[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 244 (Thursday, December 23, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 72956]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27781]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ID-9353-000]

Notice of Filing; Smita N. Shah, P.E.

    Take notice that on December 10, 2021, Smita N. Shah, P.E.
submitted for filing, application for authority to hold interlocking
positions, pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, 16
U.S.C. 825d (b) and Part 45.8 of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR part
45.8.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    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://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. 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 protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. 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.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on January 3, 2022.

    Dated: December 16, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-27781 Filed 12-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

OFFICE OF

PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

MEMORANDUM

	Date:	12/MAR/2008

	Subject:	Dichlobenil.  Use on Caneberry (Subgroup 13-07A), Bushberry (Subgroup 13-07B).  Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data.  PP#7E7230.

		DP Number: 349398	Decision Number:  380110

		PC Code: 027401	MRID Number:  45572201

		40 CFR 180.231	Chemical Class: nitrile herbicide

       From:	Debra Rate, Ph.D., Biologist

Alternative Risk Integration and Assessment (ARIA) Team

Risk Integration, Minor Use and Emergency Response (RIMUER) Branch

Registration Division (7505P)

	Through:	William Cutchin, Acting Senior Branch Scientist

		ARIA

		RIMUERB/RD (7505P)

		And

		George F. Kramer, Ph.D., Senior Chemist

		Registration Action Branch 1 (RAB1)

		Health Effects Division (HED)(7509P)

	To:	Susan Stanton, Environmental Scientist

		RIMUERB/RD (7505P)

Executive Summary

Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4) has requested tolerances for the use of dichlobenil (2,6-dichlorobenzonitrile) on rhubarb, caneberry, subgroup 13-07A, and bushberry, subgroup 13-07B commodities.  Dichlobenil is a nitrile herbicide that acts by inhibiting germination of actively dividing meristems and acts primarily on growing points and root tips.  The rhubarb request was previously reviewed by W. Cutchin (DP Num: 31566, 22/FEB/2006).  Dichlobenil, formulated as the 4% granular product Casoron® 4G (EPA Reg. No. 400-168), is to be applied at a maximum seasonal rate of 4 lb ai/A to berry commodities.  The product is applied directly to soil while the target crop is dormant.  For berry crop group tolerances, no additional data was submitted.  Tolerances are currently established for blackberry, blueberry, and raspberry.  Since the previously reviewed data encompasses the representative commodities for the requested berry crop groups, the data may be translated to support the requested berry tolerances.

The qualitative nature of the residue in plants is adequately understood based on acceptable plant metabolism studies on apples and grapes.  Both studies indicate that the major residue of concern is 2,6-dichlorobenzamide (BAM).  The parent compound, dichlobenil, was not detected in either of the studies.  HED concluded that BAM is the major terminal residue of dichlobenil in plants, and should be added to the tolerance expression.  Since there are no berry animal feed items of regulatory concern, a discussion of the nature of the residues of dichlobenil in livestock commodities is not germane to this action.

Pesticide Analytical Manual (PAM) Vol. II, Method A is a gas-liquid chromatography/electroconductivity detector (GLC/ECD) method with a limit of detection (LOD) of 0.05 ppm, which can be used for determination of residues of dichlobenil in/on plant commodities.  This method was judged adequate for tolerance enforcement.  However, the registrant was required to revise the method or develop an alternative method using safer solvents.  The revised method is not adequate and will require additional modification before it can be accepted as a tolerance enforcement method.  A GLC/ECD method, L 3-53-71, for determination of residues of BAM in/on fruits and nuts has undergone a successful independent laboratory validation and has been validated by the EPA Analytical Chemistry Laboratory (ACL).  However, a revised method incorporating ACL's comments must be submitted before the requirements for an analytical method for BAM can be considered fulfilled.  Dichlobenil is completely recovered using the multiresidue methods in PAM Vol. I Sections 302 and 304.  BAM is also completely recovered using Section 302.  Since the multiresidue methods adequately quantitate dichlobenil and BAM, there is adequate enforcement methodology for this action.

The analytical methods SOP# Meth-83, Determination of Dichlobenil Residues in Cherries and SOP# Meth-84, Determination of 2,6-dichlorobenzamide Residues in Cherries, developed by Morse Laboratories were used with minor modifications for the analysis of dichlobenil residues on rhubarb.  Dichlobenil residues were extracted from the raw agricultural commodity (RAC) by extracting with ethyl acetate/hexane and clean up using a Florisil column.  BAM residues were extracted from RAC by extracting with ethyl acetate and clean up using a Florisil column.  Samples were analyzed using a GLC/ECD in halogen mode.  The analytical method was validated at 0.05, 0.1, and 0.5 ppm for dichlobenil and 0.01, 0.02, and 0.1 ppm for BAM.  At the range of the fortification levels, method recoveries were generally within Agency standards of 70-120%.  The lower limit of method validation (LLMV) was reported for dichlobenil and BAM as 0.05 ppm and 0.01 ppm, respectively.  The LOD was 0.006 ppm for both dichlobenil and BAM.  The method used for data collection is adequate

There are no processed commodities of regulatory interest resulting from the requested berry uses.  Berry crops are not rotated on a regular basis; therefore, inadvertent residues in rotational crops are not a concern for this action.

Regulatory Recommendations and Residue Chemistry Deficiencies

Pending receipt of the revised Section F, revised Section B and the forthcoming human health risk assessment, ARIA previously recommended the tolerances of the combined residues of the herbicide dichlobenil (2,6- dichlorobenzonitrile) and its metabolite 2,6-dichlorobenzamide in/on rhubarb at 0.06 ppm (DP Num: 315266, W. Cutchin, 22/FEB/2006) and recommends the following tolerances for the requested berry commodities at the levels listed below:

Caneberry, Subgroup 13-07A	0.10 ppm

Bushberry, Subgroup 13-07B	0.15 ppm

The revised Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) (K. Boyle, 31/JUL/1996) recommended deletion of a stone fruit crop group tolerance which was not being supported by the petitioner and establishment of a separate tolerance on cherries.  However, as stated in the previous RED, the stone fruit crop group was included in this dietary exposure assessment since as long as the tolerance exists commodities containing BAM residues could be imported (Dichlobenil: The Revised HED Chapter of the RED, Case 0263, Chemical 027401, 027402 (BAM), K. Boyle, 31/JUL/1996,).

Background

Dichlobenil is a nitrile herbicide that acts by inhibiting germination of actively dividing meristems and acts primarily on growing points and root tips.

TABLE 1.  Test Compound Nomenclature.

Compound	Chemical Structure

Common name	dichlobenil

Company experimental name	DCBN

IUPAC name	2,6-dichlorobenzonitrile

CAS name	2,6-dichlorobenzonitrile

CAS #	1194-65-6

End-use product/(EP)	Casoron® 4G (EPA Reg. No. 400-168)

TABLE 2.  Physicochemical Properties of Dichlobenil.

