                                 Attachment B
       Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act (PRIA 3) fees.
See web cite at: PRIA 3; Tables - FY 2014/15 Fee Schedule for Registration Applications | Pesticides | US EPA


MEMORANDUM

DATE:08/28/2014
FROM: 		Laura Farris/EPA Region 8
TO:CLEAN Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR - 2013-0602
SUBJECT:		Clean Power Plan Discussion with the State of Utah held on 08/28/2014

SUMMARY
EPA Headquarters and Region 8 staff discussed various questions regarding the proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants with the State of Utah on 08/28/2014. The Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was proposed on June 2, 2014.

ATTENDEES
EPA HQ:  Brian Fisher, David Solomon, Jeremy Mark, James Critchfield, Nick Swanson, Misha Vakoc, Jim Ketcham-Colwill, Jan Cortelyou, Erica Wilson, Matt Clouse, Beth Conlin, Joe Bryson, Gabrielle Stevens.
EPA Region 8: Carl Daly and Laura Farris

Utah Office of Energy Development: Peter Ashcroft, Rob Simmons
Utah DEQ: Glade Sowards, Bryce Bird, Dave McNeil, Jeff Whitchurch, Colleen Delaney

Discussion Questions
   1. Can EPA walk through the conversion from a rate-based to a mass-based standard, or provide the numbers?
   2. If a state fails to meet its goals, what are the consequences?
   3. Can EPA describe how the accounting for EE works?
   4. Does EPA have any plans to work with other Feds on new transmission, RE, and natural gas pipeline siting issues; streamlining the NEPA process; and addressing the Sage Grouse issue regarding energy development? These are major issues related to RE development and the increased use of NGCCs.
   5. Can EPA discuss what might be acceptable regarding multi-state plans? Do states still submit individual state plans? Can they include more than one multi-state program or initiative? What if one state drops out of the Plan during the review or compliance period?
   6. Does a plant have to go through NSR when it is trying to achieve (heat rate improvements) HRIs?
   7. Can EPA discuss the RE accounting mechanisms, both in goal setting and in compliance? Can the HRI's work the same way?
   8. How do states redispatch to NGCC units located in non-attainment areas?
   9. Will EPA correct errors in calculating interim and final targets for the proposed rule prior to issuing final rules?  What is the mechanism for correcting errors identified by states?  For example, the Lake Side 2 NGCC plant in Utah was mischaracterized as operational, but it was actually under construction and had no generation for 2012.  The plant began operating in June 2014.  As a result, the 2012 NGCC capacity factor was estimated to be 32% while the actual number should have been 48%.  Consequently, Utah's interim (1,378 lbs/MWh) and final (1,322 lbs/MWh) goal rates were set too high.  Because the actual capacity factor of existing plants is much higher than originally estimated (again, 48% vs. 32%), there is less remaining headroom for redispatching natural gas to the 70% capacity factor targeted by EPA.  This error should be corrected and the interim and final goals should be adjusted to 1,422 lbs/MWh and 1,369 lbs/MWh, respectively.
   10. How will existing and future RE and other resources located inside Utah be treated if they were constructed to meet policy directives (e.g., RPS, EPS, cap and trade, etc.) in other states (e.g., existing Milford FirstWind Phases 1 and 2, future IPP conversion from coal to NGCC)?  If RE is included in Utah's target, it should be available for compliance as well.
   11. How will new NGCC plants (and other fuels) be treated in the final calculations to determine whether states meet goals?  There have been mixed answers to this question in EPA-sponsored calls to-date.  It is considerably more difficult for a state like Utah with a 2030 goal in lbs/MWh in excess of the emissions rate for a typical, new NGCC plant to achieve that goal via the four blocks alone.  Allowing new NGCC plants to count towards compliance provides more flexibility in meeting the proposed target.
   12. How do the proposed targets address load growth in fast-growing states like Utah?  For example, there may be limited opportunities to redispatch to NGCC when these plants were built to meet future load growth.  Similarly, in high-growth states, EE investments may not result in lower fossil generation, but may simply be helping to meet load growth.  Related:  Can high-load growth states realistically use a mass-based approach and, if so, how?
   13. The population and economy of Utah have consistently demonstrated strong growth, driving regional economic development and innovation. An emissions reduction plan must account for Utah's growth, either through a rate-based approach, or through a mass-based approach that allows for economic growth.
   14. Utah's coal-fired power plants are among the cleanest in the country. EPA's rate-based final target for carbon dioxide emissions in Utah should be set so as to ensure the full life of Utah's coal-fired power plants, rather than burdening ratepayers and the economy with premature decommissioning. Costs of existing coal plants should be recovered before retirement. Moreover, it doesn't make sense (from an equity or emissions perspective) to sideline relatively clean Utah coal plants while allowing dirtier plants in other states to continue operation.
   15. EPA shouldn't subject Utah power plants to conflicting regulatory requirements.  Regulatory requirements for other pollutants such as PM2.5 or ozone may constrain power plant operations. For example, EPA assumes that natural gas units will be operated at an average of 70 percent capacity, which may be incompatible with other Clean Air Act requirements and/or State Implementation Plans to reduce pollutants along the Wasatch Front.
   16. The EPA timetable does not allow sufficient time for utility regulatory proceedings and legislative actions that may be necessary to develop and implement a state emissions reduction plan.
   17. Requirements for energy efficiency or renewable energy may exceed the legal authority of state air quality regulators.


[Federal Register: February 6, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 25)]
[Notices]
[Page 7024-7026]
[DOCID:fr06fe08-97]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57249; File No. SR-NYSE-2008-10]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Rule 36 (Communication Between Exchange and Exchange
Members' Offices)

January 31, 2008.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on January 30, 2008, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the
Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposed rule change pursuant to
section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\
which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange seeks to extend its current portable phone pilot (the
``Pilot'') operating pursuant to Exchange Rule 36 from its scheduled
January 31, 2008 expiration date to April 30, 2008.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange seeks to extend the Pilot operating pursuant to
Exchange Rule 36 from the Pilot's scheduled January 31, 2008 expiration
date to April 30, 2008. Pursuant to the Pilot, Floor brokers and
Registered Competitive Market Makers (``RCMM'') are permitted to use an
Exchange authorized and provided portable telephone on the Exchange
Floor provided certain conditions are met.

