[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 241 (Tuesday, December 15, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81254-81257]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27486]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90621; File No. SR-MSRB-2020-09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking
Board; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule
Change To Provide Additional Regulatory Relief on a Temporary Basis to
Dealers and Municipal Advisors Due to the Sustained Coronavirus (COVID-
19) Pandemic

December 9, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'' or ``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice
is hereby given that on December 2, 2020 the Municipal Securities
Rulemaking Board (``MSRB'' or ``Board'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule
change as described in Items I and II, below, which Items have been
prepared by the MSRB. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The MSRB filed with the Commission a proposed rule change to (i)
amend Supplementary Material .01, Temporary Relief for Completing
Office Inspections, of MSRB G-27, on supervision, to allow internal
inspections of brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers
(collectively, ``dealers'') to be conducted remotely, subject to
certain conditions, for calendar year 2020 and calendar year 2021,
without an on-site visit to the office or location; (ii) amend MSRB
Rule G-16, on periodic compliance examinations, to add Supplementary
Material .01, Temporary Relief for Completing Periodic Compliance
Examination, to provide a temporary extension of time for registered
securities associations \3\ and appropriate regulatory agencies \4\
(collectively, ``examining authorities'') to initiate periodic
examinations of dealers; (iii) amend Supplementary Material .09,
Temporary Relief for Municipal Advisor Principal, of MSRB Rule G-3, on
professional qualification requirements, to provide a further extension
of time for those individuals who meet the definition of a municipal
advisor principal \5\ to become appropriately qualified by passing the
Municipal Advisor Principal Qualification Examination (Series 54); and
(iv) make a technical change to Supplementary Material .12, Temporary
Relief for Municipal Advisor Continuing Education Requirements, of MSRB
Rule G-3 to update a cross-reference (collectively the ``proposed rule
change'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section 15B(c)(7) of the Exchange Act provides that periodic
examinations of municipal securities brokers and municipal
securities dealers shall be conducted by a registered securities
association, in the case of municipal securities brokers and
municipal securities dealers that are members of such association.
The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'') is currently
the only registered securities association. See 15 U.S.C. 78o-
4(c)(7).
    \4\ Pursuant to Section 15B(c)(7) of the Exchange Act, municipal
securities brokers and municipal securities dealers who are not
members of a registered securities association shall be examined by
their appropriate regulatory agency. The term ``appropriate
regulatory agency'' when used with respect to municipal securities
dealers means, in part, the Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (``OCC''), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System (``FRB''), and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
(``FDIC''). See 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(34)(A). The Commission also has the
authority to examine all registered municipal securities dealers.
See 15 U.S.C. 78q(b)(1).
    \5\ The term ``municipal advisor principal'' is defined in Rule
G-3(e)(i) to mean a natural person associated with a municipal
advisor who is qualified as a municipal advisor representative and
is directly engaged in the management, direction or supervision of
the municipal advisory activities of the municipal advisor and its
associated persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MSRB has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a
``noncontroversial'' rule change under Section 19(b)(3)(A) \6\ of the
Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \7\ thereunder, which renders the proposal
effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission and has
requested that the Commission waive the requirement that the proposed
rule change not become operative for 30 days after the date of the
filing, so that the MSRB can implement the proposed rule change
immediately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the MSRB's
website at www.msrb.org/Rules-and-Interpretations/SEC-Filings/2020-Filings.aspx, at the MSRB's principal office, and at the Commission's
Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    In March of this year, the United States declared a national
emergency in response to the coronavirus disease (``COVID-19'')
pandemic.\8\ In light of the operational challenges and disruptions to
normal business functions as a result of COVID-19 pandemic, the MSRB
filed a proposed rule change for immediate effectiveness with the SEC
in April of this year that provided regulatory relief on a temporary
basis to dealers and municipal advisors (collectively ``regulated
entities''). The MSRB stated it would continue to monitor the impact of
COVID-19 and work in close coordination with other financial regulators
and governmental authorities.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See The White House, ``Proclamation on Declaring a National
Emergency Concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19)
Outbreak,'' (March 13, 2020) https://www.whitehouse.gov/
presidential-actions/proclamation-declaring-national-emergency-
concerning-novel-coronavirus-disease-covid-19-outbreak/
#:~:text=On%20March%2011%2C%202020%2C%20the,and%20across%20the%20Unit
ed%20States.
    \9\ See Release No. 34-88694 (April 20, 2020), 85 FR 23088
(April 24, 2020) (File No. SR-MSRB-2020-01) (``April relief'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MSRB recognizes that a vast number of regulated entities are
still operating under business continuity plans and continue to manage
operations from alternate sites with employees working from diverse
work locations and telework arrangements. The impacts of the COVID-19
pandemic persist and, in an effort to slow the spread of COVID-19, many
states are continuing to impose stay-at-home orders, limitations on in-
person interactions and travel restrictions. Due to the ongoing
pandemic-related health and safety concerns and the operational
challenges regulated entities continue to experience, the MSRB believes
the additional tailored temporary relief provided in the proposed rule
change is warranted.
Temporary Relief Under Rule G-27 To Allow Remote Inspections for
Calendar Year 2020 and Calendar Year 2021
    With respect to Rule G-27, the April relief extended the deadline
until March 31, 2021 for dealers to complete their

