                                                                      6560-50-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

 [EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0099; FRL  -  9982-13-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Ferroalloys Production Area Sources (Renewal)

AGENCY:	Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION:	Notice.
SUMMARY:	The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), NESHAP for Ferroalloys Production Area Sources (EPA ICR No. 2303.05, OMB Control No. 2060-0625), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through August 31, 2018. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register  on June 29, 2017 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
 DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before [insert date 30 days after publication in the Federal Register].
ADDRESSES:  Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0099, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.
	EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
	Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov, or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Ferroalloys Production Area Sources (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YYYYYY) apply to existing and new ferroalloy production facilities that are an area source of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions. In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all affected facilities subject to NESHAP.
Form Numbers: None.
Respondents/affected entities: Owners and operators of area source ferroalloys production facilities.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YYYYYY).
Estimated number of respondents: 10 (total).
Frequency of response: Initially, annually, and periodically.
Total estimated burden: 391 hours (per year).  Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost:  $41,100 (per year), which includes $0 for annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.
Changes in the Estimates: The increase in burden from the most recently approved ICR is due to an adjustment. Hours were added to approximate the time spent by each source to familiarize with the rule requirements.
Dated: _____________________________________
___________________________________________
Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 37 (Wednesday, February 25, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10003-10007]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03928]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0253; FRL-9919-59]

Clothianidin; Pesticide Tolerances for Emergency Exemptions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a time-limited tolerance for
residues of clothianidin, (E)-N-[(2-chloro-5-thiazolyl)methyl]-N'-
methyl-N''-nitroguanidine, in or on fruit, citrus, group 10-10. This
action is in response to EPA's granting of an emergency exemption under
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
authorizing use of the pesticide on citrus. This regulation establishes
a maximum permissible level for residues of clothianidin in or on
citrus. The time-limited tolerance expires on December 31, 2017.

DATES: This regulation is effective February 25, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 27, 2015, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part

178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0253, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lewis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
    [emsp14]Crop production (NAICS code 111).
    [emsp14]Animal production (NAICS code 112).
    [emsp14]Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
    [emsp14]Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under section 408(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect
of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections.
You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2014-0253 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or before April 27, 2015. Addresses
for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are
provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0253, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    EPA, on its own initiative, in accordance with FFDCA sections
408(e) and 408(l)(6) of, 21 U.S.C. 346a(e) and 346a(1)(6), is
establishing a time-limited tolerance for residues of clothianidin,
(E)-N-[(2-chloro-5-thiazolyl)methyl]-N'-methyl-N''-nitroguanidine, in
or on fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 0.07 parts per million (ppm). This
time-limited tolerance expires on December 31, 2017.
    Section 408(l)(6) of FFDCA requires EPA to establish a time-limited
tolerance or exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for
pesticide chemical residues in food that will result from the use of a
pesticide under an emergency exemption granted by EPA under FIFRA
section 18. Such tolerances can be established without providing notice
or period for public comment. EPA does not intend for its actions on
FIFRA section 18 related time-limited tolerances to set binding
precedents for the application of FFDCA section 408 and the safety
standard to other tolerances and exemptions. Section 408(e) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance or an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance on its own initiative, i.e., without having
received any petition from an outside party.
    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b) (2) (C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue . .
. . ''
    Section 18 of FIFRA authorizes EPA to exempt any Federal or State
agency from any provision of FIFRA, if EPA determines that ``emergency
conditions exist which require such exemption.'' EPA has established
regulations governing such emergency exemptions in 40 CFR part 166.

III. Emergency Exemption for Clothianidin in or on Immature Citrus
Trees and FFDCA Tolerances

    The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
requested the EPA Administrator to issue a specific exemption for the
use of clothianidin as a soil drench application on immature citrus
trees to control the transmission of Huanglongbing (HLB) disease
vectored by the Asian Citrus Psyllid (ACP). The applicant asserts that
clothianidin is needed to control HLB disease due to the lack of
effective available alternatives for season long control practices, and
that significant economic losses will occur if this

