			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on February 26, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2003-14394

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of   AMERICA WEST AIRLINES, INC.,    filed   1/28/03,  for:

XX Exemption for two years under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the
following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between the terminal point Phoenix, Arizona, and Guadalajara, Mexico.
America West proposes to use the requested authority by placing its
airline designator code on flights operated by Freedom Airlines, Inc.,
in the subject market.

Applicant rep: David M. Kirstein<PHONE_NUMBER>  DOT Analyst: Linda L.
Lundell<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The authority granted was effective when taken: _February 25, 2003,
through _February 25, 2005.

Action taken by: 	 Paul L. Gretch

			Office of International Aviation

XX   The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Mexico.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated: 	XX  Holder’s
certificates of public convenience and necessity

			XX  Standard Exemption Conditions (attached)

Conditions:  The U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted is subject to
the dormancy notice requirements set forth in condition 7 of Appendix A
of Order 88-10-2.  Consistent with our standard practice, the dormancy
notice period will begin on May 1, 2003, America West’s proposed
startup date for services in the Phoenix-Guadalajara market.  In
addition, the exemption authority granted is limited to services
provided on a code-share basis only.

- see next page -

														2

The code-share operations conducted under this authorization are subject
to the following conditions:

The code-sharing operations conducted under this authority must comply
with 14 CFR 257 and with any amendment to the Department’s regulations
concerning code-share arrangements that      may be adopted.
Notwithstanding any provisions in the contract between the carriers, our
approval here is expressly conditioned upon the requirements that the
subject foreign air transportation be sold in the name of the carrier
holding out such service in computer reservation systems and elsewhere;
that the carrier selling such transportation (i.e., the carrier shown on
the ticket) accept responsibility for the entirety of the code-share
journey for all obligations established in its contract of carriage with
the passenger; and that the passenger liability of the operating carrier
be unaffected; and

(b)	 The authority granted here is specifically conditioned so that
neither America West nor Freedom Airlines shall give any force or effect
to any contractual provisions between themselves that are contrary to
these conditions.

________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department’s regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the application was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

APPENDIX

U.S. CARRIER

Standard Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of operations authorized by the attached notice, the
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with the applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration Regulations and with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

										10/2002

 To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder should, before commencing any new
service (including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, inform
its Principal Security Inspector of its plans.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 79 (Wednesday, April 24, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 24291]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09647]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2013-13]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of this notice is to
improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of
FAA's regulatory activities. 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 involved and must be received on or before May 14, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2013-
0127 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility 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.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility 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: Tyneka Thomas ARM-105,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
FAA, Office of Rulemaking, 800 Independence Ave SW., Washington, DC
20591. This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 19, 2013.
Brenda D. Courtney,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2013-0127.
    Petitioner: RPFlightSystems, Inc.
    Sections of 14 CFR Affected: Sec. Sec.  21.191 and 91.319.
    Description of Relief Sought: RPFlight Systems, Inc. is requesting
relief from Sec. Sec.  21.191 and 91.319. The proposed exemption would
allow them to operate a remote controlled unmanned aircraft for
compensation and for hire without a special airworthiness certificate
being issued by the FAA.

[FR Doc. 2013-09647 Filed 4-23-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


1 Attachment 6 Nonattainment Area Designations for Athens under the PM2.5 Standard Additional Analysis for Oconee and Madison This document contains Georgia EPD's analysis of Oconee County for possible inclusion in the Athens PM2.5 nonattainment area. EPD has already analyzed Clarke, Madison, Walton, and Jackson County in EPD's June 17, 2004, submittal to EPA. The analysis for Oconee County is conducted in a similar manner as these other Athens area counties. On June 29, 2004, EPA submitted a letter to Governor Perdue indicating EPA's intention to modify Georgia's recommended PM2.5 boundaries including the Athens nonattainment area. EPA's June 29, 2004, letter stated that Madison and Oconee counties should be included in the Athens PM2.5 nonattainment area. Since EPD has already analyzed Madison County, this analysis focuses on Oconee county. This document also analyzes meterological factors for Madison County since such analysis was not conducted as part of EPD's June 17 submittal.

EMISSIONS AND AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS EPD's Updated L Score analysis ( see Table 6 of EPD's June 17, 2004, submittal) resulted in an L Score of 5.85 for Oconee County, the 8th highest for the 15 counties analyzed by EPD. U. S. EPA's Weighted Emissions Score for Oconee County is 30.5, the 7th highest of 15 counties analyzed. These datum indicate that the urban excess emissions from Oconee County do not contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels in Athens compared to other area counties.

ANALYSIS USING OTHER FACTORS EPD has analyzedOconee County using the seven other factors as described in U. S. EPA's April 1, 2003, memorandum " Designations for the Fine Particle National Ambient Standards":

1. population density and degree of urbanization 2. traffic and commuting patterns 3. expected growth 4. meteorology 5. geography/ topography 6. jurisdictional boundaries 7. level of control of emissions Page 6 of the April 1, 2003, EPA memorandum, states that 8 hour ozone nonattainment boundaries should be considered in when recommending nonattainment boundaries for PM2.5. The Athens area was designated as attainment under the 8 hr ozone standard.