calendar year 2020 inspections.\10\ However, in light of the health and
safety concerns coupled with the continued restrictions on social
interactions and travel, the April relief is no longer sufficient. To
help proactively address the challenges resulting from the sustained
pandemic, the MSRB is proposing to amend temporary Supplementary
Material .01 under Rule G-27, on supervision, to provide dealers,
subject to specified requirements therein, the ability to conduct the
inspections of their offices and locations for calendar year 2020 and
calendar year 2021 remotely without the need to conduct an onsite visit
to such office or location.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id.
    \11\ The proposed amendment to Supplementary Material .01 would
be analogous to FINRA's rule change, File No. SR-FINRA-2020-04,
which was filed on November 6, 2020 and was effective upon filing.
See Release No. 34-90454 (Nov. 6, 2020) https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/finra/2020/34-90454.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed amendment to Supplementary Material .01 would set
forth that inspections are due to be completed by March 31, 2021 for
calendar year 2020 and completed by December 31, 2021 for calendar year
2021, the requirement to amend or supplement written supervisory
procedures for remote inspections, the use of remote inspections as
part of an effective supervisory system, and documentation
requirements. The MSRB believes affording dealers the option to conduct
remote inspections is a prudent regulatory approach during these
unprecedented times while continuing to serve the important investor
protection objectives of the inspection requirements under these unique
circumstances. The temporary proposed supplementary material makes
clear that it is not intended to alter a dealer's core responsibility,
embodied in Rule G-27, to establish and maintain a system to supervise
the activities of each associated person that is reasonably designed to
ensure compliance with Board rules and the applicable provisions of the
Act and rules thereunder.
Temporary Relief Under Rule G-16 To Extend the Time To Complete
Periodic Compliance Examinations
    MSRB Rule G-16, on periodic compliance examination, provides that
at least once every four calendar years, each dealer that is a member
of a registered securities association, must be examined by such
registered securities association (i.e., FINRA); and at least once
every two calendar years, each municipal securities dealer that is a
bank or subsidiary or department or division of a bank must be examined
by the appropriate regulatory agency (i.e., OCC, FRB, or FDIC), in
accordance with Section 15B(c)(7) of the Exchange Act \12\ for
compliance with applicable rules of the Board and applicable provisions
of the Act and rules and regulations of the Commission thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(c)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In an effort to provide examining authorities with an opportunity
to better manage and allocate resources during these exigent
circumstances; and in working with dealers as they manage operational
challenges due to the pandemic, the MSRB is proposing to temporarily
modify the date by which compliance examinations under Rule G-16 must
be met. Specifically, the proposed rule change would deem any
examination initiated between January 1, 2020 and March 31, 2021 to
have occurred in calendar year 2020.
Temporary Relief Under Rule G-3 To Extend Time To Complete Professional
Qualification Requirements and Technical Amendment
    In connection with the MSRB's April relief, the MSRB provided
additional time to allow individuals to fulfill certain professional
qualification standards under Rule G-3, on professional qualification
requirements.\13\ At that time, due to the uncertainty regarding
ongoing stay-at-home orders and social distance restrictions that could
impact capacity at Prometric testing centers,\14\ the MSRB extended the
date by which individuals are required to become qualified with the
Series 54 examination from November 12, 2020 to March 31, 2021.\15\
Given the protracted period of the COVID-19 pandemic, the MSRB is
taking proactive measures and is proposing to amend Supplementary
Material .09 of Rule G-3 to extend the time period from March 31, 2021
to November 12, 2021, by which individuals who meet the definition of a
municipal advisor principal must become appropriately qualified by
passing the Series 54 examination. This extension of time affords
municipal advisors and individuals functioning as municipal advisor
principals a full year from the sunsetting of the original grace-period
\16\ to continue to engage in the management, direction or supervision
of the municipal advisory activities of the municipal advisor and its
associated persons, so long as such persons are qualified with the
Municipal Advisor Representative Qualification Examination (Series 50).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra note 9.
    \14\ FINRA, as appointed by the Commission, provides test
administration services to the MSRB for the delivery of MSRB-owned
professional qualification examinations. See, e.g., Release No. 34-
75714 (Aug. 17, 2015) (Designation of the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority to Administer Professional Qualification Tests
for Associated Persons of Registered Municipal Advisors). FINRA uses
Prometric as its single vendor for the delivery of the professional
qualification examinations that FINRA is charged with administering,
including MSRB-owned professional qualification examinations.
    \15\ In the April relief, the MSRB provided temporary relief for
dealers by permitting any individual qualified to function in the
capacity as a municipal securities principal, municipal fund
securities limited principal or a municipal securities sales
principal additional time to engage in the principal activity before
passing the applicable principal-level qualification examination.
The April relief extended the requirement to 120 days from the time
the MSRB announces that Prometric testing centers have resumed
sufficient access to its testing centers. See Rules G-3(b)(ii)(D),
G-3(b)(iv)(B)(4) and G-3(c)(ii)(D). The MSRB stated in the April
relief that it would publish a notice on its website announcing when
Prometric resumes operations in its testing centers, so regulated
entities are on notice of when the 120-day period begins to toll.
See supra note 9. The MSRB notes dealer firms are still covered
under the April relief because, given the exigent circumstances
surrounding the sustained pandemic, the MSRB has not yet announced
when the obligation to take and pass the applicable principal
examination must be completed.
    \16\ The MSRB had previously stated, to facilitate the
transition to the new exam requirement, the MSRB was providing a
one-year grace period, sunsetting on November 12, 2020, during which
individuals qualified with the Series 50 examination would be able
to take the Series 54 examination while continuing to engage in
principal-level activities. See Release No. 34-84630 (Nov. 20,
2018), 83 FR 60927 (Nov. 27, 2018) (File No. SR-MSRB-2018-07).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change also makes a technical amendment to
Supplementary Material .12 under Rule G-3, providing for the temporary
relief for municipal advisor continuing education requirements, by
correcting the cross-reference under the provision from (i)(ii)(B)(2)
to (i)(ii)(B).
2. Statutory Basis
    The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Exchange Act,\17\ which provides that the
MSRB's rules shall:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(C).

be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect
to, and facilitating transactions in municipal securities and
municipal financial products, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market in municipal securities and
municipal financial products, and, in general, to protect investors,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
municipal entities, obligated persons, and the public interest.

    The proposed rule change is designed to provide regulated entities
additional time to comply with certain obligations under MSRB rules for
a temporary period of time; it does not relieve such entities from
compliance with underlying obligations that directly serve to protect
investors, municipal entities, obligated persons and the public
interest or market transparency goals. In a time when faced with unique
challenges resulting from the sustained pandemic, the proposed rule
change will afford dealers, municipal advisors and the examining
authorities the ability to safeguard the health and safety of their
personnel and to more effectively allocate resources to serve and
promote the protection of investors, municipal entities, obligated
persons and the public interest. In addition, the proposed rule change
will also alleviate some of the operational challenges these regulated
entities may be experiencing, which will allow them to more effectively
allocate resources to the provision of advice and the operations that
facilitate transactions in municipal securities and municipal financial
products, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market in municipal securities and municipal financial
products.
    Additionally, the proposed rule change is consistent with Section
15B(b)(2)(E) of the Exchange Act,\18\ which provides that the MSRB's
rules shall provide:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(E).

for the periodic examination in accordance with subsection (c)(7) of
this section of municipal securities brokers, municipal securities
dealers, and municipal advisors to determine compliance with
applicable provisions of this title, the rules and regulations
thereunder, and the rules of the Board. Such rules shall specify the
minimum scope and frequency of such examinations and shall be
designed to avoid unnecessary regulatory duplication or undue
regulatory burdens for any such municipal securities broker,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
municipal securities dealer, or municipal advisor.