urgent, non-routine disease is not controlled.
    Further, the Applicant asserts that an emergency condition exists
in accordance with the criteria for approval of an emergency exemption,
and issued a crisis exemption under FIFRA section 18 to allow the use
of clothianidin on immature citrus trees for control of the
transmission of HLB disease vectored by the ACP in Florida. After
having reviewed the submission, EPA concurred that an emergency
condition exists for Florida citrus growers and authorized a specific
emergency exemption under FIFRA section 18 for control of clothianidin
on immature citrus trees to control the transmission of HLB disease
vectored by the ACP.
    As part of its evaluation of the emergency exemption application,
EPA assessed the potential risks presented by residues of clothianidin
in or on citrus. In doing so, EPA considered the safety standard in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2), and EPA decided that the necessary tolerance
under FFDCA section 408(l)(6) would be consistent with the safety
standard and with FIFRA section 18. Consistent with the need to move
quickly on the emergency exemption in order to address an urgent non-
routine situation and to ensure that the resulting food is safe and
lawful, EPA is issuing this tolerance without notice and opportunity
for public comment as provided in FFDCA section 408(l)(6). Although
this time-limited tolerance expires on December 31, 2017, under FFDCA
section 408(l)(5), residues of the pesticide not in excess of the
amounts specified in the tolerance remaining in or on fruit, citrus,
group 10-10 after that date will not be unlawful, provided the
pesticide was applied in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA, and the
residues do not exceed a level that was authorized by the time-limited
tolerance at the time of that application. EPA will take action to
revoke this time-limited tolerance earlier if any experience with,
scientific data on, or other relevant information on this pesticide
indicate that the residues are not safe.
    Because this time-limited tolerance is being approved under
emergency conditions, EPA has not made any decisions about whether
clothianidin meets FIFRA's registration requirements for use on fruit,
citrus, group 10-10 or whether a permanent tolerance for this use would
be appropriate. Under these circumstances, EPA does not believe that
this time-limited tolerance decision serves as a basis for registration
of clothianidin by a State for special local needs under FIFRA section
24(c). Nor does this tolerance by itself serve as the authority for
persons in any State other than Florida to use this pesticide on the
applicable crop under FIFRA section 18 absent the issuance of an
emergency exemption applicable within that State. For additional
information regarding the emergency exemption for clothianidin contact
the Agency's Registration Division at the address provided under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
    As part of its evaluation of the emergency exemption application,
EPA assessed the potential risks presented by residues of clothianidin
in or on citrus. In doing so, EPA considered the safety standard in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2) and decided that the necessary tolerance under
FFDCA section 408(l)(6) would be consistent with the safety standard
and with FIFRA section 18.
    Consistent with the factors specified in FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other
relevant information in support of this emergency action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure expected as a result of this emergency exemption and
the time-limited tolerance for residues of clothianidin in or on fruit,
citrus, group 10-10 at 0.07 ppm.
    EPA recently evaluated the currently approved uses of clothianidin
when establishing tolerances for residues of clothianidin in three non-
citrus commodity groups in the March 29, 2013 Federal Register (78 FR
19130) (FRL-9378-6). A summary of the human risk assessment
toxicological endpoints is discussed in Units 111.A. and B. of the
March 29, 2013 Final Rule.
    EPA has also recently evaluated the dietary exposure that would
result from a similar use of clothianidin on citrus that would result
in clothianidin residues of 0.60 ppm. This is significantly higher than
the 0.07 ppm time-limited tolerance level established in today's final
rule. In order to expedite this time-limited tolerance rule, EPA has
relied on its previous dietary risk assessment assuming clothianidin
residues of 0.60 ppm on citrus. The higher application rates and
concentrations assure that exposure and risk resulting from the
emergency use are not underestimated. In addition, the estimated
drinking water concentrations based on the clothianidin use on citrus
resulted in higher acute drinking water estimates than those previously
assessed. The chronic analysis drinking water estimate remains the same
as it was in the previous dietary assessment. Even with these
conservative assumptions, the revised acute dietary risk estimates from
exposure to clothianidin through food and water are below the Agency's
level of concern for all population subgroups.
    In its aggregate assessment of exposures and risk associated with
clothianidin, including use on citrus which was assessed at a
significantly higher use rate, EPA concluded that the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to clothianidin would occupy 28% of the
acute population adjusted dose (aPAD) for children 1-2 years old, the
population subgroup receiving the greatest exposure; and that chronic
exposure to clothianidin from food and water would utilize 28% of the
chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD) for children 1-2 years old, the
population subgroup receiving the greatest exposure. These population
adjusted doses represent the levels below which exposure is not of
health concern. Because these levels of dietary exposures for the most
exposed subpopulations would be well below the aPAD and cPAD, the
expected lower levels of dietary exposures are not of concern.
    There are no new residential uses of clothianidin at this time.
However, existing uses of clothianidin on turf, ornamental plants, and/
or indoor surfaces for bed bug control may result in human exposure in
a residential setting. Such exposures may occur during application of
products containing clothianidin (handler exposure) as well as
following application (post-application exposure) and are expected to
be of short-term (1-30 days) duration.

    For clothianidin, residential handler and post-application risk
estimates are considered to be of potential concern when the dermal
margin of exposure (MOE) is less than 100, the inhalation MOE is less
than 1,000, and/or the aggregate risk index (ARI), reflecting combined
dermal and inhalation exposure, is less than one. The residential
handler and post-application risk estimates are not of concern (ARIs
range from 1.9 to 990). The aggregate ARIs, which combine residential
and dietary exposure, ranged from 1.2 to 6.5, which are not of concern
(i.e. when the ARI is greater 1).
    Therefore, EPA concluded there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result to the general population and to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to clothianidin residues as a result of
existing uses and the proposed section 18 use pattern.
    Refer to the March 29, 2013 final rule, available at http://regulations.gov, for a summary of the aggregate risk assessment and
determination of safety. Detailed discussion of the aggregate risk
assessments and the determinations of safety relied upon in this action
may be found in the Agency reviews and human health risk assessments
provided as supporting documents in the docket for this action under
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0253.

V. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An adequate enforcement methodology, based on solvent extraction
and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC-MS/
MS) separation, identification, and quantification, is available for
plant (Morse Method#Meth-164-modified, RM-39C-1, or Bayer Method 00552)
matrices to enforce the tolerance expression. The limit of quantitation
(LOQ) for clothianidin in plant commodities is 0.01 ppm. Clothianidin
and its major metabolites are not adequately recovered using any of the
United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) multi-residue methods.
    The methods may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has established MRLs for clothianidin in or on citrus
fruits at 0.07 ppm, the same level the U.S. is establishing for the
time-limited-tolerance.

VI. Conclusion

    Therefore, a time-limited tolerance is established for residues of
clothianidin, in or on fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 0.07 ppm. This
tolerance expires on December 31, 2017.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes tolerances under FFDCA sections 408(e)
and 408(l)(6). The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted
these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866,
entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4,
1993). Because this final rule has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this final rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established in accordance
with FFDCA sections 408(e) and 408(l)(6), such as the tolerances in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VIII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 13, 2015.
Susan Lewis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. In Sec.  180.586, revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.586  Clothianidin; tolerances for residues.

* * * * *
    (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. A time-limited tolerance
specified in the following table is established for residues of
clothianidin, (E)-N-[(2-chloro-5-thiazolyl)methyl]-N'-methyl-N''-
nitroguanidine, in or on the specified agricultural commodity,
resulting from use of the pesticide pursuant to FIFRA section 18
emergency exemptions. This tolerance expires on the date specified in
the table.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Parts per    Expiration
                   Commodity                      million        date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fruit, citrus, group 10-10....................        0.07     12/31/17
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-03928 Filed 2-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 7 (Friday, January 10, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1346-1351]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00204]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87897; File No. SR-MIAX-2019-53]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Fee Schedule

January 6, 2020.
    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 December 30, 2019, Miami International Securities Exchange LLC
(``MIAX Options'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have
been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX Options Fee
Schedule (the ``Fee Schedule'') to extend the waiver period for certain
non-transaction fees applicable to Market Makers \3\ that trade solely
in Proprietary Products \4\ until June 30, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Market Makers'' refers to ``Lead Market Makers'',
``Primary Lead Market Makers'' and ``Registered Market Makers''
collectively. See Exchange Rule 100.
    \4\ The term ``Proprietary Product'' means a class of options
that is listed exclusively on the Exchange. See Exchange Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings, at MIAX's principal
office, 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 and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The 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
Background
    On October 12, 2018, the Exchange received approval from the
Commission to list and trade on the Exchange, options on the
SPIKES[supreg] Index, a new index that measures expected 30-day
volatility of the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (commonly known and referred
to by its ticker symbol, ``SPY'').\5\ The Exchange adopted its initial
SPIKES transaction fees on February 15, 2019.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84417 (October 12,
2018), 83 FR 52865 (October 18, 2018) (SR-MIAX-2018-14) (Order
Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change by Miami International
Securities Exchange, LLC to List and Trade on the Exchange Options
on the SPIKES[supreg] Index).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Release No. 85283 (March 11, 2019),
84 FR 9567 (March 15, 2019) (SR-MIAX-2019-11). The Exchange
initially filed the proposal on February 15, 2019 (SR-MIAX-2019-04).
That filing was withdrawn and replaced with (SR-MIAX-2019-11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 31, 2019, the Exchange filed a proposal with the Commission
to amend the Fee Schedule to waive certain non-transaction fees
applicable to Market Makers that trade solely in Proprietary Products
(including options on the SPIKES Index) until September