The following thresholds were used to determine whether or not a county met criteria 1, 2, or 3.

A. Population Density   139 persons per square mile [ Derived from the lowest projected 2002 population density of any county with a monitored violation] B. Percent Population growth  20% ( minimum percent urbanization considered by the U. S. Census) and 2713 persons [ Derived from lowest increase in population of any county with a monitored violation] for the period 1990 2000. ( To meet this criteria, a county would have to meet or exceed both the percent growth and numerical growth thresholds. This takes into account the fact that a county with a low population can experience a high percentage growth rate with only a small increase in actual population.) 2 C. Percent Urbanization   35% ( minimum percent urbanization considered by U. S. Census Bureau) for 2000 D. In Commutes   At least 8913 vehicles commuting into a core county or a county with a monitored violation. The in commute into core counties or counties with a monitored violation was only considered for those counties outside a current non attainment area [ Derived from 15% ( minimum commute considered by U. S. Census Bureau in MSA determinations) multiplied by 59,418 vehicles] E. Vehicle Registration   59,418 vehicles [ Derived from the lowest 2003 vehicle registration of any county currently with a monitored violation]. F. Vehicular Miles Traveled ( VMT) in county   742,000 miles [ derived from lowest 2002 VMT of any county currently with a monitored violation]

The specific values for each of these criteria for the counties analyzed are shown below and are compared to the threshold values.

Meteorology, geography, topography, jurisdictional boundaries, and level of control of emissions are considered on a qualitative basis for each county.

Population Density   County Population Density persons/ square mile Oconee 147 Threshold 139 Oconee County exceeds the threshold for population density only slightly.

Population Growth

Population Growth County percent persons Oconee 49% 8607 Threshold 20% 2713 Oconee County both the percent and total persons thresholds for population density.

Percent Urbanization

County % Urbanization Oconee 49.7% Threshold 35%

Oconee County meets the threshold for percent urbanization.

In Commutes

County In Commutes to Clarke Co. 3 Oconee 6696 Threshold 8913 Oconee County does not meet the threshold for commuting to Clarke County.

Vehicle Registration   County vehicle registration Oconee 29,863 Threshold 59,418 Oconee County does not meet the threshold for vehicle registration.

Vehicle Miles Traveled   County VMT Oconee 1,304,968 Threshold 1,557,806 Oconee County does not meet the threshold for vehicle miles traveled.

Summary of Quantitative Factors   Oconee County meets three of the six quantitative criteria, but one of them ( population density) only slightly.

Meteorology   Wind frequency data was obtained from U. S. EPA's PM2.5 Designation Technical Information web page ( www. epa. gov/ ttn/ naaqs/ pm/ pm25_ tech_ info. html) for Clarke County ( the county where the violating monitor is located). The data show a strong indication of prevailing winds from the west. Oconee County is located to the south of Clarke County. Madison County is located northeast of Clarke County.

Geography  Oconee County is adjacent to the county ( Clarke) that has a violating monitor. There are no other geographical factors affecting these counties.

Topography   There are no topographical issues that affect air quality in the Athens area.

Jurisdictional   Oconee County is part of the Athens Metropolitan Statistical Area ( MSA). Oconee County, as well as the rest of the Athens area is under the jurisdiction of Georgia EPD.

Level of Control of Emissions   Oconee County is subject to the following six air quality control measures that are more stringent than elsewhere in the state:

391 3 1. 02( 2)( lll)  NOx Emissions from Fuel burning Equipment 391 3 1. 02( 2)( mmm)  NOx Emissions from Stationary Gas Turbines and Stationary Engines used to Generate Electricity 391 3 1. 02( 2)( nnn)  NOx Emissions from Large Stationary Gas Turbines 391 3 1. 02( 2)( bbb)  Gasoline Marketing 391 3 1. 02( 5)( b) 2   Open Burning, Specific County Restrictions 4 CONCLUSION Based on the above factors and the revised L Scores analysis conducted by EPD, we conclude that Oconee County should not be included in the Athens PM2.5 nonattainment area. This analysis also shows that meterological factors do not indicate that Madison County should be included in the Athens PM2.5 nonattainment area.


Memo to the Lead RIA Docket: Supplemental IQ Gain Calculations Using Two
Additional Concentration-Response Functions

In this memo we calculate changes in IQ decrements using two alternative
concentration-response functions that are found in table 5-4 of the Lead
RIA:

Lanphear et al. 2005 Log-Linear with low-exposure linearization (LLL),
based on concurrent blood lead metric

The median value of the slopes of the “set of studies with shallower
slopes”

For each standard alternative considered in Chapter 5 of the RIA, we use
the above functions to calculate changes in IQ gains and the associated
monetized benefits. Tables 1 and 2 present results using each function.
Figure 1 compares the estimated change in IQ points using these two
functions above as well as the log-linear Lanphear et al. 2005 function
based on lifetime blood lead (see page 5-24).