    Given the potential period of the pandemic and resulting persistent
challenges to business operations, the proposed rule change provides
examining authorities, not only with the ability to appropriately
allocate their resources, but with a degree of flexibility to be
responsive to the challenges dealers may face and minimize, to the
extent possible, undue regulatory burdens, while not substantively
altering examining authorities' obligations to examine for compliance
with applicable rules of the Board and applicable provisions of the
Act. The MSRB believes the temporary relief to provide for an extension
of time for examining authorities to initiate periodic compliance
examinations is not likely to, in isolation, create an investor
protection harm given that, through risk assessments, dealers are
prioritized and examined with a greater frequency than the timeline
Rule G-16 allows.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The MSRB stated in a filing made with the SEC, in 2011,
that firms that are members of a registered securities association
are risk-ranked based on an analysis of various identified risks and
related factors. See Release No. 34-65992 (Dec. 16, 2011), 76 FR
79738 (Dec. 22, 2011) (File No. SR-MSRB-2011-19).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is also consistent
with Section 15B(b)(2)(A) of the Act,\20\ which authorizes the MSRB to
prescribe ``standards of training, experience, competence, and such
other qualifications as the Board finds necessary or appropriate in the
public interest or for the protection of investors and municipal
entities or obligated persons,'' in that those acting in the capacity
of a municipal advisor principal would still be subject to the
regulatory requirements under Rule G-3, including the requirement to be
qualified with the Series 50 examination. Additionally, continuing to
allow individuals to function in a principal capacity with the Series
50 for a period of time before having to pass the Series 54
examination, given this protracted period of the pandemic, provides
individuals flexibility to prioritize safeguarding their health and
safety and the proposed rule change is not inconsistent with the
purpose of the grace period that the MSRB originally provided such
professionals to qualify by the Series 54 examination, which is to
minimize disruptions and to provide an orderly transition to the new
qualification requirements.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(A).
    \21\ See Release No. 34-84630 (Nov. 20, 2018), 83 FR 60927 (Nov.
27, 2018) (File No. SR-MSRB-2018-07).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act requires that MSRB rules be
designed not to impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\22\ The MSRB
does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden
on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
Exchange Act. The goal of the proposed rule change is to provide
temporary relief to grant additional time for regulated entities and
the examining authorities to meet certain obligations under MSRB rules
during the exigent circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic but would not
alter their underlying obligations under MSRB rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, Section 15B(b)(2)(L)(iv) of the Exchange Act,
requires that MSRB rules not impose a regulatory burden on small
municipal advisors that is not necessary or appropriate in the public
interest and for the protection of investors, municipal entities, and
obligated persons, provided that there is robust protection of
investors against fraud.\23\ The MSRB believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section 15B(b)(2)(L)(iv) of the Exchange Act
\24\ in that, while the proposed rule change to extend the date by
which individuals have to pass the Series 54 examination will affect
all municipal advisors, including small municipal advisors, there is no
new regulatory burden that results. Small municipal advisors typically
have fewer associated persons and, as a result, their resources may be
more limited during the pandemic and the benefits of the proposed rule
change may provide smaller municipal advisors a greater benefit given
their limited resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(L)(iv).
    \24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) \25\ of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) \26\ thereunder, the MSRB has designated the proposed rule
change as one that effects a change that: (i) Does not significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) does
not impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) by its
terms, does not become operative for 30 days after the date of the
filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate. A
proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does not
become operative until 30 days after the date of filing.\27\ However,
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \28\ permits the Commission to

designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.\29\ The MSRB has
requested that the Commission designate the proposed rule change
operative upon filing,\30\ as specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\31\
which would make the proposed rule change operative on December 2,
2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \27\ Id.
    \28\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \29\ In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-
regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its
intent to file a proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and text of such proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the date of filing, or such shorter time as
designated by the Commission. The Commission has designated a
shorter time for delivery of such written notice.
    \30\ See SR-MSRB-2018-10.
    \31\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MSRB notes that the proposed rule change does not relieve
regulated entities from compliance with underlying obligations. Rather,
the proposed rule change provides regulated entities with additional
time and flexibility to comply with certain compliance obligations for
a temporary period of time. Additionally, it grants examining
authorities an extension of time to examine dealers without
substantially altering the examining authorities' obligations. The MSRB
believes the proposed rule change will afford regulated entities the
ability to more effectively allocate resources to serve and promote the
protection of investors, municipal entities, obligated persons and the
public interest during the sustained pandemic. Further the MSRB stated,
that by alleviating operational challenges, the proposed rule change
will allow regulated entities to focus resources on the provision of
advice and operations that facilitate transactions in municipal
securities and municipal financial products.
    The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
The proposed rule change does not relieve regulated entities from
compliance with underlying obligations and will allow regulated
entities to more effectively allocate resources during ongoing
disruption to normal business functions as a result of the pandemic.
Waiver of the 30-day operative period will alleviate operational
challenges and facilitate the provision of advice and transactions in
the municipal securities market in light of the ongoing impacts to in-
person interactions, travel, health and safety presented by the
pandemic. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day
operative delay specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) and designates the
proposed rule change to be operative upon filing.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ For the purpose of waiving the 30-day operative delay for
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15
U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-MSRB-2020-09 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MSRB-2020-09. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the MSRB. 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-MSRB-2020-09 and should be submitted on
or before January 5, 2021.

    For the Commission, pursuant to delegated authority.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-27486 Filed 12-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


*** GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH OFFICE OF DIRECTOR ( 202) 645 5556 FAX: 645 0526 W. Michael McCabe Regional Administrator U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region I11 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 2029 Dear Mr. MAILING ADDRESS:

800 9TH STREFT, S. W. 3RD FLOOR WASHINGTON, D. C. 20024 2493 Enclcked for your review is a copy of the District of Columbia state authorization application submitted to EPA pursuant to section 404( A) of TSCA.

As requested, I have enclosed an unbound copy in order that it may be conveniently reproduced if necessary.

If I can answer any questions for you regarding the application materials or its content, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Richard Brewster, Program Manager, Lead Poison Prevention Program at ( 202) 645 5360. You may also contact Ms. Sandra Handon, Lead Coordinator, with any questions you may have at ( 202) 645 5959.

