[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 150 (Tuesday, August 4, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47287-47288]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16932]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. 2020-44]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Parks
College of Aviation, Engineering and Technology at Saint Louis
University

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The
purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and
participation in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of
this notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary
is intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final
disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and

must be received on or before August 24, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2018-0525
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nia Daniels,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of
Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 30, 2020.
Brandon Roberts,
Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2018-0525.
    Petitioner: Parks College of Aviation, Engineering and Technology
at Saint Louis University.
    Sections of 14 CFR Affected: Sec.  61.195(h)(2) and (3).
    Description of Relief Sought: Parks College of Aviation,
Engineering and Technology at Saint Louis University petitions for an
exemption to allow it to conduct approved Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (14 CFR), part 141, Appendix F flight training
associated with a first-time flight instructor applicant utilizing
instructors who do not meet the requirements of Sec.  61.195(h)(2) and
(3). This exemption would not apply to ground training that includes
Fundamentals of Instructing, as described in part 141, Appendix F.

[FR Doc. 2020-16932 Filed 8-3-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6305-6306]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02832]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

RTCA Program Management Committee Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: RTCA Program Management Committee Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of RTCA Program Management Committee Meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held March 22, 2018 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at: RTCA Headquarters, 1150 18th
Street NW, Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karan Hofmann at [email protected] or
202-330-0680, or The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW, Suite 910,
Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax at (202)
833-9434, or website at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of the RTCA PMC Program Management Committee
Meeting. The agenda will include the following:

1. Welcome and Introductions
2. Review/Approve
    A. Meeting Summary December 19, 2017
    B. Administrative SC TOR Revisions
3. Publication Consideration/Approval
    A. Revision to DO-257A--Minimum Operational Performance Standards
for the Depiction of Navigational Information on Electronic Maps
Prepared, by SC-227 (Standards of Navigation Performance)
4. Integration and Coordination Committee (ICC)
5. Cross Cutting Committee (CCC)
6. Past Action Item Review
7. Discussion
    A. SC-223--Internet Protocol Suite (IPS) and Aeronautical Mobile
Airport Communication System (AEROMACS)--Discussion--Revised TOR
    B. SC-229--406 MHZ Emergency Locator Transmitters (ELTS)--
Discussion--Revised TOR
    C. SC-236--Standards for Wireless Avionics Intra-Communication
System (WAIC) WITHIN 4300-4400 MHZ--Discussion--Revised TOR
    D. SC-147--Aircraft Collision Avoidance Systems--Discussion--Status
    E. SC-206--Aeronautical Information and Meteorological Data Link
Services--Discussion--Temporary Restricted Areas White Paper--
Discussion
    F. NAC--Status Update
    G. TOC--Status Update
    H. DAC--Status Update
    I. FAA Actions Taken on Previously Published Documents--Report
    J. Special Committees--Chairmen's Reports and Active Inter-Special
Committee Requirements Agreements (ISRA)--Review
    K. European/Eurocae Coordination--Status Update
8. Documents Open for Final Review and Comment
9. Other Business
10. Schedule for Committee Deliverables and Next Meeting Date
11. New Action Item Summary

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 7, 2018.
Mohannad Dawoud,
Management & Program Analyst, Partnership Contracts Branch, ANG-A17,
NextGen, Procurement Services Division, Federal Aviation
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2018-02832 Filed 2-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 239 (Thursday, December 12, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 75511-75512]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29685]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2013 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No.FAA-2013-1041; Notice No. 25-13-40-SC]

Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc., Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-
500-1A11 Series Airplanes; Electronic Flight Control System: Control
Surface Awareness and Mode Annunciation

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed special conditions.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes special conditions for the Bombardier
Inc. Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 series airplanes. These
airplanes will have a novel or unusual design feature associated with
control surface awareness and mode annunciation of the electronic
flight control system. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not
contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design
feature. These proposed special conditions contain the additional
safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to
establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the
existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: Send your comments on or before January 27, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2013-1041
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Jacobsen, FAA, Airplane and
Flightcrew Interface Branch, ANM-111, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
    We will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing
date for comments. We may change these special conditions based on the
comments we receive.