Background

    The Commission originally approved the Pilot to be implemented for
a six-month period \5\ beginning no later than June 23, 2003.\6\ Since
the inception of the Pilot, the Exchange has extended the Pilot eight
times, with the current Pilot expiring on January 31, 2008.\7\ Exchange

Rule 36 governs the establishment of telephone or electronic
communications between the Exchange Floor and any other location. Prior
to the Pilot, Exchange Rule 36 prohibited the use of portable telephone
communication between the Exchange Floor and any off-Floor location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47671 (April 11,
2003), 68 FR 19048 (April 17, 2003) (SR-NYSE-2002-11) (``Original
Order'').
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47992 (June 5,
2003), 68 FR 35047 (June 11, 2003) (SR-NYSE-2003-19) (delaying the
implementation date for portable phones from on or about May 1, 2003
to no later than June 23, 2003).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 48919 (December 12,
2003), 68 FR 70853 (December 19, 2003) (SR-NYSE-2003-38) (extending
the Pilot for an additional six months ending on June 16, 2004);
49954 (July 1, 2004), 69 FR 41323 (July 8, 2004) (SR-NYSE-2004-30)
(extending the Pilot for an additional five months ending on
November 30, 2004); 50777 (December 1, 2004), 69 FR 71090 (December
8, 2004) (SR-NYSE-2004-67) (extending the Pilot for an additional
four months ending March 31, 2005); 51464 (March 31, 2005), 70 FR
17746 (April 7, 2005) (SR-NYSE-2005-20) (extending the Pilot for
additional four months ending July 31, 2005); 52188 (August 1,
2005), 70 FR 46252 (August 9, 2005) (SR-NYSE-2005-53) (extending the
Pilot for an additional four months ending January 31, 2006); 53277
(February 13, 2006), 71 FR 8877 (February 21, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2006-
03) (extending the Pilot for an additional six months ending July
31, 2006); 54276 (August 4, 2006), 71 FR 45885 (August 10, 2006)
(SR-NYSE-2006-55) (extending the Pilot for an additional six months
ending January 31, 2007); and 55218 (January 31, 2007), 72 FR 6025
(February 8, 2007) (SR-NYSE-2007-05) (extending the Pilot for an
additional twelve months ending January 31, 2008). Also, the
Exchange has incorporated RCMMs into the Pilot and subsequently
amended the Pilot to allow RCMMs to use an Exchange authorized and
provided portable telephone on the Exchange Floor to call to and
receive calls from their upstairs offices, the upstairs offices of
their clearing firm, and their booth locations on the Exchange
Floor. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53213 (February 2,
2006), 71 FR 7103 (February 10, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2005-80), and 54215
(July 26, 2006), 71 FR 43551 (August 1, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2006-51).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the operation of the Pilot, Floor brokers and RCMMs may use
Exchange authorized and issued portable telephones on the Exchange
Floor. Floor brokers are permitted to engage in direct voice
communication from the point of sale to an off-Floor location, such as
a member firm's trading desk or the office of one of the broker's
customers. Such communications permit the broker to accept orders
consistent with Exchange rules governing the entry of orders on the
Exchange Floor; \8\ provide status and oral execution reports as to
orders previously received, as well as ``market look'' observations as
have historically been routinely transmitted from a broker's booth
location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Floor brokers receiving orders from the public over portable
phones must be properly qualified to engage in such ``direct
access'' business under Exchange Rules 342 and 345, among others.
See also note 10 infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Both incoming and outgoing calls are allowed, provided the
requirements of all other Exchange rules have been met. A Floor broker
is not permitted to represent and execute any order received as a
result of such voice communication unless the order is first properly
recorded by the member and entered into the Exchange's Front End
Systemic Capture (FESC) electronic database (Exchange Rule 123(e)).\9\
In addition, Exchange rules require that any Floor broker receiving
orders from the public over portable phones must be properly qualified
to engage in such direct access business under Exchange Rules 342 and
345, among others.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43689 (December 7,
2000), 65 FR 79145 (December 18, 2000) (SR-NYSE-98-25). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44943 (October 16, 2001), 66 FR
53820 (October 24, 2001) (SR-NYSE-2001-39) (discussing certain
exceptions to FESC, such as orders to offset an error, or a bona
fide arbitrage, which may be entered within 60 seconds after a trade
is executed).
    \10\ For more information regarding Exchange requirements for
conducting a public business on the Exchange Floor, see Information
Memos 01-41 (November 21, 2001), 01-18 (July 11, 2001) (available on
http://www.nyse.com/regulation/) and 91-25 (July 8, 1991).

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

    The Pilot also allows RCMMs to use an Exchange authorized portable
phone solely to call and receive calls from their booths on the
Exchange Floor, to communicate with their or their member
organizations' off-Floor office, and to communicate with the off-Floor
office of their clearing member organization to enter off-Floor orders
and to discuss matters related to the clearance and settlement of
transactions, provided the off-Floor office uses a wired telephone line
for these discussions. RCMMs, who trade for their own accounts on the
Exchange Floor subject to the requirements of Exchange Rule 107A, are
currently not allowed to use a portable phone to conduct any agency
business.\11\ For both RCMMs and Floor brokers, use of a portable
telephone on the Exchange Floor other than one authorized and issued by
the Exchange is prohibited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Allowing RCMMs acting as Floor brokers to use portable
phones would involve further discussions with the Commission and
would be the subject of a separate filing with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specialists are subject to separate restrictions in Exchange Rule
36 on their ability to engage in voice communications from the
specialist post to an off-Floor location.\12\ The Pilot does not apply
to specialists, who would continue to be prohibited from speaking from
the post to upstairs trading desks or customers.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46560 (September
26, 2002), 67 FR 62088 (October 3, 2002) (SR-NYSE-00-31) (discussing
restrictions on specialists' communications from the post).
    \13\ Exchange Rule 36.30 provides that, with the approval of the
Exchange, a specialist unit may maintain a telephone line at its
stock trading post location to the off-Floor offices of the
specialist unit or the unit's clearing firm. Such telephone
connection shall not be used for the purpose of transmitting to the
Exchange Floor orders for the purchase or sale of securities but may
be used to enter options or futures hedging orders through the
unit's off-Floor office or the unit's clearing firm or through a
member (on the Exchange Floor) of an options or futures exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pilot Program Results