7 Deputy Director, EHA Enclosure cc: Enid Gerena, Project Oficer Shana Arnold, OECA Paul Cestone, OPPT /


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 197 (Friday, October 13, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47788-47789]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22231]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Release and Permanent Closure of the St. Clair Regional
Airport, St. Clair, Missouri

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of release and permanent closure of the St. Clair
Regional Airport, St. Clair, Missouri.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is publishing this notice of a pending action required
by statute. Public Law 113-285 requires the FAA to release the City of
St. Clair, Missouri, from all restrictions, conditions, and limitations
on the use, encumbrance, conveyance, and closure of the St. Clair
Regional Airport upon the satisfaction of certain conditions of the St.
Clair Regional Airport (K39). On August 1, 2017, the City of St. Clair,
Missouri provided written notice to the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) of its intent to permanently close the St. Clair Regional Airport
(K39), in St. Clair, Missouri. The City of St. Clair provided this
notice to the FAA in excess of 30 days before the permanent closure.
The FAA hereby publishes the City of St. Clair's notice of permanent
closure of the St. Clair Regional Airport.

DATES: The permanent closure of the airport is applicable November 13,
2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim A. Johnson, FAA Central Region
Airports Division, Airports Division Director, 901 Locust, Room 364,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106,<PHONE_NUMBER>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Law 113-285 requires the FAA to
release the City of St. Clair, Missouri, of restrictions, conditions,
and limitations on the use, encumbrance, conveyance, and closure of the
Airport upon the satisfaction of certain conditions of the St. Clair
Regional Airport (K39). This non-towered, general aviation airport
consist of approximately 79 acres and 6 based aircraft. Title 49 U.S.C.
46319 states that a public agency (as defined in section 47102) may not
permanently close an airport listed in the National Plan of Integrated
Airport Systems under section 47103 without providing written notice to
the Administrator of the FAA at least 30 days before the date of the
closure. The FAA recognizes that the City of St. Clair met this
requirement on August 1, 2017.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on October 6, 2017.
Jim A. Johnson,
Director, Airports Division, Central Region.
[FR Doc. 2017-22231 Filed 10-12-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 154 (Wednesday, August 10, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 52846]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18889]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER16-2263-000]

Telysium Energy Marketing, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Telysium Energy Marketing, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is August 22, 2016.
    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
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic 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
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 2, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-18889 Filed 8-9-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 197 (Thursday, October 10, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54528-54529]
[FR Doc No: 2019-21960]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0767; Airspace Docket No. 19-AGL-26]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Neillsville, WI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface at Neillsville Municipal
Airport, Neillsville, WI. The FAA is proposing this action due to the
decommissioning of the Neillsville non-directional radio beacon (NDB).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 25, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, telephone
(202) 366-9826, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2019-0767; Airspace Docket No. 19-AGL-26, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit and review comments through the internet
at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket
containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final
disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.
    FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11D at NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Shelby, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would modify Class E airspace at Neillsville Municipal Airport in
support of standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations
at the airport.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2019-0767;
Airspace Docket No. 19-AGL-26.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the

internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace-amendments/">http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace-amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic
Organization, Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and effective
September 15, 2019. FAA Order 7400.11D is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11D lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by amending Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile radius of
Neillsville Municipal Airport, Neillsville, WI, and removing the
Neillsville NDB, this action is necessary due to the decommissioning of
the Neillsville NDB, and for the safety and management of instrument
flight rules (IFR) operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11D, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11D,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and
effective September 15, 2019, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth

* * * * *

AGL WI E5 Neillsville, WI [Amended]

Neillsville Municipal Airport, WI
    (Lat. 44[deg]33'29'' N, long. 90[deg]30'44'' W)
    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.3-mile radius of Neillsville Municipal Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 2, 2019.
Steve Szukala,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2019-21960 Filed 10-9-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 146 (Tuesday, August 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41853-41854]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16522]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2020-D-2024]

Enhanced Drug Distribution Security at the Package Level Under
the Drug Supply Chain Security Act; Draft Guidance for Industry;
Availability; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is
extending the comment period for the notice of availability entitled
``Enhanced Drug Distribution Security at the Package Level Under the
Drug Supply Chain Security Act; Draft Guidance for Industry;
Availability'' that appeared in the Federal Register of June 4, 2021.
The Agency is taking this action to allow interested persons additional
time to submit comments.

DATES: FDA is extending the comment period for the notice of
availability published on June 4, 2021 (86 FR 30053). Submit either
electronic or written comments by September 2, 2021 to ensure that the
Agency considers your comment on this draft guidance before it begins
work on the final version of the guidance.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as
follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2020-D-2024 for ``Enhanced Drug Distribution Security at the
Package Level Under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act; Draft Guidance
for Industry.'' Received comments will be placed in the docket and,
except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly
viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management
Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked

as ``confidential'' will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21
CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information
about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469,
September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of this guidance to the
Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research,
Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale
Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-
addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your
requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Abha Kundi, Office of Compliance,
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration,
10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of June 4, 2021 (86 FR 30053), FDA
published a notice with a 60-day comment period to announce and request
comments on a draft guidance for industry entitled ``Enhanced Drug
Distribution Security at the Package Level Under the Drug Supply Chain
Security Act.'' FDA is extending the comment period until September 2,
2021. The Agency believes that an additional 30 days will allow
adequate time for interested persons to submit comments without
compromising the timely publication of the final version of the
guidance.

II. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance
at either https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents, or
https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: July 28, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-16522 Filed 8-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


1 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 2, 2005 SUBJECT: Cost Impacts Associated with NSPS for Stationary CI ICE FROM: Tanya Parise, Alpha Gamma Technologies, Inc.

TO: Sims Roy, EPA OAQPS ESD Combustion Group The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an estimate of the cost impacts of the proposed new source performance standards ( NSPS) for stationary compression ignition ( CI) internal combustion engines ( ICE). Costs associated with the proposed rule include costs of add on emission control and activities related to engine certification for manufacturers, and the cost of initial notification, recordkeeping, and testing for certain engine owners and operators.

