[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 53 (Monday, March 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16622-16623]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05537]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 8315-017]

Eagle Creek Sartell Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application Tendered
for Filing With the Commission and Soliciting Additional Study Requests
and Establishing Procedural Schedule for Relicensing and a Deadline for
Submission of Final Amendments

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: 8315-017.
    c. Date filed: February 28, 2023.
    d. Applicant: Eagle Creek Sartell Hydro, LLC (Eagle Creek).
    e. Name of Project: Sartell Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Mississippi River in Stearns and Benton
Counties, Minnesota. No federal lands are located within the project
boundary.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: David H. Fox, Senior Director, Regulatory
Affairs, Eagle Creek Sartell Hydro, LLC, 7315 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite
1100W, Bethesda, Maryland 20814; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
[email protected].
    i. FERC Contact: Michael Davis at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].
    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in item l below. Cooperating agencies should note
the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation
of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See, 94 FERC ]
61,076 (2001).
    k. Pursuant to section 4.32(b)(7) of 18 CFR of the Commission's
regulations, if any resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person believes
that an additional scientific study should be conducted in order to
form an adequate factual basis for a complete analysis of the

application on its merit, the resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person
must file a request for a study with the Commission not later than 60
days from the date of filing of the application, and serve a copy of
the request on the applicant.
    l. Deadline for filing additional study requests and requests for
cooperating agency status: April 29, 2023.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
additional study requests and requests for cooperating agency status
using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support
at [email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202)
502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper
copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed
to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent
via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue,
Rockville, Maryland 20852. All filings must clearly identify the
project name and docket number on the first page: Sartell Hydroelectric
Project (8315-017).
    m. The application is not ready for environmental analysis at this
time.
    n. The Sartell Hydroelectric Project consists of the following
existing facilities: (1) a 46-foot-high dam with four sections; (2) a
powerhouse containing 11 generating units; (3) a radial Tainter-type
gate section and bascule gate section; (4) a concrete non-overflow dam
section; (5) an overflow spillway; (6) an earthen embankment; (7) a
step-up transformer; and (8) a 715-foot-long transmission line. The
reservoir encompasses approximately 2,350.5 acres with a gross storage
capacity of 15,278.3 acre-feet at the reservoir surface elevation of
1,015 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum 1929 (NGVD). The project
has a combined total rated capacity of 8.95 megawatts.
    o. In addition to publishing the full text of this notice in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this notice, as well
as other documents in the proceeding (e.g., license application) 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 documents (P-
8315). 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 FERC
Online Support.
    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, contact FERC
Online Support.
    p. Procedural schedule and final amendments: The application will
be processed according to the following preliminary schedule. Revisions
to the schedule will be made as appropriate.

Issue Deficiency Letter (if necessary)--May 2023
Request Additional Information (if necessary)--May 2023
Issue Scoping Document 1 for comments--November 2023
Issue Scoping Document 2 (if necessary)--February 2024

    Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

    Dated: March 13, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-05537 Filed 3-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 30, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 189)]
[Notices]
[Page 57327-57329]
[DOCID:fr30se05-146]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. ICR 1218-0247 (2005)]

State Plans for the Development and Enforcement of State
Standards; Extension of the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB)
Approval of Information-Collection (Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION:  Request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comment concerning its request for an
extension of the information collection requirements associated with
its regulations and program regarding State Plans for the development
and enforcement of state standards (29 CFR 1902, 1952, 1953, 1954,
1955, 1956).

DATES: Comments must be submitted by the following dates:
    Hard Copy: Your comments must be submitted (postmarked or received)
by November 29, 2005.
    Facsimile and electronic transmission: Your comments must be
received by November 29, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments, identified by OSHA Docket
No. ICR 1218-0247 (2005), by any of the following methods:
    Regular mail, express delivery, hand-delivery, and messenger
service: Submit your comments and attachments to the OSHA Docket
Office, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20210. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. The OSHA Docket
Office hours of operation are 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., ET.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including any attachments, are 10
pages or fewer, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202)
693-1648.
    Electronic: You may submit comments through the Internet at http://dockets.osha.gov/.
 Follow instructions on the OSHA Web page for

submitting comments.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read or download comments or
background materials, such as the complete Information Collection
Request (ICR), containing the Supporting Statement, OMB 83-I Form and
attachments, go to OSHA's Web page at http://www.OSHA.gov. Comments,

