[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 230 (Friday, November 29, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65803-65804]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25910]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 3251-010]

Cornell University; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and
Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: 3251-010.
    c. Date Filed: June 28, 2019.
    d. Applicant: Cornell University.
    e. Name of Project: Cornell University Hydroelectric Project
(Cornell Project).
    f. Location: On Fall Creek within the Cornell University campus in
the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York. The project does not
occupy federal land.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Frank Perry, Manager of Projects, Energy
and Sustainability, Humphreys Service Building, Room 131, Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY 14853-3701;<PHONE_NUMBER>; email_
[email protected]
    i. FERC Contact: Christopher Millard at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests: 60 days
from the issuance date of this notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene and protests using the Commission's eFiling system
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. For assistance, please
contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-
3676 (toll free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic
filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The
first page of any filing should include docket number P-3251-010.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an
intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency.
    k. This application has been accepted, but is not ready for
environmental analysis at this time.
    l. The Cornell Project consists of: (1) An existing 28-foot-high,
260-foot-long reinforced-concrete gravity overflow-type dam, known as
Beebe Lake Dam, with a crest elevation of 780.7 feet mean sea level
(msl); (2) an impoundment (Beebe Lake) with a surface area of 16 acres
and a storage capacity of 50 acre-feet at the normal pool elevation of
780.7 feet msl; (3) a concrete forebay wall and reinforced-concrete
intake with a 6-foot-high, 6-foot-wide steel vertical-slide gate along
the right (north) bank; (4) a 5-foot-diameter, 1,507-foot-long
reinforced-concrete underground pipeline and a 5-foot-diameter, 200-
foot-long riveted-steel underground penstock; (5) a 79-foot-long, 29-
foot-wide, 24-foot-high powerhouse containing two Ossberger turbines
and induction generators with a combined authorized capacity of 1,718
kilowatts; (6) a tailrace located on the river right-side of Fall Creek
directly below the powerhouse; (7) a 385-foot-long, 2.4-kilovolt
transmission line connecting to Cornell's distribution system; and (8)
appurtenant facilities.
    The Cornell Project is operated in a run-of-river mode and bypasses
an 1,800-foot-long reach of Fall Creek that extends from the toe of the
dam to the powerhouse tailrace. From 2013 through 2018, the average
annual generation was 4,599 megawatt-hours.
    m. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in item h above.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    n. Anyone may submit a protest or a motion to intervene in
accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18
CFR 385.210, .211, and .214. In determining the appropriate action to
take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments
filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with
the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any
protests or motions to intervene must be received on or before the
specified comment date for the particular application.
    All filings must: (1) Bear in all capital letters the title
``PROTEST'' or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE;'' (2) set forth in the heading
the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005.
Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the
applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served
upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application.
    o. Procedural schedule and final amendments: The application will
be processed according to the following preliminary schedule. Revisions
to the schedule will be made as appropriate.

Issue Scoping Document 1 for comments--December 2019.
Request Additional Information (if necessary)--February 2020.
Issue Scoping Document 2--March 2020.
Issue notice of ready for environmental analysis--March 2020.
Commission issues EA--September 2020.
Comments on EA--October 2020.

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

    Dated: November 22, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-25910 Filed 11-27-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


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

    Based on this illustrative analysis of four separate hypothetical
scenarios, EPA estimates that the costs for changes in the advanced
fuel volumes compared to 2017 could range from $(70)-$2 million in
2018. It is important to note that these illustrative costs do not take
into consideration the benefits of the program. For the purpose of this
annual rulemaking, we have not quantified benefits for the proposed
2018 standards. We do not have a quantified estimate of the GHG or
energy security impacts for a single year (e.g., 2018), and there are a
number of benefits that are difficult to quantify, such as rural
economic development and employment impacts from more diversified fuel
sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \116\ 40 million gallons on an ethanol gallon equivalent (EGE)
basis is approximately 27 million gallons of biodiesel on an energy
equivalent basis, assuming 1.5 RINs per gallon of biodiesel for the
purposes of this illustrative costs example. Due to the difference
in energy content between biodiesel and diesel, one gallon of
biodiesel is energy-equivalent to approximately 91% of a gallon of
diesel; 27 million gallons of biodiesel (or 40 million ethanol-
equivalent gallons) is energy-equivalent to approximately 24 million
gallons of diesel.
    \117\ Overall costs may not match per gallon costs times volumes
due to rounding.
    \118\ Due to the difference in energy content between ethanol
and gasoline, one gallon of ethanol is energy-equivalent to
approximately 67% of a gallon of gasoline; 40 million gallons of
ethanol is energy-equivalent to approximately 27 million gallons on
a gasoline gallon equivalent (GGE) basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Biomass-Based Diesel Volume for 2019

    In this section we discuss the proposed BBD applicable volume for
2019. We are establishing this volume in advance of those for other
renewable fuel categories in light of the statutory requirement in CAA
section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii) to establish the applicable volume of BBD for
years after 2012 no later than 14 months before the applicable volume
will apply. We are not at this time establishing the BBD percentage
standards that would apply to obligated parties in 2019 but intend to
do so in the Fall of 2018, after receiving EIA's estimate of gasoline
and diesel consumption for 2019. Although the BBD applicable volume
sets a floor for required BBD use, because the BBD volume requirement
is nested within both the advanced biofuel and the total renewable fuel
volume requirements, any ``excess'' BBD produced beyond the mandated
2019 BBD volume can be used to satisfy both of these other applicable
volume requirements. Therefore, these other standards also influence
BBD production and use.

A. Statutory Requirements

    The statute establishes applicable volume targets for years through
2022 for cellulosic biofuel, advanced biofuel, and total renewable
fuel. For BBD, applicable volume targets are specified in the statute
only through 2012. For years after those for which volumes are
specified in the statute, EPA is required under CAA section
211(o)(2)(B)(ii) to determine the applicable volume of BBD, in
coordination with the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of
Agriculture, based on a review of the implementation of the program
during calendar years for which the statute

specifies the volumes and an analysis of the following factors:
    1. The impact of the production and use of renewable fuels on the
environment, including on air quality, climate change, conversion of
wetlands, ecosystems, wildlife habitat, water quality, and water
supply;
    2. The impact of renewable fuels on the energy security of the
United States;
    3. The expected annual rate of future commercial production of
renewable fuels, including advanced biofuels in each category
(cellulosic biofuel and BBD);
    4. The impact of renewable fuels on the infrastructure of the
United States, including deliverability of materials, goods, and
products other than renewable fuel, and the sufficiency of
infrastructure to deliver and use renewable fuel;
    5. The impact of the use of renewable fuels on the cost to
consumers of transportation fuel and on the cost to transport goods;
and
    6. The impact of the use of renewable fuels on other factors,
including job creation, the price and supply of agricultural
commodities, rural economic development, and food prices.
    The statute also specifies that the volume requirement for BBD
cannot be less than the applicable volume specified in the statute for
calendar year 2012, which is 1.0 billion gallons. The statute does not,
however, establish any other numeric criteria, or provide any guidance
on how the EPA should weigh the importance of the often competing
factors, and the overarching goals of the statute when the EPA sets the
applicable volumes of BBD in years after those for which the statute
specifies such volumes. In the period 2013-2022, the statute specifies
increasing applicable volumes of cellulosic biofuel, advanced biofuel,
and total renewable fuel, but provides no guidance, beyond the 1.0
billion gallon minimum, on the level at which BBD volumes should be
set. As shown in Table VI.B.1-1 below, we have raised the BBD standard
above the statutory minimum each year beginning in 2013.