Background

    On December 10, 2009, Bombardier Inc. applied for a type
certificate for their new Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 series
airplanes (hereafter collectively referred to as ``C-series.'' The C-
series airplanes are swept-wing monoplanes with a pressurized cabin.
They share an identical supplier base and significant common design
elements. The fuselage is aluminum alloy material, blended double-
bubble fuselage, sized for nominal 5-abreast seating. Each airplane's
powerplant consists of two under wing Pratt and Whitney PW1524G ultra-
high bypass, geared turbofan engines. Flight controls are fly-by-wire
flight with two passive/uncoupled side sticks. Avionics includes five
landscape primary cockpit displays. The dimension of the airplanes
encompass a wingspan of 115 feet; a height of 37.75 feet; and a length
of 114.75 feet for the Model BD-500-1A10 and a length of 127 feet for
the Model BD-500-1A11. Passenger capacity is designated as 110 for the
Model BD-500-1A10 and 125 for the Model BD-500-1A11. Maximum takeoff
weight is 131,000 pounds for the Model BD-500-1A10 and 144,000 pounds
for the Model BD-500-1A11. Maximum takeoff thrust is 21,000 pounds for
the Model BD-500-1A10 and 23,300 pounds for the Model BD-500-1A11.
Range is 3,394 miles (5,463 kilometers) for both models of airplanes.
Maximum operating altitude is 41,000 feet for both model airplanes.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
21.17, Bombardier Inc. must show that the C-series airplanes meet the
applicable provisions of 14 CFR part 25 as amended by Amendments 25-1
through 25-129 thereto.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the C-series airplanes because of a
novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed
under the provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same or similar
novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also
apply to the other model under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special

conditions, the C-series airplanes must comply with the fuel vent and
exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise
certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36, and the FAA must issue a
finding of regulatory adequacy under section 611 of Public Law 92-574,
the ``Noise Control Act of 1972.''
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type-
certification basis under Sec.  21.17(a)(2).

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The C-series airplanes will incorporate the following novel or
unusual design features: A fly-by-wire electronic flight control system
(EFCS) and no direct coupling from the flightdeck controller to the
control surface. As a result, the pilot is not aware of the actual
control surface position as envisioned under current airworthiness
standards.

Discussion

    These special conditions propose that the flightcrew receive a
suitable flight control position annunciation when a flight condition
exists in which nearly full surface authority (not crew-commanded) is
being used. Suitability of such a display must take into account that
some pilot-demanded maneuvers (e.g., rapid roll) are necessarily
associated with intended full performance, which may saturate the
surface. Therefore, simple alerting systems function in both intended
and unexpected control-limiting situations. As a result, they must be
properly balanced between providing necessary crew awareness and being
a potential nuisance to the flightcrew. A monitoring system that
compares airplane motion and surface deflection with the demand of the
pilot side stick controller could help reduce nuisance alerting.
    These special conditions also address flight control system mode
annunciation. It proposes suitable mode annunciation be provided to the
flightcrew for events that significantly change the operating mode of
the system but do not merit the classic ``failure warning.''
    These special conditions establish a level of safety equivalent to
that provided by a conventional flight control system and existing
regulations.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 series airplanes. Should Bombardier
Inc. apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to
include another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design
feature, the special conditions would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on two model series of airplanes. It is not a rule of general
applicability.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Proposed Special Conditions

    Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes the
following special conditions as part of the type certification basis
for the Bombardier Inc. Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 series
airplanes.
    1. Electronic Flight Control System: Control Surface Awareness and
Mode Annunciation. In addition to the requirements of Sec. Sec.
25.143, 25.671, and 25.672, the following requirements apply:
    a. The system design must ensure that the flightcrew is made
suitably aware whenever the primary control means nears the limit of
control authority.
    Note: The term ``suitably aware'' indicates annunciations provided
to the flightcrew are appropriately balanced between nuisance and that
necessary for crew awareness.
    b. If the design of the flight control system has multiple modes of
operation, a means must be provided to indicate to the flightcrew any
mode that significantly changes or degrades the normal handling or
operational characteristics of the airplane.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 27, 2013.
John Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-29685 Filed 12-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: December 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 243)]
[Notices]
[Page 76633]
[DOCID:fr17de08-70]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13056-001]