submissions and the ICR are available for inspection and copying at the
OSHA Docket Office at the above address. You may also contact Barbara
Bryant at the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR. For additional
information on submitting comments, please see the ``Public
Participation'' heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Bryant, Directorate of
Cooperative and State Programs, Office of State Programs, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-
3700, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone:
(202) 693-2244; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance consultation
program to provide the general public with an opportunity to comment on
proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance
with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA 95) (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)).
    This program ensures that information is in the desired format, has
practical utility, reporting burden (time and cost) is minimized,
collection instruments are understandable, and OSHA's estimate of the
information collection burden is correct. Currently, OSHA is soliciting
comments concerning the extension of the information collection
requirements contained in the series of regulations establishing
requirements for the submission, initial approval, continuing approval,
final approval, monitoring and evaluation of OSHA-approved State Plans:
     29 CFR Part 1902, State Plans for the Development and
Enforcement of State Standards;
     29 CFR Part 1952, Approved State Plans for Enforcement of
State Standards;
     29 CFR Part 1953, Changes to State Plans for the
Development and Enforcement of State Standards;
     29 CFR Part 1954, Procedures for the Evaluation and
Monitoring of Approved State Plans;
     29 CFR Part 1955, Procedures for Withdrawal of Approval of
State Plans; and
     29 CFR Part 1956, State Plans for the Development and
Enforcement of State Standards Applicable to State and Local Government
Employees in States without Approved Private Employee Plans.
    Section 18 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act offers an
opportunity to the States to assume responsibility for the development
and enforcement of State standards through the mechanism of an OSHA-
approved State Plan. Absent an approved plan, States are precluded from
enforcing occupational safety and health standards in the private
sector with respect to an issue that is addressed by OSHA. Once
approved and operational, the State provides most occupational safety
and health enforcement and compliance assistance in the State in lieu
of Federal OSHA. States also must extend jurisdiction to State and
local government employees. In order to obtain and maintain State Plan
approval, a State must submit various documents to OSHA describing its
program structure and operation, including any modifications thereto as
they occur, in accordance with the identified regulations. OSHA funds
50% of the costs required to be incurred by an approved State Plan with
the State at least matching and providing additional funding at its
discretion.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of OSHA's functions, including
whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
cost) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on participating States, for
example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is proposing to extend the collection-of-information
requirements associated with its State Plan regulations. In doing so,
the Agency is proposing to adjust the total burden hours associated
with the six regulations affecting the States that currently operate,
or propose to operate, OSHA-approved State Plans from 8,522 hours to
10,522 to reflect the on-going development of a possible new State
Plan. The Agency will summarize the comments submitted in response to
this notice and will include this summary in its request to OMB to
extend the approval of the information collection requirements related
to its six State Plan regulations.
    Agency: U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration.
    Title: State Plans for the Development and Enforcement of State
Standards.
    OMB Number: 1218-0247.
    Affected Public: Designated State government agencies which are
seeking or have submitted and obtained approval for State Plans for the
development and enforcement of occupational safety and health
standards.
    Number of Respondents: 27.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion; quarterly; annually.
    Average Time Per Response: Varies from one hour to respond to an
information survey to 80 hours to document State annual performance
goals.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 10,522.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation-Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments and supporting materials in response to
this document by (1) hard copy, (20 FAX transmission (facsimile) or (3)
electronically through the OSHA Webpage. Because of security-related
problems, a significant delay may occur in the receipt of comments by
regular mail. Please contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>) for information about security procedures
concerning the delivery of materials by express delivery, hand delivery
and courier service.
    All comments, submissions and background documents are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office at the above
address. Comments and submissions are also posted on OSHA's Webpage and
are available at http://www.OSHA.gov. Contact the OSHA Docket Office

for information about material not available through the OSHA Webpage,
and for assistance using the Webpage to locate docket submissions.
    Electronic copies of this Federal Register notice, as well as other
relevant documents, are available on OSHA's Webpage. All submissions
become public; therefore, private information, such as a social
security number, should not be submitted.

V. Authority and Signature

    Jonathan L. Snare, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2002
(67 FR 65008).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on September 27, 2005.
Jonathan L. Snare,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor.
[FR Doc. 05-19648 Filed 9-29-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4610-26-M


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 9, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6917-6919]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02443]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77041; File No. SR-OCC-2016-001]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Revise the Options Clearing Corporation's Schedule of Fees

February 3, 2016.
    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 January 20, 2016, The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') 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 primarily by OCC. OCC filed the proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) \3\ of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(2) \4\ thereunder so that the proposal was effective upon filing
with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The purpose of this proposed rule change by The Options Clearing
Corporation (``OCC'') is to revise OCC's Schedule of Fees effective
March 1, 2016, to implement a reduction of clearing fees in accordance
with OCC's Fee Policy, which was recently adopted as part of OCC's
Capital Plan.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In 2015, the Commission approved (``Approval Order'') OCC's
plan for raising additional capital (``Capital Plan''), which was
put in place in light of proposed regulatory capital requirements
applicable to systemically important financial market utilities,
such as OCC. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74452 (March 6,
2015) 80 FR 13058 (March 12, 2015) (SR-OCC-2015-02). OCC also filed
proposals in the Capital Plan Filing as an advance notice under
Section 806(e)(1) of the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement
Supervision Act of 2010. 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1). On February 26, 2015,
the Commission issued a notice of no objection to the advance notice
filing. See Exchange Act Release No. 74387 (February 26, 2015), 80
FR 12215 (March 6, 2015) (SR-OCC-2014-813). BATS Global Markets,
Inc., BOX Options Exchange LLC, KCG Holdings, Inc., Miami
International Securities Exchange, LLC, and Susquehanna
International Group, LLP (collectively ``Petitioners'') each filed
petitions for review of the Approval Order, challenging the action
taken by delegated authority. The filing of the petitions
automatically stayed the Approval Order. OCC filed a Motion to Lift
the Stay on April 2, 2015, and the Petitioners responded. The
Commission subsequently determined that the automatic stay of
delegated action should be discontinued, and the Commission granted
OCC's Motion to Lift Stay of the staff's action in approving by
delegated authority File No. SR-OCC-2015-02.

