[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 222 (Monday, November 20, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55040-55042]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24737]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0338; Product Identifier 2016-NM-153-AD; Amendment
39-19103; AD 2017-23-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2A12 (CL-601 Variant) and CL-600-2B16
(CL-601-3A, CL-601-3R, and CL-604 Variants) airplanes. This AD was
prompted by a determination that the bushing holes on the engine mount
rib might not conform to the engineering drawings and that certain
inspections of the engine mount rib must be included in the
airworthiness limitations section (ALS) of the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness (ICA). This AD requires revising the
maintenance or inspection program to incorporate certain airworthiness
limitation items (ALIs). We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective December 26, 2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North
America toll-free telephone 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone 1-
514-855-2999; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected];
Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this referenced
service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2017-0338.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0338; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aziz Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Section, New York Aircraft ACO Branch,
FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-
228-7329; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc.,
Model CL-600-2A12 (CL-601 Variant) and CL-600-2B16 (CL-601-3A, CL-601-
3R, and CL-604 Variants) airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on June 14, 2017 (82 FR 27219) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM was
prompted by a determination that the bushing holes on the engine mount
rib might not conform to the engineering drawings and that certain
inspections of the engine mount rib must be included in the ALS of the
ICA. The NPRM proposed to require revising the maintenance or
inspection program to incorporate certain ALIs. We are issuing this AD
to detect and correct failure of an engine mount rib. Failure of an
engine mount rib could compromise the structural integrity of the
engine mount and could lead to subsequent detachment of an engine.
    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2015-09R1, dated June 29, 2015 (referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2A12 (CL-
601 Variant) and CL-600-2B16 (CL-601-3A, CL-601-3R, and CL-604
Variants) airplanes. The MCAI states:

    The aeroplane manufacturer has determined that the bushing holes
on the engine mount rib may not conform to the engineering drawings.
Non-conforming bushing holes could increase loading on adjacent
fasteners, resulting in premature fatigue cracking of the engine
mount rib.
    In addition, it was also discovered that the inspection
requirements for the engine mount rib were not listed in the
Airworthiness Limitations Section of the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness.
    Failure of the engine mount rib could compromise the structural
integrity of the engine mount and could lead to subsequent
detachment of an engine.
    A new Time Limits/Maintenance Checks (TLMC) Airworthiness
Limitations (AWL) task is introduced to ensure that any fatigue
cracking of the engine mount rib is detected and corrected.
    The original issue of this [Canadian] AD mandated the
incorporation of a new TLMC AWL task [into the maintenance or
inspection program, as applicable].
    Revision 1 of this [Canadian] AD is issued to remove model CL-
600-1A11 (600) aeroplanes from the Applicability section of the
[Canadian] AD since this model was incorrectly included in the
original issue.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0338.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.

Requests To Revise Applicability

    Bombardier, Inc. (Bombardier) and NetJets Inc. (NetJets) requested
that we revise paragraph (c)(3) of the proposed AD. The commenters
explained that the Applicability should specify Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-
604 Variant) airplanes having serial numbers (S/Ns) 5301 through 5665
inclusive, and S/Ns 5701 through 5990 inclusive; instead of Model CL-
600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes, having S/Ns 5301 through 5665
inclusive, and S/Ns 5701 and subsequent.
    Bombardier stated that ``Challenger 650'' is a marketing
designation for Model CL-600-2B16 (604 Variant) airplanes starting at
S/N 6050, and ``Challenger 605'' is a marketing designation for Model
CL-600-2B16 (604 Variant) airplanes having S/Ns 5701 to 5990.
Bombardier and NetJets stated that future Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604
Variant) airplanes having serial numbers subsequent to S/N 5990 do not
require the proposed actions, explaining that task 54-50-00-103
(inspections of the engine mount rib) was first incorporated into the
Time Limits/Maintenance Checks (TLMC) manual for Challenger 650
airplanes. Therefore, Bombardier asserts that operators of Challenger
650 airplanes should not be required to comply with the AD.
    We agree with the commenters' requests. We have coordinated with
TCCA and have verified that Model CL-

600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes having serial numbers subsequent to
S/N 5990 should not be subject to the required actions. We have changed
paragraph (c)(3) of this AD accordingly.