BPUS Generation Development, LLC; Notice of Surrender of
Preliminary Permit

December 10, 2008.
    Take notice that BPUS Generation Development, LLC, permittee for
the proposed Buckhorn Lake Dam Hydroelectric Project, has requested
that its preliminary permit be terminated. The permit was issued on
June 4, 2008, and would have expired on May 31, 2011.\1\ The project
would have been located on the Middle Fork of the Kentucky River in
Perry County, Kentucky.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 123 FERC ] 62,192.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The permittee filed the request on December 2, 2008, and the
preliminary permit for Project No. 13056 shall remain in effect through
the thirtieth day after issuance of this notice unless that day is a
Saturday, Sunday, part-day holiday that affects the Commission, or
legal holiday as described in section 18 CFR 385.2007, in which case
the effective date is the first business day following that day. New
applications involving this project site, to the extent provided for
under 18 CFR part 4, may be filed on the next business day.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-29870 Filed 12-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 58 (Monday, March 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 17474]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7151]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13843-001]

Qualified Hydro 24, LLC; Notice of Intent To File License
Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, Denying Use of the
Traditional Licensing Process, Commencement of Licensing Proceeding,
Scoping, and Solicitation of Study Requests and Comments on the Pad

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Request to Use the Traditional
Licensing Process.
    b. Project No.: 13843-001.
    c. Dated Filed: January 3, 2012.
    d. Submitted By: Qualified Hydro 24, LLC (Qualified Hydro 24).
    e. Name of Project: Cle Elum Dam Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Cle Elum River, in Kittitas County, Washington.
A portion of the project occupies United States lands administered by
U.S. Forest Service.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Ramya Swaminathan, Qualified Hydro
24, LLC, 239 Causeway Street, Suite 300, Boston, MA 02114; (978) 283-
2822.
    i. FERC Contact: James Hastreiter at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Qualified Hydro 24 filed its request to use the Traditional
Licensing Process on January 3, 2012. Qualified Hydro 24 provided
public notice of its request on January 27, 2012. Qualified Hydro 24's
request to use the Traditional Licensing Process was denied by letter
dated March 15, 2012.
    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; (b) NOAA Fisheries under
section 305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act and implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.920; and (c)
the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer, as required by
section 106, National Historical Preservation Act, and the implementing
regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR
800.2.
    l. With this notice, we are designating Qualified Hydro 24 as the
Commission's non-federal representative for carrying out informal
consultation, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act,
section 305 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Act, and section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
    m. Qualified Hydro 24 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 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in paragraph h.
    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.

    Dated: March 15, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-7151 Filed 3-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 17, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7980-7982]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03130]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2013-0613; FRL-9942-30-Region 6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of New
Mexico/Albuquerque-Bernalillo County; Infrastructure and Interstate
Transport SIP 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality
Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submission from the Governor of New Mexico
for the City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County for the 2010 Nitrogen
Dioxide (NO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS). The submittal addresses how the existing SIP provides for
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the 2010 NO2
NAAQS (infrastructure SIP or i-SIP). This i-SIP ensures that the
State's SIP for Albuquerque-Bernalillo County is adequate to meet the
state's responsibilities under the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or Act),
including the four

CAA requirements for interstate transport of NO2 emissions.

DATES: This final rule is effective on March 18, 2016.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R06-OAR-2013-0613. All documents in the docket are listed on
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not
placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracie Donaldson,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' means the EPA.

I. Background

    The background for this action is discussed in detail in our
December 2, 2015 proposal (80 FR 75444). In that document, we proposed
that the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County New Mexico i-SIP submittal for
the 2010 NO2 NAAQS met the requirements for an i-SIP,
including the requirements for interstate transport of NO2
emissions. Our Proposal and the technical support documents (TSDs) that
accompanied the proposed rule provide detailed descriptions of the
revisions and the rationale for our proposed decisions. Please see the
docket for these and other documents regarding our proposal. The public
comment period for our proposal closed on January 4, 2016. We did not
receive any comments. Therefore, we are finalizing our action as
proposed.