The total estimated costs of the proposed NSPS for stationary CI engines are presented in Table 1. The capital cost of control of the NSPS is estimated to be $ 67 million in 2015, the model year for which all stationary CI ICE would have to meet final Tier 4 emission standards. The annual cost of control of the NSPS is estimated to be $ 46 million in 2015. The total annual cost in 2015 is estimated to be $ 57 million. Total estimated control costs by North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) codes are shown in Table 2 for the following industries:

335312  Motor and Generator Manufacturing 333911  Pump and Pumping Equipment Manufacturing 333912  Air and Gas Compressor Manufacturing 333992  Welding and Soldering Equipment Manufacturing 2 Table 1. Summary of Total Costs Associated with NSPS Type of Cost Total Costs ($)

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Capital Control Cost 30,979,878 40,072,436 42,449,091 62,633,605 66,847,709 68,582,222 70,316,736 Annual Control Cost 4,376,759 10,421,567 16,843,561 26,083,667 36,069,319 43,310,598 56,807,506 Engine Certification 844,916 844,916 844,916 844,916 844,916 844,916 844,916 Initial Notification 5,768 5,768 5,768 5,768 5,768 5,768 5,768 Recordkeeping 10,194,065 12,540,355 15,014,194 17,562,107 20,218,455 22,949,698 25,755,835 Total Annual Cost 15,421,507 23,812,606 32,708,439 44,496,458 57,138,458 70,110,981 83,414,025 * Summed values may not total due to rounding.

Table 2. Summary of Control Costs Associated with NSPS by NAICS NAICS Control Cost ($ million)

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 335312 Capital control Annual control 25.7 3.8 31.8 8.7 33.2 13.8 46.2 20.7 49.9 28.4 51.2 36.2 52.4 44.4 333911 Capital control Annual control 1.4 0.2 2.1 0.5 2.3 0.8 4.2 1.4 4.3 2.0 4.4 2.6 4.5 3.2 333912 Capital control Annual control 3.1 0.4 4.9 1.0 5.5 1.8 9.8 3.2 10.1 4.6 10.4 6.0 10.6 7.5 333992 Capital control Annual control 0.8 0.09 1.2 0.2 1.5 0.4 2.5 0.8 2.6 1.1 2.7 1.5 2.7 1.9 3 * Summing values in this table may not total to Table 1 values due to rounding. Projected Number of New Engines The projected number of new stationary CI internal combustion engines per year in the years 2011 through 2017 is given in Table 3. The methodology for determining the projected number of new stationary CI internal combustion engines is discussed in the memorandum entitled " Population and Projection of Stationary Engines." The estimate given in Table 3 represents the number of new stationary CI engines per year and includes all applications. It is estimated that 80 percent of the total population of stationary CI engines are used in emergency service and that the remaining 20 percent are non emergency engines.

Table 3: Projected Number of New Stationary CI Engines Per Year from 2011 through 2017 HP Range 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 50 100 21,481 22,243 23,006 23,768 24,530 25,293 26,055 100 175 19,061 19,615 20,168 20,722 21,276 21,829 22,383 175 300 19,230 19,911 20,592 21,273 21,954 22,635 23,316 300 600 7,004 7,168 7,333 7,498 7,662 7,827 7,991 600 750 960 976 993 1,009 1,026 1,042 1,059 > 750 4,781 4,908 5,034 5,160 5,287 5,413 5,539 Total 72,516 74,820 77,125 79,429 81,734 84,038 86,343 * The projected number of new stationary CI engines in this table represents non emergency and emergency engines.

Cost of Control Engine manufacturers must certify all their stationary non emergency CI engines to final Tier 4 PM and NOx emission standards according to the schedule for nonroad diesel engines shown in Table 4. The final Tier 4 PM standards for stationary nonemergency CI engines greater than or equal to 25 horsepower ( HP) are based on the use of catalyzed diesel particulate filters ( CDPF). For stationary non emergency CI engines greater than or equal to 75 HP, the NOx emission standards are based on utilizing NOx adsorbers. The EPA is not proposing any emission standards that are based on add on control for NOx for stationary CI engines less than 75 HP. The proposed NSPS does not require emergency engines to meet emission standards based on add on controls. Therefore, no control costs are associated with emergency 4 engines.

Table 4. Tier 4 Emission Standards Schedule for Engine Manufacturers HP Range Model Year PM NOx < 25 Tier 4 standard is not based on add on control Tier 4 standard is not based on add on control

25 to < 50 2013  50 to < 75 2013  75 to < 100 2012 2014  100 to < 175 2012 2014  175 to < 300 2011 2014  300 to < 600 2011 2014  600 to

750 2011 2014 > 750 to

1,200 2015 2015 > 1,200 2015 2011 * The EPA does not expect there will be any stationary CI engines less than 50 HP and has therefore not included the cost of control for engines less than 50 HP in this estimate. ** Note that based on information used to estimate the projected number of new stationary CI engines, it appears that the majority of stationary CI engines greater than 750 HP are generator sets. Our estimates of NOx and PM emission reduction for engines greater than 750 HP are therefore based on the final Tier 4 emission standards for generator sets.

The cost of NOx adsorbers and CDPF are based on costs developed for the rule for nonroad diesel engines and were presented in the memorandum entitled " Control Costs for NOx Adsorbers and CDPF for CI Engines." The capital and annual costs of NOx adsorber and CDPF are presented in Table 5. Total control costs for nonemergency stationary CI engines were estimated based on these control costs multiplied by the average HP for each HP range ( also shown in Table 5) and the estimated number of new non emergency engines. The total control costs were shown in Table 1. 5 Table 5. Capital and Annual Costs for NOx adsorber and CDPF HP Range Average HP NOx Adsorber CDPF Total Capital Cost ($/ HP) Total Annual Cost ($/ HP) Total Capital Cost ($/ HP) Total Annual Cost ($/ HP)

50 75 63 10 1 12 2 75 100 88 10 1 12 2 100 175 135 8 1 10 2 175 300 238 7 1 9 1 300 600 450 6 1 8 1 600 750 675 6 1 8 1 750 1,200 975 5 1 7 1 1,200 3,000 2,100 5 1 7 1 > 3,000 5,000 5 1 7 1 * The EPA does not expect there will be any stationary CI engines less than 50 HP and has therefore not included the cost of control for engines less than 50 HP in this estimate.

Cost of Certification Manufacturers of stationary CI engines will be required to certify their engines starting with the 2007 model year. Based on information received from engine manufacturers, EPA has estimated that about 200 engine families currently certified for nonroad use will be required to be certified to the rule for stationary CI engines. The EPA expects that minimal additional effort will have to be spent certifying these 200 engine families for stationary use also. It is estimated that the manufacturer will have to spend 1 hour per engine family to certify each engine family to the requirements of the stationary CI rule. It is assumed that a technical person will handle the certification at a rate of $ 65 per hour. The EPA estimates a cost of $ 13,000 per year to certify stationary CI engines that are currently certified to the nonroad CI engine rule.