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

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, OCC 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. OCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A),
(B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of these
statements.

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to revise OCC's
Schedule of Fees in accordance with its new Fee Policy. The revised fee
schedule would become effective on March 1, 2016.
    By way of background, in 2015, the Commission approved OCC's
Capital Plan,\6\ which was put in place in light of proposed regulatory
capital requirements applicable to systemically important financial
market utilities, such as OCC. As part of OCC's Capital Plan, OCC
adopted a Fee Policy whereby OCC would set clearing fees at a level
that covers OCC's operating expenses plus a Business Risk Buffer \7\ of
25%.\8\ The purpose of the Business Risk Buffer is to ensure that OCC
accumulates sufficient capital to cover unexpected fluctuations in
operating expenses, business capital needs, and regulatory capital
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See supra note 5.
    \7\ The Business Risk Buffer is equal to net income before
refunds, dividends, and taxes divided by total revenue.
    \8\ OCC's Schedule of Fees must also meet the requirements set
forth in Article IX, Section 9 of OCC's By-Laws. In general, Article
IX, Section 9 of OCC's By-Laws requires that OCC's fee structure be
designed to: (1) Cover OCC's operating expenses plus a business risk
buffer, (2) maintain reserves deemed reasonably necessary by OCC's
Board of Directors, and (3) accumulate an additional surplus deemed
advisable by the Board of Directors to permit OCC to meet its
obligations to its clearing members and the public. Clauses 2 and 3
above will only be invoked at the discretion of OCC's Board of
Directors and in extraordinary circumstances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC analyzed its current Schedule of Fees \9\ against projected
revenues and projected expenses for 2016 in accordance with its Fee
Policy. The primary goal of this analysis was to determine a fee
setting approach for 2016 that covers OCC's anticipated operating
expenses, seeks to minimize the number of fee resets under normal
market conditions, and seeks to achieve a Business Risk Buffer of 25%.
To project revenue (which is a product of cleared contract volume and
clearing fees per contract), OCC estimated cleared contract volume per
month for 2016 by computing the average of the previous 12 months of
actual cleared contract volume data, excluding the high and low volume
months, and used such average as the anticipated cleared contract
volume per month for 2016.\10\ For expenses, OCC used projected 2016
expenses, computed at the end of 2015 as part of OCC's 2016 budgeting
process. OCC arrived at the fee schedule presented herein by
determining the figures that would result in a coverage OCC's
anticipated operating expenses plus a Business Risk Buffer of 25%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ OCC previously revised its Schedule of Fees effective April
1, 2014, to reinstate permanent reduced fee rates for securities
options and securities futures that were originally adopted
effective May 1, 2007. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71769
(March 21, 2014), 79 FR 17214 (March 27, 2014) (SR-OCC-2014-05).
    \10\ In order to validate this approach, OCC back tested its
volume projecting methodology against data from the previous five
years and determined that such methodology yields reasonable
estimate of future contract volume.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of the aforementioned analysis, OCC proposes to revise
its Schedule of Fees as set forth below.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ These changes are also reflected in Exhibit 5. Market
maker/specialist scratch and linkage fees per side will remain
unchanged at $0.020.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Trades with contracts of:                  Current fee                        Proposed fee
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-500....................................  $0.050/contract............  $0.041/contract.
501-1000.................................  $0.040/contract............  $0.032/contract.
1001-2000................................  $0.030/contract............  $0.024/contract.
>2000....................................  $55.00/trade...............  $46.00/trade.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC anticipates that the proposed changes to OCC's Schedule of Fees
would result in an average decrease in clearing fees of 19%. Moreover,
and in accordance with its Fee Policy, OCC will continue to monitor
cleared contract volume and operating expenses in order to determine if
further revisions to OCC's Schedule of Fees are required so that monies
received from clearing fees cover OCC's operating expenses plus a
Business Risk Buffer of 25%.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Any subsequent changes to OCC's Schedule of Fees would be
the subject of a subsequent proposed rule change filed with the
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    OCC believes that the proposed rule change concerning a reduction
to OCC's clearing fees is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(D) \13\ of
the Act, because the proposed fee schedule provides for the equitable
allocation of reasonable fees among its clearing members and other
market participants pursuant to criteria set forth in OCC's Capital
Plan, which has been approved by the Commission.\14\ The revised fee
schedule would result in lower clearing fees for OCC's clearing members
and other market participants and would be equally applicable to all
market participants. The proposed rule change is not inconsistent with
the existing rules of OCC, including any other rules proposed to be
amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D).
    \14\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    OCC does not believe that the proposed rule change would have an
impact or impose a burden on competition.\15\ Although this proposed
rule change affects clearing members, their customers, and the markets
that OCC serves, OCC believes that the proposed rule change would not
disadvantage or favor any particular user of OCC's services in
relationship to another user because the proposed clearing fees apply
equally to all users of OCC. Accordingly, OCC does not believe that the
proposed rule change would have any impact or impose a burden on
competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments on the proposed rule change were not and are not
intended to be solicited with respect to the proposed rule change and
none have been received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective upon filing \16\
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \17\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(2) thereunder \18\ because it constitutes a change in fees imposed
by OCC on its clearing members and other market participants using
OCC's services. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Notwithstanding the immediate effectiveness of the proposed
rule change and OCC's anticipated implementation date of March 1,
2016, implementation of this rule change is also contingent on it
being deemed certified under CFTC Regulation Sec.  40.6.
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \18\ 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 email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-OCC-2016-001 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2016-001. 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
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of OCC and on OCC's
Web site at http://www.theocc.com/components/docs/legal/rules_and_bylaws/sr_occ_16_001.pdf. 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-OCC-2016-001 and should be submitted on
or before March 1, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-02443 Filed 2-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 36 (Thursday, February 23, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10658-10662]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4165]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 1