Parameter	Value	Reference

Melting point/range	145°C	RED Chapter, 6/29/95

pH	NA

	Density	1.3 g/cm3	IPS Inchem, 4/05

Water solubility ( 25°C)	0.0021g/100mL	RED Chapter, 6/29/95

Solvent solubility (g/100mL at 25°C)	xylene 5.3

ethanol 1.5

cyclohexane 0.37

	Vapor pressure at 20°C	5.5 x 10-4 mmHg	IPS Inchem, 4/05

Dissociation constant (pKa)	NA

	Octanol/water partition coefficient Log(KOW)	2.64	IPS Inchem, 4/05

UV/visible absorption spectrum	NA

860.1200  Directions for Use

Table 3.  Summary of Directions for Use of Dichlobenil.

Applic. Timing, Type, and Equip.

Formulation

[EPA Reg. No.]

Applic. Rate

(lb ai/A)

Max. No. Applic. per Season

Max. Seasonal Applic. Rate

(lb ai/A)

PHI

(days)

Use Directions and Limitations

Bushberry, Subgroup 13-07A (Blueberry, Currant, Elderberry, Gooseberry, Huckleberry, Aronia berry, Blueberry lowbush, Buffalo currant, Chilian guava, European barberry, Highbush cranberry, Honesuckle, Jostaberry, Juneberry, Lingonberry, Native currant, Salal, Sea buckthorn)

Apply only to established plantings using granular applicator

Maybe used on bearing, non-bearing, and nursery stock.  Do not apply until 4 weeks after transplanting.

Casoron® 4G [400-168]

4

6

1 (assumed)

4

6

NA

Do not apply during new shoot emergence.

Caneberry, Subgroup 13-07B (Blackberry, Raspberry, Boysenberry, Dewberry, Loganberry, Wild Raspberry)

Apply only to established plantings using granular applicator

Casoron® 4G [400-168]

4

1 (assumed)

4

NA

Do not apply during new shoot emergence.

Do not allow livestock to graze on treated orchards.

* Highlighted areas represent wording of the Section B that differs from the proposed label.

Conclusions.  The label is adequate to allow evaluation of the residue data relative to the proposed uses on caneberry, subgroup 13-07A.  However, the Section B must be revised for the bushberry, subgroup 13-07B from 6 lbs ai/A to 4 lbs ai/A to match the label use and submitted data for the bushberry, subgroup 13-07B commodities.  Also, the label and Section B must be revised to correctly spell the commodities containing “currant” in the name.

860.1300 Nature of the Residue - Plants

Dichlobenil RED, October 1998

The qualitative nature of the residue in plants is adequately understood based on acceptable plant metabolism studies on apples and grapes.  Both studies indicate that the major residue of concern is BAM.  The parent compound, dichlobenil, was not detected in either of the studies.  On June 8, 1992, HED concluded that BAM is the major terminal residue of dichlobenil in plants, and should be added to the tolerance expression.  Because dichlobenil plant metabolism studies demonstrate that 2,6-dichlorobenzoic acid (2,6-DCBA) is not a plant metabolite, HED has recommended removing 2,6-DCBA from the tolerance expression for dichlobenil.  Therefore, residue data for 2,6-DCBA are no longer required.  All conclusions specified here regarding the status of residue chemistry data requirements and the adequacy of the established tolerances reflect the determination to add BAM to the tolerance expression and remove 2,6-DCBA from the tolerance expression.

Conclusions.  The residues of concern in plants are the parent dichlobenil and the metabolite BAM.

860.1300 Nature of the Residue - Livestock

Since there are no berry animal feed items of regulatory concern, a discussion of the nature of the residue of dichlobenil is not germane to this action.

860.1340 Residue Analytical Methods

Dichlobenil RED, 10/98

45572201.der.doc, W. Cutchin, 22/FEB/2006

PAM Vol. II, Method A is a GLC/ECD method with a detection limit of 0.05 ppm, which can be used for determination of residues of dichlobenil in/on plant commodities.  This method was judged adequate for tolerance enforcement; however, Method A uses benzene as a solvent.  The registrant was required to revise the method or develop an alternative method using safer solvents.  This method will likely require additional modification before it can be accepted as a tolerance enforcement method.  The Dichlobenil Guidance Document (23/MAR/1987), referenced in the RED document, required the development of an analytical method for the detection and quantitation of BAM in plant commodities.  The former basic producer, Solvay Duphar, submitted a GLC/ECD method (L 3-53-71) for determination of residues of BAM in/on fruits and nuts.  This method has undergone a successful independent laboratory validation and has been validated by the EPA Beltsville ACL.  However, a revised method incorporating ACL's comments must be submitted before the requirements for an analytical method for BAM can be considered fulfilled.

The analytical methods SOP# Meth-83, Determination of Dichlobenil Residues in Cherries and SOP# Meth-84, Determination of 2,6-dichlorobenzamide Residues in Cherries, developed by Morse Laboratories were used with minor modifications for the analysis of dichlobenil residues on berry matrices.  Dichlobenil residues were extracted from the RAC by homogenizing the samples with ethyl acetate/hexane and rotovaping the supernatant almost to dryness.  The residue is then redissolved in hexane and cleaned up using a Florisil column.  The dichlobenil residues are eluted with ethyl acetate/hexane, rotovaping the eluant almost to dryness, and the sample redissolved in hexane for analysis.  BAM residues were extracted from the RAC by homogenizing the samples with ethyl acetate and taking the supernatant almost to dryness.  The residue is then redissolved in hexane and cleaned up using a Florisil column.  The BAM residues are eluted with ethyl acetate/hexane, taking the eluant almost to dryness, and the sample redissolved in hexane for analysis.  A GLC/ECD in halogen mode was used for the analysis.  The analytical method was validated at 0.05, 0.1, and 0.5 ppm for dichlobenil and 0.01, 0.02, and 0.1 ppm for BAM.  At these fortification levels, method recoveries were generally within Agency standards of 70-120%.  The petitioner presented adequate sample chromatograms and calibration curves.  The LLMV was reported for dichlobenil and BAM as 0.05 ppm and 0.01 ppm, respectively.  The LOD was 0.006 ppm for both dichlobenil and BAM.

Conclusions.  The previously submitted methods proposed for tolerance enforcement for dichlobenil and BAM on plants are not adequate for the reasons described above.  However, as the multiresidue methods adequately quantitate dichlobenil and BAM (see, 860.1360, below), there is no deficiency for this action.  The method used for data collection is adequate.

860.1360 Multiresidue Methods

Dichlobenil RED, October 1998

The FDA PESTDATA database dated 1/94 (PAM Vol I, Appendix I) indicates that dichlobenil is completely recovered (>80%) using multiresidue methods PAM Vol. I Sections 302 (Luke method) and 304 (Mills fatty food method), and has partial recovery (50-80%) using Section 303 (Mills, Onley, Gaither method).  The database also indicates that BAM is completely recovered (>80%) using Section 302.

860.1380 Storage Stability

DP Num: 179079, C. Olinger, 09/FEB/1993

DP Num:182600, C. Olinger, 05/MAR/1993

Since the representative berry commodity samples were stored for less than 35 days at -18ºC between harvest and analysis, additional storage stability data is not required for these RACs.