Table 1. Number of IQ points gained and Monetary Benefits (in Millions
of 2006$) in 2020: Lanphear et al. 2005 LLL (based on concurrent blood
lead metric)

Standard Alternative	IQ Points Gained	Estimated Net Present Value of IQ
Points Gained*

3% Discount Rate	7% Discount Rate

0.5 Second Maximum Monthly Mean	97,000	$850--$1,200	$110--$210

0.3 Second Maximum Monthly Mean	180,000	$1,600--$2,200	$190--$380

0.2 Second Maximum Monthly Mean	250,000	$2,200--$3,200	$270--$540

0.1 Second Maximum Monthly Mean	390,000	$3,500--$4,900	$430--$850

0.05 Second Maximum Monthly Mean	620,000	$5,400--$7,700	$680--$1,300

*Lower end of range calculated using Schwartz (1994b) estimate; upper
end calculated using Salkever (1995) estimate.

** Results reflect the use a 2002 derived non-air background blood lead
applied to analysis year of 2020. To the extent that state and federal
interventions such as the Renovation and Repair Rule (EPA, 2008c) reduce
future non-air blood lead levels, the estimate of IQ change above may be
overstated.

Table 2. Number of IQ points gained and Monetary Benefits (in Millions
of 2006$) in 2020: The median value of the slopes of the “set of
studies with shallower slopes”

Standard Alternative	IQ Points Gained	Estimated Net Present Value of IQ
Points Gained*

3% Discount Rate	7% Discount Rate

0.5 Second Maximum Monthly Mean	150,000	$1,400--$1,900	$170--$330

0.3 Second Maximum Monthly Mean	220,000	$1,900--$2,700	$240--$470

0.2 Second Maximum Monthly Mean	270,000	$2,400--$3,400	$290--$580

0.1 Second Maximum Monthly Mean	350,000	$3,100--$4,400	$380--$760

0.05 Second Maximum Monthly Mean	460,000	$4,000--$5,800	$500--$990

*Lower end of range calculated using Schwartz (1994b) estimate; upper
end calculated using Salkever (1995) estimate.

** Results reflect the use a 2002 derived non-air background blood lead
applied to analysis year of 2020. To the extent that state and federal
interventions such as the Renovation and Repair Rule (EPA, 2008c) reduce
future non-air blood lead levels, the estimate of IQ change above may be
overstated.

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41014-41015]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18246]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM98-1-000]

Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public Notice

    This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of
the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.
    Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission
decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-
the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested
proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of
the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any
oral communication.
    Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional
file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the
proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited
communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the
decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not
be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a
proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or
contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may
request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and
responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant
such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any
person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record
communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the
official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with
Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.
    Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional
record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a
cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR
385.2201(e)(1)(v).
    The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently
received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed
are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are
available for electronic review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Docket No.               File date     Presenter or requester
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prohibited:
    1. CP15-554-000............        8-4-2017  John A. Wagner.
    2. CP15-554-000............        8-7-2017  Mass Mailing.\1\
    3. CP15-554-000............        8-8-2017  Linda Lou Griffin.
    4. CP16-22-000.............       8-16-2017  International Union of
                                                  Operating Engineers.
Exempt:
    1. CP15-93-000.............        8-3-2017  U.S. Congress \2\
    2. P-1494-000..............        8-3-2017  U.S. Congress \3\
    3. P-1494-000..............        8-3-2017  State of Oklahoma,
                                                  Office of the
                                                  Secretary of Energy &
                                                  Environment
    4. P-1494-000..............        8-7-2017  U.S. Senator James M.
                                                  Inhofe
    5. CP16-10-000.............        8-8-2017  Commonwealth of
                                                  Virginia Department of
                                                  Environmental Quality

    6. P-13318-000.............       8-15-2017  FERC Staff \4\
    7. CP16-454-000, CP16-455-        8-16-2017  FERC Staff \5\
     000.
    8. CP17-80-000.............       8-17-2017  FERC Staff \6\
    9. CP15-93-000.............       8-18-2017  State of Ohio
                                                  Lieutenant Governor,
                                                  Mary Taylor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Two letters have been sent to FERC Commissioners and staff under
  this docket number.
\2\ Ranking Members Frank Pallone, Jr. and Maria Cantwell.
\3\ Senators James M. Inhofe and James Lankford. House Representatives
  Markwayne Mullin and Jim Bridestine.
\4\ Email dated August 14, 2017 with Daniel Blake from U.S Fish and
  Wildlife Service.
\5\ Conference Call Notes for call on August 15, 2017 with U.S.
  Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety
  Administration and Rio Grande LNG, LLC's contractor CHIV
  International.
\6\ Email dated August 11, 2017 with Tonya Tipton from Shawnee Tribe.