30, 2019.\7\ In particular, the Exchange adopted waivers for Membership
Application fees, monthly Market Maker Trading Permit fees, Application
Programming Interface (``API'') Testing and Certification fees for
Members, and monthly MEI Port fees assessed to Market Makers that trade
solely in Proprietary Products (including options on SPIKES) until
September 30, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86109 (June 14,
2019), 84 FR 28860 (June 20, 2019) (SR-MIAX-2019-28).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 1, 2019, the Exchange filed a proposal with the
Commission to extend the waiver period for the same non-transaction
fees applicable to Market Makers that trade solely in Proprietary
Products (including options on SPIKES) until December 31, 2019.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87282 (October 10,
2019), 84 FR 55658 (October 17, 2019) (SR-MIAX-2019-43).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal
    The Exchange now proposes to extend the waiver period for the same
non-transaction fees applicable to Market Makers that trade solely in
Proprietary Products (including options on SPIKES) until June 30, 2020.
In particular, the Exchange proposes to waive Membership Application
fees, monthly Market Maker Trading Permit fees, Member API Testing and
Certification fees, and monthly MEI Port fees assessed to Market Makers
that trade solely in Proprietary Products (including options on SPIKES)
until June 30, 2020.
Membership Application Fees
    The Exchange currently assesses Membership fees for applications of
potential Members. The Exchange assesses a one-time Membership
Application fee on the earlier of (i) the date the applicant is
certified in the membership system, or (ii) once an application for
MIAX membership is finally denied. The one-time application fee is
based upon the applicant's status as either a Market Maker or an
Electronic Exchange Member (``EEM'').\9\ A Market Maker is assessed a
one-time Membership Application fee of $3,000.00.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The term ``Electronic Exchange Member'' or ``EEM'' means the
holder of a Trading Permit who is not a Market Maker. Electronic
Exchange Members are deemed ``members'' under the Exchange Act. See
Exchange Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes that the waiver for the one-time Membership
Application fee of $3,000.00 for Market Makers that trade solely in
Proprietary Products (including options on SPIKES) will be extended
from December 31, 2019 until June 30, 2020, which the Exchange proposes
to state in the Fee Schedule. The purpose of this proposed change is to
continue to provide an incentive for potential Market Makers to submit
membership applications, which should result in increasing potential
liquidity in Proprietary Products, including options on SPIKES. Even
though the Exchange is proposing to extend the waiver of this
particular fee for Market Makers who will trade solely in Proprietary
Products from December 31, 2019 until June 30, 2020, the overall
structure of the fee is outlined in the Fee Schedule so that there is
general awareness that the Exchange intends to assess such a fee after
June 30, 2020.
Trading Permit Fees
    The Exchange issues Trading Permits that confer the ability to
transact on the Exchange. MIAX Trading Permits are issued to Market
Makers and EEMs. Members receiving Trading Permits during a particular
calendar month are assessed monthly Trading Permit fees as set forth in
the Fee Schedule. As it relates to Market Makers, MIAX currently
assesses a monthly Trading Permit fee in any month the Market Maker is
certified in the membership system, is credentialed to use one or more
MIAX Express Interface Ports (``MEI Ports'') \10\ in the production
environment and is assigned to quote in one or more classes. MIAX
assesses its Market Makers the monthly Market Maker Trading Permit fee
based on the greatest number of classes listed on MIAX that the MIAX
Market Maker was assigned to quote in on any given day within a
calendar month and the applicable fee rate is the lesser of either the
per class basis or percentage of total national average daily volume
measurements. A MIAX Market Maker is assessed a monthly Trading Permit
Fee according to the following table:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Full Service MEI Ports provide Market Makers with the
ability to send Market Maker simple and complex quotes, eQuotes, and
quote purge messages to the MIAX System. Full Service MEI Ports are
also capable of receiving administrative information. Market Makers
are limited to two Full Service MEI Ports per matching engine. See
Fee Schedule, note 27.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Market Maker assignments (the lesser of the applicable
                                                                      measurements below) [Omega]
      Type of Trading Permit          Monthly MIAX    ----------------------------------------------------------
                                   Trading Permit Fee                                     % of national average
                                                                  Per class                   daily volume
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Market Maker (includes RMM, LMM,            $7,000.00  Up to 10 Classes...............  Up to 20% of Classes by
 PLMM).                                                                                volume.
                                            12,000.00  Up to 40 Classes...............  Up to 35% of Classes by
                                                                                volume.
                                          * 17,000.00  Up to 100 Classes..............  Up to 50% of Classes by
                                                                                volume.
                                          * 22,000.00  Over 100 Classes...............  Over 50% of Classes by
                                                                                volume up to all
                                                                                Classes listed on MIAX.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Omega] Excludes Proprietary Products.
* For these Monthly MIAX Trading Permit Fee levels, if the Market Maker's total monthly executed volume during
  the relevant month is less than 0.060% of the total monthly executed volume reported by OCC in the market
  maker account type for MIAX-listed option classes for that month, then the fee will be $15,500 instead of the
  fee otherwise applicable to such level.

    MIAX proposes that the waiver for the monthly Trading Permit fee
for Market Makers that trade solely in Proprietary Products (including
options on SPIKES) will be extended from December 31, 2019 to June 30,
2020, which the Exchange proposes to state in the Fee Schedule. The
purpose of this proposed change is to continue to provide an incentive
for Market Makers to provide liquidity in Proprietary Products on the
Exchange, which should result in increasing potential order flow and
volume in Proprietary Products, including options on SPIKES. Even
though the Exchange is proposing to extend the waiver of this
particular fee for Market Makers trading solely in Proprietary Products
from December 31, 2019 until June 30, 2020, the overall structure of
the fee is outlined in the Fee Schedule so that there is general
awareness by potential Members seeking a Trading Permit on the Exchange
that the Exchange intends to assess such a fee after June 30, 2020.

