[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 245 (Friday, December 20, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70186-70187]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26588]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10002-55-OW]

Notice of Availability of the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
Louisiana Trustee Implementation Group Draft Restoration Plan and
Environmental Assessment #6: Wetlands, Coastal, and Nearshore Habitats

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability; request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) and the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Federal and State natural
resource trustee agencies for the Louisiana Trustee Implementation
Group (Louisiana TIG) prepared a Draft Restoration Plan and
Environmental Assessment #6: Wetlands, Coastal, and Nearshore Habitats
(Draft RP/EA). The Draft RP/EA describes and proposes restoration
project alternatives considered by the Louisiana TIG to restore and
conserve wetlands, coastal, and nearshore habitats injured as a result
of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The Louisiana TIG evaluated these
alternatives under criteria set forth in the OPA natural resource
damage assessment (NRDA) regulations, and also evaluated the
environmental consequences of the restoration alternatives in
accordance with the NEPA. The proposed projects are consistent with the
restoration alternatives selected in the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
Final Programmatic Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan/Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement (PDARP/PEIS). This notice informs the
public of the availability of the Draft RP/EA and provides an
opportunity for the public to submit comments on the document.

DATES: The Louisiana TIG will consider public comments received on or
before January 21, 2020.
    Public Webinar: The Louisiana TIG will conduct a public webinar on
January 8, 2020, at 12 p.m. Central Standard Time to facilitate public
review and comment on the Draft RP/EA. The public webinar will include
a presentation on the Draft RP/EA. Public comments will be taken during
the public webinar. The public may register for the webinar at https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/8527752114619805195. After
registering, participants will receive a confirmation email with
instructions for joining the webinar. The presentation will be posted
on the web shortly after the webinar is conducted.

ADDRESSES:
    Obtaining Documents: You may download the Draft RP/EA at any of the
following sites:
     http://www.gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov;
     http://www.la-dwh.com.
    Alternatively, you may request a CD of the Draft RP/EA (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). You may also view the document at any of
the public facilities listed at http://www.gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov.
    Submitting Comments: You may submit comments on the Draft RP/EA by
one of the following methods:
     Via the Web: http://www.gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov/restoration-areas/louisiana.
     Via U.S. Mail: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box
29649, Atlanta, GA 30345.
     During the Public Webinar: Comments may be provided by the
public during the webinar on January 8, 2020.
    Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
Louisiana TIG may publish any comment received on the document. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The Louisiana TIG will generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the
web, cloud, or other file sharing system). Please be aware that your
entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will
become part of the public record. Please note that mailed comments must
be postmarked on or before the comment deadline of 30 days following
publication of this notice to be considered.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

 Louisiana--Joann Hicks,<PHONE_NUMBER>
 EPA--Douglas Jacobson,<PHONE_NUMBER>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Introduction

    On April 20, 2010, the mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater
Horizon, which was being used to drill a well for BP Exploration and
Production, Inc. (BP), in the Macondo prospect (Mississippi Canyon 252-
MC252), experienced a significant explosion, fire, and subsequent
sinking in the Gulf of Mexico, resulting in the release of an
unprecedented volume of oil and other discharges from the rig and from
the wellhead on the seabed. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill is the
largest offshore oil spill in U.S. history, discharging millions of
barrels of oil over a period of 87 days. The Trustees conducted the
natural resource damage assessment for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill
under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.). Under the
OPA, Federal and State agencies act as trustees on behalf of the public
to assess natural resource injuries and losses and

to determine the actions required to compensate the public for those
injuries and losses. The OPA further instructs the designated trustees
to develop and implement a plan for the restoration, rehabilitation,
replacement, or acquisition of the equivalent of the injured natural
resources under their trusteeship, including the loss of use and
services from those resources from the time of injury until the time
restoration to baseline (the resource quality and conditions that would
exist if the spill had not occurred) is complete.
    The Deepwater Horizon oil spill Trustees are:
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA);
     U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), as represented by
the National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bureau
of Land Management;
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), on
behalf of the U.S. Department of Commerce;
     U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA);
     State of Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration
Authority (CPRA), Oil Spill Coordinator's Office (LOSCO), Department of
Environmental Quality (LDEQ), Department of Wildlife and Fisheries
(LDWF), and Department of Natural Resources (LDNR);
     State of Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality;
     State of Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural
Resources and Geological Survey of Alabama;
     State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection
and Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission; and
     State of Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, General Land
Office, and Commission on Environmental Quality.
    On April 4, 2016, the Trustees reached and finalized a settlement
of their natural resource damage claims with BP in a Consent Decree
approved by the United States District Court for the Eastern District
of Louisiana. Pursuant to that Consent Decree, restoration projects in
the Louisiana Restoration Area are chosen and managed by the Louisiana
TIG. The Louisiana TIG is composed of the following Trustees: CPRA,
LOSCO, LDEQ, LDWF, LDNR, EPA, DOI, NOAA, USDA.

Background

    In a June 2019 notice posted at http://www.gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov, the Louisiana TIG requested public
input on restoration project ideas in Louisiana within the Wetlands,
Coastal, and Nearshore Habitats restoration type. The Louisiana TIG
reviewed and considered these restoration project ideas.

Overview of the Draft RP/EA

    The Draft RP/EA is being released in accordance with the OPA, NRDA
implementing regulations, and the NEPA. In the Draft RP/EA, the
Louisiana TIG presents to the public their plan to restore and conserve
wetlands, coastal, and nearshore habitats injured by the Deepwater
Horizon oil spill. The Draft RP/EA evaluates a total of four
restoration project alternatives within the Wetlands, Coastal, and
Nearshore Habitats restoration type. Of those, three are identified as
preferred alternatives.
    The Draft RP/EA proposes the following preferred project
alternatives:
     West Grand Terre Beach Nourishment and Stabilization;
     Golden Triangle Marsh Creation; and
     Biloxi Marsh Living Shoreline.
    The Draft RP/EA also evaluates a no action alternative. One or more
alternatives may be selected for implementation by the Louisiana TIG.
The proposed projects are intended to continue the process of using
restoration funding to restore and conserve wetlands, coastal, and
nearshore habitats injured by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The
total estimated cost of the preferred alternatives is approximately
$209 million. Additional restoration planning for the Louisiana
Restoration Area will continue.

Next Steps

    The public is encouraged to review and comment on the Draft RP/EA.
A public webinar is scheduled to help facilitate the public review and
comment process. After the public comment period ends, the Louisiana
TIG will consider the comments received before issuing a Final RP/EA. A
summary of comments received and the Louisiana TIG's responses and any
revisions to the document, as appropriate, will be included in the
final document.