B. Determination of Applicable Volume of Biomass-Based Diesel

    One of the primary considerations in determining the BBD volume for
2019 is a review of the implementation of the program to date, as it
affects BBD. This review is required by the CAA, and also provides
insight into the capabilities of the industry to produce, import,
export, and distribute BBD. It also helps us to understand what
factors, beyond the BBD standard, may incentivize the production and
import of BBD. The number of BBD RINs generated, along with the number
of RINs retired due to export or for reasons other than compliance with
the annual BBD standards from 2011-2018 are shown in Table VI.B.1-1
below.

                                      Table VI.B.1-1--Biomass-Based (D4) RIN Generation and Standards in 2011-2018
                                                                 [million gallons] \119\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                BBD RINs
                                                           BBD RINs      Exported BBD    retired,  non-   Available  BBD   BBD  standard   BBD  standard
                                                           generated        (RINs)         compliance         RINs \a\       (gallons)        (RINs)
                                                                                reasons
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011..................................................           1,692              72                98           1,522             800           1,200
2012..................................................           1,737             102                90           1,545           1,000           1,500
2013..................................................           2,739             124               101           2,514           1,280           1,920
2014..................................................           2,710             134                92           2,484           1,630       \b\ 2,490
2015..................................................           2,796             145                32           2,619           1,730       \b\ 2,655
2016..................................................           4,008             203                52           3,753           1,900           2,850
2017..................................................             N/A             N/A               N/A             N/A           2,000           3,000
2018..................................................             N/A             N/A               N/A             N/A           2,100           3,150
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Available BBD RINs may not be exactly equal to BBD RINs Generated minus Exported RINs and BBD RINs Retired, Non-Compliance Reasons, due to rounding.
\b\ Each gallon of biodiesel qualifies for 1.5 RINs due to its higher energy content per gallon than ethanol. Renewable diesel qualifies for between 1.5
  and 1.7 RINs per gallon. In 2014 and 2015 the number of RINs in the BBD Standard column is not exactly equal to 1.5 times the BBD volume standard as
  these standards were established based on actual RIN generation data for 2014 and a combination of actual data and a projection of RIN generation for
  the last three months of the year for 2015. Some of the volume used to meet the BBD standard was renewable diesel, which generally has an equivalence
  value of 1.7.

    In reviewing historical BBD RIN generation and use, we see that the
number of RINs available for compliance purposes exceeded the volume
required to meet the BBD standard in 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2016.
Additional production and use of biodiesel was likely driven by a
number of factors, including demand to satisfy the advanced biofuel and
total renewable fuels standards, the biodiesel tax credit,\120\ and
favorable blending economics. The number of RINs available in 2014 and
2015 was approximately equal to the number required for compliance in
those years, as the standards for these years were finalized at the end
of November 2015. In 2016, with RFS standards established prior to the
beginning of the year and the blenders tax credit in place, BBD RIN
generation exceeded the volume required by the BBD standard by more
than one billion RINs. This strongly suggests that there is demand for
BBD RINs to satisfy the advanced biofuel and/or total renewable fuel
requirements beyond the required volume of BBD.\121\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \119\ Net BBD RINs Generated, Exported BBD RINs, and BBD RINs
Retired for Non-Compliance Reasons information from EMTS.
    \120\ The biodiesel tax credit was reauthorized in January 2013.
It applied retroactively for 2012 and for the remainder of 2013. It
was once again extended in December 2014 and applied retroactively
to all of 2014 as well as to the remaining weeks of 2014. In
December 2015 the biodiesel tax credit was authorized and applied
retro-actively for all of 2015 as well as through the end of 2016.
    \121\ For a further discussion of the ability for the advanced
biofuel and total renewable fuel volume requirements to provide a
demand for BBD beyond the BBD required volume see ``Memorandum to
docket: Draft Statutory Factors Assessment for the 2019 Biomass-
Based Diesel (BBD) Applicable Volumes'' and the 2017 final rule (81
FR 89795-89798, December 12, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In establishing the BBD and cellulosic standards as nested within
the advanced biofuel standard, Congress clearly intended to support
development of BBD and cellulosic biofuels, while also providing an
incentive for the growth of other non-specified types of advanced
biofuels. That is, the advanced biofuel standard provides an
opportunity for other advanced biofuels (advanced