[Docket No. FDA-2002-N-0153] (Formerly Docket No. 2002N-0277)
RIN 0910-AG73

Establishment, Maintenance, and Availability of Records:
Amendment to Record Availability Requirements

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending its
regulations on establishment, maintenance, and availability of records.
FDA is issuing this interim final rule (IFR) to amend FDA's regulation
on the record availability requirements to implement the amendments to
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) made by the FDA
Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). The FSMA amendment expands FDA's
former records access authority beyond records relating to the specific
suspect article of food to records relating to any other article of
food that the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary)
reasonably believes is likely to be affected in a similar manner. In
addition, the FSMA amendment permits FDA to access records relating to
articles of food for which the Secretary believes that there is a
reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to the article of
food, and any other article of food that the Secretary reasonably
believes is likely to be affected in a similar manner, will cause
serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or animals. This
expanded records access authority will further help improve FDA's
ability to respond to, and further contain threats of serious adverse
health consequences or death to humans or animals.

DATES: Effective date: This interim final rule is effective March 1,
2012.
    Comment date: Interested persons may submit either electronic or
written comments on this interim final rule by May 23, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William A. Correll, Jr., Office of
Compliance (HFS-607), Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,
Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD
20740,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FDA-2002-
N-0153 (formerly Docket No. 2002N-0277) and/or Regulatory Information
Number (RIN) 0910-AG73 by any of the following methods:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Written Submissions

    Submit written submissions in the following ways:
     FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper or CD-ROM
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Agency
name, docket number and RIN for this rulemaking. All comments received
may be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided. For additional information on
submitting comments, see the ``Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into
the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of
Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Legal Background

    Each year about 48 million people (1 in 6 Americans) get sick,
128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die from food borne diseases,
according to recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) (Estimates of Foodborne Illness in the United States--
CDC 2011 Estimates, available at http://www.cdc.gov/foodborneburden).
This is a significant public health burden that is largely preventable.
    FSMA (Pub. L. 111-353), signed into law by President Obama on
January 4, 2011, enables FDA to better protect public health by helping
to ensure the safety and security of the food supply. It enables FDA to
focus more on preventing food safety problems rather than relying
primarily on reacting to problems after they occur. The law also
provides FDA with new enforcement authorities to help it achieve higher
rates of compliance with prevention and risk-based food safety
standards and to better respond to and contain problems when they do
occur. The law also gives FDA important new tools to better ensure the
safety of imported foods and directs FDA to build an integrated
national food safety system in partnership with State and local
authorities.
    Section 101 of FSMA amends section 414(a) of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 350c(a)). Section 414 was added to the FD&C Act by the Public
Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002
(the Bioterrorism Act) (Pub. L. 107-188). As amended section 414(a) of
the FD&C Act expands FDA's access to records. Specifically, FDA's
access to records was expanded beyond records relating to the specific
suspect article of food to records relating to any other article of
food that the Secretary (by delegation FDA) reasonably believes is
likely to be affected in a similar manner. In addition, FDA can now
access records if FDA believes that there is a reasonable probability
that the use of or exposure to an article of food, and any other
article of food that FDA reasonably believes is likely to be affected
in a similar manner, will cause serious adverse health consequences or
death to humans or animals. Decisions regarding whether FDA
``reasonably believes'' a food is affected in a similar manner to cause
serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or animals would
be made on a case-by-case basis because such decisions are fact-
specific. Section 414(a) of the FD&C Act further provides that, at the
request of an officer or employee duly designated by FDA, each person
(excluding farms and restaurants) who manufactures, processes, packs,
distributes, receives, holds, or imports such article shall permit such
officer or employee to have access to and copy all records relating to
such article and any other article of food that FDA reasonably believes
is likely to be affected in a similar manner. FDA shall have access to
the records that are needed to assist FDA in determining whether there
is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to the food
will cause serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or
animals. To gain access to these records, the officer or employee must
present appropriate credentials and a written notice to such person, at
reasonable times and within reasonable limits and in a reasonable
manner. The Bioterrorism Act also amended section 704(a)(1)(B) of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 374(a)(1)(B)) to include a cross-reference to
section 414 of the FD&C Act. Section 101 of FSMA amends this section by
updating the cross-reference to refer to the amended version of section
414(a).
    The amendments made by section 101 of FSMA to the FD&C Act were
effective upon enactment of the law (January 4, 2011).