In addition, EPA estimates that another 35 engine families that are used for stationary purposes only will be required to be certified to the emission standards of the rule. These engines are not currently certified to any nonroad standards and manufacturers of these engines would need to conduct all activities that are associated with obtaining certification for these engines. The EPA anticipates that the manufacturer burden to certify stationary only engine families will be the same as the manufacturer burden EPA has previously estimated for the certification of nonroad CI 1Information Collection Request Support Statement. Information Requirements for Nonroad Diesel Engines ( Nonroad Large SI Engines and Marine Diesel Engines) ( Amendments). Spring 2004. Assessment and Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and Radiation, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. ICR Tracking Number 1897.07.

6 engines1.

A total of 1,077 nonroad engine families will be certified per year under the nonroad CI engine program. The EPA estimated that 10 nonroad engine families will be subject to selective enforcement audits ( SEA), which equates to approximately 1 percent of the engine families. The EPA believes that it is reasonable to assume that the same percent of SEA would occur for stationary engines. In addition, for the nonroad CI engine information collection request, EPA took into account the manufacturers' need to investigate and report emission related defects and assumed that 10 percent of the engine families trigger the defect investigation threshold. The EPA assumed that manufacturers would require 126 hours of effort per engine family to perform the investigation and submit the required reports. Since stationary engines will be required to follow the certification program that is established for nonroad engines, the EPA believes that the same percentage of stationary engine families would have to conduct defect reporting with the same amount of effort. A certification cost of $ 2,156 per engine family for engine families that will be certified for stationary use only has also been included. Finally, consistent with the nonroad CI engine ICR, operation and maintenance costs associated with engine certification have been included. Operation and maintenance costs include expenses related to engine testing. Costs are for laboratory time, the use of test equipment, engine parts, fuel and other supplies, and fabrication of test tools and fixtures. The EPA estimates a total certification cost of about $ 830,000 to certify engine families that are not already certified to nonroad CI standards. Table 6 presents a breakdown of the various costs related to the certification process. 7 Table 6. Estimated Cost of Certifying Engine Families for Stationary Use Only Requirement Estimated Labor Hours per Engine Family Labor Cost per Engine Family O& M Costs per Engine Family Number of Families Total Cost per Year Mgr. @ $ 73/ hr Tech. @ $ 65/ hr Cler. @ $ 33/ hr Certification Application* 2 36 6 $ 2,690 $ 0 35 $ 169,610 Recordkeeping 0.2 2.2 2 $ 224 $ 0 35 $ 7,847 Certification/ Durability Testing 0 168 0 $ 10,920 $ 4,776 35 $ 549,360 Selective Enforcement Audits 5 100 10 $ 7,210 $ 75,105 1 $ 82,315 Defect Reporting 6 40 80 $ 5,696 $ 0 4 $ 22,784 Total $ 831,916 * Cost for certification application includes fees assessed at $ 2,156 per engine family.

Cost of Initial Notification The rule requires owners and operators of non emergency stationary CI engines that are greater than 3,000 HP or that have a displacement of 10 liters per cylinder or more to submit an initial notification. Engine manufacturers have indicated that approximately 160 stationary CI engines greater than 3,000 HP are sold each year. The EPA estimates that 20 percent of all engines are used for non emergency purposes. This means that there are an estimated 32 new non emergency engines greater than 3,000 HP sold each year that would have to submit an initial notification. According to manufacturers, eight engines with a displacement of 10 liters per cylinder or more are sold in the U. S. each year. All of these engines are assumed to be nonemergency engines and would have to submit an initial notification. Owners and operators of pre 2007 model year non emergency stationary CI engines that are greater than 175 HP and that are not certified are also required to submit an initial notification. However, since the cost estimates in this memorandum are shown for the years 2011 through 2017, the cost of initial notification for pre 2007 model year engines are not presented. Owners and operators of emergency stationary CI engines are not required to submit any notifications.

The cost of an initial notification is estimated at $ 144. The initial notification is based on 2 technical hours, which EPA estimates is a sufficient amount of time to prepare and submit the information associated with an initial notification. The management and clerical hours are estimated as a percentage of the technical hours 8 [( 2 hrs x $ 65 hr )

( 0.05 x 2 hrs x $ 76 hr )

( 0.1 x 2 hrs x $ 33 hr )] x 40 Engine and are 5 and 10 percent, respectively. The labor rates, on a per hour basis, were obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics web site ( http:// www. bls. gov/ news. release/ ecec. toc. htm) as posted for June 2004. The base labor rates are $ 28.20 for technical personnel, $ 32.12 for management, and $ 13.91 for clerical. The total compensation rate is $ 38.82 for technical personnel, $ 45.29 for managerial, and $ 19.92 for clerical. This accounts for paid leave, insurance, etc. The compensation rates were then adjusted by an overhead and profit rate of 167 percent. The final total wage rates are as follows:

Technical Personnel: $ 65 per hour Management: $ 76 per hour Clerical: $ 33 per hour The total cost of submitting initial notifications was calculated using the following equation:

yielding a total cost for submitting initial notifications of $ 5,768 per year, as shown in Table 1.

Cost of Recordkeeping The proposed rule includes recordkeeping requirements that apply to owners and operators of certain stationary CI ICE. Owners and operators of emergency stationary engines are required to keep records of the hours spent operating during non emergencies, i. e., during maintenance and testing. The rule requires that owners and operators limit this time to 30 hours per year. A non resettable hour meter must be installed to keep track of operation during non emergencies to ensure the hours of operation restricted by the rule is not exceeded. According to vendors, an hour meter is typically included with the engine, therefore, no separate cost of the hour meter was estimated. The EPA anticipates that minimal effort will be involved in recording the number of hours spent in emergency operation and estimates that about 1/ 2 hour per year of technical labor will be required to record and keep the appropriate records.

The EPA estimates that there will be 308,225 new emergency engines subject to the rule in the year 2011. This estimate includes 75 percent of 2006 model year emergency engines and 2007 through 2011 model year emergency engines. The cost of recording hours during non emergency operation in 2011 was calculated as follows: 9 1/ 2 hr Technical Labor x $ 65 hr x 308,225 Engines 1/ 2 hr Technical Labor x $ 65 hr x 5,439 Engines yielding a total cost for recording hours of operation during non emergencies of $ 10,017,313.