860.1480 Meat, Milk, Poultry, and Eggs

Since there are no berry livestock feed items of regulatory concern, a discussion of dichlobenil residues in livestock commodities is not germane to this action.

860.1500 Crop Field Trials

DP Num: 179079, C. Olinger, 09/FEB/1993

DP Num:182600, C. Olinger, 05/MAR/1993

Caneberry, Subgroup 13-07A and Bushberry, Subgroup 13-07B

No additional field trial studies have been submitted.  The petitioner has requested that current tolerances on blackberry, blueberry, and raspberry in combination with previously submitted studies be translated to include tolerances on caneberry, subgroup 13-07A, and bushberry, subgroup 13-07B.

Adequate data on blackberry, blueberry and raspberry is available to support the requested tolerances.  ARIA recommends for the establishment of tolerances for dichlobenil residues in/on caneberry, subgroup 13-07A at 0.10 ppm, and bushberry, subgroup 13-07B at 0.15 ppm.  A revised Section F is required.

860.1520 Processed Food and Feed

Since there are no berry processed food items of regulatory concern, a discussion of dichlobenil residues in processed commodities is not germane to this action.

860.1650 Submittal of Analytical Reference Standards

No analytical reference standards are available in the Agency’s Pesticide Repository.  However, both dichlobenil and BAM are available as reference standards in the commercial market place.

860.1850 & 860.1900 Confined and Field Accumulation in Rotational Crops

The requested berry commodities are perennial crops; therefore a discussion of residues in rotational crops is not germane to this action.

860.1550 Proposed Tolerances

Dichlobenil residues of concern are parent dichlobenil and the metabolite BAM (2,6-dichlorobenzamide) as stated in 40 CFR §180.231.  There are no international harmonization issues associated with this action.

Table 5.  Tolerance Summary for Dichlobenil

Commodity

Proposed Tolerance (ppm)

Recommended Tolerance (ppm)

Comments (correct commodity definition)

Rhubarb*	0.15	0.06

	Caneberry, Subgroup 13A	0.1	0.10	Caneberry, Subgroup 13-07A

Wild raspberry	0.1	NA	Member of new Caneberry, Subgroup 13-07A.

Bushberry, Subgroup 13B	0.15	0.15	Bushberry, Subgroup 13-07B.

Aronia berry	0.15	NA	Member of new Bushberry, Subgroup 13-07B.

Blueberry, lowbush	0.15	NA

Member of new Bushberry, Subgroup 13-07B.

Buffalo currant	0.15	NA

	Chilian guava	0.15	NA

	European barberry	0.15	NA

	Highbush cranberry	0.15	NA

	Honeysuckle	0.15	NA

	Jostaberry	0.15	NA

	Juneberry	0.15	NA

	Lingonberry	0.15	NA

	Native currant	0.15	NA

	Salal	0.15	NA

	Sea buckthorn	0.15	NA

	* Recommended in DP Num: 315266, W. Cutchin, 22/FEB/2006.

INTERNATIONAL RESIDUE LIMIT STATUS

Chemical Name: 2,6- dichlorobenzonitrile

Common Name:  Dichlobenil

√ Proposed tolerance

( Reevaluated tolerance

( Other

Date: 01/22/2008

Codex Status

(Maximum Residue Limits)

U. S. Tolerances

√ No Codex proposal step 6 or above

( No Codex proposal step 6 or above for the crops requested

Petition Numbers:  2E6398, 7E7320

DP Num:  341453, 315266

Other Identifier:

Residue definition (step 8/CXL): N/A

Reviewer/Branch: D. Rate

Proposed Residue definition:  Combined residues of dichlobenil and metabolite 2,6-dichlorobenzamide (BAM)

Crop (s)

MRL (mg/kg)

Crop(s)

Tolerance (ppm)

Rhubarb	0.06

Caneberry, Subgroup 13A	0.1

Wild raspberry	0.1

Bushberry, Subgroup 13B	0.15

Aronia berry	0.15

Buffalo currant	0.15

Chilian guava	0.15

European barberry	0.15

Highbush cranberry	0.15

Honeysuckle	0.15

Jostaberry	0.15

Juneberry	0.15

Lingonberry	0.15

Native currant	0.15

Salal	0.15

Sea buckthorn	0.15

Limits for Canada

Lim瑩⁳潦⁲敍楸潣܇

"

#

q

r

w

œ

Ÿ

±

²

³

Å

Æ

Ç

÷

2

#

ༀ#

I

p

q

²

³

´

Æ

Ç

㄀Ĥ摧ଦ

᐀2

‹

ö

 h&

h&

愀Ĥ

ht

摧㩰

摧㩰

hp:

ht

hp:

hp:

hp:

hp:

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

摧㩰

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

gdp:

摧㩰

gdp:

摧㩰

gdp:

摧㩰

gdp:

摧㩰

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

  ht

  ht

ht

hp:

hp:

hp:

hp:

hp:

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

愀Ĥ摧㩰

摧㩰

摧犊Ê

摧犊Ê

摧犊Ê

摧犊Ê

摧犊Ê

܀√  No Limits

(  No Limits for the crops requested

√   No Limits

(  No Limits for the crops requested

Residue definition: N/A

Residue definition: N/A

Crop(s)

MRL (mg/kg)

Crop(s)

MRL (mg/kg)

Notes/Special Instructions:  S. Funk, 01/30/2008.

Dichlobenil	Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data	DP Num: 349398

 PAGE  8  of  NUMPAGES  8


Memorandum to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0178

EPA staff attended the below OMB 12866 meetings. EPA did not have a speaking role in these meetings but rather listened to the presenters.

      11/20/2019:
      E.O. 12866 - Meeting on the "Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Ethylene Oxide Commercial Sterilization and Fumigation Operations." This meeting was requested by the CGCN Group.


[Federal Register: October 3, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 190)]
[Notices]
[Page 57590-57591]
[DOCID:fr03oc05-92]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