Requests To Clarify Method of Compliance (MOC) for Maintenance/
Inspection Program Revision

    Bombardier requested that more details be provided on how to meet
the intent of paragraph (g) of the proposed AD, which specifies
contacting the FAA for a MOC for revising the maintenance or inspection
program to incorporate maintenance tasks. Bombardier suggested that the
AD should specify the revisions in which the tasks were incorporated
into the TLMC manual. Bombardier also suggested that this would prevent
operators with a proper TLMC from being subject to a future AD.
Bombardier stated that the AD should specify the tasks to be
incorporated in the maintenance schedule, in order to provide operators
with a sufficient level of detail on the revisions to be made to their
maintenance or inspection program.
    NetJets requested that we identify the specific tasks that are to
be incorporated into the maintenance or inspection program. NetJets
noted that the MCAI provides the specific task numbers.
    We partially agree. We agree that operators need to know which
actions must be incorporated into their maintenance or inspection
programs. Therefore, we have revised paragraph (g) of this AD to
identify the actions that must be incorporated.
    We do not agree to identify specific TLMC revisions in this AD. The
service information specified in Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD
provides guidance on the required actions. However, to specify the
service information in paragraph (g) of this AD would require it to be
incorporated by reference in this AD. The service information
identified in this AD does not meet the Office of the Federal
Register's criteria for materials incorporated by reference. Therefore,
we have not changed this AD in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 129 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
              Action                        Labor cost            Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revision of maintenance or          1 work-hour x $85 per                  $0              $85          $10,965
 inspection program.                 hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to
the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that 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 the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; 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.

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):

2017-23-09 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-19103; Docket No. FAA-
2017-0338; Product Identifier 2016-NM-153-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective December 26, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Bombardier, Inc., airplanes identified in
paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD, certificated in
any category.
    (1) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2A12 (CL-601) airplanes,
having serial numbers (S/Ns) 3001 through 3066 inclusive.
    (2) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-601-3A and CL-601-3R
Variants) airplanes, having S/Ns 5001 through 5194 inclusive.
    (3) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant)
airplanes having S/Ns 5301 through 5665 inclusive, and S/Ns 5701
through 5990 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Periodic
inspections.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that the bushing holes
on the engine mount rib may not conform to the engineering drawings
and that certain inspections of the engine mount rib must be
included in the airworthiness limitations section (ALS) of the
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA). We are issuing this
AD to detect and correct failure of an engine mount rib. Failure of
an engine mount rib could compromise the structural integrity of the
engine mount and could lead to subsequent detachment of an engine.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate
inspections for fatigue cracking of the engine mount rib and
corrective actions, as applicable, in accordance with a method
approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA.
    Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD: Guidance can be found in
Tasks 54-10-00-106 and 54-50-00-103 of Chapter 5 of the Bombardier
Time Limits/Maintenance Checks (TLMC) Manual PSP 601-5 (for Model
CL-600-2A12 (CL-601 Variant) airplanes); Bombardier TLMC Manual PSP
601A-5 (for CL-600-2B16 (CL-601-3A and CL-601-3R Variants)
airplanes); Bombardier TLMC Manual CL-604 (for Model CL-600-2B16
(CL-604 Variant) airplanes, S/Ns 5301 through 5665 inclusive); and
Bombardier TLMC Manual CL-605 (for Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604
Variant) airplanes, S/Ns 5701 through 5990).

(h) No Alternative Actions and/or Intervals

    After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised as
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g.,
inspections) and/or intervals may be used, unless the actions and/or
intervals are approved as an AMOC in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate.
If sending information directly to the manager of the certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2015-09R1, dated June 29,
2015, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0338.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Aziz Ahmed,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Section, New
York Aircraft ACO Branch, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 7, 2017.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-24737 Filed 11-17-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


1 Date: August 22, 2003 Subject: Meeting Summary  EPA and representatives from the taconite industry From: Chris Sarsony, Alpha Gamma Technologies, Inc.

To: Docket OAR 2002 0039 I. Purpose Taconite industry representatives requested this meeting to discuss the de listing petition that they plan to submit to the EPA and to discuss the public comments received on the proposed Taconite NESHAP.

II. Date January 29, 2003 III. Attendees U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Steve Fruh, OAQPS/ ESD/ MG Dave Guinnup, OAQPS/ ESD/ REAG Taconite industry representatives Don Ahola, Empire Mining John Meier, Cleveland Cliffs Brad Anderson, EVTAC Rhonda Ross, Warner Norcross & Judd Dave Crouch, Cleveland Cliffs Larry Salmela, U. S. Steel Mr. Bill Kubiak  U. S. Steel Dave Skolasinski, Northshore Mining LaTisha Gietzen, National Steel Andrea Hayden, Hibbing Taconite Alpha Gamma Technologies, Inc.

Chris Sarsony Chuck Zukor IV. Discussion ° Industry requested the meeting to discuss the de listing petition that they plan to submit to the EPA.