    Dated: August 23, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-18246 Filed 8-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 26, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 206)]
[Notices]
[Page 61804-61805]
[DOCID:fr26oc05-73]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

October 18, 2005.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings.
    Docket Numbers: ER05-1407-001.
    Applicants: Portland General Electric Company.
    Description: Portland General Electric Co submits revised filing in
response to FERC's request for additional information.
    Filed Date: October 12, 2005.
    Accession Number: 20051013-0074.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 2, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-150-002.
    Applicants: Trinity Public Utilities District.
    Description: Trinity Public Utilities District advises FERC that it
has prepared, executed and forwarded to Pacific Gas & Electric Co an
amendment to the existing Operating Agreement.
    Filed Date: October 12, 2005.
    Accession Number: 20051014-0113.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 2, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-19-000.
    Applicants: MeadWestvaco Energy Services, LLC.
    Description: MeadWestvaco Energy Services LLC notifies FERC that it
changed its name to NewPage Energy Services LLC effective September 30,
2005.
    Filed Date: October 11, 2005.
    Accession Number: 20051017-0221.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, November 1, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-22-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc
submits an unexecuted Large Generator Interconnection Agreement among
Endeavor Power Partners, Midwest ISO and Interstate Power and Light
Company 22.
    Filed Date: October 12, 2005.
    Accession Number: 20051013-0045.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 2, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-23-000.
    Applicants: TXU Electric Delivery Company.
    Description: TXU Electric Delivery Co submits a notice of
cancellation of Transmission Service Agreement Nos. 94, 106, and 111
pursuant to FERC Electric Tariff, Ninth Revised Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: October 12, 2005.
    Accession Number: 20051013-0078.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 2, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-25-000.
    Applicants: American Electric Power Service Corporation.
    Description: American Electric Power Service Corp on behalf of AEP
Texas North Co submits an executed amended and restated generation
interconnection agreement with Buffalo Gap Wind Farm, LLC etc.
    Filed Date: October 12, 2005.
    Accession Number: 20051013-0081.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 2, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-29-000.
    Applicants: Dartmouth Power Associates Limited Partnership.
    Description: Dartmouth Power Associates L.P. submits a notice of
cancellation of FERC Rate Schedule No. 1 effective October 13, 2005.
    Filed Date: October 12, 2005.
    Accession Number: 20051014-0116.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 2, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-30-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator Inc.
submits an executed Large Generator Interconnection Agreement among
Union Electric Co dba AmerenUE, Midwest ISO and Central Illinois Public
Service Company dba AmerenCIPS.
    Filed Date: October 11, 2005.
    Accession Number: 20051017-0222.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, November 1, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER99-3077-002.
    Applicants: Colorado Power Partners.
    Description: Colorado Power Partners submits its updated market
power analysis in compliance with FERC's prior Orders.
    Filed Date: October 12, 2005.
    Accession Number: 20051014-0114.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 2, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER99-3197-002.
    Applicants: BIV Generation Company, L.L.C.
    Description: BIV Generation Co, LLC submits its updated market
power analysis in compliance with FERC's July 28, 1999 Order.
    Filed Date: October 12, 2005.
    Accession Number: 20051014-0118.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 2, 2005.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov.
 To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet

access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For

assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-5900 Filed 10-25-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 181 (Monday, September 19, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58063-58065]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23897]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65325; File No. SR-CBOE-2011-085]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change Concerning the Clearing Trading Permit Holder
Proprietary Transaction Fee Waiver for Orders in Multiply-Listed FLEX
Options Classes

September 12, 2011.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on August 31, 2011, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. 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 amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.org/legal), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission.

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
    On August 1, 2011, the Exchange implemented a waiver of the
Clearing Trading Permit Holder (``CTPH'') Proprietary Transaction Fee
(the ``Fee'') for CTPHs executing facilitation orders in multiply-
listed FLEX Options classes (the ``Waiver'').\3\ At that time, the
Exchange intended to exclude from the Waiver such orders originating
from joint back-office (``JBO'') participants, but due to an oversight,
such orders were not excluded. Therefore, the Exchange now proposes to
amend the Waiver to exclude such orders originating from JBO
participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-65007 (August 2,
2011), 76 FR 48190 (August 8, 2011) (SR-CBOE-2011-071).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A JBO is an arrangement whereby a broker/dealer maintains a nominal
ownership interest in its clearing firm. The clearing firm will issue a
special class of non-voting preferred stock to other broker/dealers
that clear their proprietary positions through the clearing firm. JBO
participants are not considered self-clearing for any purpose other
than the extension of credit under CBOE Rule 12.3 or under comparable