    The Exchange also proposes that Market Makers who trade Proprietary
Products (including options on SPIKES) along with multi-listed classes
will continue to not have Proprietary Products (including SPIKES)
counted toward those Market Makers' class assignment count or
percentage of total national average daily volume. This exclusion is
noted with the symbol ``[Omega]'' following the table that shows the
monthly Trading Permit Fees currently assessed for Market Makers in
Section 3)b) of the Fee Schedule.
API Testing and Certification Fee
    The Exchange assesses an API Testing and Certification fee to all
Members depending upon the type of Member. An API makes it possible for
Members' software to communicate with MIAX software applications, and
is subject to Members testing with, and certification by, MIAX. The
Exchange offers four types of interfaces: (i) The Financial Information
Exchange Port (``FIX Port''),\11\ which enables the FIX Port user
(typically an EEM or a Market Maker) to submit simple and complex
orders electronically to MIAX; (ii) the MEI Port, which enables Market
Makers to submit simple and complex electronic quotes to MIAX; (iii)
the Clearing Trade Drop Port (``CTD Port''),\12\ which provides real-
time trade clearing information to the participants to a trade on MIAX
and to the participants' respective clearing firms; and (iv) the FIX
Drop Copy Port (``FXD Port''),\13\ which provides a copy of real-time
trade execution, correction and cancellation information through a FIX
Port to any number of FIX Ports designated by an EEM to receive such
messages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ A FIX Port is an interface with MIAX systems that enables
the Port user (typically an Electronic Exchange Member or a Market
Maker) to submit simple and complex orders electronically to MIAX.
See Fee Schedule, note 24.
    \12\ Clearing Trade Drop (``CTD'') provides Exchange members
with real-time clearing trade updates. The updates include the
Member's clearing trade messages on a low latency, real-time basis.
The trade messages are routed to a Member's connection containing
certain information. The information includes, among other things,
the following: (i) Trade date and time; (ii) symbol information;
(iii) trade price/size information; (iv) Member type (for example,
and without limitation, Market Maker, Electronic Exchange Member,
Broker-Dealer); (v) Exchange Member Participant Identifier
(``MPID'') for each side of the transaction, including Clearing
Member MPID; and (vi) strategy specific information for complex
transactions. CTD Port Fees will be assessed in any month the Member
is credentialed to use the CTD Port in the production environment.
See Fee Schedule, Section 5)d)iii.
    \13\ The FIX Drop Copy Port (``FXD'') is a messaging interface
that will provide a copy of real-time trade execution, trade
correction and trade cancellation information for simple and complex
orders to FIX Drop Copy Port users who subscribe to the service. FIX
Drop Copy Port users are those users who are designated by an EEM to
receive the information and the information is restricted for use by
the EEM only. FXD Port Fees will be assessed in any month the Member
is credentialed to use the FXD Port in the production environment.
See Fee Schedule, Section 5)d)iv.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    API Testing and Certification fees for Market Makers are assessed
(i) initially per API for CTD and MEI in the month the Market Maker has
been credentialed to use one or more ports in the production
environment for the tested API and the Market Maker has been assigned
to quote in one or more classes, and (ii) each time a Market Maker
initiates a change to its system that requires testing and
certification. API Testing and Certification fees will not be assessed
in situations where the Exchange initiates a mandatory change to the
Exchange's system that requires testing and certification. The Exchange
currently assesses a Market Maker an API Testing and Certification fee
of $2,500.00. The API Testing and Certification fees represent costs
incurred by the Exchange as it works with each Member for testing and
certifying that the Member's software systems communicate properly with
MIAX's interfaces.
    MIAX proposes to extend the waiver of the API Testing and
Certification fee for Market Makers that trade solely in Proprietary
Products (including options on SPIKES) from December 31, 2019 until
June 30, 2020, which the Exchange proposes to state in the Fee
Schedule. The purpose of this proposed change is to continue to provide
an incentive for potential Market Makers to develop software
applications to trade in Proprietary Products, including options on
SPIKES. Even though the Exchange is proposing to extend the waiver of
this particular fee for Market Makers who trade solely in Proprietary
Products from December 31, 2019 until June 30, 2020, the overall
structure of the fee is outlined in the Fee Schedule so that there is
general awareness that the Exchange intends to assess such a fee after
June 30, 2020.
MEI Port Fees
    MIAX provides four (4) Port types, including (i) the FIX Port,
which enables the FIX Port user (typically an EEM or a Market Maker) to
submit simple and complex orders electronically to MIAX; (ii) the MEI
Port, which enables Market Makers to submit simple and complex
electronic quotes to MIAX; (iii) the CTD Port, which provides real-time
trade clearing information to the participants to a trade on MIAX and
to the participants' respective clearing firms; and (iv) the FXD Port,
which provides a copy of real-time trade execution, correction and
cancellation information through a FIX Port to any number of FIX Ports
designated by an EEM to receive such messages.
    MIAX assesses monthly MEI Port Fees to Market Makers in each month
the Member has been credentialed to use the MEI Port in the production
environment and has been assigned to quote in at least one class. The
amount of the monthly MEI Port Fee is based upon the number of classes
in which the Market Maker was assigned to quote on any given day within
the calendar month, and upon the class volume percentages set forth in
the above table. The class volume percentage is based on the total
national average daily volume in classes listed on MIAX in the prior
calendar quarter. Newly listed option classes are excluded from the
calculation of the monthly MEI Port Fee until the calendar quarter
following their listing, at which time the newly listed option classes
will be included in both the per class count and the percentage of
total national average daily volume. The Exchange assesses MIAX Market
Makers the monthly MEI Port Fee based on the greatest number of classes
listed on MIAX that the MIAX Market Maker was assigned to quote in on
any given day within a calendar month and the applicable fee rate that
is the lesser of either the per class basis or percentage of total
national average daily volume measurement. MIAX assesses MEI Port Fees
on Market Makers according to the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Market Maker assignments (the lesser of the applicable measurements
                                                                     below) [Omega]
        Monthly MIAX MEI Fees         --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                % of national average daily
                                                      Per class                              volume
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$5,000.00............................  Up to 5 Classes........................  Up to 10% of Classes by volume.
10,000.00............................  Up to 10 Classes.......................  Up to 20% of Classes by volume.
14,000.00............................  Up to 40 Classes.......................  Up to 35% of Classes by volume.