Owners and operators of stationary CI ICE that are equipped with DPF are required to install a backpressure monitor that notifies the operator when the high backpressure limit of the engine is approached. Control technology vendors have indicated that a backpressure monitor is typically included with the equipment so no separate cost was estimated. Owners and operators are required to keep records of any corrective action performed after the backpressure monitor alerts the operator. The earliest a DPF would be required would in the year 2011, therefore, recordkeeping costs associated with this requirement has been estimated for 2011 model year and later engines. The EPA expects that cleaning of the DPF will be conducted about once per year. This is based on what the California Air Resources Board estimated for the stationary CI engine regulation, where cleaning was expected to occur every 1,500 hours of operation. Information indicates that non emergency engines operate on average about 1,000 hours per year, therefore, cleaning is anticipated to occur about once per year. Again, minimal effort is involved with keeping records of action taken after the backpressure monitor has alerted the operator that the high backpressure limit has been reached and EPA estimates that 1/ 2 per year of technical labor will be sufficient to document the action taken.

As mentioned, the earliest DPF would be required would be in the year 2011 and engines between 175 and 750 HP would be equipped with DPF in this year. The EPA estimates that 5,439 new non emergency engines between 175 and 750 HP will come online in 2011. To estimate the cost of recording action taken following backpressure alerts in 2011, the following equation was used:

yielding a total cost for recording action taken after backpressure alerts in the year 2011 of $ 176,768. Adding the cost of recording backpressure alerts to the cost of recording the number of hours of operation during non emergencies ($ 10,017,313), yields a total recordkeeping cost of about $ 10,194,100 in 2011, consistent with the figure shown in Table 1 for this year. 10 11 $ 2,000 per test x 12,200 Engines MY 2006 x 0.75 x 0.20 Cost of Testing The majority of owners and operators of stationary CI engines covered by this rule will demonstrate compliance by purchasing a certified engine. There will be a period during which certified stationary non emergency CI engines may not be available. The proposed NSPS requires that engine manufacturers certify their 2007 model year and later stationary CI engines to the nonroad diesel engine emission standards. The proposed rule also requires pre 2007 model year engines subject to the rule to meet emission standards based on current levels achieved. However, pre 2007 model year engines may not be available as certified engines since the proposed rule requires that engine manufacturers certify stationary engines starting with 2007 model year engines. Therefore, some owners and operators of pre 2007 model year engines will have to demonstrate compliance by other means. Options for demonstrating compliance include keeping records of engine manufacturer or control device vendor data and test results for a performance test conducted on a similar engine. The owner and operator may also demonstrate initial compliance by conducting a performance test on the engine. The EPA expects that most owners and operators will rely on information available from the engine manufacturer and control device vendor to demonstrate initial compliance and estimates that only 20 percent of stationary pre 2007 model year non emergency CI engines subject to the rule will conduct a performance test. No performance testing is expected to occur after certified engines become available although the enforcing agency may request a performance test.

For purposes of estimating costs, it is assumed that 2006 model year engines will test in 2006 and based on the applicability date of the rule ( engines ordered after the proposal date and manufactured after April 1, 2006), the EPA estimates that about 75 percent of 2006 model year engines will be affected by the rule and will have to comply with emissions limitations. A performance test is expected to cost approximately $ 2,000 and EPA's projection estimates indicate that there will be approximately 12,200 new non emergency stationary CI engines in 2006, of which 75 percent, or 9,150 will be affected by the rule. The cost of testing in 2006 was calculated as follows:

yielding estimated testing costs of about $ 3.7 million for 2006 model year engines.


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 140 (Thursday, July 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42740-42742]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17881]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PF10-18-000]

Ryckman Creek Resources, LLC; Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Assessment for the Planned Ryckman Creek Storage Project
and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

July 15, 2010.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA). The EA will
discuss the environmental impacts of the Ryckman Creek Storage Project
(Project) involving construction and operation of facilities by Ryckman
Creek Resources, LLC (Ryckman Creek) in Uinta County, Wyoming. This EA
will be used by the Commission in its decisionmaking process to
determine whether the project is in the public convenience and
necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process that will
be used to gather input from the public and interested agencies on the
Project. Your input will help the Commission staff and cooperating
agencies determine which issues need to be evaluated in the EA. Please
note that the scoping period for this Project will close on August 16,
2010. This is not your only public input opportunity; please refer to
the Environmental Review Process flow chart in Appendix 1.
    The FERC will be the lead Federal agency for the preparation of the
EA. The EA will satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) and will be used by the FERC to consider the
environmental impacts that could result if it issues Ryckman Creek
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity under section 7 of the
Natural Gas Act.
    The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is participating as a
cooperating agency in the preparation of the EA to satisfy its
respective NEPA and planning responsibilities since the Project would
cross Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Kemmerer Field Office
in Wyoming. Under sections 17 and 28 of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920
(30 U.S.C. 185(f) and 226(m)), the BLM has the authority to issue
underground gas storage agreements and right-of-way grants for all
affected Federal lands. This would be in accordance with title 43 Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 2800, 2880, and 5105.5 subsequent
2800, 2880, and 3160-11 Manuals, and Handbook 2801-1. As a cooperating
agency, the BLM would adopt the EA per Title 40 CFR 1506.3 to meet its
responsibilities under NEPA in considering Ryckman Creek's application
for a Right-of-Way Grant and Temporary Use Permit for the portion of
the Project on Federal land, by the Kemmerer Field Office, High Desert
District; and the issuance of an Underground Gas Storage Agreement by
the Wyoming State Office, Reservoir Management Group, Casper, Wyoming.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives are asked to notify their constituents of this planned
project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, you may be contacted
by a pipeline company representative about the acquisition of an
easement to construct, operate, and maintain the planned facilities.
The company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement.
However, if the project is approved by the Commission, that approval
conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if easement
negotiations fail to produce an agreement, the pipeline company could
initiate condemnation proceedings in accordance with state law.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?'' is available for
viewing on the FERC Web site (http://www.ferc.gov). This fact sheet
addresses a number of typically asked questions, including the use of
eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings.