September 26, 2005.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER02-2408-002.
    Applicants: Lower Mount Bethel Energy, LLC.
    Description: Lower Mount Bethel Energy, LLC submits a Triennial
Market-Based Rate update in compliance with the Commission's Letter
Order issued 9/18/02.
    Filed Date: 09/19/2005.
    Accession Number: 20050921-0084.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 11, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER03-879-002; ER03-880-002; ER03-882-002.
    Applicants: D.E. Shaw Plasma Trading, L.L.C.; D.E. Shaw & Co.
Energy, L.L.C.; D.E. Shaw Plasma Power, L.L.C.
    Description: DE Shaw Plasma Trading, LLC et al. inform FERC of a
departure from the characteristics relied upon by FERC in its 7/23/03
Order.
    Filed Date: 09/15/2005.
    Accession Number: 20050922-0144.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 07, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-1270-001.
    Applicants: Allegheny Energy Supply Company, Inc. Monongahela Power
Company.
    Description: Allegheny Energy Supply Co and Monongahela Power Co
amend their 7/29/05 filing to include additional information and
support requested in a FERC staff letter dated 9/6/05.
    Filed Date: 09/19/2005.
    Accession Number: 20050920-0053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 11, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-1318-001.
    Applicants: Geneva Energy, LLC.
    Description: Geneva Energy, LLC's substitutes an amended Rate
Schedule FERC Form 1, in support of its petition for acceptance of
initial rate schedule.
    Filed Date: 09/19/2005.
    Accession Number: 20050922-0145.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 11, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-1414-001.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: San Diego Gas & Electric Co submits Substitute First
Revised Sheet Nos. 129, 131, 132, and 148 of its Rate Schedule FERC
Service Agreement No. 12.
    Filed Date: 09/19/2005.
    Accession Number: 20050920-0051.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 11, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-1489-000.
    Applicants: Craven County Wood Energy Limited Partnership.
    Description: Craven County Wood Energy Limited Partnership's
application for order approving market-based rates, FERC Electric
Tariff, Original Volume No. 2, and a Code of Conduct.
    Filed Date: 09/19/2005.
    Accession Number: 20050920-0050.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 11, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-1490-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
and the Midwest ISO Transmission Owners submit revisions to the Midwest
ISO Agreement, and revisions to Midwest ISO Tariff Schedule 21.
    Filed Date: 09/12/2005.
    Accession Number: 20050921-0082.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 11, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-1491-000.
    Applicants: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation.
    Description: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp submits a market-
based sales tariff, designated as its FERC Elec Tariff, Original Volume
1, & requests FERC approval to sell electric energy & capacity at
market-based rates.
    Filed Date: 09/19/2005.
    Accession Number: 20050921-0083.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 11, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-17-005.
    Applicants: Trans-Elect NTD Path 15, LLC.
    Description: Trans-Elect NTD Path 15, LLC's request that FERC issue
an order accepting a compliance filing, without conditions, on or
before 10/21/05.
    Filed Date: 09/19/2005.
    Accession Number: 20050921-0085.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 11, 2005.

    Docket Numbers: ER99-2342-004, -005; ER01-931-008, -009; ER01-930-
008, -009; ER96-1563-021, -022; ER99-415-007, -008; ER02-510-004, -005;
ER02-507-004, -005; ER02-1000-005, -006
    Applicants: Tampa Electric Company; Panda Gila River, L.P.; Union
Power Partners, L.P. TECO EnergySource, Inc.; Commonwealth Chesapeake
Company, L.L.C., TPS Dell, LLC; TPS McAdams, LLC; TECO-PANDA Generating
Company, L.P.
    Description: Tampa Electric Co et al. submit the available transfer
capability data from the Florida Open Access Same-Time Information
System for 2003 and revision to their respective market-based rate
tariffs.
    Filed Date: 09/12/2005.
    Accession Number: 20050914-0073.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 11, 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 (866) 208-
3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-5388 Filed 9-30-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


  INSTRUCTIONS
  The ENERGY STAR Multifamily High Rise Submittal Validation Form is used by the licensed professional to validate submittals. This form must be signed and stamped by a professional engineer or registered architect and submitted to EPA or its designated agent for approval. For more information on program submittals see the Licensed Professional's Guide to the ENERGY STAR Label for MFHR Buildings.

  BUILDING INFORMATION

         Building Address	ENERGY STAR Developer Partner	Licensed Professional
 Project Name:                                    Street:                                                City, State:
 ZIP:
 Company Name:                                Contact Name:                                  Phone:
 Email:
 Company Name:                                Contact Name:                                  Phone:
 Email:

  SUBMITAL VALIDATION
  This building is earning the ENERGY STAR using the following (Please check the appropriate box):

     OMB Control No. 2060-0586
Performance Path

     Prescriptive Path

  This validation form pertains to the following (please check the appropriate box)

  Proposed Building Submittal (The following documents must be included as part of the submittal)

  1.  Proposed Building Reporting Summary (Performance
     Path Only)
  2.  Testing and Verification Worksheets

  As-Built Building Submittal (The following documents must be part of the submittal)

  1.  As-Built Building Reporting Summary (Performance
     Path Only)
  2.  Testing and Verification Worksheets
  3.  Photo Template

  By signing and stamping this form the licensed professional is not guaranteeing performance of the operating building nor does it require that the licensed professional certify that the building will perform to any specified level. By validating the submission, the licensed professional is certifying that the information contained within the submitted documents is accurate and in accordance with the program's guidelines, based on the conditions observed.

 HOW TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTS

 To ensure that EPA or its designated agent has a complete file for each project participating in the program the
 Proposed and As-Built Building Submittals should be submitted as indicate below.

 1.  The following documents must be submitted in Portable Document Format (PDF)

    -	Proposed Building Reporting Summary
    -	As-Built Building Reporting Summary
    -	ENERGY STAR MFHR Submittal Validation Form
    -	Photo Template

 2.  The Testing and Verification Worksheets Excel file must be submitted in its entirety

 All documents should be emailed as an attachment to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>with the following the subject line,
 [Proposed] or [As-Built] Building Submittal (Project Name, Address, City, State).

 Contact information for questions:
 ::	Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS> ::	Website: www.energystar.gov/mfhr

 If the licensed professional chooses to submit hard copy documents to EPA they should be sent to the following address

 Mailing Address
 ENERGY STAR Label for Multifamily High Rise Buildings
 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (6202J)
 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460

 Express Mail and Courier
 ENERGY STAR Label for Multifamily High Rise Buildings
 Room 927P
 1310 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20005

 EPA Form 5900-270
The government estimates the average time needed to fill out this form is 0.17 hours and welcomes suggestions for reducing this effort. Send comments (referencing OMB Control Number) to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. EPA (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460.


[Federal Register: March 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 59)]
[Notices]
[Page 16091-16092]
[DOCID:fr26mr08-142]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2008-12]

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 April 15, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2006-
25049 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<PHONE_NUMBER> or
Laverne Brunache<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 March 20, 2008.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2006-25049.
    Petitioner: American Airlines, Inc.
    Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 121.619.
    Description of Relief Sought: To amend American Airlines, Inc.
(American), current Exemption No. 9570, which grants relief to
American; American certificated dispatchers; and American pilots in
command from 14 CFR 121.619 to the extent necessary to dispatch
aircraft to domestic airports without designating an alternate for the
destination airport where for at least 1 hour before and 1 hour after
the estimated time of arrival at the destination airport the
appropriate weather reports or forecasts, or any combination of them,
indicate the ceiling will be at least 1,000 feet above the airport
elevation and visibility will be at least 3 statute miles, subject to
certain conditions and limitations. Condition No. 3 of that exemption
states, Operations under this exemption are limited to only those
airports at which an operable Category I Instrument Landing System (CAT
I ILS) procedure with published minimums of 200 feet and runway visual
range (RVR) 2,000 or lower is available for use if needed. The
amendment American seeks would revise Condition No. 3 to limit
operations under this exemption to airports at which an operable CAT I
ILS procedure with published minimums of 300 feet and RVR of 4,000 feet
or lower is available. Additionally, American seeks to amend Condition
No. 4. This condition, states, in pertinent part, that the dispatch
release will contain a statement for each flight dispatched under this
exemption of ``ALTERNATE WEATHER EXEMPTION APPLIED. REFERENCE [insert
name of appropriate document].'' American wishes to revise the
statement to read ``ALTN WX EXEMPTION APPLIED.''
 [FR Doc. E8-6147 Filed 3-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57618-57621]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22915]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67843; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2012-104]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Relating to the Customer Rebate To Add Liquidity and Non-Customer Fees
for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options