17,500.00 *..........................  Up to 100 Classes......................  Up to 50% of Classes by volume.
20,500.00 *..........................  Over 100 Classes.......................  Over 50% of Classes by volume up
                                                                                to all Classes listed on MIAX.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Omega] Excludes Proprietary Products.
* For these Monthly MIAX MEI Fees levels, if the Market Maker's total monthly executed volume during the
  relevant month is less than 0.060% of the total monthly executed volume reported by OCC in the market maker
  account type for MIAX-listed option classes for that month, then the fee will be $14,500 instead of the fee
  otherwise applicable to such level.

    MIAX proposes to extend the waiver of the monthly MEI Port Fee for
Market Makers that trade solely in Proprietary Products (including
options on SPIKES) from December 31, 2019 until June 30, 2020, which
the Exchange proposes to state in the Fee Schedule. The purpose of this
proposal is to continue to provide an incentive to Market Makers to
connect to MIAX through the MEI Port such that they will be able to
trade in MIAX Proprietary Products. Even though the Exchange is
proposing to extend the waiver of this particular fee for Market Makers
trading solely in Proprietary Products until June 30, 2020, the overall
structure of the fee is outlined in the Fee Schedule so that there is
general awareness that the Exchange intends to assess such a fee after
June 30, 2020.
    The Exchange notes that for the purposes of this proposed change,
other Market Makers who trade MIAX Proprietary Products (including
options on SPIKES) along with multi-listed classes will continue to not
have Proprietary Products (including SPIKES) counted toward those
Market Makers' class assignment count or percentage of total national
average daily volume. This exclusion is noted by the symbol ``[Omega]''
following the table that shows the monthly MEI Port Fees currently
assessed for Market Makers in Section 5)d)ii) of the Fee Schedule.
    The proposed extension of the fee waivers are targeted at market
participants, particularly market makers, who are not currently members
of MIAX, who may be interested in being a Market Maker in Proprietary
Products on the Exchange. The Exchange estimates that there are fewer
than ten (10) such market participants that could benefit from the
extension of these fee waivers. The proposed extension of the fee
waivers does not apply differently to different sizes of market
participants, however the fee waivers do only apply to Market Makers
(and not EEMs).
    Market Makers, unlike other market participants, take on a number
of obligations, including quoting obligations that other market
participants do not have. Further, Market Makers have added market
making and regulatory requirements, which normally do not apply to
other market participants. For example, Market Makers have obligations
to maintain continuous markets, engage in a course of dealings
reasonably calculated to contribute to the maintenance of a fair and
orderly market, and to not make bids or offers or enter into
transactions that are inconsistent with a course of dealing.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes it is reasonable and not unfairly
discriminatory to continue to offer the fee waivers to Market Makers
because the Exchange is seeking additional liquidity providers for
Proprietary Products, in order to enhance liquidity and spreads in
Proprietary Products, which is traditionally provided by Market Makers,
as opposed to EEMs.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \14\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \15\ in
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees
and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using
its facilities. The Exchange also believes the proposal furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers and dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposal to extend the fee waiver
period for certain non-transaction fees for Market Makers in
Proprietary Products is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees
because the proposal continues to waive non-transaction fees for a
limited period of time in order to enable the Exchange to improve its
overall competitiveness and strengthen its market quality for all
market participants in MIAX's Proprietary Products, including options
on SPIKES. The Exchange believe the proposed extension of the fee
waivers is fair and equitable and not unreasonably discriminatory
because it applies to all market participants not currently registered
as Market Makers at the Exchange. Any market participant may choose to
satisfy the additional requirements and obligations of being a Market
Maker and trade solely in Proprietary Products in order to qualify for
the fee waivers.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed extension of the fee
waivers is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory for Market Makers
as compared to EEMs because Market Makers, unlike other market
participants, take on a number of obligations, including quoting
obligations that other market participants do not have. Further, Market
Makers have added market making and regulatory requirements, which
normally do not apply to other market participants. For example, Market
Makers have obligations to maintain continuous markets, engage in a
course of dealings reasonably calculated to contribute to the
maintenance of a fair and orderly market, and to not make bids or
offers or enter into transactions that are inconsistent with a course
of dealing.
    The Exchange believes it is reasonable and equitable to continue to
waive the one-time Membership Application Fee, monthly Trading Permit
Fee, API Testing and Certification Fee, and monthly MEI Port Fee for
Market Makers that trade solely in Proprietary Products (including
options on SPIKES) until June 30, 2020, since the waiver of such fees
provides incentives to interested market participants to trade in
Proprietary Products. This should result in increasing potential order
flow and liquidity in MIAX Proprietary Products, including options on
SPIKES.
    The Exchange believes it is reasonable and equitable to continue to
waive the API Testing and Certification fee assessable to Market Makers
that trade

solely in Proprietary Products (including options on SPIKES) until June
30, 2020, since the waiver of such fees provides incentives to
interested Members to develop and test their APIs sooner. Determining
system operability with the Exchange's system will in turn provide MIAX
with potential order flow and liquidity providers in Proprietary
Products.
    The Exchange believes it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory that Market Makers who trade in Proprietary Products
along with multi-listed classes will continue to not have Proprietary
Products counted toward those Market Makers' class assignment count or
percentage of total national average daily volume for monthly Trading
Permit Fees and monthly MEI Port Fees in order to incentivize existing
Market Makers who currently trade in multi-listed classes to also trade
in Proprietary Products, without incurring certain additional fees.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed extension of the fee
waivers constitutes an equitable allocation of reasonable fees and
other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its
facilities. The proposed extension of the fee waivers means that all
prospective market makers that wish to become Market Maker Members of
the Exchange and quote solely in Proprietary Products may do so and
have the above-mentioned fees waived until June 30, 2020. The proposed
extension of the fee waivers will continue to not apply to potential
EEMs because the Exchange is seeking to enhance the quality of its
markets in Proprietary Products through introducing more competition
among Market Makers in Proprietary Products. In order to increase the
competition, the Exchange believes that it must continue to waive entry
type fees for such Market Makers. EEMs do not provide the benefit of
enhanced liquidity which is provided by Market Makers, therefore the
Exchange believes it is reasonable and not unfairly discriminatory to
continue to only offer the proposed fee waivers to Market Makers (and
not EEMs). Further, the Exchange believes it is reasonable and not
unfairly discriminatory to continue to exclude Proprietary Products
from an existing Market Maker's permit fees and port fees, in order to
incentive such Market Makers to quote in Proprietary Products. The
amount of a Market Maker's permit and port fee is determined by the
number of classes quoted and volume of the Market Maker. By excluding
Proprietary Products from such fees, the Exchange is able to
incentivize Market Makers to quote in Proprietary Products. EEMs do not
pay permit and port fees based on the classes traded or volume, so the
Exchange believes it is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly
discriminatory to only offer the exclusion to Market Makers (and not
EEMs).