Administrative Record

    The documents comprising the Administrative Record for the Draft
RP/EA can be viewed electronically at https://www.doi.gov/deepwaterhorizon/adminrecord.

Authority

    The authority for this action is the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33
U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), its implementing NRDA regulations found at 15 CFR
part 990, and the NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).

    Dated: December 2, 2019.
Benita Best-Wong,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
[FR Doc. 2019-26588 Filed 12-19-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: January 8, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 4)]
[Notices]
[Page 774-775]
[DOCID:fr08ja07-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings  1

December 27, 2006.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC07-39-000.
    Applicants: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
    Description: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. submits an application
for Blanket Authorization to Acquire Utility and/or Holding Company
Securities.
    Filed Date: 12/20/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061227-0035.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 10, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: EC07-40-000.
    Applicants: T. Rowe Price Group, Inc.; T. Rowe Price Associates,
Inc.; T. Rowe Price International, Inc.; T. Rowe Price Global
Investment Services Limited; T. Rowe Price Global Asset Management
Limited; T. Rowe Price (Canada), Inc.; T. Rowe Price Trust Company; T.
Rowe Price (Luxembourg) Management S.[agrave]r.l.; T. Rowe Price
Savings Bank.
    Description: T Rowe Price Group, Inc. et al submit a request for
blanket authorizations to acquire and dispose of securities under
Section 203 of the Federal Power Act.
    Filed Date: 12/20/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061227-0034.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 10, 2007.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings.

    Docket Numbers: ER00-1053-019.
    Applicants: Maine Public Service Company.
    Description: Maine Public Service Co. submits revised OATT pages
and a Settlement Agreement regarding its Formula Rate and its 2006
Informational Filing.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061226-0202.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 12, 2007.
    Docket Numbers: ER01-205-017; ER98-2640-015; ER98-4590-013; ER99-
1610-021.
    Applicants: Xcel Energy Services Inc.; Northern States Power
Company.
    Description: Xcel Energy Services Inc. on behalf of Southwestern
Public Service Company submits this change in status report relating to
its market-based rate authority.
    Filed Date: 12/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061227-0036.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 11, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-349-000.
    Applicants: Westar Energy, Inc.
    Description: Westar Energy, Inc. submits Revised Sheets 131, 132
and 137 of Schedules 2 and 6 of its FERC Electric Tariff, Second
Revised Volume 5.
    Filed Date: 12/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061226-0130.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 11, 2007.
    Docket Numbers: ER07-350-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits revisions to the
chart in Schedule 2 of the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff.
    Filed Date: 12/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061226-0131.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 11, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-351-000.
    Applicants: Powerex Corp.
    Description: Powerex Corp. submits a certificate of concurrence to
the Hourly Coordination Agreement, filed by Washington Water Power Co.
    Filed Date: 12/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061227-0037.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 11, 2007.
    Docket Numbers: ER07-352-000.
    Applicants: S.D. Warren Company.
    Description: S.D. Warren Co. submits an order accepting market-
based rate Tariff, Original Volume 1, and granting waivers and blanket
authority.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061226-0200.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 12, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-353-000; ER07-354-000; ER07-355-000; ER07-355-
000.
    Applicants: Unitil Energy Systems, Inc.; Fitchburg Gas and Electric
Light Company.
    Description: Unitil Power Corp. and Fitchburg Gas and Electric
Light Co. submits tariff sheets and Attachment A-D to the FERC Electric
Tariff, Second Revised Volume 3.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061226-0194.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 12, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-356-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: New York Independent System Operator, Inc. submits
revisions to its Market Administration and Control Area Services
Tariff.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061226-0199.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 12, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-357-000.
    Applicants: Fenton Power Partners I, LLC.
    Description: Fenton Power Partners I, LLC submits for order
accepting their FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061226-0198.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 12, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-358-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits an executed service
agreement for Firm Point-to-Point Transmission Service with Western
Resources dba Westar Energy.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061226-0197.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 12, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-359-000.
    Applicants: Maine Public Service Company.
    Description: Maine Public Service Co submits revisions to the MPS
Open Access Transmission Tariff, pursuant to the Commissions 4/25/06.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061226-0196.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 12, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-360-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: New York Independent System Operator, Inc submits
proposed revisions to Section 4.5(b) of Attachment H to its Market
Administration and Control Area Services Tariff.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061226-0195.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m Eastern Time on Friday, January 12, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-361-000.
    Applicants: AmerenEnergy Marketing Company.
    Description: Ameren Energy Marketing Co, Central Illinois Public
Service Co, Illinois Power Co and Union Electric Co submits an
application under Section 205 of the Federal Power Act.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061226-0201.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 12, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-363-000
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Company submits First
Revised

Sheet 19 et al for its Agreements w/Arizona Public Service Co et al
reflecting a proposal to freeze until at least January 1, 2010.
    Filed Date: 12/26/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061227-0011.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 16, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-364-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Company submits an executed
Operating Agreement dated 12/14/06 w/ Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric
Cooperative et al and a notice of termination for FERC Rate Schedule
173.
    Filed Date: 12/26/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061227-0010.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 16, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-365-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.; New England Power Pool.
    Description: ISO New England Inc and the New England Power Pool
Participants Committee submits proposed revisions to Market 1 relating
to the Methodology for Calculating Installed Capacity Requirements.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061227-0008.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 17, 2007.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR Sec.  385.211 and
Sec.  385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a
subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously
intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing
a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on
the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov.
 To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet

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

Magalie Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-22669 Filed 1-5-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Table 1. C  MACT Floor Analysis for Large Gaseous Fuel Subcategory  Institutional ( Municipalities Only)

Particulate Matter/ Metals ( not expected to be present in gas) Inorganics Control Combination R a n k 1 # of Units % of Units 2 Total % Control Combination R a n k # of Units % of Units Total %

No Control 140 100.00% 100.00% No Control 140 100.00% 100.00%

No Information 234 No Information 234 Number of Gas Boilers = 374 Number of Gas Boilers with Control Information = 140 1 Rankings are based on information in emissions database, previous EPA projects, and engineering judgement. Controls are assumed to consistently achieve a removal efficiency. The rankings are as follows:

1 = > 99% control 5 = > 50% control 2 = > 98% control 6 = > 30% control 3 = > 90% control 7 = < 30% control 4 = > 75% control 8 = no control 2 The percent of units with a control combination is based on the population for which " control" or " no control" is specified.

* This analysis only includes boilers in the Inventory v4.0 and Survey v2.0 databases that were determined to be located at major sources.