September 12, 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 August 31, 2012, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or
``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 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 NASDAQ Stock Market LLC proposes to modify Chapter XV, entitled
``Options Pricing,'' at Section 2 governing pricing for NASDAQ members
using the NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM''), NASDAQ's facility for
executing and routing standardized equity and index options.
Specifically, NOM proposes to amend the Customer Rebate to Add
Liquidity and Non-Customer Fees for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot
\3\ Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Penny Pilot was established in March 2008 and in October
2009 was expanded and extended through June 30 [sic], 2012. See
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 57579 (March 28, 2008), 73 FR
18587 (April 4, 2008)(SR-NASDAQ-2008-026)(notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness establishing Penny Pilot); 60874 (October
23, 2009), 74 FR 56682 (November 2, 2009)(SR-NASDAQ-2009-091)(notice
of filing and immediate effectiveness expanding and extending Penny
Pilot); 60965 (November 9, 2009), 74 FR 59292 (November 17,
2009)(SR-NASDAQ-2009-097)(notice of filing and immediate
effectiveness adding seventy-five classes to Penny Pilot); 61455
(February 1, 2010), 75 FR 6239 (February 8, 2010)(SR-NASDAQ-2010-
013)(notice of filing and immediate effectiveness adding seventy-
five classes to Penny Pilot); 62029 (May 4, 2010), 75 FR 25895 (May
10, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-053)(notice of filing and immediate
effectiveness adding seventy-five classes to Penny Pilot); 65969
(December 15, 2011), 76 FR 79268 (December 21, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-
2011-169) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness extension
and replacement of Penny Pilot); and 67325 (June 29, 2012), 77 FR
40127 (July 6, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-075) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness extension and replacement of Penny Pilot
through December 31, 2012). See also NOM Rules, Chapter VI, Section
5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the changes proposed herein are effective upon filing, the
Exchange has designated these changes to be operative on September 4,
2012.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ proposes to modify Chapter XV, entitled ``Options Pricing,''
at Section 2(1) governing the rebates and fees assessed for option
orders entered into NOM. The Exchange is proposing to increase the Non-
Customer Penny Pilot Options Fees for Removing Liquidity in order to
offer additional Penny Pilot Options Customer Rebates to Add Liquidity
to attract additional order flow to the Exchange to the benefit of all
market participants.
    Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to modify the five tier
structure for paying Customer Rebates to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot
Options. Today, the Exchange pays Rebates to Add Liquidity in Penny
Pilot Options as follows:
    * * * The Customer Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options
will be paid as noted below. Each Customer order of 5,000 or more,
displayed or non-displayed contracts, which adds liquidity in Penny
Pilot Options, will qualify for an additional rebate of $0.01 per
contract provided the NOM Participant has qualified for a rebate in
Tier 2, 3, 4 or 5 for that month.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Rebate to
                       Monthly volume                            add
                                                              liquidity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1 Participant adds Customer liquidity of up to 14,999         $0.26
 contracts per day in a month..............................
Tier 2 Participant adds Customer liquidity of 15,000 to             0.38
 49,999 contracts per day in a month.......................
Tier 3 Participant adds Customer liquidity of 50,000 to             0.43
 74,999 contracts per day in a month.......................
Tier 4 \a\ Participant adds Customer liquidity of 75,000 or         0.44
 more contracts per day in a month or has Total Volume of
 100,000 or more contracts per day in a month..............
Tier 5 \b\ Participant adds (1) Customer liquidity of               0.42
 25,000 or more contracts per day in a month, (2) the
 Participant has certified for the Investor Support Program
 set forth in Rule 7014; and (3) the Participant executed
 at least one order on NASDAQ's equity market..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ For purposes of Tier 4, ``Total Volume'' shall be defined as
  Customer, Professional, Firm, NOM Market Maker and Non-NOM Market
  Maker volume in Penny Pilot Options which either adds or removes
  liquidity.
\b\ For purposes of Tier 5, the Exchange will allow a NOM Participant to
  qualify for the rebate if a NASDAQ member under common ownership with
  the NOM Participant has certified for the Investor Support Program and
  executed at least one order on NASDAQ's equity market. Common
  ownership is defined as 75 percent common ownership or control.

    The Exchange proposes to add a Tier 6 to the Penny Pilot Options
Customer Rebates to Add Liquidity and pay Customers a rebate of $0.45
per contract when a Participant has Total Volume of 130,000 or more
contracts per day in month. Total Volume is defined as Customer,
Professional, Firm, NOM Market Maker and Non-NOM Market Maker volume in
Penny Pilot Options and Non-Penny Pilot Options which either adds or
removes liquidity. In addition, NOM Participants under common ownership
will be permitted to aggregate their volume to qualify for the Tier 6
rebate. The Exchange defines common ownership as 75 percent common
ownership or control.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ NOM Participants may be requested by the Exchange's
Membership Department to demonstrate that they are under 75% common
ownership if the information is not readily available in Web CRD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with offering the Tier 6 rebate, the Exchange
proposes to eliminate the current incentive for Customer orders of
5,000 or more, displayed or non-displayed contracts, which add
liquidity in Penny Pilot Options provided the NOM Participant