biofuels that do not qualify as cellulosic biofuel or BBD) to be used
to satisfy the advanced biofuel standard after the cellulosic biofuel
and BBD standards have been met. Indeed, since Congress specifically
directed growth in BBD only through 2012, leaving development of volume
targets for BBD to EPA for later years while also specifying
substantial growth in the cellulosic biofuel and advanced biofuel
categories, we believe that Congress clearly intended for EPA to
evaluate the appropriate rate of participation of BBD within the
advanced biofuel standard.
    The BBD industry is currently the single largest contributor to the
advanced biofuel pool, one that to date has been largely responsible
for providing the growth in advanced biofuels envisioned by Congress.
We continue to believe that preserving space under the advanced biofuel
standard for non-BBD advanced biofuels, as well as BBD volumes in
excess of the BBD standard, will help to encourage the development and
production of a variety of advanced biofuels over the long term without
reducing the incentive for additional volumes of BBD beyond the BBD
standard in 2019. A variety of different types of advanced biofuels,
rather than a single type such as BBD, would positively impact energy
security (e.g., by increasing the diversity of feedstock sources used
to make biofuels, thereby reducing the impacts associated with a
shortfall in a particular type of feedstock) and increase the
likelihood of the development of lower cost advanced biofuels that meet
the same GHG reduction threshold as BBD.\122\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \122\ All types of advanced biofuel, including BBD, must achieve
lifecycle GHG reductions of at least 50%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With the considerations discussed above and in Section IV.B.2 in
mind, as well as our analysis of the factors specified in the statute,
we are proposing to maintain the applicable volume of BBD at 2.1
billion gallons for 2019. We believe it is appropriate to continue to
support the BBD industry through a guaranteed volume requirement, while
allowing room within the advanced biofuel volume requirement for the
participation of non-BBD advanced fuels. While in recent years we have
annually increased this BBD guarantee, we note that there has been a
very substantial cumulative increase since 2012, and that the 2018
guarantee is over twice the minimum BBD volume specified in the
statute. While we believe it is important to provide continued support
to the BBD industry, we do not believe it is necessary to increase the
BBD set-aside in 2019 in order to do so. Our assessment of the required
statutory factors, summarized in the next section and in a memorandum
to the docket (the ``2019 BBD docket memorandum''), supports our
proposal.\123\ We request comment on the biomass-based diesel volume
requirement for 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \123\ ``Memorandum to docket: Draft Statutory Factors Assessment
for the 2019 Biomass-Based Diesel (BBD) Applicable Volumes.'' See
Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0091.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We believe this approach strikes the appropriate balance between
providing a market environment where the development of other advanced
biofuels is incentivized, while also maintaining support for the BBD
industry. Based on our review of the data, and the nested nature of the
BBD standard within the advanced standard, we conclude that the advance
standard continues to drive the ultimate volume of BBD supplied. This
means that setting a marginally lower or higher BBD standard would not
change the volume of BBD used in 2019. Given the success of the
industry in the past few years, as well as the substantial increases in
the BBD volume requirement since 2012, we are proposing that a higher
volume requirement for BBD in 2019 is not necessary to provide support
for the industry, and are proposing to maintain the volume requirement
at the level specified for 2018. Setting the BBD standard in this
manner would continue to allow a considerable portion of the advanced
biofuel volume to be satisfied by either additional gallons of BBD or
by other unspecified and potentially less costly types of qualifying
advanced biofuels. As discussed in Section I.E., EPA also requests
comment on decreasing the required volume of BBD for 2019 in an effort
to increase the energy independence impacts of the RFS program.

C. Consideration of Statutory Factors Set Forth in CAA Section
211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(I)-(VI) for 2019

    As noted earlier in Section IV.B., the BBD volume requirement is
nested within the advanced biofuel requirement and the advanced biofuel
requirement is, in turn, nested within the total renewable fuel volume
requirement. This means that any BBD produced beyond the mandated BBD
volume can be used to satisfy both these other applicable volume
requirements. The result is that in considering the statutory factors
we must consider the potential impacts of increasing BBD in comparison
to other advanced biofuels.\124\ For a given advanced biofuel standard,
greater or lesser BBD volume requirements do not change the amount of
advanced biofuel used to displace petroleum fuels; rather, increasing
the BBD requirement may result in the displacement of other types of
advanced biofuels that could have been used to meet the advanced
biofuels volume requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \124\ While excess BBD production could also displace
conventional renewable fuel under the total renewable standard, as
long as the BBD applicable volume is significantly lower than the
advanced biofuel applicable volume our action in setting the BBD
applicable volume is not expected to displace conventional renewable
fuel under the total renewable standard, but rather other advanced
biofuels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with our 2018 approach in setting the final BBD volume
requirement, EPA's primary assessment of the statutory factors for the
proposed 2019 BBD applicable volume is that because the BBD requirement
is nested within the advanced biofuel volume requirement, we expect
that the 2019 advanced volume requirement, when set next year, will
determine the level of BBD production and imports that occur in
2019.\125\ Therefore, EPA continues to believe that the same overall
volume of BBD would likely be supplied in 2019 regardless of the BBD
volume we mandate for 2019 in this proposed rule. This assessment is
based, in part, on our review of the RFS program implementation to
date, as discussed above in Section VI.B. and in the 2019 BBD docket
memorandum. Thus, we do not expect our proposed 2019 BBD volume
requirement to result in a difference in the factors we consider
pursuant to CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(I)-(VI).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \125\ Even though we are not proposing to set the 2019 advanced
biofuel volume requirement as part of this rulemaking, we expect
that the 2019 advanced volume requirement will be considerably
higher than the 2019 BBD requirement, consistent with past practice
and, therefore, that the BBD volume requirement for 2019 would not
be expected to impact the volume of BBD that is actually produced
and imported during the 2019-time period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an additional supplementary assessment, we have considered the
potential impacts of selecting an applicable volume of BBD other than
2.1 billion gallons in 2019 based on the assumption that in
guaranteeing the BBD volume at any given level there could be greater
use of BBD and a corresponding decrease in the use of other types of
advanced biofuels. However, setting a BBD volume requirement higher or
lower than 2.1 billion gallons in 2019 would only be expected to impact
BBD volumes on the margin, protecting to a lesser or greater degree BBD
from being outcompeted by

other advanced biofuels. In this supplementary assessment we have
considered all of the statutory factors found in CAA section
211(2)(B)(ii), and as described in the 2019 BBD docket memorandum, our
assessment does not appear, based on available information, to provide
a reasonable basis for setting a higher or lower volume requirement for
BBD than 2.1 billion gallons for 2018.
    Overall and as described in the 2019 BBD docket memorandum, we have
determined that both the primary assessment and the supplemental
assessment of the statutory factors specified in CAA section
211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(I)-(VI) for the year 2019 does not provide significant
support for setting the BBD standard at a level higher or lower than
2.1 billion gallons in 2019.

VII. Percentage Standards for 2018

    The renewable fuel standards are expressed as volume percentages
and are used by each obligated party to determine their Renewable
Volume Obligations (RVOs). Since there are four separate standards
under the RFS program, there are likewise four separate RVOs applicable
to each obligated party. Each standard applies to the sum of all non-
renewable gasoline and diesel produced or imported. The percentage
standards are set so that if every obligated party meets the
percentages by acquiring and retiring an appropriate number of RINs,
then the amount of renewable fuel, cellulosic biofuel, BBD, and
advanced biofuel used will meet the applicable volume requirements on a
nationwide basis.
    Sections III through V provide our rationale and basis for the
proposed volume requirements for 2018.\126\ The volumes used to
determine the proposed percentage standards are shown in Table VII-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \126\ The 2018 volume requirement for BBD was established in the
2017 final rule.

 Table VII-1--Volumes for Use in Setting the 2018 Applicable Percentage
                                Standards
                            [Billion gallons]
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cellulosic biofuel.............................................    0.238
Biomass-based diesel \a\.......................................     2.10
Advanced biofuel...............................................     4.24
Renewable fuel.................................................    19.24
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Represents physical volume.

    For the purposes of converting these volumes into percentage
standards, we generally use two decimal places to be consistent with
the volume targets as given in the statute, and similarly two decimal
places in the percentage standards. However, for cellulosic biofuel we
use three decimal places in both the volume requirement and percentage
standards to more precisely capture the smaller volume projections and
the unique methodology that in some cases results in estimates of only
a few million gallons for a single producer.