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Intra-Market Competition
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to extend certain of the
non-transaction fee waivers until June 30, 2020 for Market Makers in
Proprietary Products would increase intra-market competition by
incentivizing new potential Market Makers to quote in Proprietary
Products, which will enhance the quality of quoting and increase the
volume of contracts in Proprietary Products traded on MIAX. To the
extent that this purpose is achieved, all the Exchange's market
participants should benefit from the improved market liquidity for the
Exchange's Proprietary Products. Enhanced market quality and increased
transaction volume in Proprietary Products that results from the
anticipated increase in Market Maker activity on the Exchange will
benefit all market participants and improve competition on the
Exchange.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intra-market competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the
proposed changes for each separate type of market participant (new
Market Makers and existing Market Makers) will be assessed equally to
all such market participants. While different fees are assessed to
different market participants in some circumstances, these different
market participants have different obligations and different
circumstances as discussed above. For example, Market Makers have
quoting obligations that other market participants (such as EEMs) do
not have.
Inter-Market Competition
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on inter-market competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the
proposed extension of the fee waivers apply only to the Exchange's
Proprietary Products (including options on SPIKES), which are traded
exclusively on the Exchange.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor 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,\16\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \17\ thereunder.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change,
the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such
action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether
the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \17\ 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-MIAX-2019-53 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2019-53. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements

with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2019-53, and should be submitted on
or before January 31, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-00204 Filed 1-9-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Appendix C: Model Information and History

Industrial Source Complex 3 (ISC3)

ISC3 (  HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_alt.htm"
http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_alt.htm ) was developed by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a replacement for ISC2.
ISC3 is a steady-state Gaussian plume model which can be used to assess
pollutant concentrations from a wide variety of sources including point
and area sources.  ISC3 operates in both long-term and short-term modes.
 OPP has operated the model in short-term mode in its fumigant
assessments and used the designation ISCST3.  ISCST3 allows for three
different types of outputs: (1) summaries of high values (highest,
second highest, etc.) by receptor for each averaging period and source
group combination, (2) summaries of overall maximum values (e.g., the
maximum 50) for each averaging period and source group combination, and
(3) tables of concurrent values summarized by receptor for each
averaging period and source group combination for each day of data
processed. The third output option was used when OPP ran the ISCST3
model.  These outputs can be produced all the way down to an hourly
basis.

Up until the end of 2005, ISC3 was the Agency’s recommended air
dispersion model for steady state sources.  It should be noted that ISC3
can still be used as an alternative to the recommended models in
Appendix W in regulatory applications with case-by-case justification
(see Appendix W to 40 CFR Part 51, Section 3.2).

The ISCST3 model allows for the conservative assessment of
concentrations of fumigants coming off of treated fields under specific
meteorological and application conditions.  However, one of the main
weaknesses of ISCST3 is in its treatment of calm periods.  A calm period
in ISCST3 is when the wind speed is less than 1.0 m/s.  When this
occurs, ISCST3 assumes that there is no wind blowing and assigns a wind
speed of 0.0 m/s and this can result in a misrepresentation of the
fumigant plume.  For the Agency’s fumigant assessments, ISCST3 was run
using the “regulatory option” for addressing calm periods.

American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency
Regulatory Model (AERMOD)

AERMOD (  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_prefrec.htm#aermod"
http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_prefrec.htm#aermod ) was
developed by American Meteorological Society (AMS) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  ISC was replaced by AERMOD as
the preferred air dispersion model for near-field, steady state sources
in the Agency’s Guidelines on Air Quality Models as of December 9,
2005.  AERMOD is a Gaussian plume model which can be used to assess
pollutant concentrations from a wide variety of sources including point
and area sources.  AERMOD incorporates air dispersion based on planetary
boundary layer turbulence structure and scaling concepts, including
treatment of both surface and elevated sources, and both simple and
complex terrain.  The AERMOD modeling system consists of two
pre-processors and the dispersion model.  The meteorological
preprocessor AERMET, uses meteorological data and surface
characteristics to calculate boundary layer parameters (e.g. mixing
height, friction velocity, etc.) needed to run AERMOD.  The terrain
pre-processor AERMAP both characterizes the terrain and generates
receptor grids for AERMOD.  AERMOD allows for three different types of
outputs: (1) summaries of high values (highest, second highest, etc.) by
receptor for each averaging period and source group combination, (2)
summaries of overall maximum values (e.g., the maximum 50) for each
averaging period and source group combination, and (3) tables of
concurrent values summarized by receptor for each averaging period and
source group combination for each day of data processed.  These outputs
can be produced all the way down to an hourly basis.

As the replacement to ISC3, AERMOD currently contains new or improved
algorithms for: 1) dispersion in both the convective and stable boundary
layers; 2) plume rise and buoyancy; 3) plume penetration into elevated
inversions; 4) computation of vertical profiles of wind, turbulence, and
temperature; 5) the urban nighttime boundary layer; 6) the treatment of
receptors on all types of terrain from the surface up to and above the
plume height; 7) the treatment of building wake effects; 8) an improved
approach for characterizing the fundamental boundary layer parameters;
and 9) the treatment of plume meander.  Many of these improvements have
little to no effect on OPP’s approach to modeling fumigant
applications as area sources.

AERMOD allows for the conservative assessment of concentrations of
fumigants coming off of treated fields under specific meteorological and
application conditions.  However, AERMOD has a similar weakness to ISC3
in its treatment of calm periods.  A calm period in AERMOD is when the
wind speed is less than 1.0 m/s.  When this occurs, AERMOD assumes that
there is no wind blowing and assigns a wind speed of 0.0 m/s and this
can result in a misrepresentation of the fumigant plume.  Also, AERMOD
does not allow for the probabilistic treatment of variables such as the
meteorological conditions.

CALPUFF

CALPUFF (  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_prefrec.htm#calpuff"
http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_prefrec.htm#calpuff ) is a
non-steady-state meteorological and air quality modeling system
developed by the Atmospheric Studies Group at TRC Solutions.  It is
maintained by the model developers and distributed by TRC (  HYPERLINK
"http://www.src.com/html/calpuff/calpuff1.htm"
http://www.src.com/html/calpuff/calpuff1.htm ).  CALPUFF v.5 has been
adopted by the Agency in its Guideline on Air Quality Models as the
preferred model for assessing long range transport of pollutants and on
a case-by-case basis for certain near-field applications involving
complex meteorological conditions (i.e., non-steady state).  The
modeling system consists of three main components and a set of
preprocessing and postprocessing programs.   The main components of the
modeling system are CALMET (a diagnostic 3-dimensional meteorological
model), CALPUFF (an air quality dispersion model), and CALPOST (a
postprocessing package).