has qualified for Tier 2, 3, 4 or 5 for that month. The Exchange
believes that the Tier 6 incentive will encourage NOM Participants to
send additional order flow to the Exchange and is therefore eliminating
the incentive at this time.
    The Exchange also proposes to amend Tier 4 which currently provides
that a NOM Participant that adds Customer liquidity of 75,000 or more
contracts per day in a month or has Total Volume of 100,000 or more
contracts per day in month qualifies for a $0.44 per contract rebate.
The Exchange proposes to amend Tier 4 to state that only a NOM
Participant that adds Customer liquidity of 75,000 or more contracts
per day in a month qualifies for a $0.44 per contract rebate.\5\ The
Exchange would eliminate the qualifier of 100,000 or more contracts of
Total Volume because it is instead offering the Tier 6 rebate. The
Exchange would also eliminate note ``a,'' which is no longer relevant
because it applied to Total Volume in Tier 4. The remainder of the
notes would change lettering.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange is not proposing to amend the amount of the
$0.44 per contract rebate at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to amend the Fees for Removing Liquidity
in Penny Pilot Options. Professionals, Firms, Non-NOM Market Makers and
NOM Market Makers who are currently assessed a $0.45 per contract fee
would be assessed a $0.47 per contact Fee for Removing Liquidity in a
Penny Pilot Option.\6\ In addition, the Exchange proposes to reduce the
Professional, Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker and NOM Market Maker Penny
Pilot Option Fees for Removing Liquidity by $0.01 per contract for
transactions in which the same participant is the buyer and the seller
to further incentivize these NOM Participants to add and remove
liquidity in the market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Customer Penny Pilot Fee for Removing Liquidity of $0.45
per contract is not being amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule changes are consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\7\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\8\ in particular, in that they provide for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among
members and issuers and other persons using any facility or system
which NASDAQ operates or controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed addition of Tier 6 is
reasonable because it is part of an existing program \9\ to encourage
broker-dealers acting as agent for Customer orders to select the
Exchange as a venue to post Customer orders. The Exchange believes that
its success at attracting Customer order flow benefits all market
participants by improving the quality of order interaction and
executions at the Exchange. Also, the Exchange believes the existing
monthly volume thresholds have incentivized firms that route Customer
orders to send additional Customer order flow to the Exchange. The
Exchange desires to continue to encourage firms that route Customer
orders to increase Customer order flow to the Exchange by providing an
additional opportunity to qualify for a Customer Rebate. The Exchange
would allow a NOM Participant to total both Penny Pilot Option Volume
and Non-Penny Pilot Option volume that adds or removes liquidity to
qualify for the $0.45 per contract Customer Rebate to Add Liquidity in
Penny Pilot Options proposed in Tier 6. The Exchange believes that
additional NOM Participants would be able to qualify for this tier,
including NOM Participants who do not qualify for rebates today, as
long as the 130,000 volume requirement was met. Proposed Tier 6 is a
broader category because it includes Non-Penny Pilot Option volume to
qualify for the rebate. The proposed Tier 6 Total Volume qualifier is
similar to pricing currently in place on BATS Exchange, Inc.
(``BATS'').\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange adopted these monthly volume achievement tiers
in September 2011. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 65317
(September 12, 2011), 76 FR 57778 (September 16, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-
2011-124), 65317 (September 12, 2011), 76 FR 61129 (October 3, 2011)
(SR-NASDAQ-2011-127), 66126 (January 10, 2012), 77 FR 2335 (January
17, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-003), 66360 (February 8, 2012), 77 FR 8312
(February 14, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-022), 66768 (April 6, 2012), 77
FR 22015 (April 12, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-048) 67388 (July 10,
2012), 77 FR 42073 (July 17, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-083).
    \10\ BATS pays rebates for certain Customer Penny Pilot orders
based on, among other factors, total consolidated volume. BATS
defines total consolidated volume as the volume reported by all
exchanges to the consolidated transaction reporting plan for the
month for which the fees apply. See BATS BZX Exchange Fee Schedule.
The Exchange is proposing to utilize Total Volume which would
include Penny Pilot Option and Non-Penny Pilot Option volume which
either adds or removes liquidity to qualify for the Customer Rebate
to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that proposed Tier 6 is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because the Exchange is proposing to offer an
even higher Customer rebate in Penny Pilot Options of $0.45 per
contract to NOM Participants which will be based on Total Volume. NOM
Participants may total all Penny Pilot Option and Non-Penny Pilot
Option volume that either adds or removes liquidity to qualify for this
new tier. The Exchange believes that this added incentive would allow
additional NOM Participants to qualify and receive the Customer rebate.
All NOM Participants that transact Customer orders in Penny Pilot
Options are eligible for the Customer rebates.\11\ The Exchange
believes that allowing NOM Participants to qualify for proposed Tier 6
by totaling Penny and Non-Penny Option volume that adds or removes
liquidity would enable a greater number of NOM Participants to qualify
for the rebate because NOM Participants can utilize either Penny or
Non-Penny Pilot volume to reach the 130,000 volume requirement. All NOM
Participants may transact orders in both Penny and Non-Penny Pilot
Options and the Exchange would equally apply the criteria for Tier 6 to
all NOM Participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Tier 1 pays a rebate for NOM Participants that add Customer
liquidity of up to 14,999 contracts per day in a month of Penny
Pilot Options. There is no required minimum volume of Customer
orders to qualify for a Customer Rebate to Add Liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to permit NOM Participants under common
ownership to aggregate their volume for purposes of qualifying for the
Tier 6 rebate. Certain NOM Participants chose to segregate their
businesses into different legal entities for purposes of conducting
business. The Exchange believes that these NOM Participants should be
treated as one entity for purposes of qualifying for the Tier 6 rebate
as long as there is at least 75% common ownership or control present
among the NOM Participants. The Exchange currently permits a similar
aggregation for the Tier 5 Total Volume calculation.
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to eliminate the $0.01 per
contract rebate incentive for Customer orders of 5,000 or more,
displayed or non-displayed, contracts that add liquidity in Penny Pilot
Options for NOM Participants that qualified for certain tiers is
reasonable because the Exchange has proposed an alternative incentive
for NOM Participants in its proposal to adopt Tier 6 with a higher
rebate. The Exchange believes the Tier 6 rebate will increase order
flow to the Exchange because all Penny Pilot Option and Non-Penny Pilot
Option volume that either adds or removes liquidity would count toward
the 130,000 volume requirement to qualify for the rebate.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to eliminate the $0.01
incentive is equitable and not unfairly