A. Calculation of Percentage Standards

    To calculate the proposed percentage standards, we are following
the same methodology for 2018 as we have in all prior years. The
formulas used to calculate the percentage standards applicable to
producers and importers of gasoline and diesel are provided in Sec.
80.1405. The formulas rely on estimates of the volumes of gasoline and
diesel fuel, for both highway and nonroad uses, which are projected to
be used in the year in which the standards will apply. The projected
gasoline and diesel volumes are provided by EIA, and include
projections of ethanol and biodiesel used in transportation fuel. Since
the percentage standards apply only to the non-renewable gasoline and
diesel produced or imported, the volumes of ethanol and biodiesel are
subtracted out of the EIA projections of gasoline and diesel.
    Transportation fuels other than gasoline or diesel, such as natural
gas, propane, and electricity from fossil fuels, are not currently
subject to the standards, and volumes of such fuels are not used in
calculating the annual percentage standards. Since under the
regulations the standards apply only to producers and importers of
gasoline and diesel, these are the transportation fuels used to set the
percentage standards, as well as to determine the annual volume
obligations of an individual gasoline or diesel producer or importer.
    As specified in the March 26, 2010 RFS2 final rule,\127\ the
percentage standards are based on energy-equivalent gallons of
renewable fuel, with the cellulosic biofuel, advanced biofuel, and
total renewable fuel standards based on ethanol equivalence and the BBD
standard based on biodiesel equivalence. However, all RIN generation is
based on ethanol-equivalence. For example, the RFS regulations provide
that production or import of a gallon of qualifying biodiesel will lead
to the generation of 1.5 RINs. The formula specified in the regulations
for calculation of the BBD percentage standard is based on biodiesel-
equivalence, and thus assumes that all BBD used to satisfy the BBD
standard is biodiesel and requires that the applicable volume
requirement be multiplied by 1.5. However, BBD often contains some
renewable diesel, and a gallon of renewable diesel typically generates
1.7 RINs.\128\ In addition, there is often some renewable diesel in the
conventional renewable fuel pool. As a result, the actual number of
RINs generated by biodiesel and renewable diesel is used in the context
of our assessing reasonably attainable volumes for purposes of deriving
the applicable volume requirements and associated percentage standards
for advanced biofuel and total renewable fuel, and likewise in
obligated parties' determination of compliance with any of the
applicable standards. While there is a difference in the treatment of
biodiesel + renewable diesel in the context of determining the
percentage standard for BBD versus determining the percentage standard
for advanced biofuel and total renewable fuel, it is not a significant
one given our approach to determining the BBD volume requirement. Our
intent in setting the BBD applicable volume is to provide a level of
guaranteed volume for BBD, but as described in Section VI.B, we do not
expect the BBD standard to be binding. That is, we expect that actual
supply of BBD, as well as supply of conventional biodiesel + renewable
diesel, will be driven by the advanced biofuel and total renewable fuel
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \127\ 75 FR 14670, March 26, 2010.
    \128\ Although in some cases a gallon of renewable diesel
generates either 1.5 or 1.6 RINs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Small Refineries and Small Refiners

    In CAA section 211(o)(9), enacted as part of the Energy Policy Act
of 2005, and amended by the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007, Congress provided a temporary exemption to small refineries \129\
through December 31, 2010. Congress provided that small refineries
could receive a temporary extension of the exemption beyond 2010 based
either on the results of a required DOE study, or based on an EPA
determination of ``disproportionate economic hardship'' on a case-by-
case basis in response to small refinery petitions. In reviewing
petitions, EPA, in consultation with the Department of Energy,
evaluates the impacts petitioning refineries would likely face in
achieving compliance with the RFS requirements and how compliance would
affect their ability to remain competitive and profitable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \129\ A small refiner that meets the requirements of 40 CFR
80.1442 may also be eligible for an exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has granted exemptions pursuant to this process in the past. In
the Consolidated Appropriations Act of

2017, an explanatory statement directed EPA ``to follow DOE's
recommendations which are based on the original 2011 Small Refinery
Exemption study prepared for Congress and the conference report to
division D of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016.'' \130\ This
directive could impact how EPA evaluates small refinery hardship
petitions and the number and magnitude of exemptions granted. As a
result, EPA seeks comment on how we should account for exemptions in
setting the annual percentage standards for 2018 under CAA section
211(o)(3) and 40 CFR 80.1405.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \130\ Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017, Public Law 115-31.
The Explanatory Statement is available at: https://rules.house.gov/sites/republicans.rules.house.gov/files/115/OMNI/DIVISION%20G%20-%20INT%20SOM%20FY17%20OCR.pdf, and reads ``The agreement includes
the directive contained in Senate Report 114-281 related to small
refinery relief.'' Senate Report 114-281 includes the quoted
language above directing EPA to follow DOE's recommendation and is
available at: https://www.congress.gov/114/crpt/srpt281/CRPT-114srpt281.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Proposed Standards

    The formulas in Sec.  80.1405 for the calculation of the percentage
standards require the specification of a total of 14 variables covering
factors such as the renewable fuel volume requirements, projected
gasoline and diesel demand for all states and territories where the RFS
program applies, renewable fuels projected by EIA to be included in the
gasoline and diesel demand, and exemptions for small refineries. The
values of all the variables used for this proposed rule are shown in
Table VII.C-1.\131\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \131\ To determine the 49-state values for gasoline and diesel,
the amounts of these fuels used in Alaska is subtracted from the
totals provided by DOE because petroleum based fuels used in Alaska
do not incur RFS obligations. The Alaska fractions are determined
from the June 29, 2016 EIA State Energy Data System (SEDS), Energy
Consumption Estimates.

  Table VII.C-1--Values for Terms in Calculation of the 2018 Standards
                                  \132\
                            [Billion gallons]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Term                     Description             Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RFVCB..........................  Required volume of                0.238
                                  cellulosic biofuel.
RFVBBD.........................  Required volume of                 2.10
                                  biomass-based diesel.
RFVAB..........................  Required volume of                 4.24
                                  advanced biofuel.
RFVRF..........................  Required volume of                19.24
                                  renewable fuel.
G..............................  Projected volume of              142.90
                                  gasoline.
D..............................  Projected volume of               55.23
                                  diesel.
RG.............................  Projected volume of               14.38
                                  renewables in gasoline.
RD.............................  Projected volume of                2.58
                                  renewables in diesel.
GS.............................  Projected volume of                0.00
                                  gasoline for opt-in
                                  areas.
RGS............................  Projected volume of                0.00
                                  renewables in gasoline
                                  for opt-in areas.
DS.............................  Projected volume of                0.00
                                  diesel for opt-in
                                  areas.
RDS............................  Projected volume of                0.00
                                  renewables in diesel
                                  for opt-in areas.
GE.............................  Projected volume of                0.00
                                  gasoline for exempt
                                  small refineries.
DE.............................  Projected volume of                0.00
                                  diesel for exempt
                                  small refineries.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Projected volumes of gasoline and diesel, and the renewable fuels
contained within them, were taken from the April, 2017 version of EIA's
STEO. For the final rule, we intend to use volume projections provided
by EIA as required in the statute at CAA section 211(o)(3)(A), which
are typically consistent with those available in the STEO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \132\ See ``Calculation of proposed % standards for 2018'' in
docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0091.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Using the volumes shown in Table VII.C-1, we have calculated the
percentage standards for 2018 as shown in Table VII.C-2.