II. Final Action

    We are approving the July 26, 2013 i-SIP submission from
Albuquerque-Bernalillo County New Mexico, which address the
requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as applicable to the
2010 NO2 NAAQS. Specifically, we are approving the following
infrastructure elements: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), (G),
(H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). We are also approving the New Mexico-
Albuquerque Bernalillo County demonstration as it meets the four
statutory requirements for interstate transport of NO2
emissions.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, described in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation
land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the
rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 18, 2016. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposed of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide
(NO2), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 4, 2016.
Ron Curry,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart GG--New Mexico

0
2. In Sec.  52.1620, the second table in paragraph (e) entitled ``EPA
Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the
New Mexico SIP'' is amended by adding a new entry at the end of the
table for ``Infrastructure and Interstate Transport for the 2010
NO2 NAAQS'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1620  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                EPA Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the New Mexico SIP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                State
       Name of SIP provision        Applicable geographic    submittal/               EPA approval date                         Explanation
                                    or nonattainment area  effective date
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
Infrastructure and Interstate       Albuquerque-                7/26/2013  2/17/16, [insert Federal Register       .....................................
 Transport for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.   Bernalillo County.                     citation].
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-03130 Filed 2-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 37 (Thursday, February 25, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9561-9563]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04022]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. SIPA-174; File No. SIPC-2016-01]

Securities Investor Protection Corporation

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Notice of the determination of the Board of Directors of the
Securities Investor Protection Corporation (``SIPC'') regarding the
standard maximum cash advance amount, beginning January 1, 2017.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 3(e)(2) of the Securities Investor
Protection Act of 1970 (``SIPA''),\1\ notice is hereby given that the
Board of Directors of SIPC (the ``Board'') filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') on February 17, 2016
notification that the Board has determined, beginning January 1, 2017,
and for the five year period immediately thereafter, that the standard
maximum cash advance amount available to satisfy customer claims for
cash in a SIPA liquidation proceeding will remain at $250,000. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on Board's
determination from interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(2).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Comments are to be received on or before March 11, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments concerning the foregoing by any of the following
methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SIPC-2016-01 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All comments should refer to File Number SIPC-2016-01. 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/other.shtml).
    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to this Notice that are filed with the
Commission, and all written communications relating to the Notice
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 Web site 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. 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael A. Macchiaroli, Associate
Director, at<PHONE_NUMBER>; Thomas K. McGowan, Associate Director, at
(202) 551-5521; Randall W. Roy, Deputy Associate Director, at (202)
551-5522; Timothy C. Fox, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or Rose
Russo Wells, Senior Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER>; Office of Financial
Responsibility, Division of Trading and Markets, Securities and
Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-7010.

I. SIPC'S Statement of the Purpose of and Statuory Basis of the
Determination of the Board of Directors of SIPC Not To Adjust the
Standard Maximum Cash Advance Amount for Inflation

    In its filing with the Commission, SIPC included statements
concerning the purpose of and statutory basis of the SIPC Board's
determination. The text of these statements may be examined at the
places specified above, and appear in the text, below.
* * * * *
    ``Under the Securities Investor Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. Section
78aaa et seq. (``SIPA''), the Board of SIPC must decide, every five
years beginning no earlier and no later than January 1, 2011, whether
to adjust for inflation the standard maximum amount that SIPC can
advance to satisfy customer claims for cash under SIPA. See SIPA Sec.
78fff-3(e)(1).\2\ The Board considered the question at its Meeting on
June 18, 2015, and on July 16, 2015, after further deliberation, the
Board reached its determination. The Board's determination is subject
to the approval of the Commission as provided under SIPA Section
78ccc(e)(2).\3\ If approved, any adjustment to the standard cash
maximum advance would take effect on January 1, 2017. See SIPA 78fff-
3(e)(4). Under SIPA Section 78fff-3(e)(3)(A), the SEC is required to
publish in the Federal Register notice of the maximum amount.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For convenience, references herein to provisions of SIPA
shall be to the United States Code, and shall omit ``15 U.S.C.''
    \3\ SIPA Section 78ccc(e)(2) establishes procedures governing
proposed changes to SIPC's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Per our notice to the Commission by letter dated August 18, 2015,
this will re-affirm to the Commission that effective January 1, 2017,
and for the five years immediately thereafter, the Board has determined
that the maximum amount of the advance to satisfy a claim for cash will
remain at the current level of $250,000 per customer.