discriminatory because it is being replaced with the Tier 6 rebate
which offers a higher rebate to NOM Participants who may currently
qualify for other tiers or a new rebate for NOM Participants that
currently do not qualify for a rebate. Today, the $0.01 incentive is
applicable to NOM Participants that qualified for Tiers 2, 3, 4 and 5.
Proposed Tier 6 would be applicable to the Total Volume of contracts in
Penny and Non-Penny Pilot Options which either adds or removes
liquidity for any market participant. The Exchange believes a greater
number of NOM Participants may qualify for proposed Tier 6 as compared
to other tiers which are limited to Customer volume in Penny Pilot
Options.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to eliminate the text of
Tier 4, which provides that NOM Participants may qualify for Tier 4 by
achieving Total Volume of 100,000 or more contracts per day in a month,
is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the
Exchange is proposing to offer a new Tier 6 rebate which would allow
NOM Participants to achieve an even higher rebate if the NOM
Participant is able to meet the increased volume requirement of 130,000
contracts per day in a month. The Exchange believes the new tier may
further incentivize NOM Participants to send additional volume to the
Exchange that either adds or removes liquidity in Penny or Non-Penny
Pilot Options to qualify for the $0.45 per contract rebate.
    The Exchange believes that the increased Fees for Removing
Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options are reasonable because they permit the
Exchange to offer an increased Tier 6 rebate to attract additional
order flow to NOM. The Exchange believes that the increased Fees for
Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options are equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because all market participants, other than
Customers, are being assessed the same Fees for Removing Liquidity in
Penny Pilot Options. The Exchange believes that Customer order flow
brings unique benefits to the market which benefits all market
participants and therefore Customers are assessed lower fees as
compared to other market participants. Additionally, the Exchange is
offering NOM Participants, other than Customers, the ability to reduce
the Fees for Removing Liquidity by $0.01 per contract when the same
participant is the buyer and the seller. The Exchange believes that
this additional fee reduction should further incentivize non-Customer
NOM Participants to both add and remove liquidity in Penny Pilot
Options on NOM. It is important to note that NOM Participants are
unaware at the time the order is entered of the identity of the contra-
party. Because contra-parties are anonymous, NOM Participants would
aggressively pursue order flow in order to receive the benefit of the
reduction. Providing the additional incentive is reasonable for this
reason and also is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because
all NOM Participants are entitled to receive the fee reduction when
they are both the buyer and seller. By way of example, if a NOM
Participant that is assigned the firm code ``ABC'' by the Exchange
posted an order utilizing its Customer order router, which order was
removed by an ABC firm proprietary order, the NOM Participant would
receive the $0.01 per contract fee reduction. The Exchange proposes to
utilize the Exchange assigned firm code \12\ to determine which NOM
Participant executed an order and to apply the fee reduction to the
Penny Pilot Option Fee for Removing Liquidity if the same non-Customer
NOM Participant was the buyer and the seller to a transaction.\13\ The
Exchange believes that it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to not offer the same fee reduction to Customers because
the Customer fee is not being increased and will now be $0.02 per
contract lower than the Penny Pilot Options Fees for Removing Liquidity
applicable to all other market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Each NOM Participant is assigned a firm code by the
Exchange.
    \13\ In this example, the same NOM Participant added and removed
the order and would be entitled to the fee reduction because the NOM
Participant was the buyer and seller on the transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market comprised of
ten U.S. options exchanges in which sophisticated and knowledgeable
market participants can and do send order flow to competing exchanges
if they deem fee levels at a particular exchange to be excessive or
rebate opportunities to be inadequate. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rebate scheme and fees are competitive and similar to other
fees, rebates and tier opportunities in place on other exchanges. The
Exchange believes that this competitive marketplace materially impacts
rebates and fees present on the Exchange today and substantially
influences the proposal set forth above.

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule changes will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. To the contrary,
NASDAQ has designed its rebates and fees to compete effectively for the
execution and routing of options contracts and to reduce the overall
cost to investors of options trading. The Exchange believes that
incentivizing NOM Participants to transact greater Customer volume on
the Exchange benefits all market participants because of the increased
liquidity to the market.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\14\ 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. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NASDAQ-2012-104 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-NASDAQ-2012-104. 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 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 publicly available. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-104 and should be submitted
on or before October 9, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-22915 Filed 9-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: January 13, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 8)]
[Notices]
[Page 1692-1693]
[DOCID:fr13ja09-58]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2009-D-0675]

Draft Guidance for Industry on Good Importer Practices;
Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing on behalf
of several members of the Interagency Working Group on Import Safety
(agencies) the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled
``Good Importer Practices.'' This draft guidance document provides
general recommendations to importers on possible practices and
procedures they may follow to increase the likelihood the products they
import are in

compliance with applicable U.S. safety and security requirements. The
recommendations provided here are intended to promote and facilitate an
assessment by importers of a product's life cycle so the importer may
make sound decisions about how best to address the product's potential
to cause harm and to facilitate compliance with U.S. requirements.

DATES: Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the agencies consider your comments on
this draft guidance before they begin work on the final version of the
guidance, submit written or electronic comments on the draft guidance
by April 13, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of the draft
guidance to the Food and Drug Administration, Office of Policy and
Planning, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., White Oak Building 1, 4th
Floor,Silver Spring, MD 20993. Send one self-addressed adhesive label
to assist the office in processing your request.Submit written comments
on the draft guidance to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305),
Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852. Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov. All
comments should be identified with the docket number found in brackets
in the heading of this document. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section for electronic access to the draft guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Shuren, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, White Oak Building 1,
Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing on behalf of the agencies\1\ the availability of
a draft guidance for industry entitled ``Good Importer Practices.''
This draft guidance is issued in response to recommendations contained
in the Action Plan for Import Safety: A Roadmap for Continual
Improvement (Action Plan) issued on November 6, 2007, by the
Interagency Working Group on Import Safety (Working Group) established
by Executive Order 13439 (see http://www.importsafety.gov/report/
actionplan.pdf). The Action Plan recommends that the Federal Government
work with the importing community and other members of the public to
develop Good Importer Practices and issue guidance. The Action Plan
specifies that the focus of these practices should be to ensure that
imported products meet U.S. standards, as well as to promote effective
supply-chain management. The Action Plan recommended that these
practices be risk-based and provide concrete guidance to the importing
community for evaluating imported products. This evaluation would be
based on due diligence and preventive control principles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The agencies who developed this draft guidance are the U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Department of Agriculture,
the Department of Commerce, the Department of Health and Human
Services (FDA), the Department of Homeland Security, the Department
of Transportation, and the Environmental Protection Agency, as well
as with input from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This guidance is intended for use by the importer that initiates or
causes the entry or attempted entry of foreign-sourced products into
the United States or the reimportation of U.S.-made products (American
goods returned) for commercial purposes to help ensure that such
products are safe and comply with applicable U.S. requirements.\2\ At
any point during the product's life cycle, hazards can be introduced
that may place consumers at risk unless appropriate preventive controls
are implemented. In general, the recommendations advise the importer to
know the foreign firms with whom they do business and through which the
products they purchase pass, understand the products they import and
their vulnerabilities, understand the hazards that may be introduced
during the product life cycle, and ensure that these hazards have been
properly controlled and monitored. Importers should consider
instituting practices to identify and minimize risk. Importers should
put into place controls for known vulnerabilities, such as to
microbiological contamination or product defects, and monitor for other
risks, such as counterfeiting or intentional contamination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ While this guidance document sets out principles and
recommendations for helping to ensure the safety and security of
imported products, the principles and the non-customs related
recommendations are also applicable to helping ensure the safety and
security of products that are domestically produced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These Good Importer Practices are broadly organized by four guiding
principles. These four guiding principles are as follows:
     Establishing a product safety management program
     Knowing the product and applicable U.S. requirements
     Verifying product and firm compliance with U.S.
requirements throughout the supply chain and product life cycle
     Taking corrective and preventive action when the imported
product or firm is not compliant with U.S. Requirements
The guidance suggests actions the importer can take to accomplish each
of these objectives.
    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with the Office of
Management and Budget's Final Bulletin for Agency Good Guidance
Practices (No. 07-02 (M-07-07)). The draft guidance, when finalized,
will represent the agencies' current thinking on Good Importer
Practices. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person
and does not operate to bind the agencies or the public. An alternative
approach may be used if such approach satisfies the requirements of the
applicable U.S. statutes and regulations.