rules of another self-regulatory organization.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See CBOE Rule 13.4, Interpretation and Policy .01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    JBOs are separate entities from the CTPHs with which they maintain
an arrangement, and do not have a complete common identity of ownership
with the CTPHs. JBOs take advantage of the exposure across the market
that CTPHs afford and use CTPHs for margin relief. While JBO trades
come into market with the same origin code as CTPHs, these trades are
executed on behalf of the JBO and not the CTPHs. CTPHs have various
obligations, such as clearing accounts and settling trades, and must
abide by certain requirements, such as those regarding books and
records, and risk analysis, that JBOs do not. Moreover, unlike CTPHs,
JBOs do not guarantee performance on contracts, and if a JBO backs out
of a position or otherwise cannot maintain a position that the JBO had
taken, the CTPH is still on the hook to maintain that JBO position.
Also, unlike CTPHs, JBOs are not self-clearing for the purposes of
facilitation.\5\ Further, CTPHs must work with the Options Clearing
Corporation (``OCC'') to clear trades and satisfy OCC requirements on
subjects such as capital requirements, which JBOs do not need to
satisfy. In recognition of the obligations and liabilities that CTPHs
possess and which JBOs do not possess, and because JBOs are not self-
clearing for the purposes of facilitation, the Exchange does not at the
present time desire to provide the Waiver to JBOs, and therefore
proposes to exclude JBOs from the Waiver. Finally, the Exchange
currently excludes JBO orders from the Fee Cap and Sliding Scale.\6\
Excluding JBOs from the Waiver helps to achieve a level of consistency
in the Fees Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See CBOE Rule 13.4, Interpretation and Policy .01.
    \6\ See Exchange Fees Schedule section regarding the Multiply-
Listed Options Fee Cap and the CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding
Scale for Clearing Trading Permit Holder Proprietary Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As previously stated, JBO trades come into the market with the same
origin code as CTPHs. However, CTPHs may possess different clearing
firm numbers; each CTPH has a number for its own trades, and a
different number for each JBO. Therefore, JBO trades will be identified
and differentiated from CTPH trades by these different numbers.
    The proposed rule change would take effect on September 1, 2011.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\7\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) \8\
of the Act in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
CBOE Trading Permit Holders and other persons using Exchange
facilities. The Exchange believes that amending the Waiver to exclude
JBO orders is reasonable because the amount of the fee, either $0.20 or
$0.25 per contract (depending on the product), is within the range of
fees assessed by the Exchange for other orders charged to other market
participants for the same product.\9\ Indeed, up until August 1, 2011
(one month ago), when the Waiver was instituted and unintentionally
included JBO trades, JBOs paid this amount for firm facilitation orders
in multiply-listed FLEX Options classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \9\ See Exchange Fees Schedule, Section 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes amending the Waiver to exclude JBO orders is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because, unlike CTPHs, JBOs
are not self-clearing for the purposes of facilitation,\10\ and because
CTPHs have a number of obligations, responsibilities and liabilities
that JBOs do not possess. These obligations include clearing accounts,
settling trades, and must abide by certain requirements, such as those
regarding books and records, and risk analysis. Moreover, unlike CTPHs,
JBOs do not guarantee performance on contracts, and if a JBO backs out
of a position or otherwise cannot maintain a position that the JBO had
taken, the CTPH is still on the hook to maintain that JBO position.
Further, CTPHs must work with the OCC to clear trades and satisfy OCC
requirements on subjects such as capital requirements, which JBOs do
not need to satisfy. In recognition of the obligations and liabilities
that CTPHs possess and which JBOs do not possess, and because JBOs are
not self-clearing for the purposes of facilitation, the Exchange
believes it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to exclude
JBOs from the Waiver. Finally, the Exchange currently excludes JBO
orders from the Fee Cap and Sliding Scale.\11\ Excluding JBOs from the
Waiver helps to achieve a level of consistency in the Fees Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See CBOE Rule 13.4, Interpretation and Policy .01.
    \11\ See Exchange Fees Schedule section regarding the Multiply-
Listed Options Fee Cap and the CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding
Scale for Clearing Trading Permit Holder Proprietary Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
sophisticated and knowledgeable market participants readily can, and
do, send order flow to competing exchanges based on fee levels. The
Exchange believes that the fees it assesses must be competitive with
fees assessed on other options exchanges. The Exchange believes that
this competitive marketplace impacts the fees present on the Exchange
today and influences the proposals set forth above.

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition 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

    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

    The proposed rule change is designated by the Exchange as
establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge, thereby
qualifying for effectiveness on filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)
of the Act\12\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4\13\ thereunder. At
any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the
Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-CBOE-2011-085 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2011-085. 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 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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. 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-CBOE-2011-085 and should be
submitted on or before October 11, 2011.

For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant
to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-23897 Filed 9-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 207 (Monday, October 26, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 67732]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23644]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER21-136-000]

Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing
Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization; Flat Ridge 3
Wind Energy, LLC

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced Flat Ridge 3
Wind Energy, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is November 9, 2020.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. At this time, the
Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free, (886) 208-
3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 19, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-23644 Filed 10-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 20, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 60392]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27331]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2232-698]