8/ 03 dwcgi 7150 1077829742 84018000. xls Page 1 Table 1. B  Revised MACT Floor Analysis for Large Liquid Fuel Boiler Subcategory  Institutional ( Municipalities Only)

Control Device R a n k 1 # of Units % of Units2 Total % Control Device R a n k # of Units % of Units Total %

Cyclone/ FF 1 0.00% 0.00% Cyclone/ Venturi 2 0 0.00% 0.00%

Fabric Filter 1 0.00% 0.00% Packed Scrubber 2 0 0.00% 0.00%

ESP/ Wet Scrubber 2 0.00% 0.00% Cyclone/ FGD 4 0 0.00% 0.00%

Cyclone/ ESP 2 1 7.14% 7.14% Cyclone/ Wet Scrubber 4 0 0.00% 0.00%

ESP 2 2 14.29% 21.43% ESP/ Wet Scrubber 4 0 0.00% 0.00%

Cyclone/ FGD 4 0.00% 21.43% FGD 4 0 0.00% 0.00%

Cyclone/ Venturi 4 0.00% 21.43% Wet Scrubber 4 0 0.00% 0.00%

Cyclone/ Wet Scrubber 4 0.00% 21.43% Cyclone/ FF 8 0 0.00% 0.00%

Cyclone 4 0.00% 21.43% Fabric Filter 8 0 0.00% 0.00%

FGD 5 0.00% 21.43% Cyclone/ ESP 8 1 7.14% 7.14%

Packed Scrubber 5 0.00% 21.43% ESP 8 2 14.29% 21.43%

Wet Scrubber 5 0.00% 21.43% Cyclone 8 0 0.00% 21.43%

No Control 8 11 78.57% 100% No Control 8 11 78.57% 100.00%

No Information 9 50 No Information 9 50 Total Number of Liquid Boilers = 64 Total Number of Liquid Boilers ( with control information) = 14 1 Rankings are based on information in emissions database, previous EPA projects, and engineering judgement. Controls are assumed to consistently achieve a removal efficiency. The rankings are as follows:

1 = > 99% control 5 = > 50% control 2 = > 98% control 6 = > 30% control 3 = > 90% control 7 = < 30% control 4 = > 75% control 8 = no control 2 The percent of units with a control combination is based on the population for which " control" or " no control" is specified.

* This analysis includes only boilers in the Inventory v4.0 and Survey v3.0 databases that were determined to be located at major sources.

Particulate Matter/ Metals Inorganics 8/ 03 dwcgi 7150 1077829742 84018000. xls Page 2 Table 1. A  Revised MACT Floor Analysis for Large Solid Fuel Boiler Subcategory  Institutional ( Municipalities Only)

Particulate Matter/ Metals Inorganics Control Ranking Category R a n k 1 # of Units % of Units 2 Total % Control Ranking Category R a n k # of Units % of Units Total %

Cyclone/ ESP/ FF 1 0.00% 0.00% Cyclone/ ESP/ Packed Scrubber 2 0 0.00% 0.00%

Cyclone/ FF 1 16 22.86% 22.86% Cyclone/ Packed Scrubber 2 0 0.00% 0.00%

Cyclone/ FF/ Wet Scrubber 1 0.00% 22.86% ESP/ Packed Scrubber 2 0 0.00% 0.00%

Cyclone/ FF/ DSI 1 0.00% 22.86% Cyclone/ SD/ ESP 3 0 0.00% 0.00%

Cyclone/ SD/ FF 1 0.00% 22.86% Cyclone/ FF/ DSI 3 0 0.00% 0.00%

DSI/ FF 1 0.00% 22.86% Cyclone/ SD/ FF 3 0 0.00% 0.00%

ESP/ FF 1 0.00% 22.86% DSI/ FF 3 0 0.00% 0.00%

Fabric Filter 1 5 7.14% 30.00% SD/ ESP 3 0 0.00% 0.00%

Fabric Filter/ FGD 1 0.00% 30.00% SD/ FF 3 4 5.71% 5.71%

Fabric Filter/ Wet Scrubber 1 2 2.86% 32.86% Cyclone/ ESP/ Wet Scrubber 4 0 0.00% 5.71%

Fabric Filter/ FSI 1 0.00% 32.86% Cyclone/ FF/ Wet Scrubber 4 0 0.00% 5.71%

SD/ FF 1 4 5.71% 38.57% Cyclone/ Wet Scrubber 4 0 0.00% 5.71%

Cyclone/ ESP 2 14 20.00% 58.57% Cyclone/ FGD 4 0 0.00% 5.71%

Cyclone/ ESP/ Packed Scrubber 2 0.00% 58.57% DSI/ ESP 4 0 0.00% 5.71%

Cyclone/ ESP/ Wet Scrubber 2 0.00% 58.57% ESP/ Venturi/ FGD 4 0 0.00% 5.71%

Cyclone/ SD/ ESP 2 0.00% 58.57% ESP/ Wet Scrubber 4 0 0.00% 5.71%

DSI/ ESP 2 0.00% 58.57% Fabric Filter/ FGD 4 0 0.00% 5.71%

ESP 2 6 8.57% 67.14% Fabric Filter/ Wet Scrubber 4 2 2.86% 8.57%

ESP/ Venturi/ FGD 2 0.00% 67.14% Flue Gas Desulfurization 4 0 0.00% 8.57%

ESP/ Wet Scrubber 2 0.00% 67.14% Wet Scrubber 4 6 8.57% 17.14%

ESP/ FSI 2 0.00% 67.14% Wet Scrubber/ FGD 4 0 0.00% 17.14%

ESP/ Packed Scrubber 2 0.00% 67.14% Cyclone/ ESP/ FF 8 0 0.00% 17.14%

Mechanical Collector/ ESP 2 0.00% 67.14% Cyclone/ FF 8 16 22.86% 40.00%

SD/ ESP 2 0.00% 67.14% ESP/ FF 8 0 0.00% 40.00%

Cyclone 3 4 16 22.86% 90.00% Fabric Filter 8 5 7.14% 47.14%

Cyclone/ Packed Scrubber 4 0.00% 90.00% Fabric Filter/ FSI 8 0 0.00% 47.14%

Cyclone/ Wet Scrubber 4 0.00% 90.00% Cyclone/ ESP 8 14 20.00% 67.14%

Cyclone/ FGD 4 0.00% 90.00% ESP 8 6 8.57% 75.71%

Flue Gas Desulfurization 5 0.00% 90.00% ESP/ FSI 8 0 0.00% 75.71%

Wet Scrubber 5 6 8.57% 98.57% Mechanical Collector/ ESP 8 0 0.00% 75.71%

Wet Scrubber/ FGD 5 0.00% 98.57% Cyclone 8 16 22.86% 98.57%

No Control 9 1 1.43% 100.00% No Control 9 1 1.43% 100.00%

No Information 10 58 No Information 10 58 Total Number of Units in the Solid Boiler Subcategory = 128 Total Number of Units in the Solid Subcategory with Control Information = 70 1 Rankings are based on information in emissions database, previous EPA projects, and engineering judgement. Controls are assumed to consistently achieve a removal efficiency. The rankings are as follows:

1 = > 99% control 5 = > 50% control 2 = > 98% control 6 = > 30% control 3 = > 90% control 7 = < 30% control 4 = > 75% control 8 = no control 2 The percent of units with a control combination is based on the population for which " control" or " no control" is specified.