II. Comments

    FDA is coordinating the receipt of submitted comments on behalf of
the agencies. Interested persons may submit to FDA's Division of
Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) written or electronic comments
regarding this document. Submit a single copy of electronic comments or
two paper copies of any mailed comments, except that individuals may
submit one paper copy. Comments are to be identified with the docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received
comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
    Please note that on January 15, 2008, the FDA Division of Dockets
Management Web site transitioned to the Federal Dockets Management
System (FDMS). FDMS is a Government-wide, electronic docket management
system. Electronic comments or submissions will be accepted by FDA only
through FDMS at http://www.regulations.gov.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the document at
either http://www.fda.gov/oc/guidance/goodimportpractice.html or http:/
/www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: January 8, 2009.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E9-453 Filed 1-12-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 97 (Friday, May 19, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32212-32213]
[FR Doc No: 2023-10738]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP23-466-000]

Great Basin Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Application and

Establishing Intervention Deadline

    Take notice that on May 1, 2023, Great Basin Gas Transmission
Company (Great Basin), P.O. Box 94197, Las Vegas, Nevada 89193-4197,
filed an application under sections 7b and 7c of the Natural Gas Act
(NGA), and part 157 of the Commission's regulations requesting
authorization for its 2024 Expansion Project (Project). Great Basin
proposes to: (1) construct approximately 0.25 miles of 20-inch-diameter
pipeline loop along its Carson Lateral in Storey County, Nevada; (2)
replace approximately 2.88 miles of existing 10-inch-diameter pipeline
with new 20-inch-diameter pipeline along the Carson Lateral in Lyon
County, Nevada; and (3) construct approximately 0.28 miles of 12-inch-
diameter pipeline loop on its South Tahoe Lateral in Douglas County,
Nevada. The Project will provide 5,674 dekatherms per day of
incremental firm transportation service to meet the growth requirements
of two existing firm transportation shippers. Great Basin estimates the
total cost of the Project to be $14,939,850 and proposes a new
incremental recourse rate to apply to the Project capacity, all as more
fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission
and open for public inspection.

Water Quality Certification

    Great Basin's application states that a water quality certificate
under section 401 of the Clean Water Act is required for the project
from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection--Bureau of Water
Quality Planning. The request for certification must be submitted to
the certifying agency and to the Commission concurrently. Proof of the
certifying agency's receipt date must be filed no later than five (5)
days after the request is submitted to the certifying agency.
    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 (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. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free, (886) 208-
3676 or TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding the proposed project should be directed to
Frank J. Magliette Jr., Senior Manager/Interstate Pipelines/Business
Operations, P.O. Box 94197, Las Vegas, Nevada 89193-4197, by phone at
(702) 876-7384, or by email at [email protected].
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure,\1\ within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will
either: complete its environmental review and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or environmental
assessment (EA) for this proposal. The filing of an EA in the
Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify
Federal and State agencies of the timing for the completion of all
necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all Federal
authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission
staff's FEIS or EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 157.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project: you can file comments on the project, and you can file a
motion to intervene in the proceeding. There is no fee or cost for
filing comments or intervening. The deadline for filing a motion to
intervene is 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on June 5, 2023.

Comments

    Any person wishing to comment on the project may do so. Comments
may include statements of support or objections to the project as a
whole or specific aspects of the project. The more specific your
comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your comments
are timely and properly recorded, please submit your comments on or
before June 5, 2023.
    There are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the
Commission. In all instances, please reference the Project docket
number CP23-466-000 in your submission.
    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's website at www.ferc.gov
under the link to Documents and Filings. Using eComment is an easy
method for interested persons to submit brief, text-only comments on a
project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located 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 will be asked to select the type of filing you
are making; first select ``General'' and then select ``Comment on a
Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address below. Your written comments must reference the
Project docket number (CP23-466-000).
    To file via USPS: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    To file via any other method: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland
20852.
    The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments (options 1
and 2 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected].
    Persons who comment on the environmental review of this project
will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, and will
receive notification when the environmental documents (EA or EIS) are
issued for this project and will be notified of meetings associated
with the Commission's environmental review process.
    The Commission considers all comments received about the project in
determining the appropriate action to be taken. However, the filing of
a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the
proceeding. To become a party, you must intervene in the proceeding.
For instructions on how to intervene, see below.

Interventions

    Any person, which includes individuals, organizations, businesses,
municipalities, and other entities,\2\ has

the option to file a motion to intervene in this proceeding. Only
intervenors have the right to request rehearing of Commission orders
issued in this proceeding and to subsequently challenge the
Commission's orders in the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 18 CFR 385.102(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To intervene, you must submit a motion to intervene to the
Commission in accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure \3\ and the regulations under the NGA \4\ by the
intervention deadline for the project, which is June 5, 2023. As
described further in Rule 214, your motion to intervene must state, to
the extent known, your position regarding the proceeding, as well as
the your interest in the proceeding. For an individual, this could
include your status as a landowner, ratepayer, resident of an impacted
community, or recreationist. You do not need to have property directly
impacted by the project in order to intervene. For more information
about motions to intervene, refer to the FERC website at https://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 18 CFR 385.214.
    \4\ 18 CFR 157.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are two ways to submit your motion to intervene. In both
instances, please reference the Project docket number CP23-466-000 in
your submission.
    (1) You may file your motion to intervene by using the Commission's
eFiling feature, which is located on the Commission's website
(www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. New eFiling
users must first create an account by clicking on ``eRegister.'' You
will be asked to select the type of filing you are making; first select
``General'' and then select ``Intervention.'' The eFiling feature
includes a document-less intervention option; for more information,
visit https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/document-less-intervention.pdf.; or
    (2) You can file a paper copy of your motion to intervene, along
with three copies, by mailing the documents to the address below. Your
motion to intervene must reference the Project docket number CP23-466-
000.
    To file via USPS: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    To file via any other method:
    Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    The Commission encourages electronic filing of motions to intervene
(option 1 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected].
    Protests and motions to intervene must be served on the applicant
either by mail or email at: Frank J. Magliettei Jr., Senior Manager/
Interstate Pipelines/Business Operations, P.O. Box 94197, Las Vegas,
Nevada 89193-4197 or at [email protected]. Any subsequent
submissions by an intervenor must be served on the applicant and all
other parties to the proceeding. Contact information for parties can be
downloaded from the service list at the eService link on FERC Online.
Service can be via email with a link to the document.
    All timely, unopposed \5\ motions to intervene are automatically
granted by operation of Rule 214(c)(1).\6\ Motions to intervene that
are filed after the intervention deadline are untimely, and may be
denied. Any late-filed motion to intervene must show good cause for
being late and must explain why the time limitation should be waived
and provide justification by reference to factors set forth in Rule
214(d) of the Commission's Rules and Regulations.\7\ A person obtaining
party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the
Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies (paper or
electronic) of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other
parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The applicant has 15 days from the submittal of a motion to
intervene to file a written objection to the intervention.
    \6\ 18 CFR 385.214(c)(1).
    \7\ 18 CFR 385.214(b)(3) and (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tracking the Proceeding

    Throughout the proceeding, additional information about the project
will be available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at
(866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website at www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link as described above. The eLibrary link also provides
access to the texts of all 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. For more information and to register, go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Intervention Deadline: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on June 5, 2023.

    Dated: May 15, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-10738 Filed 5-18-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P