Consideration of the Statutory Criteria

    In deciding whether to adjust the maximum cash advance amount, the
Board is to consider the following criteria under SIPA Section 78fff-
3(e)(5):
    (A) The overall state of the fund and the economic conditions
affecting members of SIPC;
    (B) the potential problems affecting members of SIPC; and
    (C) such other factors as the Board of Directors of SIPC may
determine appropriate.
    In furtherance of the Board's consideration of the above factors,
the SIPC staff solicited and received comments and/or data from the
staffs of FINRA, SIFMA, the SEC, and the FDIC. The data related to
member firms' aggregate leverage, liquidity, and default risk, and to
aggregate customer free credit balances. The information was presented
to the Board by the SIPC staff, as part of an analysis by the staff of
the state of the SIPC Fund and its projected growth. The staff's
analysis focused on SIPC's historical experience and examined (1) SIPC
advances in past and present liquidation proceedings; (2) amounts
generated from assessments on member broker-dealers; and (3) projected
returns on SIPC investments. The analysis also considered a 2013 study
by consultants engaged by SIPC to examine the potential impact on the
SIPC Fund of an increase in the cash advance limit to $500,000. The
conclusions reached by the staff in their analysis were corroborated by
the data received from the aforementioned authorities and by the 2013
consultants' study, namely, that the SIPC Fund is positioned to remain
on a steady growth path for the foreseeable future, barring any
unforeseen catastrophic event.
    The Board also reviewed the number of claims for cash exceeding the
limit of protection in past and present liquidation proceedings. This
data suggests that an inflation adjustment may not be necessary to
further SIPC's purposes, but that if an inflation adjustment is made,
its impact on the SIPC Fund may not be significant.
    Of the more than 625,000 allowed claims in completed or
substantially completed liquidation proceedings as of December 31,
2014, the unsatisfied portion of cash claims amounted to $25 million.
More than half of that amount related to only three claims that were
submitted when the limit of protection for cash claims was less than
the current $250,000. In the six SIPA proceedings initiated since 2010,
SIPC has advanced, net, funds for only one cash claim in excess of
$250,000.
    The Board also noted that customer credit balances at brokerage
firms had decreased at the end of 2013 and 2014, and that due to
broker-dealers' offer of overnight ``sweep'' programs, customer free
credit balances were being moved to bank accounts, with the protection
of such accounts thereby transferred to the FDIC.
    With regard to FDIC deposit insurance, increases to the limit of
protection for cash claims under SIPA historically have been in
lockstep with increases in FDIC deposit insurance under the Federal
Deposit Insurance Act, 12 U.S.C. 1821 et seq. (``FDIA'').\4\ In 2008,
and again, in 2010, parity with deposit insurance was the primary
reason for SIPC's request to Congress to increase the SIPA limit of
protection for cash claims. FDIC coverage is currently $250,000. While
the Federal Deposit Insurance Act includes similar language to SIPA
related to adjusting for inflation, the adjustment is based upon a
$100,000 coverage level, and the FDIC has not

increased coverage under the inflation provision.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The below compares the limits of protection for cash under
SIPA and the FDIA:
    SIPA: $20,000 (Pub. L. 91-598, Sec.  6(f)(1)(A), 84 Stat. 1636,
1651 (1970))
    FDIA: $20,000 (Pub. L. 91-151, Sec.  7, 83 Stat. 371, 375
(1969))
    SIPA: $40,000 (Pub. L. 95-283, Sec.  9, 92 Stat. 249, 265
(1978))
    FDIA: $40,000 (Pub. L. 93-495, Sec.  102(a), 88 Stat. 1500, 1502
(1974))
    SIPA: $100,000 (Pub. L. 96-433, Sec.  1, 94 Stat. 1855 (1980))
    FDIA: $100,000 (Pub. L. 96-221, Sec.  308, 94 Stat. 132, 147
(1980))
    SIPA: $250,000 (Pub. L. 111-203, Sec.  929H, 124 Stat. 1376,
1865 (2010))
    FDIA: $250,000 ((temporary until 12/31/2009) Public Law No. 110-
343, Sec.  136, 122 Stat. 3765, 3799 (2008); (permanent) Public Law
111-203, Sec.  335, 124 Stat. 1376, 1540 (2010)).
    \5\ 12 U.S.C. 1821(a)(1)(F)(i)(I). See Deposit Insurance
Regulations; Permanent Increase in Standard Coverage Amount;
Advertisement of Membership; International Banking; Foreign Banks,
75 FR 49363 n.6 (Aug. 13, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Board expressed concern that a unilateral increase to the SIPA
limit could have unintended consequences, particularly in light of the
issue not having been widely studied or discussed. For example,
increasing the SIPA limit above the deposit insurance limit could
incentivize the movement of funds to brokerage accounts as a savings
vehicle, an outcome not consistent with the intent of SIPA.
    Finally, the Board considered the amount by which the limit of
protection for allowed cash claims would change if adjusted for
inflation. Under SIPA Section 78fff-3(e)(1)(B), if the Board determines
that an adjustment is appropriate, then $250,000 is to be multiplied by