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for
Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Non-Project Use of Project Lands.
    b. Project No.: 2232-698.
    c. Date Filed: November 13, 2017.
    d. Applicant: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (licensee).
    e. Name of Project: Catawba-Wateree Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The affected project land is located on the Catawba
River in Burke County, North Carolina.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Dennis Whitaker, Manager, Lake Services
North, 526 South Church Street, ECQ12, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Alicia Burtner; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address: [email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene and protests
is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission. The
Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions
to intervene, protests and comments using the Commission's eFiling
system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at [email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or
(202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper
copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should
include docket number P-2232-698. Comments emailed to Commission staff
are not considered part of the Commission record.
    k. Description of Request: The licensee filed a request for
approval for a non-project use of project lands and waters, to lease
approximately 18.715 acres of the project area in Burke County, North
Carolina to Carolina Sand, Inc. for the purpose of hydraulic sand
mining activities. While not currently in operation, this location has
been maintained for dredging by previous contractors for over 75 years.
The proposed sand mining would employ hydraulic dredge and barge
operations to remove an estimated average of 33,000 tons of sediment
from the river bed each year. The sediment would be transported via
pipeline to a 29-acre processing and stockpiling area, and the excess
water would be treated to remove sediment and turbidity and then
returned to the Catawba River.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed on
the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
[email protected], for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: All filings must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title PROTEST, MOTION TO INTERVENE, or
COMMENTS; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and
the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3)
furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person
protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions
to intervene or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and
otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.24(b). All comments,
motions to intervene, or protests should relate to project works which
are subject of the non-project use application. A copy of any protest
or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the
applicant specified in the particular application. If an intervener
files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits
of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular
resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that
resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this
application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons
listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this
proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Dated: December 13, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-27331 Filed 12-19-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70719-70720]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29405]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13948-001]

Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County; Notice of
Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document,
and Approving Use of the Traditional Licensing Process

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application and
Request to Use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    b. Project No.: 13948-001.
    c. Date Filed: September 9, 2011.
    d. Submitted By: Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County
(Snohomish PUD).
    e. Name of Project: Calligan Creek Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On Calligan Creek, in King County, Washington. No
federal lands are occupied by the project works or located within the
project boundary.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Kim D. Moore, Assistant General
Manager of Generation, Water, and Corporate Services; Public Utility
District No. 1 of Snohomish County; 2320 California Street; P.O. Box
1107; Everett, WA 98206-1107;<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Kelly Wolcott at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Snohomish PUD No. 1 filed its request to use the Traditional
Licensing Process on September 9, 2011. Snohomish PUD provided public
notice of its request on September 8, 2011. In a letter dated November
7, 2011, the Director of the Division of Hydropower

Licensing approved Snohomish PUD's request to use the Traditional
Licensing Process.
    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 Snohomish PUD 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. Snohomish PUD 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,<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in paragraph h.
    o. 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: November 8, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-29405 Filed 11-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 167 (Tuesday, August 28, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43953-43954]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18502]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Advisory
Circular (AC): Reporting of Laser Illumination of Aircraft

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period
soliciting comments on the following collection of information was
published on June 28, 2018. The collection involves the reporting of
unauthorized illumination of aircraft by lasers. The information to be
collected will be used to assist law enforcement and provide support
for recommended mitigation actions to be taken to ensure continued safe
and orderly flight operations.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by September 24, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be
addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
[email protected], or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW, Washington,
DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Hall at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of

information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the accuracy of the
estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the quality, utility and
clarity of the information collection; and (d) ways that the burden
could be minimized without reducing the quality of the collected
information. The agency will summarize and/or include your comments in
the request for OMB's clearance of this information collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0698.
    Title: Advisory Circular (AC): Reporting of Laser Illumination of
Aircraft.
    Form Numbers: Advisory Circular 70-2A, Reporting of Laser
Illumination of Aircraft.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on June 28, 2018 (83 FR 30474). Advisory Circular 70-2A
provides guidance to civilian air crews on the reporting of laser
illumination incidents and recommended mitigation actions to be taken
in order to ensure continued safe and orderly flight operations.
Information is collected from pilots and aircrews that are affected by
an unauthorized illumination by lasers. The requested reporting
involves an immediate broadcast notification to Air Traffic Control
(ATC) when the incident occurs, as well as a broadcast warning of the
incident if the aircrew is flying in uncontrolled airspace. In
addition, the AC requests that the aircrew supply a written report of
the incident and send it by fax or email to the Washington Operations
Control Complex (WOCC) as soon as possible.
    Respondents: Approximately 1,100 pilots and crewmembers.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 10 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 183 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 21, 2018.
Robin Darden,
Management Support Specialist, Performance, Policy, and Records
Management Branch, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2018-18502 Filed 8-27-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 68 (Monday, April 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21122-21123]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8430]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66728; File No. SR-BX-2012-023]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
BOX Fee Schedule