B. Brief History of Establishment, Maintenance, and Availability of
Records

    Among other things, section 306(a) of the Bioterrorism Act amended
the FD&C Act by adding section 414(a) to the FD&C Act, which provided
FDA with the authority to access records if FDA has a reasonable belief
that an article of food is adulterated and presents a threat of serious
adverse health consequences or death to humans or animals, persons who
manufacture, process, pack, distribute, receive, hold, or import food
must provide access to records related to the food that are needed to
assist FDA in determining whether the food is adulterated and presents
a threat of serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or
animals. The statute provided for such records to be provided under
certain conditions, including at reasonable times.
    In addition, section 306(a) of the Bioterrorism Act added a new
section 414(b) to the FD&C Act that provided, in part, that FDA may by
regulation establish requirements regarding establishment and
maintenance, for not longer than 2 years, of records by persons
(excluding farms and restaurants) who manufacture, process, pack,
transport, distribute, receive, hold, or import food. The records that
are required to be kept by these regulations are those needed by FDA
for inspection to allow FDA to identify the immediate previous sources
and immediate subsequent recipients of food.
    Section 306(b) of the Bioterrorism Act also amended section 704(a)
of the FD&C Act to authorize FDA inspections of all records and other
information described in section 414 of the FD&C Act, when FDA has a
reasonable belief that an article of food is adulterated and presents a
threat of serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or
animals.
    Further, section 306(c) of the Bioterrorism Act amended section 301
of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 331) to make it a prohibited act to refuse
to permit access to, or copying of, any record as required by section
414 or 704(a) of the FD&C Act; or to fail to establish or

maintain any record as required by section 414(b) of the FD&C Act; or
to refuse to permit access to, or verification or copying of, any such
required record; or for any person to use to his own advantage, or to
reveal, other than to FDA or officers or employees of the Department of
Health and Human Services, or to the courts when relevant in any
judicial proceeding under the FD&C Act, any information acquired under
authority of section 414 of the FD&C Act.
    In accordance with the Bioterrorism Act, FDA issued a proposed rule
in the Federal Register on May 9, 2003 (68 FR 25188) (the 2003 proposed
rule), proposing to require the establishment and maintenance of
records to identify the immediate previous sources and immediate
subsequent recipients of food and the record availability requirements.
On December 9, 2004, FDA issued a final rule in the Federal Register
(69 FR 71562) (the 2004 final rule) specifying the requirements for the
establishment and maintenance of records, including among other
provisions the record availability requirements. The establishment,
maintenance, and availability of records regulations have been codified
at part 1, subpart J (21 CFR part 1, subpart J).
    The current regulation at Sec.  1.361 primarily tracks the language
of section 414(a) of the FD&C Act prior to the amendments made by FSMA.
However, the regulation does specify the timeframe in which the records
must be provided in that requested records and information must be made
available as soon as possible, not to exceed 24 hours, from the time of
receipt of an official request. As specified by the statute, the
request must be from an officer or employee designated by the Secretary
who presents appropriate credentials and a written notice.
    This IFR amends Sec.  1.361 by replacing the current text with
language that reflects the language of section 414 of the FD&C Act as
amended by section 101 of FSMA. This amendment conforms the regulation
to the statute that is now in effect. Upon publication of this IFR,
records requested by FDA under amended section 414(a)(1) and (a)(2) of
the FD&C Act will fall within the scope of the availability
requirements in the regulation.

C. Justification for Interim Final Rulemaking

    In accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Procedure
Act at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and FDA's administrative practices and
procedures regulations at Sec.  10.40(e)(1) (21 CFR 10.40(e)(1)), FDA
finds for good cause that use of prior notice and comment procedures
for issuing this IFR is contrary to the public interest. This IFR
modifies Sec.  1.361 to be consistent with the current statutory
language in section 414(a) of the FD&C Act and to require that records
and other information be provided as soon as possible, but no later
than 24 hours from the receipt of an official records request. Because
FDA's expanded records access authority was effective upon the
enactment of FSMA, it is contrary to the public interest to require
those members of the public whose records are requested under FDA's
expanded authority to produce records without regulations explaining
how to comply with FDA's new authority. Thus, in the interest of
protecting the public health and eliminating any possible confusion
about how to comply with FDA's expanded authority, FDA is dispensing
with the need for prior notice and comment and is issuing this IFR.
    Further, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) and Sec.  10.40(d), we find good
cause to make this IFR effective immediately. As stated previously in
this document, to protect the public health it is necessary that we act
quickly to make the regulation at issue consistent with the current
statutory provisions in order to eliminate any possible confusion that
may arise during the time that the regulation and statute are
inconsistent. As discussed later in this document, FDA invites public
comment on this IFR.

II. Analysis of Impacts

    FDA has examined the impacts of this IFR under Executive Order
12866, Executive Order 13563, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601-612), and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct Agencies to assess all costs
and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation
is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net
benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health
and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity).
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this IFR
is a significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires Agencies to analyze
regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule
on small entities. Because the additional costs per entity of this IFR
are negligible if any, the Agency also concludes that this IFR will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    Section 202(a) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104-4) requires that Agencies prepare a written statement, which
includes an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits, before
proposing ``any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result
in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted
annually for inflation) in any one year.'' The current threshold after
adjustment for inflation is $136 million, using the most current (2010)
Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. FDA does not
expect this IFR to result in any 1-year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.
    In the 2003 proposed rule, FDA analyzed the economic impact of the
proposed rule to require the establishment and maintenance of records
and record availability requirements under the Bioterrorism Act (68 FR
25188). The Economic Impact Analysis of the 2004 final rule (69 FR
71562 at 71611) revised the analysis set forth in the 2003 proposed
rule in response to comments on the proposed rule and to account for
the changes between the proposed and final rules. The Economic Impact
Analysis in this IFR explains and further revises the analysis set
forth in the 2004 final rule by addressing the economic impact of the
amendments made by section 101 of FSMA.