          Table VII.C-2--Proposed Percentage Standards for 2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cellulosic biofuel............................................     0.131
Biomass-based diesel..........................................      1.74
Advanced biofuel..............................................      2.34
Renewable fuel................................................     10.62
------------------------------------------------------------------------

VIII. Public Participation

    We request comment on all aspects of this proposal. This section
describes how you can participate in this process.

A. How do I submit comments?

    We are opening a formal comment period by publishing this document.
We will accept comments during the period indicated under the DATES
section above. If you have an interest in the proposed standards, we
encourage you to comment on any aspect of this rulemaking. We also
request comment on specific topics identified throughout this proposal.
    Your comments will be most useful if you include appropriate and
detailed supporting rationale, data, and analysis. Commenters are
especially encouraged to provide specific suggestions for any changes
that they believe need to be made. You should send all comments, except
those containing proprietary information, to our Docket (see ADDRESSES
section above) by the end of the comment period.
    You may submit comments electronically through the electronic
public docket, www.regulations.gov, by mail to the address shown in
ADDRESSES, or through hand delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt
by EPA, identify the appropriate docket identification number in the
subject line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your
comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments
received after the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.''
EPA is not required to consider these late comments. If you wish to
submit Confidential Business Information (CBI) or information that is
otherwise protected by statute, please follow the instructions in
Section VIII.B below.
    EPA will also hold a public hearing on this proposed rule. We will
announce the public hearing date and location for this proposal in a
supplemental Federal Register document.

B. How should I submit CBI to the agency?

    Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI
electronically through the electronic public docket,
www.regulations.gov, or by email. Send or deliver information
identified as CBI only to the following address: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency,

Assessment and Standards Division, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI
48105, Attention Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0091. You may claim
information that you submit to EPA as CBI by marking any part or all of
that information as CBI (if you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the
outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically
within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is CBI).
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    In addition to one complete version of the comments that include
any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comments that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion
in the public docket. This non-CBI version of your comments may be
submitted electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/courier. If
you submit the copy that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark
the outside of the disk or CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI.
Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket
without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the
procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is an economically significant regulatory action that
was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.
Any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been
documented in the docket. The EPA prepared an analysis of illustrative
costs associated with this action. This analysis is presented in
Section V.D of this preamble.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the information collection
activities contained in the existing regulations and has assigned OMB
control numbers 2060-0637 and 2060-0640. The proposed standards would
not impose new or different reporting requirements on regulated parties
than already exist for the RFS program.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule.
    The small entities directly regulated by the RFS program are small
refiners, which are defined at 13 CFR 121.201. We have evaluated the
impacts of this proposed rule on small entities from two perspectives:
as if the 2018 standards were a standalone action or if they are a part
of the overall impacts of the RFS program as a whole.
    When evaluating the standards as if they were a standalone action
separate and apart from the original rulemaking which established the
RFS2 program, then the standards could be viewed as decreasing the
advanced and total renewable fuel volumes required of obligated parties
by 40 million gallons between 2017 and 2018. To evaluate the impacts of
the proposed volumes on small entities relative to 2017, EPA has
conducted a screening analysis \133\ to assess whether it should make a
finding that this action would not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. Currently available
information shows that the impact on small entities from implementation
of this rule would not be significant. EPA has reviewed and assessed
the available information, which shows that obligated parties,
including small entities, are generally able to recover the cost of
acquiring the RINs necessary for compliance with the RFS standards
through higher sales prices of the petroleum products they sell than
would be expected in the absence of the RFS program.134 135
This is true whether they acquire RINs by purchasing renewable fuels
with attached RINs or purchase separated RINs. The costs of the RFS
program are thus generally being passed on to consumers in the highly
competitive marketplace. Even if we were to assume that the cost of
acquiring RINs were not recovered by obligated parties, and we used the
maximum values of the illustrative costs discussed in Section V.D of
this preamble and the gasoline and diesel fuel volume projections and
wholesale prices from the April 2017 version of EIA's Short-Term Energy
Outlook, and current wholesale fuel prices, a cost-to-sales ratio test
shows that the costs to small entities of the RFS standards are far
less than 1 percent of the value of their sales.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \133\ ``Draft Screening Analysis for the Proposed Renewable Fuel
Standard Program Renewable Volume Obligations for 2018'', memorandum
from Dallas Burkholder, Nick Parsons, and Tia Sutton to EPA Air
Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0091.
    \134\ For a further discussion of the ability of obligated
parties to recover the cost of RINs see ``A Preliminary Assessment
of RIN Market Dynamics, RIN Prices, and Their Effects,'' Dallas
Burkholder, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, US EPA. May
14, 2015, EPA Air Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0111.
    \135\ Knittel, Christopher R., Ben S. Meiselman, and James H.
Stock. ``The Pass-Through of RIN Prices to Wholesale and Retail
Fuels under the Renewable Fuel Standard.'' Working Paper 21343. NBER
Working Paper Series. Available online http://www.nber.org/papers/w21343.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the screening analysis described above supports a
certification that this rule would not have a significant economic
impact on small refiners, we continue to believe that it is more
appropriate to consider the standards as a part of ongoing
implementation of the overall RFS program. When considered this way,
the impacts of the RFS program as a whole on small entities were
addressed in the RFS2 final rule (75 FR 14670, March 26, 2010), which
was the rule that implemented the entire program required by the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007). As such, the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) panel process
that took place prior to the 2010 rule was also for the entire RFS
program and looked at impacts on small refiners through 2022.
    For the SBREFA process for the RFS2 final rule, EPA conducted
outreach, fact-finding, and analysis of the potential impacts of the
program on small refiners, which are all described in the Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, located in the rulemaking docket (EPA-
HQ-OAR-2005-0161). This analysis looked at impacts to all refiners,
including small refiners, through the year 2022 and found that the
program would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities, and that this impact was expected to decrease
over time, even as the standards increased. For gasoline and/or diesel
small refiners subject to the standards, the analysis included a cost-
to-sales ratio test, a ratio of the estimated annualized compliance
costs to the value of sales per company. From this test, it was
estimated that all directly regulated small entities would have
compliance costs that are less than one percent of their sales over the
life