[t]he ratio of the annual value of the Personal Consumption
Expenditures Chain-Type Price Index (or any successor index
thereto), published by the Department of Commerce, for the calendar
year preceding the year in which such determination is made, to the
published annual value of such index for the calendar year preceding
the year in which this subsection was enacted.

    15 U.S.C. 78fff-3(e)(1)(B).\6\ Although the amount of the inflation
adjustment need only be considered if the Board determines to adjust
the $250,000 for inflation, see SIPA Section 78fff-3(e)(1), that
determination would be meaningless if the adjustment resulted in no
change. This was the case on January 1, 2011, when application of the
formula would have increased the limit to the adjusted amount of
$254,449.52.\7\ However, under SIPA Section 78fff-3(e)(2), because the
adjusted amount must be rounded down to the nearest $10,000 if it is
not a multiple of $10,000, the limit would have remained at $250,000.
Even if it had determined to do so, the Board could not have adjusted
the amount.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Under SIPA Sections 78fff-3(d) and 78fff-3(e)(1), the Board
was required to adjust the maximum cash advance, if at all, after
December 31, 2010, but no later than January 1, 2011, and then,
could do so every 5 years thereafter. Thus, the five-year period
after January 1, 2011, would occur in 2016. Under SIPA Section
78fff-3(e)(4), any adjustment to the amount of the cash advance
would take effect on January 1 of the year immediately after the
year in which the adjustment was made.
    \7\ The calculation would be as follows: $250,000 multiplied by
1.017798--the ratio of 111.112 (the annual value of the Price Index
published by the Department of Commerce for 2010, the calendar year
preceding the year in which the determination was to be made), to
109.169 (the published annual value of such index for 2009, the
calendar year preceding the year in which the subsection was
enacted)--equals $254,449.52.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion

    A present-day application of the formula would increase the limit
by $20,000.\8\ The Board weighed the relevant factors against a
potential adjustment of $20,000. The Board concluded that, on balance,
in light of the unprecedented break with the FDIC limit that would
result, with possibly harmful consequences, and the absence of evidence
that an appreciable number of investors would be benefitted, an
adjustment to the limit of protection for cash claims was not
appropriate. Accordingly, the Board determined that the standard
maximum cash advance amount should remain at $250,000 per customer.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The $20,000 is arrived at as follows: $250,000 multiplied by
1.08763 which is the ratio of 108.763 (the annual value of the Price
Index published by the Department of Commerce for calendar year
2014), to 100.000 (the published annual value of the index for 2009,
the calendar year preceding the year in which subsection 78fff-
3(e)(1)(B) was enacted) which equals $271,907.50. Rounded down to
$270,000, the adjusted limit reflects an increase of $20,000 from
the $250,000 limit. Because the determination is to be made for the
calendar year 2016, the annual value of the Price Index to be used
is for the ``calendar year preceding the year in which such
determination is made,'' namely, the year 2015. However, the 2015
annual value was not available until after the end of the year. This
calculation therefore was conditioned on the assumption of no
unexpected dramatic rise in inflation in calendar year 2015. See
http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=9&step=1#reqid=9&step=3&isuri=1&904=2009&903=64&906=a&905=2015&910=x&911=0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

II. Date of Effectiveness and Timing for Commission Action

    Within thirty-five days of the date of publication of this notice
of the SIPC Board's determination in the Federal Register, or within
such longer period (i) as the Commission may designate of not more than
ninety days after such date if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which SIPC consents, the Commission shall:
    (A) By order approve such determination or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether such determination
should be disapproved.