    Currently, there are approximately 400 portable phone
subscribers.\14\ For a sample week of October 15 through October 19,
2007, an average of 2,518 calls/day was outgoing calls from portable
phones issued to Floor brokers and RCMMs. An average of 960 calls/day
was incoming calls to the portable phones. Of the outgoing calls from
portable phones, an average of 1,026 calls/day was internal calls to
the booth by Floor brokers and RCMMs, and 1,492 calls/day was external
calls by RCMMs to the upstairs offices of their member organization and
their clearing member organization and external calls of Floor brokers.
Thus, approximately 47% of the outgoing calls from portable phones were
internal calls to the booth by Floor brokers and RCMMs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ This data includes both Floor brokers and RCMMs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Of the 960 average incoming calls/day received, an average of 337
calls/day was external calls to RCMMs from the upstairs offices of
their member organization and their clearing member organization and
external calls to Floor brokers. An average of 623 calls/day was
internal calls received from the booth. Thus, approximately 65% of all
incoming calls received were from the booth and the remaining 35% of
incoming calls received were external calls to RCMMs from the upstairs
offices of their member organization and their clearing member
organization and external calls to Floor brokers.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The Exchange has received records of incoming and outgoing
telephone calls from January 31, 2007 through December 31, 2007 for
Floor brokers and RCMMs and will continue to receive records of such
telephone calls on a monthly basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the Pilot is operating successfully in
that there is a reasonable degree of usage of portable phones. During
the period of January 31, 2007 through January 31, 2008, there have
been no significant regulatory concerns identified with their
usage.\16\ Moreover, there have been no administrative or technical
problems, other than routine telephone maintenance issues, that have
resulted from the operation of the Pilot over the past few months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ With respect to regulatory actions concerning the Pilot, in
October 2007, there were two matters concerning the receipt of a
phone call from an unauthorized number by RCMMs that were each
investigated and closed with no action by NYSE Regulation, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion

    The Exchange proposes to extend the operation of the current Pilot
for an additional three months to April 30, 2008. The Exchange believes
that the approval of the Pilot's continuation for an additional three
months will enable the Exchange to continue to provide more direct,
efficient access to its trading crowds and customers, increase the
speed of transmittal of orders and the execution of trades, and provide
an enhanced level of service to customers in an increasingly
competitive environment.\17\ Therefore the Exchange believes it is
appropriate to extend the Pilot for an additional three months,
expiring on April 30, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43493 (October 30,
2000), 65 FR 67022 (November 8, 2000) (SR-CBOE-00-04), cited by
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43836 (January 11, 2001), 66 FR
6727 (January 22, 2001) (discussing and approving the Chicago Board
Options Exchange's and the Pacific Exchange's proposals to remove
current prohibitions against Floor brokers' use of cellular or
cordless phones to make calls to persons located off the trading
floor).

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

2. Statutory Basis
    The basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is the
requirement under section 6(b)(5) \18\ that an Exchange have rules that
are designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. The amendment to Exchange Rule 36
supports the mechanism of free and open markets by providing for
increased means by which communications to and from the Exchange Floor
may take place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with
the protection of investors and the public interest, it has become
effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \19\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\20\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange requests that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative period under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) of the Act.\21\ The
Exchange believes that the continuation of the Pilot is in the public
interest as it will avoid inconvenience and interruption to the public.
The Commission believes that it is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest to waive the 30-day operative delay
and make this proposed rule change immediately effective.\22\ The
Commission believes that the waiver of the 30-day operative delay will
allow the Exchange to continue, without interruption, the existing
operation of its Pilot until April 30, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \22\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C.
78c(f). The Exchange provided the Commission written notice of its
intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days
prior to filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that proper surveillance is an essential
component of any telephone access policy to an exchange trading floor.
Surveillance procedures should help to ensure that Floor brokers and
RCMMs use portable phones as authorized by Exchange Rule 36 and that
orders are being handled in compliance with Exchange rules.\23\ The
Commission expects the Exchange to actively review these procedures and
address any potential concerns that have arisen during the Pilot. In
this regard, the Commission notes that the Exchange should address
whether telephone records are adequate for surveillance purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See note 10 supra and accompanying text for other NYSE
requirements that Floor brokers be properly qualified before doing
public customer business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also requests that the Exchange report any problems,
surveillance, or enforcement matters associated with the Floor brokers'
and RCMMs' use of an Exchange authorized and provided portable
telephone on the Exchange Floor. As stated in the Original Order, NYSE
should also address whether additional surveillance would be needed
because of the derivative nature of the ETFs. Furthermore, in any
future additional filings on the Pilot, the Commission would expect
that NYSE submit information documenting the usage of the phones, any
problems that have occurred, including, among other things, any
regulatory actions or concerns, and any advantages or disadvantages
that have resulted.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ In any request for a permanent approval of the Pilot, the
Commission would expect the information to distinguish between Floor
brokers' and RCMMs' usage of the phones.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NYSE-2008-10 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2008-10. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying 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. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of NYSE. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2008-10 and should be
submitted on or before February 27, 2008.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-2140 Filed 2-5-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 61 (Friday, March 29, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 11972]
[FR Doc No: 2019-06016]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9044-1]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/nepa/.
Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements
Filed 03/18/2019 through 03/22/2019
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20190036, Draft Supplement, NRCS, MO, Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement Little Otter Creek Watershed Plan,
Comment Period Ends: 05/13/2019, Contact: Chris Hamilton<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20190037, Final, FHWA, NC, I-4400/I-4700 I-26 Widening Combined
Final Environmental Impact Statement, Final Section 4(f) Evaluation,
and Record of Decision, Contact: Clarence W. Coleman, PE<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Under 23 U.S.C. 139(n)(2), FHWA has issued a single document that
consists of a final environmental impact statement and record of
decision. Therefore, the 30-day wait/review period under NEPA does not
apply to this action.