of the program (75 FR 14862, March 26, 2010).
    We have determined that this proposed rule would not impose any
additional requirements on small entities beyond those already
analyzed, since the impacts of this proposed rule are not greater or
fundamentally different than those already considered in the analysis
for the RFS2 final rule assuming full implementation of the RFS
program. This rule proposes the 2018 advanced and total renewable fuel
volume requirements at levels 40 million gallons lower than the 2017
volume requirements, and significantly below the statutory volume
targets. This exercise of EPA's waiver authority reduces burdens on
small entities, as compared to the burdens that would be imposed under
the volumes specified in the Clean Air Act in the absence of waivers--
which are the volumes that we assessed in the screening analysis that
we prepared for implementation of the full program. Regarding the BBD
standard, we are proposing to maintain the volume requirement for 2019
at the same level as 2018. While this volume is an increase over the
statutory minimum value of 1 billion gallons, the BBD standard is a
nested standard within the advanced biofuel category, which we are
significantly reducing from the statutory volume targets. As discussed
in Section VI, we are proposing to set the 2019 BBD volume requirement
at a level below what is anticipated will be produced and used to
satisfy the reduced advanced biofuel requirement. The net result of the
standards being proposed in this action is a reduction in burden as
compared to implementation of the statutory volume targets, as was
assumed in the RFS2 final rule analysis.
    While the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, there are compliance
flexibilities in the program that can help to reduce impacts on small
entities. These flexibilities include being able to comply through RIN
trading rather than renewable fuel blending, 20 percent RIN rollover
allowance (up to 20 percent of an obligated party's RVO can be met
using previous-year RINs), and deficit carry-forward (the ability to
carry over a deficit from a given year into the following year,
providing that the deficit is satisfied together with the next year's
RVO). In the RFS2 final rule, we discussed other potential small entity
flexibilities that had been suggested by the SBREFA panel or through
comments, but we did not adopt them, in part because we had serious
concerns regarding our authority to do so.
    Additionally, as we realize that there may be cases in which a
small entity may be in a difficult financial situation and the level of
assistance afforded by the program flexibilities is insufficient. For
such circumstances, the program provides hardship relief provisions for
small entities (small refiners), as well as for small refineries.\136\
As required by the statute, the RFS regulations include a hardship
relief provision (at 40 CFR 80.1441(e)(2)) that allows for a small
refinery to petition for an extension of its small refinery exemption
at any time based on a showing that compliance with the requirements of
the RFS program would result in the refinery experiencing a
``disproportionate economic hardship.'' EPA regulations provide similar
relief to small refiners that are not eligible for small refinery
relief (see 40 CFR 80.1442(h)). EPA evaluates these petitions on a
case-by-case basis and may approve such petitions if it finds that a
disproportionate economic hardship exists. In evaluating such
petitions, EPA consults with the U.S. Department of Energy, and takes
the findings of DOE's 2011 Small Refinery Study and other economic
factors into consideration. EPA successfully implemented these
provisions by evaluating petitions for exemption from 12 small
refineries for the 2016 RFS standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \136\ See CAA section 211(o)(9)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given that this proposed rule would not impose additional
requirements on small entities, would decrease burden via a reduction
in required volumes as compared to statutory volume targets and as
compared to the 2017 volume requirements, would not change the
compliance flexibilities currently offered to small entities under the
RFS program (including the small refinery hardship provisions we
continue to successfully implement), and available information shows
that the impact on small entities from implementation of this rule
would not be significant viewed either from the perspective of it being
a standalone action or a part of the overall RFS program, we have
therefore concluded that this action would have no net regulatory
burden for directly regulated small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action
implements mandates specifically and explicitly set forth in CAA
section 211(o) and we believe that this action represents the least
costly, most cost-effective approach to achieve the statutory
requirements of the rule.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This proposed rule would be implemented at the
Federal level and affects transportation fuel refiners, blenders,
marketers, distributors, importers, exporters, and renewable fuel
producers and importers. Tribal governments would be affected only to
the extent they produce, purchase, and use regulated fuels. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it implements specific standards
established by Congress in statutes (CAA section 211(o)) and does not
concern an environmental health risk or safety risk.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. This action proposes to establish the
required renewable fuel content of the transportation fuel supply for
2018, consistent with the CAA and waiver authorities provided therein.
The RFS program and this rule are designed to achieve positive effects
on the nation's transportation fuel supply, by increasing energy
independence and lowering lifecycle GHG emissions of transportation
fuel.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations, and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
This proposed rule does not affect the level of protection provided to
human health or the environment by applicable air quality standards.
This action does not relax the control measures on sources regulated by
the RFS regulations and therefore would not cause emissions increases
from these sources.

X. Statutory Authority

    Statutory authority for this action comes from section 211 of the
Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7545. Additional support for the procedural
and compliance related aspects of this proposed rule come from sections
114, 208, and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7542, and
7601(a).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Diesel fuel, Fuel additives, Gasoline, Imports,
Oil imports, Petroleum, Renewable fuel.

    Dated: July 5, 2017.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40
CFR part 80 as follows:

PART 80--REGULATION OF FUELS AND FUEL ADDITIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7414, 7521, 7542, 7545, and 7601(a).

Subpart M--Renewable Fuel Standard

0
2. Section 80.1405 is amended by adding new paragraph (a)(9) to read as
follows:

Sec.  80.1405   What are the Renewable Fuel Standards?

    (a) * * *
    (9) Renewable Fuel Standards for 2018.
    (i) The value of the cellulosic biofuel standard for 2018 shall be
0.131 percent.
    (ii) The value of the biomass-based diesel standard for 2018 shall
be 1.74 percent.
    (iii) The value of the advanced biofuel standard for 2018 shall be
2.34 percent.
    (iv) The value of the renewable fuel standard for 2018 shall be
10.62 percent.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-14632 Filed 7-20-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 21, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 182)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 57384-57385]
[DOCID:fr21se10-8]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 201

[Release No. 34-62921]

Rescission of Rules Pertaining to the Payment of Bounties for
Information Leading to the Recovery of Civil Penalties for Insider
Trading