The output files that CALPUFF creates for each run include unformatted
data files containing grids of time-averaged concentrations,
time-averaged dry deposition fluxes, and time-averaged wet deposition
fluxes.  These outputs in CALPUFF v.5 can be produced all the way down
to an hourly basis.  The post-processing program CALPOST is designed to
produce ranked tabulations of averages of selected concentration data
from these data files. CALPOST writes a text file containing the input
data summary and output tables.

Although CALPUFF v.5 is on the Agency’s guideline for air models,
there is also currently a CALPUFF v.6 that has not yet been reviewed by
the Agency.  CALPUFF v.6 includes a number of technical enhancements
over v.5 but the major one that could have effects on OPP’s modeling
of fumigant emissions is the option to use subhourly (i.e., 1 minute, 5
minute, etc.) meteorological data.

Probabilistic Exposure and Risk model for FUMigants (PERFUM)

PERFUM (  HYPERLINK
"http://www.exponent.com/practices/health/PERFUM.html"
http://www.exponent.com/practices/health/PERFUM.html ) was developed to
address the issue of bystander exposures following agricultural
applications of fumigants.  The core of the PERFUM modeling system is
the US EPA dispersion model ISCST3 which at the time PERFUM was
developed was the Agency’s recommended air dispersion model for steady
state sources.  ISCST3 as described above calculates concentrations but
is not designed to determine a buffer zone.  PERFUM was designed to
specifically take the ISCST3 outputs and use them to produce buffer zone
outputs in a distributional format.

PERFUM allows users to develop an understanding of the distributions of
potential bystander exposures and thus more fully characterize the range
of risks resulting to bystanders around treated fields.  ISCST3 is an
integral part of the PERFUM model and the basic physics and code of
ISCST3 remain unchanged.  PERFUM essentially provides ISCST3 with daily
meteorological data over 5 years as well as flux estimates within the
uncertainty of those data.  PERFUM then uses this information to create
distributional outputs for pre-defined receptor locations.

Fumigant Emissions Modeling System (FEMS)

FEMS (http://www.sullivan-environmental.com) was developed to address
the issue of bystander exposures following agricultural applications of
fumigants.  FEMS allows the user to define a number of options prior to
running the model including: the fumigant to be applied, the frequency
of fumigation, the sealing method employed, field size and shape,
consecutive day/contiguous field applications, application season, the
averaging time for the concentrations, and the dispersion model used
(ISCST3, CALPUFF v.5, or CALPUFF v.6).  FEMS also allows the user to
include Monte Carlo treatments of all the key model inputs like
meteorological conditions, emissions data, day the application starts,
etc.

Once the core dispersion model is selected, FEMS simulates the
application of a fumigant and it’s off-gassing over a 4 day simulation
using 4 hour time steps.  The model estimates fumigant concentrations at
various receptors beyond the perimeter of the applied field that are
matched to the averaging time of interest for the user.  Aside from
estimating the fumigant concentrations, FEMS keeps track of the number
of times that concentrations exceed the concentration of concern at each
receptor.

Once FEMS completes the modeling simulation, the distribution of
concentrations is computed for each receptor.  FEMS produces two main
outputs.  The first is a frequency distribution that looks at the number
of times that concentrations exceed the concentration of concern at each
receptor.  The second involves establishing the distributions of
concentrations for each receptor and then taking the maximum number of
periods per averaging time of interest above the concentration of
concern and computing them as a function of distance from the field.
Buffer zones are then established based on the most conservative
concentrations that were modeled as a function of distance.

Soil Fumigant Exposure Assessment System (SOFEA)

SOFEA (http://www.epa.gov/oscpmont/sap/meetings/2004/index.htm) was
developed to evaluate and manage human inhalation exposure potential
associated with agricultural applications of fumigants.  SOFEA
calculates fumigant concentrations in air arising from volatility losses
from treated fields for entire agricultural regions using multiple
sources (treated fields), GIS information, agronomic specific variables,
user specified buffer zones and field re-entry intervals.  SOFEA uses a
modified version of ISCST3 as its dispersion model.   SOFEA also uses
Monte Carlo techniques to vary the following parameters: weather
information, field size, application date, application rate, application
method, pesticide degradation rates in air, sealing method, field
re-treatment, and buffer setbacks.

Multi-year, multiple field simulations can be conducted with SOFEA using
random field placement in all agricultural areas or by selectively
placing fields in historical or prospective use areas.  Regional land
use information can be used to refine the placement of treated fields,
dispersion calculations, and exposure assessments.  SOFEA has been
previously used for regulatory decision making in California.

Page   PAGE  1  of   NUMPAGES  4


"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 09/27/2007 05:25 PM

To

"Baer, Mitchell"<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Farrell, Amy L." <EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Laur, Michele - Washington, DC" <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, "Schwab, Margo"<EMAIL_ADDRESS> cc

Subject

RIA NAAQS Workshop

Hi All,

Ron has asked that I get a head count for those that are planning on heading to RTP for the naaqs ria workshop.

Please let me or Ron know asap if you plan to attend.  Are there others from your agency that would be interested in attending?

Cheers,

Rob


[Federal Register: August 3, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 149)]
[Notices]
[Page 43264]
[DOCID:fr03au07-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP00-632-024]

Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Errata Fuel Report

July 27, 2007.
    Take notice that on July 19, 2007, Dominion Transmission, Inc.
(DTI) tendered for filing a revised Workpaper 3 to its June 27, 2007
informational fuel report.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing 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. Such protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a
protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is 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 docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 6, 2007.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-15075 Filed 8-2-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Agenda for the May 17, 2006 Call with NARC on the SAFETEA-LU Conformity
Rulemaking

Introductions

Opportunity for questions on the February 14, 2006 interim SAFETEA-LU
conformity guidance

How EPA is planning to address:

Conformity Redeterminations

Frequency

Lapse Grace Period

Conformity SIPs

Horizons

TCM Substitution

Feedback on our plans

General Plans for the Rulemaking

Also, here is the link to the SAFETEA-LU interim conformity guidance:
HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/420b06901.pdf"
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/420b06901.pdf

Major Topics of  Discussion During the May 17, 2006 Call with NARC and
Its Members on the SAFETEA-LU Conformity Rulemaking

Participants: EPA, FHWA, FTA, NARC, SANDAG, OKI, DRCOG and NOACA

Major Topics of Discussion:

Overview of the transportation conformity-related Clean Air Act
amendments made by SAFETEA-LU

General plans and timeline for the SAFETEA-LU conformity rulemaking

Questions asked by the participants:

If an MPO’s transportation plan expires, does the MPO still have a
transportation plan?