A. Need for Regulation

    The need for this IFR arises from section 101 of FSMA which expands
FDA's access to records beyond records relating to the specific suspect
article of food to records relating to any other article of food that
FDA reasonably believes is likely to be affected in a similar manner.
In addition, the FSMA amendment provides FDA additional access to
records relating to articles of food for which FDA believes that there
is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to the article
of food, and any other article of food that FDA reasonably believes is
likely to be affected in a similar manner, will cause serious adverse
health consequences or death to humans or animals. This amendment will
further help the Agency prevent potentially harmful food from reaching
consumers and thereby improve the safety of the food supply in the
United States. This IFR amends the record availability requirements in
Sec.  1.361 in accordance with the new records access authority in
section 414(a) of the FD&C Act, which

became effective immediately upon the enactment of FSMA.

B. Costs

    FDA expects the costs related to this IFR to be negligible.
According to the 2004 final rule analysis, the final rule covered more
than 1 million entities, and this IFR covers those same entities.
    Because, as a standard business practice, most firms were already
capable of providing records access within 24 hours of a request,
records access planning costs and records retention (which include
storage and retrieval) costs were estimated to be zero in the 2004
final rule and were not reported in the total costs estimate.
    As this IFR only affects FDA's authority to access already existing
records, most records management procedures will not change. As stated
in the 2004 final rule (69 FR 71562 at 71635), the estimated records
access costs are based on the private costs of planning for a records
access request. The costs to plan for a records access request are the
same under this IFR as they were under the 2004 final rule, regardless
of the number of records requested. FDA does not estimate the
probability of a records access request. To the extent that FDA would
have access to additional records that we previously could not access,
the following potential costs could be incurred by both FDA and
businesses:
    1. Costs to FDA: Costs incurred by FDA could result from the
additional time it would take to analyze records in order to complete
an investigative visit. On average, records access times depend, in
part, on how records are stored and maintained; average travel times,
length of overnight stays required for completing an investigative
visit; and average records analysis times. According to the 2004 final
rule, the time required to analyze records depends on the quality of
the records (69 FR 71562 at 71616). Potential costs to the Agency from
this IFR in terms of additional time needed to analyze more records
than under the 2004 final rule are expected to be small.
    2. Costs to businesses: Costs incurred by businesses could result
from an FDA access request requiring them to retrieve a larger number
of records than they would have otherwise retrieved under the current
authority. Similar to the costs of planning for a records access
request, the 2004 final rule estimated records retrieval costs are also
based on the private costs of retrieving records (69 FR 71562 at
71635). This IFR does not require firms to make any changes in records
retention practices beyond the requirement in the 2004 final rule (69
FR 71562 at 71654), and thus the marginal cost is estimated to be
negligible.
    Since neither the FDA nor firms are able to predict the number of
records requested to complete an investigation under the current
authority or the new authority, additional costs to retrieve any number
of additional records are estimated to be the same under this IFR as
they were under the 2004 final rule, regardless of the number of
records requested.
    FDA would use this new authority in a targeted fashion and it is
unlikely that FDA would request all records from a suspect facility.
The records FDA will access and copy will be focused on addressing the
immediate needs of the inspection.
    To the extent that FDA requests access to more records than it was
previously allowed to access under similar circumstances, businesses
may incur additional retrieval costs per record. However, the costs of
retrieving one or more additional records from any number of records
still remain part of the private costs for records retention which are
determined by a firm's business plan. Thus, any potential costs to
businesses from this IFR in terms of retrieving more records than under
the 2004 final rule are also expected to be small.

C. Benefits

    In the 2004 final rule analysis, FDA estimated the number of
illnesses prevented (excluding those associated with food security) to
be approximately 1,204 (69 FR 71562 at 71616). Averted illnesses in the
2004 final rule were attributed to having quicker access to records
(24-hour time period) to initiate an investigation and also due to an
increased ability to complete investigations that previously would have
been prematurely terminated due to poor records quality (69 FR 71562 at
71614).
    Similarly, the expected benefits from this IFR will be from
minimizing consumer exposure to potentially dangerous foods. These
benefits will be achieved by FDA having access to records beyond those
relating only to the specifically suspect article of food. By expanding
the current records access authority to include records relating to any
other article of food that FDA reasonably believes is likely to be
affected in a similar manner, FDA can now access additional information
that can enhance FDA's food safety efforts.
    FDA has not quantified any additional benefits from this IFR, but
because this IFR enhances food safety and security efforts, we reason
that any benefits resulting from this IFR are likely to be in addition
to benefits already estimated in the 2004 final rule.

III. Small Entity Analysis (or Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis)

    FDA examined the economic implications of this IFR as required by
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612). If a rule has a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires us to analyze regulatory
options that would lessen the economic effect of the rule on small
entities.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires analyzing options for
regulatory relief for small businesses. In compliance with the
Regulatory Flexibility Act this IFR will not have a significant impact
on a substantial number of small businesses.