Summary of the Planned Project

    Ryckman Creek plans to convert a partially depleted oil field,
known as the Ryckman Nugget Unit (Unit), into a natural gas storage
field offering approximately 25 to 30 billion cubic feet (Bcf) of high
deliverability working gas capacity in Uinta County, Wyoming. Ryckman
Creek would also construct and operate about 3.9 miles of 16- to 20-
inch-diameter pipeline header system connecting the existing Canyon
Creek Compressor Station with the Unit. The Project will provide for
the injection and withdrawal of natural gas into and out of the Unit
via interconnects with the existing Kern River, Questar, and
Overthrust/REX pipelines directly adjacent to the Canyon Creek
Compressor Station. Combined, these three interconnect pipelines
provide a total of 1.55 Bcf per day of take-away capacity. Prior to and
concurrent with the development of the storage field, Ryckman Creek
proposes to initiate enhanced oil recovery (EOR) operations of the
petroleum reserves remaining in the Unit.
    The Ryckman Creek Storage Project would consist of the following
facilities, all in Unita County, Wyoming:
     Drill and complete up to five new horizontal injection/
withdrawal (I/W) wells and convert an EOR horizontal withdrawal well,
to be drilled in the initial EOR phase in 2010, to an I/W well for
storage operations.
     The Project would require an additional 6,000 to 9,000
horsepower (hp), for a total of 28,000 to 31,000 hp at the existing
Canyon Creek Compressor Station. One or two new electric-driven
compressors would be added and four of the existing compressor units
would be retrofitted.
     Create a central gas/liquids separation facility (Ryckman
Plant) where all of the gas pipelines meet. It would contain a small
electric-driven compressor to compress casing head gas, liquids
separation equipment, and water and gas handling equipment.
     Construct a 3.9-mile-long high pressure header pipeline
between the Ryckman Plant at the storage field and the Canyon Creek
Compressor Station.
     Construct 4 mile(s) of new 8-inch-diameter storage field
I/W lines.
     Convert one previously re-entered well to an observation
well.
     Construct ancillary facilities, as necessary to operate
the Project (e.g., valves, meters, filtration, safety, cleaning and
inspection equipment).
     Construct temporary laydown and temporary support
facilities. To the extent feasible, some of these would be located
within the existing disturbed,

fenced areas at either the Canyon Creek Compressor Station or on the
original site of the previous oil and gas production operations on the
Unit.
     Re-enter/re-complete up to 13 production wells (EOR
development concurrent with storage operations).
     Re-enter/re-complete up to two saltwater disposal wells,
one on the Unit and one off-Unit (the first of two saltwater disposal
wells would be re-completed in 2010 as part of the initial EOR
development).
     Re-use/construct production well gathering system (EOR
development concurrent with storage operations).
     Construct a water/hydrocarbon liquids dew point control
plant and a nitrogen reject unit (NRU) at the existing Canyon Creek
Compressor Station.
     Certain facilities may need to be abandoned at the Canyon
Creek Compressor Station.

The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix
2.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The appendices referenced in this notice are not being
printed in the Federal Register. Copies of appendices were sent to
all those receiving this notice in the mail and are available at
http://www.ferc.gov using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the
Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, or call<PHONE_NUMBER>. For instructions on
connecting to eLibrary, refer to the last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the planned facilities would disturb about 177
acres of land for the pipelines and wells. Following construction,
about 128 acres would be maintained for permanent operation of the
project's facilities; the remaining acreage would be restored and
allowed to revert to former uses. Additional land would be required for
construction and operation of the aboveground facilities, for access
roads, and additional temporary workspaces.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
\2\ to discover and address concerns the public may have about
proposals. This process is referred to as scoping. The main goal of the
scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public
comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. All comments
received will be considered during the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``We'', ``us'', and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction and operation of the planned project under these
general headings:
     Geology and soils;
     Land use;
     Water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
     Cultural resources;
     Vegetation and wildlife including migratory birds;
     Air quality and noise;
     Endangered and threatened species; and
     Public safety.
    We will also evaluate possible alternatives to the planned project
or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to lessen
or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    Although no formal application has been filed, we have already
initiated our NEPA review under the Commission's pre-filing process.
The purpose of the pre-filing process is to encourage early involvement
of interested stakeholders and to identify and resolve issues before an
application is filed with the FERC. As part of our pre-filing review,
we have begun to contact some Federal and state agencies to discuss
their involvement in the scoping process and the preparation of the EA.
See Appendix 1 for an overview of the Commission's Pre-Filing
Environmental Review Process.
    Our independent analysis of the issues will be presented in the EA.
The EA will be placed in the public record and, depending on the
comments received during the scoping process, may be published and
distributed to the public. A comment period will be allotted if the EA
is published for review. We will consider all comments on the EA before
we make our recommendations to the Commission. To ensure your comments
are considered, please carefully follow the instructions in the Public
Participation section beginning on page 6.
    With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction and/or
special expertise with respect to environmental issues to formally
cooperate with us in the preparation of the EA. These agencies may
choose to participate once they have evaluated the proposal relative to
their responsibilities. Agencies that would like to request cooperating
agency status should follow the instructions for filing comments
provided under the Public Participation section of this notice.
Currently, the BLM has expressed their intention to participate as a
cooperating agency in the preparation of the EA to satisfy their NEPA
responsibilities related to this project.

Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations, we are using this notice to solicit the views
of the public on the project's potential effects on historic
properties.\3\ We will document our findings on the impacts on cultural
resources and summarize the status of consultations under section 106
of the National Historic Preservation Act in our EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
are at title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, part 800. Historic
properties are defined in those regulations as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register for Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the project. 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 your
comments are timely and properly recorded, please send your comments so
that they will be received in Washington, DC on or before August 16,
2010.
    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit
your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic
filing of comments and has expert eFiling staff available to assist you
at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the Quick
Comment feature, which is located at http:www.ferc.gov under the link
called ``Documents and Filings''. A Quick Comment is an easy method for
interested persons to submit text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the
``eFiling'' feature that is listed under the ``Documents and Filings''
link. eFiling involves preparing your submission in the same manner as
you would if filing on paper, and then saving the file on your
computer's hard drive. You will attach that file to your submission.
New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on the links
called ``Sign up'' or ``eRegister''. You will be asked to select the
type of filing you are making. A comment on a particular

project is considered a ``Comment on a Filing''; or
    (3) You may file a paper copy of your comments at the following
address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Room 1A Washington, DC 20426.

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes Federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local newspapers. This list also includes all
affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's regulations) who
are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property may be used
temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within certain
distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits comments on
the project. We will update the environmental mailing list as the
analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related to
this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
planned project.
    If the EA is published for distribution, copies will be sent to the
environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you would
prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD
version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please
return the attached Information Request (appendix 3).

Becoming an Intervenor

    Once Ryckman Creek files its application with the Commission, you
may want to become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are
included in the User's Guide under the ``e-filing'' link on the
Commission's Web site. Please note that the Commission will not accept
requests for intervenor status at this time. You must wait until a
formal application for the project is filed with the Commission.

Additional Information

    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 (http://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., PF10-18-000. 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 http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-17881 Filed 7-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P