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
(``Dodd-Frank Act'') \1\ repealed former Section 21A(e) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which had authorized the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') to make monetary awards to
persons who provided information leading to the recovery of civil
penalties for insider trading violations. Because the statutory basis
for the insider trading bounty program has been removed, the Commission
is rescinding rules promulgated to administer the program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (July 21, 2010).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: September 21, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth H. Hall, Assistant Chief
Counsel,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of Chief Counsel, Division of
Enforcement, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-6553.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Insider Trading and Securities Fraud
Enforcement Act of 1988 authorized the Commission to award bounties to
persons who provided information leading to the recovery of civil
penalties for insider trading violations; the bounty provision was
codified as former Section 21A(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Exchange Act''). In 1989, the Commission adopted procedural
rules to administer the insider trading bounty program. See
Applications for Bounty Awards on Civil Penalties Imposed in Insider
Trading Litigation, Exchange Act Release No. 26994 (June 30, 1989).
    The Dodd-Frank Act created a new and broader program for making
monetary awards to whistleblowers, codified as Section 21F of the
Exchange Act.\2\ Under the new whistleblower program, the Commission is
authorized to make awards to persons who voluntarily provide the
Commission

with ``original information'' about a violation of the Federal
securities laws that leads to the successful enforcement of a ``covered
judicial or administrative action,'' or a ``related action,'' as those
terms are defined by the Dodd-Frank Act. Unlike the insider trading
bounty program, awards may be paid in connection with original
information concerning any violation of the Federal securities laws.
Awards may range from 10 to 30 percent of the amounts collected as
monetary sanctions imposed in the covered judicial or administrative
action or related actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Section 922 of the Dodd-Frank Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with enactment of the new whistleblower provision,
Congress repealed Section 21A(e).\3\ Because that statutory provision
is no longer available as a basis for awarding bounties in insider
trading cases, the Commission is rescinding its rules for
administration of the insider trading bounty program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section 923(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Procedural and Other Matters

    The Administrative Procedure Act (``APA'') generally requires an
agency to publish notice of a proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register.\4\ This requirement does not apply, however, if the agency
``for good cause'' finds * * * that notice and public procedure thereon
are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.''
\5\ Because the statutory authority for the insider trading bounty
program has been repealed, the Commission is removing the rules
administering the program from the Federal Register. These rules no
longer have any practical effect, and their continued inclusion in the
Federal Register might lead to public confusion. For these reasons, the
Commission finds that good cause exists to dispense with public notice
and comment because notice and comment would be unnecessary,
impracticable and contrary to the public interest.\6\ For similar
reasons the Commission finds good cause for this action to be effective
immediately.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
    \5\ 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
    \6\ Similarly, the amendments do not require analysis under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. See 5 U.S.C. 601(2) and 603(a) (for
purposes of Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis, the term ``rule''
means any rule for which the agency publishes a general notice of
proposed rulemaking).
    \7\ Additionally, this finding satisfies the requirements for
immediate effectiveness under the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act. See 5 U.S.C. 808(2); see also 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 23(a)(2) of the Exchange Act requires the Commission to
consider the competitive effects of rulemaking under the Exchange Act.
Further, Section 3(f) of the Exchange Act requires us, when engaging in
rulemaking where we are required to consider or determine whether an
action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, to consider,
in addition to the protection of investors, whether the action will
promote efficiency, competition, and capital formation. Because
Congress has repealed the insider trading bounty program, our removal
of the procedural rules related to that program will not create any
competitive advantages or disadvantages, or affect efficiency,
competition, and capital formation.

Statutory Authority and Text of Amendments

    The Commission is removing regulations pursuant to authority
provided by Section 23(a) of the Exchange Act.

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 201

    Administrative practice and procedure.

Text of Amendments

0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, Title 17, Chapter II of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 201--RULES OF PRACTICE

0
1. The authority citation for part 201 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77s, 77sss, 78w, 78x, 80a-37, and 80b-11; 5
U.S.C. 504(c)(1).

Subpart C--[Removed and Reserved]

0
2. Remove and reserve Subpart C.

    Dated: September 15, 2010.

    By the Commission.

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-23457 Filed 9-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 65 (Friday, April 3, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18950-18951]
[FR Doc No: 2020-07019]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

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

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1285-008.
    Applicants: Craven County Wood Energy Limited Partnership.
    Description: Supplement to September 12, 2019 Notice of Non-
Material Change-In-Status of Craven County Wood Energy Limited
Partnership.
    Filed Date: 3/24/20.
    Accession Number: 20200324-5187.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/14/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2633-037.
    Applicants: Birchwood Power Partners, L.P.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Birchwood Power
Partners, L.P.
    Filed Date: 3/27/20.
    Accession Number: 20200327-5321.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1415-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Service Agreement No. 723
between Tri-State and GNE to be effective 2/27/2020.
    Filed Date: 3/27/20.
    Accession Number: 20200327-5262.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1416-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to OA, Schedule 6,
sec 1.5 re: Actual Study Cost Recovery to be effective 5/27/2020.
    Filed Date: 3/27/20.
    Accession Number: 20200327-5276.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1417-000.
    Applicants: Roundhouse Renewable Energy, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Roundhouse Renewable Energy,
LLC Application for MBR Authority to be effective 5/27/2020.
    Filed Date: 3/27/20.
    Accession Number: 20200327-528.0.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1418-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Compliance filing: FERC Order No. 864 (re: ADIT) TO
Tariff Compliance Filing to be effective 1/27/2020.
    Filed Date: 3/27/20.
    Accession Number: 20200327-5300.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1419-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Request for Waiver of Tariff Provisions, et al. of New
York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Filed Date: 3/27/20.
    Accession Number: 20200327-5320.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1420-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to Original WMPA
No. 5498; Queue No. AE1-074 to be effective 10/14/2019.
    Filed Date: 3/30/20.
    Accession Number: 20200330-5176.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/20/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1421-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 3125R8 Basin Electric Power
Cooperative NITSA and NOA to be effective 3/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 3/30/20.
    Accession Number: 20200330-5177.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/20/20.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 30, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-07019 Filed 4-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 119 (Monday, June 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35694-35695]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15268]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Pilot
Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier Operations

