cameron LNG in earlier applications.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the below listed comment date, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Please note that on February 10, 2006, the Commission issued a
Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Assessment for Cameron
LNG's above proposed LNG terminal expansion project in Docket No. PF06-
10-000. The environmental pre-filing review of Cameron LNG's proposal
has been underway since December 2005 in that docket. However, Docket
No. PF06-10-000 is now closed and all further

environmental comments should reference the pending application in
Docket No. CP06-422-000.
    Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed
electronically via the internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.
    Comment Date: August 21, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-12711 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 76 (Thursday, April 20, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24329-24330]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08216]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 76 / Thursday, April 20, 2023 / Rules
and Regulations

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 232

[Release Nos. 33-11168; 34-97161; 39-2549; IC-34860]

Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is
adopting amendments to Volume II of the Electronic Data Gathering,
Analysis, and Retrieval system (``EDGAR'') Filer Manual (``Filer
Manual'') and related rules and forms. EDGAR Release 23.1 will be
deployed in the EDGAR system on March 20, 2023.

DATES: Effective date: April 20, 2023. The incorporation by reference
of the revised Filer Manual is approved by the Director of the Federal
Register as of April 20, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions regarding the amendments
to Volume II of the Filer Manual and related rules, please contact
Rosemary Filou, Deputy Director and Chief Counsel, or E. Laurita Finch,
Senior Special Counsel, in the EDGAR Business Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
For questions regarding the changes related to amendments to 17 CFR
240.10b5-1 (``Rule 10b5-1''), and the submission timing for Form 144
and 144/A, please contact Christian Windsor, Senior Special Counsel, in
the Division of Corporation Finance at<PHONE_NUMBER> and Heather
Mackintosh, EDGAR Liaison in the Division of Corporation Finance at
(202) 551-8111. For questions concerning taxonomies or schemas, please
contact the Office of Structured Disclosure in the Division of Economic
and Risk Analysis at<PHONE_NUMBER>. For questions regarding Form type
13F-CTR/A, please contact Heather Fernandez, Financial Analyst, in the
Division of Investment Management at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are adopting an updated Filer Manual,
Volume II: ``EDGAR Filing,'' Version 65 (March 2023) and amendments to
17 CFR 232.301 (``Rule 301''). The updated Filer Manual is incorporated
by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations.

I. Background

    The Filer Manual contains information needed for filers to make
submissions on EDGAR. Filers must comply with the applicable provisions
of the Filer Manual in order to assure the timely acceptance and
processing of filings made in electronic format.\1\ Filers must consult
the Filer Manual in conjunction with our rules governing mandated
electronic filings when preparing documents for electronic submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Rule 301 of Regulation S-T.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. EDGAR System Changes and Associated Modifications to Volume II of
the Filer Manual

    EDGAR is being updated in EDGAR Release 23.1, and corresponding
amendments to Volume II of the Filer Manual are being made to reflect
these changes, as described below.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EDGAR Release 23.1 will be deployed on March 20, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 14, 2022, the Commission adopted amendments to Rule
10b5-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, creating new
disclosure requirements regarding officer and director compensation and
trading arrangements.\3\ Among other things, to implement the new
disclosure requirements and to make that information more readily
available and easily accessible to investors, market participants, and
others, the Commission is requiring filers to tag in Inline eXtensible
Business Reporting Language (Inline XBRL), disclosures required under
newly adopted 17 CFR 229.402(x) (``Item 402(x)'') and 229.408 (``Item
408 of Regulation S-K'') and Item 16J of Form 20-F. In response to the
tagging requirement, the Executive Compensation Disclosure (ECD)
taxonomy is being updated. The amendments also added 17 CFR
229.601(b)(19) (``Item 601(b)(19)''), which creates an exhibit for
issuers to file a copy of their insider trading policies and procedures
as new Exhibit 19 for submission types 10-K, 10-KT, 10K/A and 10-KT/A.
Finally, Forms 4 and 5 are updated to include a new checkbox to allow
filers to identify whether the reported transaction was subject to a
contract, instruction, or written plan intended to meet the conditions
of Rule 10b5-1(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Insider Trading Arrangements and Related Disclosures,
Release 33-11138 (Dec. 14, 2022) [87 FR 80362 (Dec. 29, 2022)].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, on February 21, 2023, the Commission adopted amendments
extending Form 144 EDGAR filing hours to 10 p.m. Eastern Standard Time
or Eastern Daylight Saving Time, whichever is currently in effect
(Eastern time).\4\ To implement these amendments, EDGAR is being
updated to include Form 144 and 144/A among the submission types that
EDGAR will accept and disseminate on the same day if the submissions
are made from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. Eastern time. Consequently, if the Form
144 is received on a business day from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. Eastern time,
the EDGAR filing date will be the date it is submitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Extending Form 144 EDGAR Filing Hours, Release 33-11159
(Feb. 21, 2023) [88 FR 12205 (Feb. 27, 2023)].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EDGAR Release 23.1 also makes general functional enhancements to
EDGAR, for which revisions are made to the Filer Manual as described
below.
    The EDGAR system is being updated to accept the 2023 versions of
the U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) Financial
Reporting, SEC Reporting taxonomy, and other eXtensible Business
Reporting Language (XBRL) taxonomies accepted in EDGAR, except the
International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) taxonomy which is
scheduled to be accepted in EDGAR during June 2023.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See https://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edgartaxonomies.shtml for
a complete list of supported standard taxonomies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EDGAR will also update its presentation link validations for the
Closed-End Fund (CEF) taxonomy, and will be updated to remove
references to previous versions of the Document and Entity Information
(DEI) taxonomy that are obsolete.
    Finally, Volume II is being amended to reflect minor software
updates made to EDGAR after the Commission last