EIS No. 20190038, Draft Supplement, USN, WA, Northwest Training and
Testing Activities Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/
Overseas Environmental Impact Statement, Comment Period Ends: 05/28/
2019, Contact: Jacqueline Queen<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20190039, Final, USFS, ID, Lolo Insect & Disease Project,
Review Period Ends: 04/29/2019, Contact: Sara Daugherty<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20190040, Final, NPS, ME, Acadia National Park Final
Transportation Plan and EIS, Review Period Ends: 04/29/2019, Contact:
John Kelly<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20190041, Final, DOE, TX, ADOPTION--Texas LNG Project-Texas LNG
Brownsville LLC, Contact: Brian Lavoie<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has adopted the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission's Final EIS No. 20190034, filed 02/22/2019 with
the EPA. DOE was a cooperating agency on this project. Therefore,
recirculation of the document is not necessary under Section 1506.3(c)
of the CEQ regulations.

    Dated: March 25, 2019.
Robert Tomiak,
Director, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2019-06016 Filed 3-28-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 24, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 57)]
[Notices]
[Page 15513-15515]
[DOCID:fr24mr08-60]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12707-001]

Hook Canyon Energy, LLC; Notice of Intent to File License
Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document (PAD), Commencement of
Licensing Proceeding, Scoping, Solicitation of Comments on the PAD and
Scoping Document, and Identification of Issues and Associated Study
Requests

March 14, 2008.
    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application for
a New License and Commencing Licensing Proceeding.
    b. Project No.: 12707-001.
    c. Dated Filed: September 10, 2007.
    d. Submitted by: Hook Canyon Energy, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Hook Canyon Pump Storage Project.
    f. Location: The project would be located in Rich County, Utah and
Bear Lake County, Idaho. The project's upper reservoir would be
constructed in Hook Canyon on the eastern side of Bear Lake. Bear Lake
would be the project's lower reservoir. The proposed project would not
occupy any federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR Part 5 of the Commission's
Regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Brent Smith, Symbiotics LLC, P.O.
Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442;<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Steve Hocking at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or (202)
502-8753.
    j. We are asking federal, state, local, and tribal agencies with
jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental
issues to cooperate with us in the preparation of the environmental
document. Agencies who would like to request cooperating status should
follow the instructions for filing comments described in paragraph o
below. Cooperating agencies should note the Commission's policy that
agencies that cooperate in the preparation of an environmental document
cannot also intervene in that same proceeding. See, 94 FERC ] 61,076
(2001).
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) The U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Fisheries under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations thereunder at
50 CFR, Part 402 and, (b) the State Historic Preservation Officer, as
required by section 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the
implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. By letters dated February 13 and 14, 2008, we designated Hook
Canyon Energy, LLC to be the Commission's non-federal representative
for consultation pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
and section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act,
respectively.
    m. Hook Canyon Energy, LLC filed a Pre-Application Document (PAD;
including a proposed process plan and schedule) with the Commission,
pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    n. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
(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, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction using the contact information in paragraph h.
    Register online at http://ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm to be notified
via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or other
pending projects at the Commission. For assistance, contact FERC Online
Support.
    o. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and
Scoping Document 1 (SD1), as well as study requests. All comments on
the PAD and SD1, and study requests should be sent to the address above
in paragraph h. In addition, all comments on the PAD and SD1, study
requests, requests for cooperating agency status, and all
communications to and from Commission staff related to the merits of
the potential application (an original and eight copies) must be filed
with the Commission at: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. All
filings with the Commission must include on the first page, the project
name (Hook Canyon Pump Storage Project) and project number (P-12707-
001), and include the heading ``Comments on Pre-Application Document,''
``Study Requests,'' ``Comments on Scoping Document 1,'' ``Request for
Cooperating Agency Status,'' or ``Communications to and from Commission
Staff.'' Any individual or entity interested in submitting study
requests, commenting on the PAD or SD1, and any agency requesting
cooperating status must do so by May 13, 2008.
    Comments on the PAD and SD1, study requests, requests for
cooperating agency status, and other permissible forms of
communications with the Commission may be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions
on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-
filing'' link.
    p. As of this time, Commission staff intend to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement for this project.

Scoping Meetings

    Commission staff will hold two scoping meetings in the vicinity of
the project at the time and place noted below. The daytime meeting will
focus on resource agency, Indian tribes, and non-governmental
organization concerns, while the evening meeting is primarily for
receiving input from the public. We invite all interested individuals,
organizations, and agencies to attend one or both of these meetings and
to assist staff in identifying particular study needs, as well as the
scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the environmental
document. The times and locations of these meetings are as follows:

Daytime Scoping Meeting

    Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2008.
    Time: 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. (MST).
    Location: Bear Lake West Restaurant and Sports Bar, 554 Lewis Loop,
Fish Haven, ID 83287.
    Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Evening Scoping Meeting

    Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2008.
    Time: 7 p.m.-10 p.m (MST).
    Location: Oregon Trail Center, 320 North 4th Street, Montpelier, ID
83254.
    Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Scoping Document 1 (SD1), which outlines the subject areas to be
addressed in the environmental document, was mailed to the individuals
and entities on the Commission's mailing list. Copies of SD1 will be
available at the scoping meetings, or may be viewed on the web at
http://www.ferc.gov, using the ``eLibrary'' link. Follow the directions
for accessing information in paragraph n. Based on all oral and written
comments, a Scoping Document 2 (SD2) may be issued. SD2 may include a
revised process plan and schedule, as well as a list of issues
identified through the scoping process.