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period
soliciting comments on the following collection of information was
published on April 9, 2015. FAA aviation safety inspectors review
Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) Certification Training Program (CTP)
submittals to determine that the program complies with the applicable
requirements of 14 CFR 61.156.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by July 22, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be
addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ronda Thompson at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 2120-0755.
    Title: Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air
Carrier Operations.
    Form Numbers: FAA Form 8700-1.
    Type of Review: Revision of an information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on April 9, 2015 (80 FR 19107). FAA aviation safety
inspectors review the Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) Certification
Training Program (CTP) submittals to determine that the program
complies with the applicable requirements of 14 CFR 61.156. The
programs that comply with the minimum requirements receive approval to
begin offering or providing the course to applicants for an ATP
certificate with a multiengine class rating or an ATP certificate
obtained concurrently with an airplane type rating. The inspectors also
review an institution of higher education's application (new form) for
the authority to certify its graduates meet the minimum requirements of
14 CFR 61.160. The institutions of higher education that receive a
letter of authorization for their degree program(s) will be authorized
to place a certifying statement on a graduates' transcript indicating
he or she is eligible for a restricted privileges ATP certificate. For
those institutions of higher education that have received the Letter of
Authorization (LOA) from the FAA to certify graduates for a restricted
privileges ATP certificate that would like to add degree programs or
additional coursework to the authorization, they must submit an
application for revision. FAA will review the revised application, and
amend the LOA accordingly.
    Respondents: Approximately 50 new applicants.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 120 hours for ATP CTP course
development, 8 hours for application for the authority to certify that
graduates meet the minimum requirements of 14 CFR 61.160, 2 hours for
revision application for authority to certify graduates for a
restricted privileges ATP certificate.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 1,411.75 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 16, 2015.
Ronda Thompson,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business
Services Division, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2015-15268 Filed 6-19-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 173 (Thursday, September 6, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54796-54797]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21261]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0222; Directorate Identifier 2011-SW-007-AD;
Amendment 39-17166; AD 2012-17-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter France Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Eurocopter France Model AS350 helicopters. This AD requires installing
protection sleeves over certain forward (pitch) servo-control hydraulic
hoses. This AD was prompted by an in-flight fire caused by the ignition
of hydraulic fluid leaking from a damaged forward servo-control
hydraulic hose. This AD's actions are intended to prevent the forward
servo-control hydraulic hoses from becoming damaged and leaking
hydraulic fluid that could ignite in flight, which could result in loss
of main rotor (M/R) control, power loss, structural damage, propagation
of fire, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: This AD is effective October 11, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain documents listed in this AD as of October 11,
2012.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75052, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or at http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub. You may review the referenced
service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas
76137.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket Operations Office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, any incorporated-by-reference
service information, the economic evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations
Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations Office, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-
140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Wilbanks, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and Policy Group, 2601 Meacham
Boulevard, Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On March 9, 2012, at 77 FR 14310, the Federal Register published
our notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed to amend 14
CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to Eurocopter AS350 B,
BA, D, B1, B2, and B3 helicopters with a single hydraulic power system
and forward (pitch) servo-control hydraulic hoses part number (P/N)
704A34-412-033 (other reference manufacturer's part number (MP/N) 675-
102-05-01) or P/N 704A34-412-035 (other reference MP/N 675-102-06-01)
installed. That NPRM proposed to require installing protection sleeves
over certain forward servo-control hydraulic hoses. The proposed
requirements were intended to prevent the forward servo-control
hydraulic hoses from becoming damaged and leaking hydraulic fluid that
could ignite in flight. Such an ignition could result in loss of M/R
control, power loss, propagation of fire, structural damage, and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
No. 2011-0033, dated March 1, 2011 (AD 2011-0033), to correct an unsafe
condition for the Eurocopter helicopters. EASA advises that an in-
flight fire in the main gearbox compartment occurred on an AS350B2
helicopter. The fire was ``caused by ignition of hydraulic fluid
leaking from a hydraulic hose, which had been damaged following an
electrical fault in a circuit located in the compartment that is not
fire protected. An in-flight fire in the main gearbox compartment
during a continued flight, when undetected or if a landing could not be
performed immediately, can result in loss of hydraulics, shutdown of
the engine because of fire effects, and damage to the Main Rotor (MR)
control system.'' This condition, if not prevented, could lead to loss
of M/R control, power loss, structural damage, propagation of fire into
the cabin or other compartments, and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter. For these reasons, AD 2011-0033 requires installation of
protection sleeves on the affected hydraulic hoses.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD, but we did not receive any comments on the NPRM.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
France and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with France, EASA, its technical
representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
the EASA AD. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all
information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same
type designs and that air safety and the public interest require
adopting the AD requirements as proposed.

Related Service Information

    Eurocopter has issued Alert Service Bulletin No. 29.00.13, dated
July 26, 2010, which specifies installing two siliconed glass wool
sleeves over both forward main rotor servo-control hydraulic hoses.
EASA classified this ASB as mandatory and issued AD 2011-0033 to ensure
the continued airworthiness of these helicopters.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 695 helicopters of U.S.
Registry and that operators will incur the following costs to comply
with this AD:
    Disconnecting the servo control hoses, installing the protective
sleeves, reconnecting the hoses, and testing for interference requires
one work hour at an average labor rate of $85 per hour. Required parts
cost $212, for a total cost of $297 for each helicopter. Based upon
these costs, we estimate a total cost to the U.S. operator fleet of
$206,415.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on helicopters identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (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);
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2012-17-03 Eurocopter France Helicopters: Amendment 39-17166; Docket
No. FAA-2012-0222; Directorate Identifier 2011-SW-007-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Eurocopter France Model AS350B, AS350BA,
AS350D, AS350B1, AS350B2, and AS350B3 helicopters, certificated in
any category, with a single hydraulic power system and either of the
following forward (pitch) servo-control hydraulic hoses installed:
part number (P/N) 704A34-412-033 (other reference manufacturer's
part number (MP/N) 675-102-05-01), or P/N 704A34-412-035 (other
reference MP/N 675-102-06-01). Helicopters that have been modified
in accordance with modification 074238 are excluded.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as unprotected forward
(pitch) servo-control hydraulic hoses, which could become damaged
and leak hydraulic fluid that could ignite in flight. This condition
could result in loss of main rotor control, power loss, structural
damage, propagation of fire into the cabin or other compartments,
and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

(c) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective October 11, 2012.

(d) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(e) Required Actions

    (1) Within 30 days, install sleeve P/N 706A34-402-225 over
hydraulic hose P/N 704A34-412-033 and sleeve P/N 706A34-402-224 over
hydraulic hose P/N 704A34-412-035 in accordance with Accomplishment
Instructions, paragraph 2.B.2, of Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin
No. 29.00.13, dated July 26, 2010.
    (2) Do not install an affected hydraulic hose on any helicopter
without a sleeve in accordance with paragraph (e)(1) of this AD.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Matt Wilbanks, Aerospace
Engineer, FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and Policy Group,
2601 Meacham Boulevard, Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone (817)
222-5051, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(g) Additional Information

    The subject of this AD is addressed in the European Aviation
Safety Agency AD EASA AD No. 2011-0033, dated March 1, 2011.

(h) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 2900: Hydraulic
Power System.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin No. 29.00.13, dated July
26, 2010.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Eurocopter service information identified in this AD,
contact American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand
Prairie, TX 75052, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax
(972) 641-3775, or at http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub.
    (4) You may review a copy of the referenced service information
at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. For information on
the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 16, 2012.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-21261 Filed 9-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P