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This interim final rule contains information collection provisions
that are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501-3520).
    We conclude that these information collection provisions are exempt
from OMB review under 44 U.S.C. 3518(c)(1)(B)(ii) and 5 CFR
1320.4(a)(2) as collections of information obtained during the conduct
of a civil action to which the United States or any official or agency
thereof is a party, or during the conduct of an administrative action,
investigation, or audit involving an agency against specific
individuals or entities. The regulations in 5 CFR 1320.3(c) provide
that the exception in 5 CFR 1320.4(a)(2) applies during the entire
course of the investigation, audit or action, but only after a case
file or equivalent is opened with respect to a particular party. Such a
case file would be opened as part of the request to access records
under Sec.  1.361.

V. Analysis of Environmental Impact

    The Agency has carefully considered the potential environmental
effects of this action. FDA has determined under 21 CFR 25.30(h) that
this action is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither
an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is
required.

VI. Federalism

    FDA has analyzed this IFR in accordance with the principles set
forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA has determined that the IFR does
not contain policies that have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the

relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. Accordingly, the Agency concludes that the IFR does not
contain policies that have federalism implications as defined in the
Executive order and, consequently, a federalism summary impact
statement is not required.

VII. Comments

    The requirements in this IFR will be in effect immediately upon
publication in the Federal Register. FDA invites public comment on this
IFR and will consider modifications to it based on comments made during
the comment period when FDA issues the final rule. FDA intends to
finalize this IFR 1 year from the close of the comment period.
    Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments regarding this
document. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. Identify
comments 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.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1

    Cosmetics, Drugs, Exports, Food labeling, Imports, Labeling,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part
1 is amended as follows:

PART 1--GENERAL ENFORCEMENT REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 1 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1453, 1454, 1455; 19 U.S.C. 1490, 1491; 21
U.S.C. 321, 331, 333, 334, 335a, 343, 350c, 350d, 352, 355, 360b,
362, 371, 374, 381, 382, 387, 387a, 393; 42 U.S.C. 216, 241, 243,
262, 264.

0
2. Section 1.361 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  1.361  What are the record availability requirements?

    When FDA has a reasonable belief that an article of food, and any
other article of food that FDA reasonably believes is likely to be
affected in a similar manner, is adulterated and presents a threat of
serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or animals, or
when FDA believes that there is a reasonable probability that the use
of or exposure to an article of food, and any other article of food
that FDA reasonably believes is likely to be affected in a similar
manner, will cause serious adverse health consequences or death to
humans or animals, any records and other information accessible to FDA
under section 414 or 704(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(21 U.S.C. 350c and 374(a)) must be made readily available for
inspection and photocopying or other means of reproduction. Such
records and other information must be made available as soon as
possible, not to exceed 24 hours from the time of receipt of the
official request, from an officer or employee duly designated by the
Secretary of Health and Human Services who presents appropriate
credentials and a written notice.

    Dated: February 17, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-4165 Filed 2-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


"Mary Bachynsky/FPC Environmental Dept."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>02/24/2009 07:59 AM
 To Jodi Howard/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
cc "Mary Bachynsky"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Peter de la Cruz"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Subject RE: VCM production and mercury

Ms. Howard, attached, please find our understanding of the Subject issue.  I hope it addresses your questions.  Upon your review, please let us know of any questions.
Regards, Mary

Mary P. Bachynsky
Formosa Plastics Corp. U.S. A.
9 Peach Tree Hill Road
Livingston, New Jersey 07039
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> Cell:<PHONE_NUMBER>
<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>

-----Original Message-----
From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:33 AM
To: Mary Bachynsky/FPC Environmental Dept.
Subject: VCM production and mercury

Ms. Bachynsky,

I have a question regarding vinyl chloride monomer production and
mercury usage.  Is Mercury used in the production of VCM?  If so, it is
wide spread or are just a few facilities utilizing it in their
production of VCM?  I understand that foreign VCM manufactures utilize
mercury in the their processes but I was not sure if US manufactures do
the same.  Any information that you can provide would be helpful.
Thanks.

Jodi Howard, Environmental Engineer
U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Program Divisions
Coatings and Chemicals Group
Mail Code:  E143-01
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>
Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>

____________________________________________________________
This communication is solely for use by the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this communication, in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Unless explicitly stated, this communication does not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance of a contract offer. This communication also does not constitute consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for transfers of data to third parties.