approved changes to the Filer Manual.\6\ Volume II is updated to add a
new ``Is this a de novo request?'' radio button to the ``Filer
Information'' page for form type 13F-CTR/A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Software changes to EDGAR were made in EDGAR Release 22.4.1,
deployed on January 3, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Amendments to Rule 301 of Regulation S-T

    Along with the adoption of the updated Filer Manual, we are
amending Rule 301 of Regulation S-T to provide for the incorporation by
reference into the Code of Federal Regulations of the current
revisions. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director
of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
    The updated EDGAR Filer Manual is available at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/filermanual.

IV. Administrative Law Matters

    Because the Filer Manual and rule amendments relate solely to
agency procedures or practice and do not substantially alter the rights
and obligations of non-agency parties, publication for notice and
comment is not required under the Administrative Procedure Act
(``APA'').\7\ It follows that the amendments do not require analysis
under requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act \8\ or a report to
Congress under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
of 1996.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A).
    \8\ 5 U.S.C. 601 through 612.
    \9\ 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The effective date for the updated Filer Manual and related rule
amendments is April 20, 2023. In accordance with the APA,\10\ we find
that there is good cause to establish an effective date less than 30
days after publication of these rules. The Commission believes that
establishing an effective date less than 30 days after publication of
these rules is necessary to coordinate the effectiveness of the updated
Filer Manual with the related system upgrades.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Statutory Basis

    We are adopting the amendments to 17 CFR part 232 (``Regulation S-
T'') under the authority in sections 6, 7, 8, 10, and 19(a) of the
Securities Act of 1933,\11\ sections 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15B, 23, and
35A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,\12\ section 319 of the
Trust Indenture Act of 1939,\13\ and sections 8, 30, 31, and 38 of the
Investment Company Act of 1940.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, and 77s(a).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78c, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o, 78o-4, 78w, and 78ll.
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 77sss.
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, and 80a-37.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 232

    Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Securities.

Text of the Amendments

    In accordance with the foregoing, title 17, chapter II of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 232--REGULATION S-T--GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR
ELECTRONIC FILINGS

0
1. The general authority citation for part 232 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77c, 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s(a), 77z-3,
77sss(a), 78c(b), 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o(d), 78w(a), 78ll, 80a-6(c),
80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, 80a-37, 80b-4, 80b-6a, 80b-10, 80b-11, 7201
et seq.; and 18 U.S.C. 1350, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *

0
2. Section 232.301 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  232.301  EDGAR Filer Manual.

    Filers must prepare electronic filings in the manner prescribed by
the EDGAR Filer Manual, promulgated by the Commission, which sets forth
the technical formatting requirements for electronic submissions. The
requirements for becoming an EDGAR Filer and updating company data are
set forth in the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: ``General Information,''
Version 41 (December 2022). The requirements for filing on EDGAR are
set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: ``EDGAR
Filing,'' Version 65 (March 2023). All of these provisions have been
incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations, which
action was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You must comply with
these requirements in order for documents to be timely received and
accepted. The EDGAR Filer Manual is available for inspection at the
Commission and at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). The EDGAR Filer Manual is available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Operating conditions may limit access to the
Commission's Public Reference Room. For information on the availability
of the EDGAR Filer Manual at NARA, visit www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html or email [email protected]. The
EDGAR Filer Manual may also be obtained from https://www.sec.gov/edgar/filermanual.

    By the Commission.

    Dated: March 20, 2023.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-08216 Filed 4-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P