* This analysis only includes boilers in the Inventory v4.0 and Survey v3.0 databases that were determined to be located at major sources.

3 Cyclone efficiency is specific here only to particulate matter control because cyclones are not efficient in controlling metals.

8/ 03 dwcgi 7150 1077829742 84018000. xls Page 3


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4954-4956]
[FR Doc No: 2017-00779]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79766; File No. SR-BatsBZX-2016-92]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Amending
Fees To Adopt a New Cross-Asset Step-Up Tier

January 10, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on December 30, 2016, Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change effective upon
filing with the Commission. 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable
to Members \5\ and non-members of the Exchange pursuant to BZX Rules
15.1(a) and (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or
dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See
Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.bats.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change 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 parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to adopt a new Tier 4 under footnote 3,
Cross-Asset Step-Up Tiers and to rename the existing Tier 4 as Tier 5.
Currently, with respect to the Exchange's equities trading platform
(``BZX Equities''), the Exchange determines the fee charged for the
removal of liquidity or the rebate for adding liquidity that it will
provide to Members using the Exchange's tiered pricing structure, which
is based on the Member meeting certain volume tiers based on their ADAV
\6\ as a percentage of TCV \7\ or ADV \8\ as a percentage of TCV.
Included amongst the volume tiers offered on BZX Equities are four
Cross-Asset Step-Up Tiers, which require participation on the
Exchange's equity options platform (``BZX Options''). The current
Cross-Asset Step-Up Tiers provide rebates of $0.0027, $0.0028 and
$0.0029 per share for Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3, respectively, and
charge a fee of $0.00295 per share for the existing Tier 4. To qualify
for Tier 1, a Member must have an Options Step-Up Add TCV \9\ that is
equal to or greater than 0.30%. To qualify for Tier 2, a Member must
have an Options Step-Up Add TCV \10\ that is equal to or greater than
0.40%. To qualify for Tier 3, a Member must have an Options Add TCV
\11\ greater than or equal to 0.30% and have a Step-Up ADAV from June
2015 greater than [sic] 1,000,000. The existing Tier 4 requires a
Member to have an Options Customer Remove TCV \12\ greater than or
equal to 0.30% and a Step-Up Remove TCV \13\ from July 2016 greater
than or equal to 0.05%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ As defined in the Exchange's fee schedule available at
http://www.bats.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/bzx/.
    \7\ Id.
    \8\ Id.
    \9\ Id.
    \10\ As defined in the Exchange's fee schedule available at
http://www.bats.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/bzx/.
    \11\ Id.
    \12\ Id.
    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to adopt a new tier, Tier 4, and to
rename the existing Tier 4 as Tier 5. Under the proposed new Tier 4,
the Exchange would provide a rebate of $0.0032 per share to Members
that have an Options Step-Up Add TCV in Customer \14\ orders from
October 2016 baseline greater than or equal to 0.35%. Other than
renaming current Tier 4 as Tier 5, no additional changes are proposed
for the renamed Tier 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ As defined in the Exchange's fee schedule available at
http://www.bats.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/bzx/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation Date
    The Exchange proposes to implement these amendments to its fee
schedule January 3, 2017.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The Exchange notes that the date of its fee schedule was
previously updated to January 3, 2017 in SR-BatsBZX-2016-87
(December 6, 2017 [sic]). See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
79636 (December 21, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\16\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\17\ in particular, as it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its Members and other persons using its
facilities. The Exchange also notes that it operates in a highly-
competitive market in which market participants can readily direct
order flow to competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular
venue to be excessive. The proposed rule change reflects a competitive
pricing structure designed to incent market participants to direct
their order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rates are equitable and non-discriminatory in that they apply
uniformly to all Members. The Exchange believes the fees and credits
remain competitive with those charged by other venues and therefore
continue to be reasonable and equitably allocated to Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Volume-based rebates such as the proposed Cross-Asset Step-Up Tier
4 have been widely adopted by equities and options exchanges and are
equitable because they are open to all Members on an equal basis and
provide additional benefits or discounts that are reasonably related to
the value to an exchange's market quality associated with higher levels
of market activity, such as higher levels of liquidity provision and/or
growth patterns, and introduction of higher volumes of orders into the
price and volume discovery processes. The Exchange believes that the
proposal to add a Cross-Asset Step-Up Tier 4 is a reasonable, fair and
equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory allocation of fees and
rebates because it will provide

Members with an additional incentive to reach certain thresholds on
both the BZX Equities and BZX Options. The increased liquidity from
this proposal also benefits all investors by deepening the BZX Equities
and BZX Options liquidity pools, offering additional flexibility for
all investors to enjoy cost savings, supporting the quality of price
discovery, promoting market transparency and improving investor
protection. Such pricing programs thereby reward a Member's growth
pattern on the Exchange and such increased volume increases potential
revenue to the Exchange, and will allow the Exchange to continue to
provide and potentially expand the incentive programs operated by the
Exchange. To the extent a Member participates on BZX Equities but not
on BZX Options, the Exchange does believe that the proposal is still
reasonable, equitably allocated and non-discriminatory with respect to
such Member based on the overall benefit to the Exchange resulting from
the success of BZX Options. As noted above, such success allows the
Exchange to continue to provide and potentially expand its existing
incentive programs to the benefit of all participants on the Exchange,
whether they participate on BZX Options or not. The proposed pricing
program is also fair and equitable in that membership in BZX Options is
available to all market participants which would provide them with
access to the benefits on BZX Options provided by the proposed changes,
as described above, even where a Member of BZX Options is not
necessarily eligible for the proposed increased rebates on the
Exchange. Further, the proposed changes will result in Members
receiving either the same or an increased rebate than they would
currently receive.
    Lastly, the Exchange believes the proposed tier's criteria and
corresponding rebate are equitable and reasonable as compared to other
Cross Asset Step-Up Tiers under footnote 3. For example, to qualify for
Tier 3 and receive a rebate of $0.0029 per share, a Member must have an
Options Add TCV greater than or equal to 0.30% and have a Step-Up ADAV
from June 2015 greater than [sic] 1,000,000. Under the proposed tier, a
Member would receive a higher rebate of $0.0032 per share where they
satisfy more stringent criteria of having an Options Step-Up Add TCV in
Customer orders from October 2016 baseline greater than or equal to
0.35%.