Site Visit

    Hook Canyon Energy, LLC and Commission staff will visit the site of
the proposed project on Tuesday, April 8, 2008, from 8 a.m. to about 12
noon. To attend the site visit, meet at 8 a.m. at the Bear Lake State
Park, Rainbow Cove Launch Area, which is located on the eastern side of
Bear Lake on Cisco Beach Road just north of Cisco beach. All
participants are responsible for their own transportation and access to
the site is limited to four-wheel drive vehicles only. Lunch will be
from about 12 to 1 p.m. All participants should bring their own bag or
box lunch with them to the site visit.
    From 1 p.m. to about 5 p.m., Hook Canyon Energy, LLC and Commission
staff will tour PacifiCorp's Lifton pump station on the north end of
Bear Lake, associated dikes, and possibly Stewart dam. To attend the
tour, meet at 1 p.m. at the Bear Lake State Park, North Beach Parking
Area which is located on the eastern side of Bear Lake on Eastshore
Road just north of the Utah/Idaho state line. Road just north of the
Utah/Idaho state line. All participants are responsible for their own
transportation. Access to the Lifton pump station and other PacifiCorp
facilities is at PacifiCorp's discretion.
    The site visit and tour scheduled for April 8, 2008, is weather
dependent. If the site visit and tour are cancelled, notice will be
placed on the Commission's April 8, 2008, calendar, on its Web site
(http://www.ferc.gov). Please check the Commission's April 8, 2008,
calendar before leaving in the morning to attend the site visit and
tour.

Meeting Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, staff will: (1) Initiate scoping of the
issues; (2) review and discuss existing conditions and resource
management objectives; (3) review and discuss existing information and
identify preliminary information and study needs; (4) review and
discuss the process plan and schedule for pre-filing activity that
incorporates the time frames provided for in Part 5 of the Commission's
regulations and, to the extent possible, maximizes coordination of
federal, state, and tribal permitting and certification processes; and
(5) discuss the appropriateness of any federal or state agency or
Indian tribe acting as a cooperating agency for development of an
environmental document.

    Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their issues
and/or concerns. Please review the PAD in preparation for the scoping
meetings. Directions on how to obtain a copy of the PAD and SD1 are
included in item n. of this document.

Meeting Procedures

    Scoping meetings will be recorded by a stenographer and will become
part of the Commission's formal record for this proceeding.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-5830 Filed 3-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 15 (Tuesday, January 24, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4263-4265]
[FR Doc No: 2023-01259]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96702; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2023-03]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Change To Modify Rule
7.31E

January 18, 2023.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on January 4, 2023, NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to modify Rule 7.31E regarding MPL-IOC
Orders. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website
at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31E regarding MPL-IOC Orders.
    Rule 7.31E(d)(3) defines a Mid-Point Liquidity Order (``MPL
Order'') as a Limit Order to buy (sell) that is not displayed and does
not route, with a working price at the lower (higher) of the midpoint
of the PBBO or its limit price. An MPL Order may be entered during any
Exchange trading session, is ranked Priority 3--Non-Display Orders, and
does not participate in auctions. An MPL Order to buy (sell) must be
designated with a limit price in the minimum price variation for the
security and will be eligible to trade at its working price.\3\ If
there is no PBB or PBO, or if the PBBO is locked or crossed, an
arriving or resting MPL Order will not be eligible to trade until the
PBBO is not locked or crossed. If a resting MPL Order to buy (sell)
trades with another MPL Order to sell (buy) after the PBBO is unlocked
or uncrossed, the MPL Order with the later working time will be the
liquidity-removing order.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Rule 7.31E(d)(3)(A).
    \4\ See Rule 7.31E(d)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An Aggressing MPL Order to buy (sell) will trade at the working
price of resting orders to sell (buy) when such resting orders have a
working price at or below (above) the working price of the MPL Order.
Resting MPL Orders to buy (sell) will trade against all Aggressing
Orders to sell (buy) priced at or below (above) the working price of
the MPL Order.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Rule 7.31E(d)(3)(C). The Exchange also proposes a non-
substantive conforming change to Rule 7.31E(d)(3)(C) to delete
``that is eligible to trade'' from the rule text. The Exchange
proposes to eliminate this text as extraneous and notes that the
proposed change would harmonize the language of Rule 7.31E(d)(3)(C)
with rules of the same number on its affiliated exchanges, New York
Stock Exchange, LLC (``NYSE''); NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'');
NYSE Chicago, Inc. (``NYSE Chicago''); and NYSE National, Inc.
(``NYSE National'') (collectively, the ``Affiliated Exchanges'').
See NYSE Rule 7.31(d)(3)(C); NYSE Arca Rule 7.31-E(d)(3)(C); NYSE
Chicago Rule 7.31(d)(3)(C); NYSE National Rule 7.31(d)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, Rule 7.31E(d)(3)(D) provides that an MPL Order may be
designated with an Immediate-or-Cancel (``IOC'') Modifier (an ``MPL-IOC
Order''). An MPL Order designated IOC will be traded in whole or in
part on the Exchange as soon as such order is received, and any
untraded quantity will be cancelled.\6\ Rule 7.31E(d)(3)(D) further
provides that, subject to the IOC Modifier, an MPL-IOC Order follows
the same trading and priority rules as an MPL Order (as described
above), except that an MPL-IOC Order will be rejected if (i) the order
entry size is less than one round lot or (ii) there is no PBBO or the
PBBO is locked or crossed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Rule 7.31E(b)(2) (defining IOC Modifier).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to modify Rule 7.31E(d)(3)(D) to permit MPL-
IOC Orders to be entered in any size and thus proposes to eliminate
rule text currently providing that an MPL-IOC Order would be rejected
if entered in a quantity less than one round lot. The Exchange believes
that requiring MPL-IOC Orders to be entered in round lots is
unnecessary and that providing ETP Holders with the option to enter
MPL-IOC Orders in odd lots could increase liquidity and enhance
opportunities for order execution on the Exchange. The Exchange notes
that permitting odd-lot order quantities is not novel on the Exchange
or other cash equity exchanges and believes that this proposed change
would align the Exchange's handling of MPL-IOC Orders with the
treatment of equivalent order types on other cash equity exchanges.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See, e.g., Members Exchange Rules 11.8(c)(1) and (2)
(providing that a Midpoint Peg Order may be designated IOC and may
be entered as an odd lot, round lot, or mixed lot); Cboe EDGX
Exchange, Inc. Rules 11.8(d)(1) and (2) (providing that a MidPoint
Peg Order may have an IOC instruction and may be entered as an odd
lot, round lot, or mixed lot); Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc. Rules
11.8(d)(1) and (2) (same). The Exchange also notes that the rules of
the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq''), Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.
(``BZX''), and Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (``BYX'') appear to permit
orders, including orders analogous to MPL-IOC Orders, to be entered
in any size. See Nasdaq Rule 4703(b) (providing that an order may be
entered in any whole share size, except as otherwise provided); BZX
Rule 11.2 (providing that orders are eligible for odd-lot, round-
lot, and mixed-lot executions unless otherwise indicated); BYX Rule
11.2 (same).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because of the technology changes associated with this proposed
rule change, the Exchange will announce the implementation date by
Trader Update, which, subject to effectiveness of this proposed rule
change, will be in the first quarter of 2023.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\9\
in particular, because it is 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 facilitating transactions in securities, to remove
impediments to, and perfect the

mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change would promote just
and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to, and perfect
the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system,
and protect investors and the public interest because it would provide
ETP Holders with the option to enter MPL-IOC Orders in odd-lot sized
orders, which could encourage order flow to the Exchange and promote
opportunities for order execution on the Exchange, to the benefit of
all market participants. The Exchange notes that the proposed change
would not otherwise impact the operation of MPL-IOC Orders as provided
under current Exchange rules. The Exchange also believes that the
proposed change would align Exchange rules with the treatment of orders
analogous to MPL-IOC Orders on other cash equity exchanges, thereby
removing impediments to, and perfecting the mechanism of, a free and
open market and a national market system.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See note 7, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed conforming change to
Rule 7.31E(d)(3)(C) would promote just and equitable principles of
trade, remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and
open market and a national market system, and protect investors and the
public interest by improving the clarity of Exchange rules and
harmonizing the text of the rule with the Affiliated Exchanges' rules
of the same number.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As noted above, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change would allow the Exchange to accept
MPL-IOC Orders of any size and align the Exchange's handling of such
orders with other cash equity exchanges' handling of similar order
types,\11\ thereby promoting competition among exchanges by offering
ETP Holders options available on other cash equity exchanges. The
Exchange also believes that, to the extent the proposed change would
increase opportunities for order execution, the proposed change would
promote competition by making the Exchange a more attractive venue for
order flow and enhancing market quality for all market participants.
The Exchange further believes that the proposed conforming change to
Rule 7.31E(d)(3)(C) would not impose any burden on competition, as the
change is intended only to simplify the rule text and align it with
rules of the same number on the Affiliated Exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \12\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of its
intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \14\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\15\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay to allow the
Exchange to implement the proposal as soon as possible. The Exchange
states that the proposed change would align the Exchange's treatment of
MPL-IOC Orders with treatment of similar order types on other cash
equity exchanges and allow the Exchange to accept MPL-IOC Orders of any
size as soon as the technology associated with the proposed change is
available, which is anticipated to be less than 30 days from the date
of this filing. The Exchange also states that the proposed conforming
change to Rule 7.31E(d)(3)(C) is non-controversial and does not raise
any novel issues, as it would clarify Exchange rules and align the text
of the rule with the Affiliated Exchanges' rules of the same number.
The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because the proposal does not raise any new or novel issues.
Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay
and designates the proposal operative upon filing.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \16\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
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 such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2023-03 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2023-03. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements

with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange.
    All comments received will be posted without change. Persons
submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2023-03 and
should be submitted on or before February 14, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-01259 Filed 1-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 152 (Monday, August 8, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52339-52341]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18535]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2015-1127]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; 2016 Wings Over Vermont Air Show, Lake Champlain,
Burlington, VT

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for an
aerobatic demonstration over the navigable waters of Lake Champlain
along the shoreline in Burlington, VT. This temporary safety zone will
be necessary to protect spectators and vessels from hazards associated
with the air show. Entry into, transit through, mooring or anchoring
within this regulated area will be prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port (COTP) Sector Northern New England (SNNE).

DATES: This rule is effective from 9 a.m. on August 12, 2014, through 6
p.m. on August 14, 2016.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
USCG-2015-1127 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on
Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
rulemaking, call or email Chief Marine Science Technician Chris Bains,
Waterways Management Division at Coast Guard Sector Northern New
England, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
SLR Special Local Regulation
U.S.C. United States Code
COTP Captain of the Port
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On April 19, 2016, the Coast Guard published an NPRM in the Federal
Register titled 2016 Wings over Vermont Air Show (81 FR 22944). There
we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed
regulatory action. No public comments or request for a public meeting
were received during the NPRM process.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The COTP is establishing a safety zone for the Wings over Vermont
Air Show from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on August 12-14, 2016 on Lake Champlain,
along the shoreline of Burlington, VT. The safety zone will cover all
navigable waters, extending to and including the breakwater bounded by
the following coordinates: 44[deg]29'24'' N./073[deg]14'44'' W.;
44[deg]29'24'' N./073[deg]14'03'' W.; 44[deg]28'56'' N./073[deg]14'03''
W.; 44[deg]28'50'' N./073[deg]13'48'' W.; 44[deg]28'12'' N./
073[deg]13'33'' W.; 44[deg]27'47'' N./073[deg]14'03'' W.;
44[deg]27'25'' N./073[deg]14'03'' W.; 44[deg]27'25'' N./073[deg]14'44''
W. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels
and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled 10
a.m. to 5 p.m. aerobatic displays. No vessel or person will be
permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from
the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text appears at
the end of this document.
    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of spectator
vessels and other traffic using the navigable waters near or around the
designated aeronautical box.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, the rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget.
    The Coast Guard has determined that this rule is not a significant
regulatory action for the following reasons: The safety zone will be of
limited duration and will only be in effect during a portion of three
days, it will allow vessels to transit in waters directly adjacent to
the safety zone, and coordinated efforts have been made to direct ferry
traffic around the safety zone so not to disrupt regularly scheduled
ferry service on Lake Champlain. Additionally, maritime advisories will
be posted in the Local Notice to Mariners and the Coast Guard will
issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine Channel 16 prior
to and during the entire duration of the enforcement period.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a
determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do
not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves a safety zone lasting a portion of
three days and will prohibit entry into without permission from the
COTP. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph 34 of figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist supporting
this is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We
seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from this rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T01-1127 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-1127  Safety Zone; 2016 Wings Over Vermont Air Show, Lake
Champlain; Burlington, VT.