On what date does an MPO’s transportation plan or TIP expire (e.g.,
the date that FHWA/FTA make their conformity determination)?

Will EPA update its existing conformity SIP guidance?

Have any MPOs indicated that they are considering making an election to
shorten their horizons?

If an MPO is planning on adopting a new transportation plan in late-2007
or early-2008, is there anything they should be worried about?


[Federal Register: September 29, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 188)]
[Notices]
[Page 60097-60102]
[DOCID:fr29se10-58]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP10-486-000]

Colorado Interstate Gas Company; Notice of Intent To Prepare An
Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Spruce Hill Air Blending
Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

September 21, 2010.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the Spruce Hill Air Blending
Project involving construction and operation of facilities by Colorado
Interstate Gas Company (CIG) in Douglas County, Colorado. This EA will
be used by the Commission in its decision-making process to determine
whether the project is in the public convenience and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies on the project. Your input will help the Commission staff
determine what issues need to be evaluated in the EA. Please note that
the scoping period will close on October 21, 2010.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives are asked to notify their constituents of this proposed
project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, you may be contacted
by a pipeline company representative about

the acquisition of an easement to construct, operate, and maintain the
proposed facilities. The company would seek to negotiate a mutually
acceptable agreement. However, if the project is approved by the
Commission, that approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain.
Therefore, if easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, the
pipeline company could initiate condemnation proceedings where
compensation would be determined in accordance with state law.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?'' was attached to the
project notice CIG provided to landowners. This fact sheet addresses a
number of typically-asked questions, including the use of eminent
domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings. It is
also available for viewing on the FERC Web site (http://www.ferc.gov).

Summary of the Proposed Project

    CIG proposes to construct and operate a new air blending station in
Douglas County, Colorado. The Spruce Hill Air Blending Project would
increase CIG's firm natural gas transportation capacity to 50,000
dekatherms per day (Dth/day) to meet contractual agreements with Black
Hills Utility Holdings, Inc. (Black Hill) as a result of Black Hill's
anticipated demand growth. According to CIG, its project would reduce
the input factor of the gas to a level that conforms to the gas quality
specifications in CIG's Tariff for its existing Valley Line, to which
the blended gas would be discharged.
    The Spruce Hill Air Blending Project would consist of the
following:
     An air blending compressor station (the Spruce Hill Air
Blending Station) containing a 215-, a 390-, and a 500-horsepower air
compressor;
     A back-pressure regulator;
     Air blending controls and instrumentation;
     A gas heater;
     Auxiliary facilities and piping;
     Modifications to the existing Spruce Hill Meter Station;
     An interconnection at the air blending station between the
existing Spruce Hill Meter Station and CIG's existing Line No. 212A;
and
     A powerline connection within CIG's 35-acre parcel.
    The general location of the project facilities is shown in Appendix
1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The appendices referenced in this notice are not being
printed in the Federal Register. Copies of appendices were sent to
all those receiving this notice in the mail and are available at
http://www.ferc.gov using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the
Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, or call<PHONE_NUMBER>. For instructions on
connecting to eLibrary, refer to the last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the proposed facilities would disturb about 5.5
acres of land for the air blending station and its auxiliary
facilities. Following construction, about 3.3 acres would be maintained
for permanent operation of the project's facilities; the remaining
acreage would be restored and allowed to revert to former uses. All
construction would occur within a 35-acre land parcel owned by CIG.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
\2\ to discover and address concerns the public may have about
proposals. This process is referred to as ``scoping''. The main goal of
the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public
comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. All comments
received will be considered during the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``We'', ``us'', and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction and operation of the proposed project under these
general headings:
     Geology and soils;
     Land use;
     Water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
     Cultural resources;
     Vegetation and wildlife;
     Air quality and noise;
     Endangered and threatened species; and
     Public safety.
    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed
project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to
lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    Our independent analysis of the issues will be presented in the EA.
The EA will be placed in the public record and, depending on the
comments received during the scoping process, may be published and
distributed to the public. A comment period will be allotted if the EA
is published for review. We will consider all comments on the EA before
we make our recommendations to the Commission. To ensure your comments
are considered, please carefully follow the instructions in the Public
Participation section below.
    With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction and/or
special expertise with respect to environmental issues to formally
cooperate with us in the preparation of the EA. These agencies may
choose to participate once they have evaluated the proposal relative to
their responsibilities. Agencies that would like to request cooperating
agency status should follow the instructions for filing comments
provided under the Public Participation section of this notice.

Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultation
with the Colorado State Historic Preservation Office, and to solicit
their views and those of other government agencies, interested Indian
tribes, and the public on the project's potential effects on historic
properties.\3\ We will define the project-specific Area of Potential
Effects (APE) in consultation with the SHPO as the project is further
developed. On natural gas facility projects, the APE at a minimum
encompasses all areas subject to ground disturbance (examples include
construction right-of-way, contractor/pipe storage yards, compressor
stations, and access roads). Our EA for this project will document our
findings on the impacts on historic properties and summarize the status
of consultations under section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Historic
properties are defined in those regulations as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register for Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the project. Your comments should focus on
the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and
measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific
your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your
comments are timely and properly recorded, please send your comments so
that they will be received in

Washington, DC on or before October 21, 2010.
    For your convenience, there are three methods which you can use to
submit your comments to the Commission. In all instances please
reference the project docket number (CP10-486-000) with your
submission. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and
has expert eFiling staff available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's Web site at http://
www.ferc.gov under the link to Documents and Filings. An 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 Web site at http://
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. A comment on a particular project is
considered a ``Comment on a Filing''; or
    (3) You may file a paper copy of your comments at the following
address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits
comments on the project. We will update the environmental mailing list
as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related
to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
proposed project.
    If the EA is published for distribution, copies will be sent to the
environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you would
prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD
version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please
return the attached Information Request (Appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are
included in the User's Guide under the ``e-Filing'' link on the
Commission's Web site.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Click
on the eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits, in the Docket Number field
(i.e., CP10-486). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range.
For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/
EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29SE10.000

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29SE10.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29SE10.002

[FR Doc. 2010-24233 Filed 9-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-C