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe its proposed amendment to its fee
schedule would impose any burden on competition that is not necessary
or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
does not believe that the proposed change represents a significant
departure from previous pricing offered by the Exchange or pricing
offered by the Exchange's competitors. Additionally, Members may opt to
disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they believe that alternatives offer
them better value. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the
proposed change will impair the ability of Members or competing venues
to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.
    The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can readily direct order flow to competing
venues if they deem fee structures to be unreasonable or excessive. The
proposed changes are generally intended to offer an incentive resulting
in a rebate for adding liquidity on the Exchange, which is intended to
draw additional participants to the Exchange. The Exchange does not
believe that the proposed new Cross-Asset Step-Up Tier 4 would burden
competition, but instead, enhance competition, as it is intended to
increase the competitiveness of and draw additional volume to the
Exchange. The Exchange does not believe the proposed amendments would
burden intramarket competition as they would be available to all
Members uniformly.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from Members or other interested
parties.

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) of the Act \18\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\19\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-BatsBZX-2016-92 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-BatsBZX-2016-92. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of 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; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BatsBZX-2016-92 and should
be submitted on or before February 7, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-00779 Filed 1-13-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 11, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15526-15528]
[FR Doc No: 2018-07218]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2017-0143; FRL-9976-50-Region 7]

Air Plan Approval; Iowa; Amendment to the Administrative Consent
Order, Grain Processing Corporation, Muscatine, Iowa; Proposal

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the State
of Iowa to incorporate an amendment to the Administrative Consent Order
(ACO) for Grain Processing Corporation (GPC), Muscatine, Iowa. The
revision amends the ACO to change the date for completion of
performance testing from May 31, 2017, to May 31, 2018, to allow the
state more time to complete the remaining air construction permit
applications submitted by GPC, and to specify testing requirements as
appropriate in the final permits. When the state submitted the request
to amend the ACO, twelve of the 107 permits were incomplete. At this
time, only two permits have not been issued by the State. The air
quality in Muscatine, Iowa, has not been adversely impacted by the
remaining pending permit approvals. This revision will not impact the
schedule for installation and operation of control equipment, will not
alter any other compliance dates, and will not adversely affect air
quality in Muscatine, Iowa, as explained in the revised Technical
Support Document that is part of this docket.
    This proposal will also address adverse comments submitted to the
docket.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 11, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2017-0143 to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Hamilton, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by
addressing the following:

I. Background
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
IV. EPA's Response to Comment
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On August 25, 2017, EPA proposed to approve a revision to the Iowa
State Implementation Plan (SIP) which amended the Administrative
Consent Order (ACO) for Grain Processing Corporation (GPC), Muscatine,
Iowa. The revision amended the ACO to change the date for completion of
performance testing from May 31, 2017, to May 31, 2018, to allow the
state more time to complete processing the remaining air construction
permit applications submitted by GPC, and to specify testing
requirements as appropriate in the remaining final permits. See 82 FR
40519. In

conjunction with the August 25, 2017 notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPR), EPA issued a direct final rule (DFR) approving the amended ACO.
See 82 FR 40491. In the DFR, EPA stated that if adverse comments were
submitted to EPA by September 25, 2017, the action would be withdrawn
and not take effect. EPA received an adverse comment prior to the close
of the comment period. EPA withdrew the DFR on October 12, 2017. See 82
FR 47396.
    This proposal will also address adverse comments submitted to the
docket.

II. What is being addressed in this document?

    This proposed revision to the Iowa State Implementation Plan (SIP)
will incorporate an amendment to the Administrative Consent Order (ACO)
with Grain Processing Corporation (GPC), Muscatine, Iowa. The revision
changes the date for completion of performance testing from May 31,
2017, to May 31, 2018, to allow the state more time to complete
processing the remaining air construction permit applications submitted
by GPC, and to specify testing requirements as appropriate in the
remaining final permits. This amendment will not impact the schedule
for installation and operation of control equipment, will not alter any
other compliance dates, and will not adversely affect air quality in
the Muscatine, Iowa, area as explained in the Technical Support
Document that is part of this docket.
    This proposal will also address adverse comments submitted to the
docket.

III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    The state submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The state instituted a
30-day comment period; no comments were received. The submission also
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In
addition, as explained above and in more detail in the revised
Technical Support Document which is part of this docket, the revision
meets the substantive SIP requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA),
including section 110 and implementing regulations.

IV. EPA's Response to Comment

    The public comment period for EPA's proposed rule opened August 25,
2017, the date of its publication in the Federal Register, and closed
on September 25, 2017. During this period, EPA received an adverse
comment. The adverse comment and EPA's response is as follows:
    Comment 1: The commenter first stated that the TSD was not
available in the docket. The TSD was not available in the docket when
the proposal and direct final notices were published on Friday, August
25, 2017.
    Response 1: The TSD was made publicly available on Monday, August
28, 2017 which was one business day. EPA did not grant an extended
comment period as suggested by the commenter. When the TSD was
available in the docket, no additional comments were received through
the end of the comment period (September 25, 2017). However, because
the TSD was not publicly available on the date the notice was
published, this proposal allows for additional comment.
    Comment 2: The commenter stated that granting an extension for GPC
to perform testing may cause a violation of emission limits, which
could cause a delay in issuing permits, and therefore cause additional
air pollution that would have an adverse impact on air quality in
Muscatine, Iowa.
    Response 2: The amendment to the ACO which provides a one-year
extension on performance tests, only affects two of the total of 107
required permits. The remaining 105 permits have already been issued by
the State. This ACO revision does not delay or allow an extension of
the requirements for implementation of the control measures required by
the ACO. GPC is still required to conduct the performance testing; the
deadline is merely adjusted for the two outstanding permits. The
permits that have been finalized, including the permit that allowed the
facility to convert from burning coal to natural gas, have resulted in
improved air quality in Muscatine, Iowa. There have been no exceedances
of the 2006 24-hour NAAQS for fine particulate matter with a diameter
of PM2.5 since July 2015, before the natural gas conversion.
    The complete and quality assured ambient air quality monitoring
data for the area shows that the area has, and continues to attain the
NAAQS. Background information with regard to air quality in Muscatine,
Iowa, as well as design values of air monitors are included in the
revised TSD, included in this docket.

V. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to approve a SIP revision submitted by the State
of Iowa to incorporate an amendment to the Administrative Consent Order
(ACO) with Grain Processing Corporation (GPC), Muscatine, Iowa. EPA is
also responding to comments received in the docket, and by responding
to comments provides additional information with regard to the
remaining permits to be finalized by the State of Iowa. A revised TSD
is included as part of this docket to support the revision to the ACO.
    We are processing this as a proposed action because we are
soliciting comments. Final rulemaking will occur after consideration of
any comments.

VI. Incorporation by Reference

    In this action, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference Iowa's EPA-approved State source-specific permits described
in the direct final amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. EPA
has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally
available through https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 7
Office (please contact the person identified in the For Further
Information Contact section of this preamble for more information).
    Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion
in the State Implementation Plan, have been incorporated by reference
by EPA into that plan, are fully Federally enforceable under sections
110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking
of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the
Director of the Federal Register in the next update to the SIP
compilation.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 11, 2018. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: March 27, 2018.
Karen A. Flournoy,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40
CFR part 52 as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart Q--Iowa

0
2. Section 52.820 paragraph(d) is amended by revising the entry ``(29)
Grain Processing Corporation'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.820  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (d)* * *

                                EPA-Approved Iowa Source-Specific Orders/Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        State
        Name of source           Order/Permit No.  effective date     EPA approval date         Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
(29) Grain Processing           Administrative            1-16-17  12/1/14, 79 FR 71025;   The last sentence of
 Corporation.                    Consent Order                      amendment approved      Paragraph 5, Section
                                 No. 2014-AQ-A1.                    [date of final          III and Section VI
                                                                    publication in the      are not approved by
                                                                    Federal Register],      EPA as part of the
                                                                    [final Federal          SIP.
                                                                    Register citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-07218 Filed 4-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 96 (Wednesday, May 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30284-30286]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10616]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94900; File No. SR-OCC-2022-001]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Options Clearing Corporation;
Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or
Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change Concerning the Options Clearing
Corporation's Margin Methodology for Incorporating Variations in
Implied Volatility

May 12, 2022.

I. Introduction

    On January 24, 2022, the Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change SR-OCC-2022-001 (``Proposed Rule Change'')
pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder to change
quantitative models related to certain volatility products.\3\ The
Proposed Rule Change was published for public comment in the Federal
Register on February 11, 2022.\4\ The Commission has received comments
regarding the Proposed Rule Change.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Notice of Filing infra note 4, at 87 FR 8072.
    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94165 (Feb. 7, 2022), 87
FR 8072 (Feb. 11, 2022) (File No. SR-OCC-2022-001) (``Notice of
Filing''). OCC also filed a related advance notice (SR-OCC-2022-801)
(``Advance Notice'') with the Commission pursuant to Section
806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act, entitled the Payment, Clearing, and
Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 and Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) under the
Exchange Act. 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1). 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) and 17 CFR
240.19b-4, respectively. The Advance Notice was published in the
Federal Register on February 11, 2022. Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 94166 (Feb. 7, 2022), 87 FR 8063 (Feb. 11, 2022) (File
No. SR-OCC-2022-801).
    \5\ Comments on the Proposed Rule Change are available at
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-occ-2022-001/srocc2022001.htm. Since
the proposal contained in the Proposed Rule Change was also filed as
an advance notice, all public comments received on the proposal are
considered regardless of whether the comments are submitted on the
Proposed Rule Change or the Advance Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 24, 2022, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange
Act,\6\ the Commission designated a longer period within which to
approve, disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
approve or disapprove the Proposed Rule Change.\7\ This order
institutes proceedings, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the

Exchange Act,\8\ to determine whether to approve or disapprove the
Proposed Rule Change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \7\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94165 (Feb. 7, 2022), 87
FR 8072 (Feb. 11, 2022) (File No. SR-OCC-2022-001).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Summary of the Proposed Rule Change

    OCC is a central counterparty (``CCP''), which means it interposes
itself as the buyer to every seller and seller to every buyer for
financial transactions. As the CCP for the listed options markets in
the U.S., as well as for certain futures, OCC is exposed to the risk
that one or more of its members may fail to make a payment or to
deliver securities. OCC addresses such exposures, in part, by requiring
its members to provide collateral, including margin collateral. Margin
is the collateral that CCPs, like OCC, collect to cover potential
changes in a member's positions over a set period of time. Typically,
margin is designed to cover such exposures during normal market
conditions, which means that margin collateral should be sufficient to
exposures at least 99 out of 100 days.
    Margin requirements may fluctuate from day to day; however, CCPs
seek to reduce fluctuations that could otherwise impose systemic risk.
For example, if a CCP collects too little margin during relatively
stable market conditions, then it would need to collect significantly
more margin during stressed market conditions. Margin requirements that
are strongly reactive to market movements are considered to be
``procyclical.'' By contrast, a CCP may collect slightly more margin
during quiet times to reduce the additional strain it places on members
during times of market stress.
    OCC's process for setting margin requirements considers several
distinct risk factors, including volatility. OCC's current models for
estimating the impact of volatility on member positions have a number
of limitations that may result in procyclical margin requirements. OCC
is proposing to change its models to reduce the level of procyclicality
in its margin requirements caused by changes in volatility. The changes
OCC is proposing would also provide for offsets between products based
on the same underlying asset. Based on data provided by OCC, the
proposed model changes would likely increase margin requirements
slightly overall, which, in turn, would reduce the additional amount of
margin OCC would need to collect during periods of market stress.
    The proposed changes to OCC's models are a continuation of
volatility model changes that OCC has implemented over the past several
years. In 2015, the Commission approved OCC's proposal to more broadly
incorporate variations in implied volatility in OCC's margin
methodology.\9\ In 2018, OCC modified its implied volatility model to
address issues highlighted by large spikes in volatility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76781 (Dec. 28,
2015), 81 FR 135 (Jan. 4, 2016) (File No. SR-OCC-2015-016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described in the Notice of Filing,\10\ OCC proposes to change
three quantitative models related to certain volatility products.
Specifically, OCC proposes the following changes:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Notice of Filing, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Implement a new model for incorporating variations in implied
volatility within OCC's margin methodology for products based on the
S&P 500 Index;
    (2) implement a new model to margin futures on volatility indexes;
\11\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ A volatility index is an index designed to measure the
volatiles implied by the prices of options on an underlying index.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) replace OCC's model to for margining variance futures.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ A variance future is an exchange-traded futures contract
based on the expected realized variance of an underlying interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove the
Proposed Rule Change and Grounds for Disapproval Under Consideration