    (a) Location. The following area is a Safety Zone: All navigable
waters, from surface to bottom, of Lake Champlain, Burlington, VT,
within an aeronautical box extending to and including the breakwater
bounded by the following coordinates: 44[deg]29'24'' N./073[deg]14'44''
W.; 44[deg]29'24'' N./073[deg]14'03'' W.; 44[deg]28'56'' N./
073[deg]14'03'' W.; 44[deg]28'50'' N./073[deg]13'48'' W.;
44[deg]28'12'' N./073[deg]13'33'' W.; 44[deg]27'47'' N./073[deg]14'03''
W.; 44[deg]27'25'' N./073[deg]14'03'' W.; 44[deg]27'25'' N./
073[deg]14'44'' W.
    (b) Enforcement period. This safety zone described in paragraph (a)
above will be enforced from 9 a.m. until 6 p.m. on August 12-14, 2016.
    (c) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR
165.23 apply. During the enforcement period, entry into, transiting,
mooring, anchoring or remaining within this safety zone is prohibited
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his designated
representatives.
    (2) Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the
safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the
Captain of the Port or his designated representatives.
    (3) Persons and vessels may request permission to enter the safety
zone by contacting the COTP or the COTP's designated representative on
VHF-16 or via phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) The ``designated representative'' is any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been designated by the
Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The on-scene representative
may be on a Coast Guard vessel, a Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel, or
onboard a local or state agency vessel that is authorized to act in
support of the Coast Guard. Additionally, the Coast Guard Auxiliary may
be present to inform vessel operators of this regulation.
    (5) Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio,
flashing light or other means, the operator of the vessel must proceed
as directed.

    Dated: July 13, 2016.
M.A. Baroody,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector Northern New
England.
[FR Doc. 2016-18535 Filed 8-5-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 46 (Monday, March 9, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13477-13479]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04728]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0875; Product Identifier 2019-NM-143-AD; Amendment
39-19850; AD 2020-04-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain The Boeing Company Model 747-400 series airplanes. This AD was
prompted by a report of a certain modification that causes interference
with inspections that are intended to detect fatigue cracks. This AD
requires repetitive low frequency eddy current (LFEC) inspections of a
certain fuselage upper skin lap splice for cracks, repetitive high
frequency eddy current (HFEC)

inspections of a certain fuselage upper skin lap splice for cracks, and
applicable on-condition actions. The FAA is issuing this AD to address
the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective April 13, 2020.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of April 13,
2020.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740-5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. It is also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0875.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0875; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing
Company Model 747-400 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on November 26, 2019 (84 FR 65034). The NPRM was
prompted by a report of a certain modification that causes interference
with inspections that are intended to detect fatigue cracks. The NPRM
proposed to require repetitive LFEC inspections of a certain fuselage
upper skin lap splice for cracks, repetitive HFEC inspections of a
certain fuselage upper skin lap splice for cracks, and applicable on-
condition actions.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address undetected fatigue cracks,
which could result in sudden decompression and loss of structural
integrity of the airplane.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA has considered the comment
received. Boeing indicated its support for NPRM.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest
require adopting this final rule as proposed, except for minor
editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-53A2901 RB,
dated July 25, 2019. This service information describes procedures for
repetitive LFEC inspections of a certain fuselage upper skin lap splice
for cracks, repetitive HFEC inspections of a certain fuselage upper
skin lap splice for cracks, and applicable on-condition actions. On-
condition actions include repair. This service information is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD would affect 3 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The agency estimates the following costs to comply with this
AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
              Action                    Labor cost        Parts cost      Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LFEC inspection..................  5 work-hours x $85               $0  $425 per inspection  $1,275 per
                                    per hour = $425                      cycle.               inspection cycle.
                                    per inspection
                                    cycle.
HFEC inspection..................  5 work-hours x $85                0  $425 per inspection  $1,275 per
                                    per hour = $425                      cycle.               inspection cycle.
                                    per inspection
                                    cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the
agency to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified
in this AD.

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.
    The FAA is 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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will 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 above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
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]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2020-04-11 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-19850 ; Docket No. FAA-
2019-0875; Product Identifier 2019-NM-143-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective April 13, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-400 series
airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-53A2901 RB, dated July 25, 2019.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of a certain modification that
causes interference with inspections that are intended to detect
fatigue cracks. The FAA is issuing this AD to address undetected
fatigue cracks, which could result in sudden decompression and loss
of structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Required Actions

    Except as specified by paragraph (h) of this AD: At the
applicable times specified in the ``Compliance'' paragraph of Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-53A2901 RB, dated July 25, 2019, do
all applicable actions identified in, and in accordance with, the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin
747-53A2901 RB, dated July 25, 2019.

    Note 1 to paragraph (g): Guidance for accomplishing the actions
required by this AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2901, dated July 25, 2019, which is referred to in Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-53A2901 RB, dated July 25, 2019.