III. Notice of the Determination of the SIPC Board Not To Adjust the
Standard Maximum Cash Advance Amount for Inflation

    Effective January 1, 2016, the Board of Directors of the Securities
Investor Protection Corporation determined that an inflation adjustment
to the standard maximum cash advance amount, as defined in section 9(d)
of the Securities Investor Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. 78fff-3(d), would
not be appropriate for the five-year period beginning on January 1,
2017. Accordingly, the Board determined that the standard maximum cash
advance amount should remain at $250,000 per customer, effective
January 1, 2017 and for the five years immediately thereafter.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(f)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: February 22, 2016.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-04022 Filed 2-24-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 117 (Tuesday, June 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 39895]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13171]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: 88 FR 38117, June
12, 2023.

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF THE MEETING: Thursday, June 15,
2023 at 9:15 a.m.

CHANGES IN THE MEETING: The Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, June
15, 2023 at 9:15 a.m. has been changed to Thursday, June 15, 2023 at
7:30 p.m.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information and to
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed,
please contact the Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b.

    Dated: June 15, 2023.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-13171 Filed 6-15-23; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: November 16, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 219)]
[Notices]
[Page 58955-58957]
[DOCID:fr16no09-36]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8981-1]

Proposed Settlement Agreement, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed settlement agreement; request for public
comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (``Act''), 42 U.S.C. 7413(g), notice is hereby given of a
proposed settlement agreement, to address a lawsuit filed by Mossville
Environmental Action Now, Louisiana Environmental Action Network, and
Sierra Club (collectively, ``Plaintiffs'') in the United States
District Court for the District of Columbia: Mossville Environmental
Action Now, et al. v. EPA, No. 1:08-cv-01803 (D.D.C.). On October 22,
2008, Plaintiffs filed a complaint alleging that EPA failed to
promulgate emission standards for major sources of hazardous air
pollutant emissions from polyvinyl chloride and copolymers production
facilities (``PVC Standards'') as required under section 112(e)(1)(E)
of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7412(e)(1)(E). The proposed settlement agreement
establishes deadlines by which the Administrator must sign the proposed
and final rules for PVC Standards.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed settlement agreement must be
received by December 16, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OGC-2009-0848, online at http://www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred
method); by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by mail to EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; or by hand delivery or courier to
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. Comments on a disk or CD-ROM should be
formatted in Word or ASCII file, avoiding the use of special characters
and any form of encryption, and may be mailed to the mailing address
above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Kataoka, Air and Radiation Law
Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Additional Information About the Proposed Settlement

    The settlement agreement resolves a lawsuit alleging that EPA
failed to promulgate emission standards for major sources of hazardous
air pollutant emissions from polyvinyl chloride and copolymers
production facilities (``PVC Standards'') as required under section
112(e)(1)(E) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7412(e)(1)(E).
    The settlement agreement provides that within 10 days after the
agreement is executed both parties will jointly notify the Court of
this settlement agreement and request that the case be held in
abeyance. The settlement agreement states that EPA shall sign a
proposed rule to establish PVC Standards no later than October 29,
2010, and that EPA shall sign a final rule to establish PVC Standards
no later than July 29, 2011. The settlement agreement further states if
EPA fulfills its obligations under the agreement than Plaintiffs shall
file a motion for voluntary dismissal of the complaint with prejudice.
Furthermore, the agreement states that EPA shall reimburse Plaintiffs
for their litigation costs and attorneys' fees.
    For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication
of this notice, the Agency will receive written comments relating to
the proposed settlement agreement. EPA or the Department of Justice may
withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed settlement agreement if
the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that such
consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with
the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of Justice
determines, based on any comment which may be submitted, that consent
to the settlement agreement should be withdrawn, the terms of the
agreement will be affirmed.

II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Settlement
Agreement

A. How Can I Get a Copy of the Settlement Agreement?

    Direct your comments to the official public docket for this action
under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2009-0848, which contains a copy of the
settlement agreement. The official public docket is available for
public viewing at the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket
in the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the OEI Docket is (202) 566-
1752.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through
http://www.regulations.gov. You may use http://www.regulations.gov to
submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the
contents of the official public docket, and access those documents in
the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, key in the appropriate docket identification number then select
``search''.
    It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or on paper, will be made available
for public viewing online at http://www.regulations.gov without change,
unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information
claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute is not included in the official public docket or in the
electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material,
including copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not
be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only
in printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all
docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access
any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket
Center.

B. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?

    You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an e-mail address or other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or
CD-ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or
contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included
as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot
read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you
for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    Use of the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments
to EPA

electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The
electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail
(e-mail) system is not an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an
e-mail comment directly to the Docket without going through http://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address is automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.

    Dated: November 6, 2009.
Patricia A. Embrey,
Acting Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E9-27418 Filed 11-13-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 112 (Friday, June 10, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35586-35587]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12497]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-482, OMB Control No. 3235-0540]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension: Rule 17a-25

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et. seq.) (``PRA''), the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
existing collection of information provided for in Rule 17a-25 (17 CFR
204.17a-25) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a
et. seq.).
    Paragraph (a)(1) of Rule 17a-25 requires registered broker-dealers
to electronically submit securities transaction information, including
identifiers for prime brokerage arrangements, average price accounts,
and depository institutions, in a standardized format when requested by
the Commission staff. In addition, Paragraph (c) of Rule 17a-25
requires broker-dealers to submit, and keep current, contact person
information for electronic blue sheets (``EBS'') requests. The
Commission uses the information for enforcement inquiries or
investigations and trading reconstructions, as well as for inspections
and examinations.
    The Commission estimates that it sends approximately 13,558
electronic blue sheet requests per year to clearing broker-dealers that
in turn submit an average 223,057 responses.\1\ It is estimated that
each broker-dealer that responds electronically will take 8 minutes,
and each broker-dealer that responds manually will take 1\1/2\ hours to
prepare and submit the securities trading data requested by the
Commission. The annual aggregate hour burden for electronic and manual
response firms is estimated to be 29,924 (223,057 x 8 / 60 = 29,741
hours) + (122 x 1.5 = 183 hours), respectively.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A single EBS request has a unique number assigned to each
request (e.g., ''0900001''). However, the number of broker-dealer
responses generated from one EBS request can range from one to
several thousand. EBS requests are sent directly to clearing firms,
as the clearing firm is the repository for trading data for
securities transactions information provided by the clearing firm
and the correspondent firms. Clearing brokers respond for themselves
and other firms they clear for. There were 446,113 responses during
the 24-month period, for an average of 223,057 annual responses.
    \2\ Few respondents submit manual EBS responses. The small
percentage of respondents that submit manual responses do so by
hand, via email, spreadsheet, disk, or other electronic media. Thus,
the number of manual submissions (approximately 122 per year) has
minimal effect on the total annual burden hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Written comments are invited on: (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing by August 9, 2022.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: David Bottom, Director/
Chief Information Office, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o John
Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an email to:
[email protected].

    Dated: June 6, 2022.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-12497 Filed 6-9-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 10, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 74006-74007]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29219]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0941; Airspace Docket No. 13-AGL-32]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Green Bay, WI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule, technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class E airspace within the Green Bay, WI,
area by updating the geographic coordinates for Austin-Straubel
International Airport. This action does not change the boundaries or
operating requirements of the airspace.

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, February 6, 2014. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone 817 321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by adjusting the geographic coordinates, within Class E
airspace, of Austin-Straubel International Airport, Green Bay, WI, to
coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database. This is an
administrative change and does not affect the boundaries, altitudes, or
operating requirements of the airspace, therefore, notice and public
procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is

certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends controlled airspace at Austin-Straubel International
Airport, Green Bay, WI.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air)

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9X, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15,
2013, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as a Surface Area.

* * * * *

AGL WI E2 Green Bay, WI [Amended]

Green Bay, Austin Straubel International Airport, WI
    (Lat. 44[deg]29'05'' N., long. 88[deg]07'47'' W.)

    Within a 5-mile radius of the Austin Straubel International
Airport. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific
dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Airport/Facility Directory.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward from 700
feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AGL WI E5 Green Bay, WI [Amended]

Green Bay, Austin Straubel International Airport, WI
    (Lat. 44[deg]29'05'' N., long. 88[deg]07'47'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.9-mile radius of the Austin Straubel International
Airport and within 2 miles each side of the 180[deg] bearing from
the airport extending from the 6.9-mile radius to 12 miles south of
the airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 25, 2013.
David P. Medina,
Manager Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2013-29219 Filed 12-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P