    The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act \13\ to determine whether the Proposed
Rule Change should be approved or disapproved. Institution of
proceedings is appropriate at this time in view of the legal and policy
issues raised by the Proposed Rule Change. Institution of proceedings
does not indicate that the Commission has reached any conclusions with
respect to any of the issues involved. Rather, the Commission seeks and
encourages interested persons to comment on the Proposed Rule Change,
providing the Commission with arguments to support the Commission's
analysis as to whether to approve or disapprove the Proposed Rule
Change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act,\14\ the
Commission is providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under
consideration. The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for
additional analysis of, and input from commenters with respect to, the
Proposed Rule Change's consistency with Section 17A of the Exchange
Act,\15\ and the rules thereunder, including the following provisions:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id.
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act,\16\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a clearing agency must
be designed to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which
are in the custody or control of the clearing agency or for which it is
responsible; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2) under the Exchange Act,\17\ which
requires a covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and
enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to provide
for governance arrangements that, among other things, (1) are clear and
transparent,\18\ (2) clearly prioritize the safety and efficiency of
the covered clearing agency,\19\ and (3) support the public interest
requirements in Section 17A of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78q-1)
applicable to clearing agencies, and the objectives of owners and
participants.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(i).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(ii).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3) under the Exchange Act,\21\ which
requires a covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and
enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to maintain
a sound risk management framework for comprehensively managing legal,
credit, liquidity, operational, general business, investment, custody,
and other risks that arise in or are borne by the covered clearing
agency, which, among other things, includes risk management policies,
procedures, and systems designed to identify, measure, monitor, and
manage the range of risks that arise in or are borne by the covered
clearing agency, that are subject to review on a specified periodic
basis and approved by the board of directors annually.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(3).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(3)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) under the Exchange Act,\23\ which
requires a covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and
enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to
effectively identify, measure, monitor, and manage its credit exposures
to participants and those arising from its payment, clearing, and
settlement processes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6) under the Exchange Act,\24\ which
requires a covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and
enforce

written policies and procedures reasonably designed to cover, if the
covered clearing agency provides central counterparty services, its
credit exposures to its participants by establishing a risk-based
margin system that, among other things, (1) considers, and produces
margin levels commensurate with, the risks and particular attributes of
each relevant product, portfolio, and market \25\ (2) calculates
sufficient margin to cover its potential future exposure to
participants in the interval between the last margin collection and the
close out of positions following a participant default; \26\ and uses
an appropriate method for measuring credit exposure that accounts for
relevant product risk factors and portfolio effects across
products.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6).
    \25\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(i).
    \26\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(iii).
    \27\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23) under the Exchange Act,\28\ which
requires a covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and
enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to provide
for, among other things, sufficient information to enable participants
to identify and evaluate the risks, fees, and other material costs they
incur by participating in the covered clearing agency.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23).
    \29\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Procedure: Request for Written Comments

    The Commission requests that interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data, and arguments with respect to the
issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have
with the Proposed Rule Change. In particular, the Commission invites
the written views of interested persons concerning whether the Proposed
Rule Change is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange
Act,\30\ Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6) under the Exchange Act,\31\ or any other
provision of the Exchange Act, or the rules and regulations thereunder.
Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to approval or
disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral presentation of views,
data, and arguments, the Commission will consider, pursuant to Rule
19b-4(g) under the Exchange Act,\32\ any request for an opportunity to
make an oral presentation.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \31\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6).
    \32\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(g).
    \33\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act grants to the
Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--either
oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is appropriate
for consideration of a particular proposal by a self-regulatory
organization. See Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Senate Comm. on
Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st
Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the Proposed Rule Change should be approved
or disapproved by June 8, 2022. Any person who wishes to file a
rebuttal to any other person's submission must file that rebuttal by
June 22, 2022.
    The Commission asks that commenters address the sufficiency of
OCC's statements in support of the Proposed Rule Change, which are set
forth in the Notice of Filing,\34\ in addition to any other comments
they may wish to submit about the Proposed Rule Change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Notice of Filing, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-OCC-2022-001 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-OCC-2022-001. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet 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 such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of OCC and on OCC's website at
https://www.theocc.com/Company-Information/Documents-and-Archives/By-Laws-and-Rules.
    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-OCC-2022-001 and
should be submitted on or before June 8, 2022. Rebuttal comments should
be submitted by June 22, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\35\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-10616 Filed 5-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 22 (Thursday, February 2, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5168-5169]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1787]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1357; Airspace Docket No. 11-AGL-26]

Amendment of Class D Airspace; Mount Clemens, MI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule, technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class D airspace within the Mount Clemens,
MI, area by updating the geographic coordinates of Selfridge Air
National Guard Base (ANGB) and the Selfridge Tactical Air Navigation
(TACAN). This action does not change the boundaries or operating
requirements of the airspace.

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, April 5, 2012. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by updating the geographic coordinates of Selfridge Air
National Guard Base and the Selfridge TACAN within Class D airspace to
coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database. This is an
administrative change and does not affect the boundaries, altitudes, or
operating requirements of the airspace, therefore, notice and public
procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends controlled airspace at Selfridge ANGB, Mount Clemens, MI.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 9, 2011, and effective

September 15, 2011, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

AGL MI D Mount Clemens, MI [Amended]

Mount Clemens, Selfridge Air National Guard Base, MI
    (Lat. 42[deg]36'30'' N., long. 82[deg]50'08'' W.)
Selfridge TACAN
    (Lat. 42[deg]36'47'' N., long. 82[deg]49'55'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
3,100 feet MSL within a 4.3-mile radius of Selfridge Air National
Guard Base, and within 1.5 miles west of the Selfridge TACAN
359[deg] radial extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 5.7 miles
north of the airport clockwise to 1.5 miles west of the Selfridge
TACAN 191[deg] radial, then north to the 4.3-mile radius. This Class
D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times
established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and
time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/
Facility Directory.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 13, 2012.
Walter L. Tweedy,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2012-1787 Filed 2-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 4 (Monday, January 7, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 979-980]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [http://www.gpo.gov/]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00095]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2010-0056]

Petition for Positive Train Control Safety Plan Approval and
System Certification of the Electronic Train Management System