April 3, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 29, 2012, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have
been substantially prepared by the Exchange. 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 amend the Fee Schedule of the Boston
Options Exchange Group, LLC (``BOX''). The text of the proposed rule
change is attached as Exhibit 5.\3\ The text of the proposed rule
change is available from the principal office of the Exchange, at the
Commission's Public Reference Room, on the Commission's Web site at
www.sec.gov, and also on the Exchange's Internet Web site at http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQOMXBX/Filings/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Commission notes that the Exhibit 5 is attached to the
filing, not to this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 these statements may be examined at the places
specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization 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
    Currently, the BOX Fee Schedule lists fingerprint processing fees
that are imposed on BOX Participants by the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc., (``FINRA'') in connection with
participation in FINRA's Web CRD registration system. The Exchange was
recently notified by FINRA that, effective March 19, 2012, FINRA
decreased the per card Initial Submission and Third Submission fees
from $30.25 to $27.50. As such, the Exchange proposes to amend the BOX
Fee Schedule to reflect this change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,\4\ in general, and Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\5\ in particular, in that it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
its members and other persons using its facilities. The Exchange
believes the proposed change is reasonable because the fees for
fingerprint processing will now be lower than they previously were. The
proposed change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because
the new, lower fingerprint processing fees will apply to all eligible
parties. Further, this fee is not being assessed or set by BOX or the
Exchange, but by FINRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 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 comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change is filed for immediate effectiveness
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Exchange Act \6\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\7\ because it establishes or changes a due,
fee, or other charge applicable only to a member. As such, the proposed
rule change is effective upon filing with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend the rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BX-2012-023 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2012-023. 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 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 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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing will also be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. 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-BX-2012-023 and should be
submitted on or before April 30, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-8430 Filed 4-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 43)]
[Notices]
[Page 10330-10331]
[DOCID:fr05mr10-140]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Extension of Existing Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0123.

Extension:
    Rule 605 of Regulation NMS; SEC File No 270-488; OMB Control No.
3235-0542; Rule 606 of Regulation NMS; SEC File No. 270-489; OMB
Control No. 3235-0541.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collections of information summarized below.
    Rule 605 of Regulation NMS (``Rule 605'') (17 CFR 242.605),\1\
formerly known as Rule 11Ac1-5, requires market centers to make
available to the public monthly order execution reports in electronic
form. The Commission believes that many market centers retain most, if
not all, the underlying raw data necessary to generate these reports in
electronic format. Once the necessary

data is collected, market centers could either program their systems to
generate the statistics and reports, or transfer the data to a service
provider (such as an independent company in the business of preparing
such reports or a self-regulatory organization (``SRO'') that would
generate the statistics and reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Regulation NMS, adopted by the Commission in June 2005,
redesignated the national market system rules previously adopted
under Section 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
78a et seq.) (``Exchange Act''). Rule 11Ac1-5 under the Exchange Act
was redesignated Rule 605 of Regulation NMS, and Rule 11Ac1-6 under
the Exchange Act was redesignated Rule 606 of Regulation NMS. No
substantive amendments were made to Rule 605 and Rule 606 of
Regulation NMS. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June
9, 2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The collection of information obligations of Rule 605 apply to all
market centers that receive covered orders in national market system
securities. The Commission estimates that approximately 408 market
centers are subject to the collection of information obligations of
Rule 605. Each of these respondents is required to respond to the
collection of information on a monthly basis.
    The Commission staff estimates that, on average, Rule 605 causes
respondents to spend 6 hours per month in additional time to collect
the data necessary to generate the reports, or 72 hours per year. With
an estimated 408 market centers subject to Rule 605, the total data
collection cost to comply with the monthly reporting requirement is
estimated to be 29,376 hours per year.
    Rule 606 of Regulation NMS (``Rule 606'') (17 CFR 242.606),
formerly known as Rule 11Ac1-6, requires broker-dealers to prepare and
disseminate quarterly order routing reports. Much of the information
needed to generate these reports already should be collected by broker-
dealers in connection with their periodic evaluations of their order
routing practices. Broker-dealers must conduct such evaluations to
fulfill the duty of best execution that they owe their customers.
    The collection of information obligations of Rule 606 apply to
broker-dealers that route non-directed customer orders in covered
securities. The Commission estimates that out of the currently 5178
broker-dealers that are subject to the collection of information
obligations of Rule 606, clearing brokers bear a substantial portion of
the burden of complying with the reporting and recordkeeping
requirements of Rule 606 on behalf of small to mid-sized introducing
firms. There currently are approximately 527 clearing brokers. In
addition, there are approximately 2426 introducing brokers that receive
funds or securities from their customers. Because at least some of
these firms also may have greater involvement in determining where
customer orders are routed for execution, they have been included,
along with clearing brokers, in estimating the total burden of Rule
606.
    The Commission staff estimates that each firm significantly
involved in order routing practices incurs an average burden of 40
hours to prepare and disseminate a quarterly report required by Rule
606, or a burden of 160 hours per year. With an estimated 2953 \2\
broker-dealers significantly involved in order routing practices, the
total burden per year to comply with the quarterly reporting
requirement in Rule 606 is estimated to be 472,480 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 527 clearing brokers + 2426 introducing brokers = 2953.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 606 also requires broker-dealers to respond to individual
customer requests for information on orders handled by the broker-
dealer for that customer. Clearing brokers generally bear the burden of
responding to these requests. The Commission staff estimates that an
average clearing broker incurs an annual burden of 400 hours (2000
responses x 0.2 hours/response) to prepare, disseminate, and retain
responses to customers required by Rule 606. With an estimated 527
clearing brokers subject to Rule 606, the total burden per year to
comply with the customer response requirement in Rule 606 is estimated
to be 210,800 hours.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate
of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information 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 within 60
days of this publication.
    Comments should be directed to Charles Boucher, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/c Shirley
Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312 or send
an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: March 1, 2010.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-4660 Filed 3-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 173 (Thursday, September 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45233-45234]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19243]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP18-13-000]

Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment for the
Proposed Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC Line 8000 Replacement Project

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for the Line
8000 Replacement Project (Project), proposed by Columbia Gas
Transmission, LLC (Columbia) in the above-referenced docket. Columbia
requests authorization to modernize and upgrade Columbia's Line 8000
pipeline system by replacing and abandoning existing pipeline and
constructing new pipeline and appurtenant facilities in Mineral County,
West Virginia and Allegany County, Maryland.
    The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the
construction and operation of the Project in accordance with the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The FERC
staff concludes that approval of the proposed project, with appropriate
mitigating measures, would not constitute a major federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
    The proposed Line 8000 Project would consist of:
     Replacement of a total of approximately 13.25 miles of
existing 12-inch-diameter bare steel pipeline, with approximately 13.54
miles of new, coated 12-inch-diameter natural gas transmission pipeline
in five sections and four modification points along Line 8000 and
Lateral Line 8006;
     Replacement of a total of approximately 0.54 miles of
existing 4-inch-diameter bare steel pipeline, with approximately 0.67
miles of new coated 4-inch-diameter natural gas transmission pipeline
along two laterals (Lateral Lines 8225 and 8244);
     Installation of two new pig \1\ launcher and receiver
sites and four new mainline valves associated with pipeline facilities;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A pig is a tool that the pipeline company inserts into and
pushes through the pipeline for cleaning the pipeline, conducting
internal inspections, or other purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Modifications/abandonment of three existing mainline
valves and three existing side tap valve sites and modification of tie-
ins at two regulator stations; and
     Abandonment of 13 active residential taps and 109 inactive
taps.
    The FERC staff mailed copies of the EA to federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes;
potentially affected landowners and other interested individuals and
groups; and newspapers and libraries in the project area. In addition,
the EA is available for public viewing on the FERC's website
(www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. A limited number of copies of
the EA are available for distribution and public inspection at: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Public Reference Room, 888 First Street
NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. Your comments
should focus on the EA's disclosure and discussion of potential
environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and

measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific
your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that the
Commission has the opportunity to consider your comments prior to
making its decision on this project, it is important that we receive
your comments in Washington, DC on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on
September 28, 2018.
    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to file
your comments to the Commission. In all instances, please reference the
project docket number (CP18-13-000) with your submission. The
Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has staff
available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
[email protected].
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief,
text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can also file your comments electronically using the
eFiling feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the
link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments
in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on eRegister. You must select the type of filing you are making. If you
are filing a comment on a particular project, please select Comment on
a Filing; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC
20426.
    Any person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a
motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.214). Only intervenors have the
right to seek rehearing or judicial review of the Commission's
decision. The Commission may grant affected landowners and others with
environmental concerns intervenor status upon showing good cause by
stating that they have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding
which no other party can adequately represent. Simply filing
environmental comments will not give you intervenor status, but you do
not need intervenor status to have your comments considered.
    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on General Search, and enter the docket number in
the Docket Number field, excluding the last three digits (i.e., CP18-
13). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected] or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Dated: August 29, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-19243 Filed 9-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 9, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54001-54002]
[FR Doc No: 2019-21958]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0472; Airspace Docket No. 19-ACE-9]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Mount Pleasant, IA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Mount Pleasant Municipal Airport, Mount
Pleasant, IA. This action is due to an airspace review caused by the
decommissioning of the Mount Pleasant non-directional beacon (NDB),
which provided navigation information to the instrument procedures at
this airport. Airspace redesign is necessary for the safety and
management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, January 30, 2020. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1 Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11D at NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the

authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This
rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle
VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is
charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace
necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of
airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it
amends the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Mount Pleasant Municipal Airport, Mount Pleasant, IA, to
support IFR operations at this airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (84 FR 33193; July 12, 2019) for Docket No. FAA-2019-0472 to
amend the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Mount Pleasant Municipal Airport, Mount Pleasant, IA.
Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11D, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

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

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 amends the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to within a 6.4-mile radius (increased from a 6-mile
radius) of the Mount Pleasant Municipal Airport, Mount Pleasant, IA;
and removes the Mount Pleasant NDB and the associated extension from
the airspace legal description.
    This action is the result of an airspace review caused by the
decommissioning of the Mount Pleasant NDB, which provided navigation
information for the instrument procedures at this airport.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    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, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that 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.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected
to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists 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 part 71 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

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

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

* * * * *

ACE IA E5 Mount Pleasant, IA [Amended]

Mount Pleasant Municipal Airport, IA
    (Lat. 40[deg]56'48'' N, long. 91[deg]30'40'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Mount Pleasant Municipal Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 2, 2019.
Steve Szukala,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2019-21958 Filed 10-8-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P