(h) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements
of this AD: Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-53A2901 RB,
dated July 25, 2019, uses the phrase ``the original issue date of
the Requirements Bulletin 747-53A2901 RB,'' this AD requires using
``the effective date of this AD,'' except where Boeing Alert
Requirements Bulletin 747-53A2901 RB, dated July 25, 2019, uses the
phrase ``the original issue date of the Requirements Bulletin 747-
53A2901 RB'' in a note or flag note.
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-53A2901 RB,
dated July 25, 2019, specifies contacting Boeing for repair
instructions: This AD requires doing the repair before further
flight using a method approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (i) of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair
method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Bill Ashforth,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 747-53A2901 RB, dated
July 25, 2019.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-
5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on February 20, 2020.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-04728 Filed 3-6-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 124 (Thursday, June 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38710-38711]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15395]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1071-001.
    Applicants: Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Arkansas, Inc. submits Att C, D, E Compliance
Filing to be effective 6/17/2013.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5122.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1121-001.
    Applicants: Peetz Logan Interconnect, LLC.
    Description: Peetz Logan Interconnect, LLC submits Peetz Logan
Interconnect, LLC Compliance Filing to be effective 11/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5127.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1188-014.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Company submits Wholesale
Distribution Tariff Rate Case 2013 (WDT2) Compliance Filing, MRID to be
effective 11/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5112.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1188-015.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Company submits Wholesale
Distribution Tariff Rate Case 2013 (WDT2) Compliance Filing, PWRPA 30
to be effective 11/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5118.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1188-016.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Company submits Wholesale
Distribution Tariff Rate Case 2013 (WDT2) Compliance Filing, PWRPA 56
to be effective 11/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5120.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1188-017.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Company Wholesale
Distribution Tariff Rate Case 2013 (WDT2) Compliance Filing, S Cove to
be effective 11/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5121.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1188-018.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Company submits Wholesale
Distribution Tariff Rate Case 2013 (WDT2) Compliance Filing, Western to
be effective 11/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5123.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1188-019.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Company submits Wholesale
Distribution Tariff Rate Case 2013 (WDT2) Compliance Filing, WPA to be
effective 11/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5126.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1707-000.
    Applicants: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
    Description: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. submits
tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: Amendment to PSL 18a Surcharge to be
effective 5/20/2013.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5102.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1708-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits 2551R1 Kansas
Municipal Energy Agency NITSA and NOA to be effective 6/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5106.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1709-000.
    Applicants: Blackwell Wind, LLC.
    Description: Blackwell Wind, LLC submits Blackwell Wind, LLC

Amendment to MBR Tariff to be effective 2/5/2012.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5128.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1710-000.
    Applicants: Elk City Wind, LLC.
    Description: Elk City Wind, LLC submits Elk City Wind, LLC
Amendment to MBR Tariff to be effective 7/21/2010.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5129.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1711-000.
    Applicants: Elk City II Wind, LLC.
    Description: Elk City II Wind, LLC submits Elk City II Wind, LLC
Amendment to MBR Tariff to be effective 12/15/2010.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5130.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1712-000.
    Applicants: FPL Energy Cowboy Wind, LLC.
    Description: FPL Energy Cowboy Wind, LLC submits FPL Energy Cowboy
Wind, LLC Amendment to MBR Tariff to be effective 7/22/2010.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5131.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1713-000.
    Applicants: FPL Energy Oklahoma Wind, LLC.
    Description: FPL Energy Oklahoma Wind, LLC submits FPL Energy
Oklahoma Wind, LLC to be effective 7/23/2010.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5132.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1714-000.
    Applicants: FPL Energy Sooner Wind, LLC.
    Description: FPL Energy Sooner Wind, LLC submits FPL Energy Sooner
Wind, LLC Amendment to MBR Tariff to be effective 7/23/2010.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5133.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1715-000.
    Applicants: High Majestic Wind II, LLC.
    Description: High Majestic Wind II, LLC submits High Majestic Wind
II, LLC Amendment to MBR Tariff to be effective 5/7/2012.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5134.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1716-000.
    Applicants: Minco Wind, LLC.
    Description: Minco Wind, LLC submits Minco Wind, LLC Amendment to
MBR Tariff to be effective 11/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5135.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1717-000.
    Applicants: Minco Wind II, LLC.
    Description: Minco Wind II, LLC submits Minco Wind II, LLC
Amendment to MBR Tariff to be effective 9/30/2011.
    Filed Date: 6/17/13.
    Accession Number: 20130617-5136.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/8/13.

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

    Dated: June 18, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-15395 Filed 6-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: February 13, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 29)]
[Notices]
[Page 7281]
[DOCID:fr13fe09-97]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent To Request Approval From the Office of
Management and Budget of a New Information Collection Activity, Request
for Comments: Specific Release Form

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA invites public comments about our intention to request
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve a new information
collection. The information garnered from a signed Specific Release
form will be used by FAA Special Agents to obtain information related
to a specific investigation.

DATES: Please submit comments by April 14, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carla Mauney on<PHONE_NUMBER>. or by
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

    Title: Specific Release Form.
    Type of Request: New collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-XXXX.
    Form(s): Form 1600-XX.
    Affected Public: A total of 270 respondents.
    Frequency: The information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: Approximately 5 minutes per
response.
    Estimated Annual Burden Hours: An estimated 22.5 hours annually.
    Abstract: The information garnered from a signed Specific Release
form will be used by FAA Special Agents to obtain information related
to a specific investigation. That information is then provided to the
FAA decision making authority to make FAA employment and/or pilot
certification/revocation determinations.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA at the following address: Ms. Carla
Mauney, Room 712, Federal Aviation Administration, IT Enterprises
Business Services Division, AES-200, 800 Independence Ave., SW.,
Washington, DC 20591.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimates of the burden of
the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 6, 2009.
Carla Mauney,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business
Services Division, AES-200.
[FR Doc. E9-3010 Filed 2-12-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register: April 21, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 75)]
[Notices]
[Page 18245-18246]
[DOCID:fr21ap09-82]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1830-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2008-0018]

Minnesota; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Minnesota (FEMA-1830-DR), dated April 9, 2009, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: April 10, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Minnesota is hereby amended to include Individual
Assistance for the following areas among those areas determined to have
been adversely affected by the event declared a major

disaster by the President in his declaration of April 9, 2009.

Clay, Norman, Traverse, and Wilkin Counties for Individual
Assistance (already designated for Public Assitance).

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

Nancy Ward,
Acting Administrator,
    Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E9-9066 Filed 4-20-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P