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), this document provides the public notice that by a document
dated November 5, 2012, BNSF Railway (BNSF) has petitioned the Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA) for Positive Train Control (PTC) Safety
Plan (PTCSP) approval and system certification of the Electronic Train
Management System (ETMS) as required by 49 U.S.C. 20157(h) and in
accordance with 49 CFR 236.1015(a). FRA assigned the petition Docket
Number FRA-2010-0056.
    Applicant: Mr. David J. Galassi, Assistant Vice President-Network
Control Systems, BNSF Railway, P.O. Box 961034, Fort Worth, TX 76161.
    BNSF seeks PTCSP approval and system certification of ETMS Version
7.0, for use over the entire BNSF railroad network. ETMS Version 7.0 is
a non-vital processor-based train control system safety overlay
designed to protect against the consequences of train-to-train
collisions, enforce compliance with civil and temporary speed limits,
provide for the safety of

roadway workers operating within the limits of their authority, and to
protect against the movement of trains through switches not properly
lined for the intended movement.
    ETMS Version 7.0 is the technical successor to earlier versions of
ETMS, approved by FRA under the provisions of 49 CFR Part 236, Subpart
H-Standards for Processor-Based Signal and Train Control Systems
(Docket Number FRA-2006-23687). BNSF asserts that the PTCSP contains
the information required by 49 CFR 236.1015(d) and that the PTCSP:
    1. Demonstrates that ETMS Version 7.0 reliably executes the
functions set forth in 49 CFR 236.1005.
    2. Demonstrates that the use of ETMS Version 7.0 obtains at least
an 80-percent reduction of the risk associated with accidents
preventable by the functions set forth in 49 CFR 236.1005, when all
effects of the change associated with the PTC system are taken into
account.
    BNSF believes that approval and certification of ETMS Version 7.0
will enhance railroad safety by allowing the deployment and use in
revenue service of ETMS to prevent or mitigate the consequences of a
loss of situational awareness by train crews, or other conditions, that
could otherwise result in catastrophic consequences to the train crew
and the general public.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
http://www.regulations.gov/ and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations
Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by February 6, 2013 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78), or online at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 2, 2013.
Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2013-00095 Filed 1-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


photostatic, miniature photographic, micrographic, automated archival
storage, or other process that completely, accurately, legibly and
durably reproduces the original records (whether on paper, microfilm,
or through electronic digital storage techniques). The process must
meet all of the following requirements, which are applicable to all
systems:
    (i) The system must be capable of reproducing all records on paper.
    (ii) The system must record and be able to reproduce all marks,
information, and other characteristics of the original record,
including both obverse and reverse sides (unless blank) of paper
documents in legible form.
    (iii) When displayed on a viewer, monitor, or reproduced on paper,
the records must exhibit a high degree of legibility and readability.
For purposes of this section, legible and legibility mean the quality
of a letter or numeral that enable the observer to identify it
positively and quickly to the exclusion of all other letters or
numerals. Readable and readability mean the quality of a group of
letters or numerals being recognized as complete words or numbers.
    (iv) The system must preserve the initial image (including both
obverse and reverse sides, unless blank, of paper documents) and record
all changes, who made them and when they were made. This information
must be stored in such a manner that none of it may be altered once it
is initially recorded.
    (v) You must establish written procedures to identify the
individuals who are responsible for the operation, use and maintenance
of the system.
    (vi) You must keep a record of where, when, by whom, and on what
equipment the records and other

information were entered into the system.
    (3) Requirements applicable to a system based on digital images.
For systems based on the storage of digital images, the system must
provide accessibility to any digital image in the system. The system
must be able to locate and reproduce all records according to the same
criteria that would have been used to organize the records had they
been maintained in original form.
    (4) Requirements applicable to a system based on photographic
processes. For systems based on photographic, photostatic, or miniature
photographic processes, the records must be maintained according to an
index of all records in the system following the same criteria that
would have been used to organize the records had they been maintained
in original form.

Sec.  786.3  Destruction or disposal of records.

    If BIS or any other authorized U.S. government agency makes a
formal or informal request for a certain record or records, such record
or records may not be destroyed or disposed of without the written
authorization of the requesting entity.

PARTS 787-799--[RESERVED]

    Dated: October 21, 2008.
Christopher R. Wall,
Assistant Secretary, for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-25559 Filed 10-30-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 177 (Monday, September 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55123-55124]
[FR Doc No: 2015-22984]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2015-N-0001]

Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory Committee; Notice
of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will
be open to the public.
    Name of Committee: Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory
Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on November 6, 2015, from 8
a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Location: FDA White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31
Conference Center, the Great Room (Rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993-
0002. Answers to commonly asked questions including information
regarding special accommodations due to a disability, visitor parking,
and transportation may be accessed at: http://www.fda.gov/
AdvisoryCommittees/

AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm.
    Contact Person: Stephanie L. Begansky, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave.,
Bldg. 31, Rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX:
301-847-8533<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or FDA Advisory Committee Information
Line, 1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the Washington, DC area). A
notice in the Federal Register about last minute modifications that
impact a previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always
be published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you
should always check the Agency's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate
advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee
information line to learn about possible modifications before coming to
the meeting.
    Agenda: The committee will discuss new drug application (NDA)
022225, sugammadex sodium injection, submitted by Organon USA Inc., a
subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., for the proposed indication of
reversal of moderate or deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) induced by
rocuronium or vecuronium.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting
link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before
October 23, 2015. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled
between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Those individuals interested in
making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and
submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or
arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed
participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to
make their presentation on or before October 15, 2015. Time allotted
for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants
requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated
during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a
lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing
session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding
their request to speak by October 16, 2015.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Stephanie L. Begansky at least 7 days in advance of the
meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: September 8, 2015.
Jill Hartzler Warner,
Associate Commissioner for Special Medical Programs.
[FR Doc. 2015-22984 Filed 9-11-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 144 (Friday, July 28, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 35148]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15738]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2017-0365; FRL-9965-29-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; Kentucky; Revisions to Louisville; Definitions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On August 29, 2012, the Commonwealth of Kentucky, through the
Kentucky Division for Air Quality (KDAQ), submitted changes to the
Kentucky State Implementation Plan (SIP) on behalf of the Louisville
Metro Air Pollution Control District (District). The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a portion of the
submission that modifies the District's air quality regulations as
incorporated into the SIP. Specifically, the revisions pertain to
definitional changes, including the modification of the definition of
``volatile organic compounds''. EPA is proposing to approve this
portion of the SIP revision because the Commonwealth has demonstrated
that these changes are consistent with the Clean Air Act. EPA will act
on the other portion of KDAQ's August 29, 2012, submittal in a separate
action.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 28, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2017-0365 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nacosta C. Ward, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Ms. Ward can be
reached via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules Section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP revision as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the
direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received
will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this document.
Any parties interested in commenting on this document should do so at
this time.

    Dated: July 11, 2017.
V. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2017-15738 Filed 7-27-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P