March 12, 2004 Page 1 of 7 Appendix A Protruding Fine Mesh Screen Modification Section through Sea Chest Opening to the Ocean Protruding Fine Mesh Sea Water Intake March 12, 2004 Page 2 of 7 Detail Item 1: Outer Bar Screen March 12, 2004 Page 3 of 7 Detail Item 2: Fine Mesh Inner Screen Detail Item 3: Fine Mesh Frame and Inner Diffuser Detail Item 4: Protruding Main Frame March 12, 2004 Page 4 of 7 Appendix B Horizontal Flow Modifier Plan View of Bottom Sea Chest Horizontal Flow Modifier Note: This modification is for use on sea chests that are located on the bottom of the vessel and no more than 30 ° of the horizontal. Flow Modifier Plate March 12, 2004 Page 5 of 7 Section YY through Horizontal Flow Modifier Notes: 1. The basic assembly consists of a flow modifier plate that is stiffened using 4" flat bar welded to the under side. These flat bar stiffeners also assists in funnelling the flow into the existing intake structure. 2. A coarse mesh has been included around the perimeter of the new intake structure. This is to prevent larger animals ( like turtles) getting trapped in the gap between the hull and the flow modifier plate ( looks similar to a reef ledge to some animals). 3. 8 brackets ( 4" PFC) are permanently welded to the hull as the primary attachment points. 4. 8 legs off the flow modifier plate ( 1/ 2" plate) attach to the brackets on the hull. 3 of the bracket to leg connections use hinge pins, the other 5 legs use bolts. Releasing the bolts allows the flow modifier to swing down for maintenance or cleaning of the sea chest intake. A lifting lug should be added to the hull to allow lifting equipment can be used to safely open and close this new structure. A lifting lug has been incorporated in the costs for this item. 5. All materials used for the construction of this item will be mild steel coated in anti fouling paint. Flow Modifier Plate March 12, 2004 Page 6 of 7 Plan View of Side Sea Chest Horizontal Flow Modifier Note: This modification is for use on sea chests that are located on the side of the vessel at angles greater than 30 ° of the horizontal. The direction of the flow louvres should be adjusted during the design and construction of this equipment such that they are horizontal Flow Louvres March 12, 2004 Page 7 of 7 Notes: 1 The basic assembly consists of a diffuser plate nested in a number of flow louvres. The diffuser ensures that the flow is evenly distributed across the louvres and the louvres ensure that the flow is horizontal at a velocity of 0.5 ft/ sec or less. 2 2 brackets ( 2" equal angles) are permanently welded to the hull as the primary attachment points. These run the entire width and at each end of the sea chest modification. 3 The horizontal flow modifier is attached to the brackets on the hull by way of a hinge on one side and bolts on the other. By releasing the bolts, the horizontal flow modifier may be swung out away from the hull for access to the existing sea chest. 4 All materials used for the construction of this item will be mild steel coated in anti fouling paint. Flow Louvres


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 206 (Friday, October 23, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 67439]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22567]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0329, Special Conditions No. 25-760-SC]

Special Conditions: The Boeing Company Model 777-9 Series
Airplane; Interior Design To Facilitate Searches Above Passenger Cabin
High Wall Suites

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting an error that appeared in the Federal
Register on March 5, 2020, for Special Conditions No. 25-760-SC, Docket
No. FAA-2019-0329. In that document, the final special conditions text
is incorrect and this document now posts the correct text.

DATES: This correction is effective on October 23, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shannon Lennon, Airframe and Cabin
Safety Section, AIR-675, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and
Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation
Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, Washington 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On February 14, 2020, the FAA issued Special Conditions No. 25-760-
SC, under Docket No. FAA-2019-0329. Those special conditions were
published in the Federal Register on March 5, 2020, (85 FR 12864).
Those special conditions pertain to passenger cabins with high wall
suites (HWS) for The Boeing Company Model 777-9 series airplane, which
is a derivative of the Model 777-300ER airplane currently approved
under Type Certificate No. T00001SE.
    A special condition paragraph to that document published with
incorrect text in condition No. 1. As published, the first special
conditions paragraph stated that there should be no hazards to a person
performing a physical search above the high wall suites (e.g., no hot
surfaces, no sharp edges, and no corners). There are no substantive
changes to the document as it is apparent that a corner is inherently
not a hazard in and of itself. However, a sharp corner could be. It is
evident that the text should have included corner as modified by sharp
not just corner itself; otherwise all corners would be considered
hazardous. Therefore, the text should have read: ``The area above each
HWS must be designed such that there should be no hazards to a person
performing a physical search above the HWS (e.g., no hot surfaces, no
sharp edges or corners)'' from the beginning.

Correction

    In Special Conditions No. 25-760-SC, published in the Federal
Register on March 5, 2020, (85 FR 12864), FR Doc. 2020-03474, on page
12865, in the second column, correct the first special conditions
paragraph to read as follows:
    1. The area above each HWS must be designed such that there should
be no hazards to a person performing a physical search above the HWS
(e.g., no hot surfaces, no sharp edges or corners).

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on October 7, 2020.
James E. Wilborn,
Acting Manager, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2020-22567 Filed 10-22-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 219 (Thursday, November 13, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67532-67533]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26872]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2014-122]

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 and

must be received on or before December 3, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2014-
0838 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: Jake Troutman,<PHONE_NUMBER>, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, 20951.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 6, 2014.
James M. Crotty,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2014-0838
    Petitioner: Southern Company Services, Inc.
    Section of 14 CFR: parts 21 Subpart H, 45 Subpart C, 47, 49,
61.3(d), 61.31(d)(2), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.105,
91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 91.213, 91.405(a)
and (d), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b).
    Description of Relief Sought: The petitioner is seeking an
exemption to commercially operate their small unmanned aircraft system
(sUAS) to conduct research on the applicability of sUAS when assessing
damage to power lines due to storm events and performing routine power
line inspection.

[FR Doc. 2014-26872 Filed 11-12-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P