° The EPA indicated that the taconite NESHAP has a court ordered promulgation deadline of August of 2003. Therefore, the de listing petition will not affect the promulgation date.

° The EPA gave a brief overview of the public comments that were received on the proposed Taconite NESHAP to date. OAR 2002 0039 IV E 11


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 202 (Friday, October 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62345-62346]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24485]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:
    Docket Numbers: EG14-3-000.
    Applicants: Miami Wind I LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Miami Wind I LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/9/13.
    Accession Number: 20131009-5053.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/30/13.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2835-002.
    Applicants: Google Energy LLC.
    Description: Supplement to August 9, 2013 Notice of Change in
Status of Google Energy LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/2/13.
    Accession Number: 20131002-5016.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1914-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits Amendment of
Creditable Upgrades Filing ER13-1914 to be effective 9/8/2013.
    Filed Date: 10/9/13.
    Accession Number: 20131009-5129.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/30/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-62-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: GIA and Distribution Service Agreement with SunEdison
Utility Solutions, LLC to be effective 10/10/2013.
    Filed Date: 10/9/13.
    Accession Number: 20131009-5004.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/30/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-63-000.
    Applicants: Bangor Hydro Electric Company, ISO New England Inc.
    Description: Oakfield Wind Farm Amended and Restated LGIA to be
effective 10/11/2013.
    Filed Date: 10/9/13.
    Accession Number: 20131009-5044.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/30/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-64-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: Filing of Executed Agreement in Compliance with Docket
No. ER12-2144 to be effective 12/9/2013.
    Filed Date: 10/9/13.
    Accession Number: 20131009-5069.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/30/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-65-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: 10-09-2013 Ameren-Prairie Power Rate Sch 37 JPZ Agr to
be effective 6/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 10/9/13.
    Accession Number: 20131009-5096.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/30/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-66-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: 10-09-2013 Rate Sch 36 Southern Co Emer Energy Service
Sch Agr to be effective 12/19/2013.
    Filed Date: 10/9/13.
    Accession Number: 20131009-5099.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/30/13.

    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: October 9, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-24485 Filed 10-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Cooling Water Intake Structure ( CWIS) Information Data Required Rig Information Rig Name Rowan Fort Worth Rowan Middletown Rowan Paris Charles Rowan Arch Rowan Gilbert Rowe Cecil Provine Rowan Halifax Rowan California Rig Type Jack up LeTourneau 116C class Total Installed Power Generation Capacity 6625  7950 HP Number of Cooling Water Intake Structures ( CWISs) 4 Brief description of each CWIS ( e. g., sea chest, simple pipe) 1 sea chest 3 simple pipe Rough dimensions of each CWIS and indicate whether onboard CWIS has an existing flange Sea chest   6" pipe with Simple pipes   12.5" to 14.75" ID pipes Screen type ( e. g., strainer, wedge wire) with mesh size Sea chests   14" x14" wire mesh screens Simple pipes  none Total Design Specifications for Daily Maximum Water Intake Volume of each CWIS 2,016,000 to 2,303,994 gal ( 48,000 to 54,857 bbls) Total Daily Water Intake Volume of each CWIS ( Set up/ Drilling) 2,016,000 to 2,303,994 gal ( 48,000 to 54,857 bbls) Design Specs for Through Screen Velocity of each CWIS ( i. e., Q= V* A) ( Set up/ Drilling) 1.70 to 3.03 fps List of Purposes of Cooling Water Intakes ( e. g., cool crude oil, produced water, power generators, drill pipe brakes) Brake water cooling, engine oil cooling, electric motor cooling List of Purposes of Non cooling Water Intakes ( e. g., fire water, hotel loads) Fire main, ballast, sanitary, pits, drill water, hotel loads, distiller input, washdown Total Volume of Water Intake for Ballasting, Duration of the Ballast intake, and the Through Screen Velocity of the Ballast intake 1,380,960 gal ( 32,880 bbls) Duration = 12 18 hours.

Mitigation Measures for reducing Exotic Species Migration through Ballast water The rig does not carry ballast/ preload water from location to location. It is taken on and dumped at the same location. Mitigation Measures for reducing Impingement and Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms, as well as Bio fouling Prevention Measures Sea chest screens Is the Rig equipped with a Radiator Cooling System for the Main Engines? No


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 109 (Thursday, June 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 26466]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11892]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86014; File No. 013-00108]

Initial Form ATS-N Filing; Notice of Extension of Commission
Review Period

June 3, 2019.
    On February 8, 2019, Instinet BlockCross filed an initial Form ATS-
N (``Form ATS-N'') with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''). Pursuant to Rule 304 under the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''), the Commission may, after notice and an
opportunity for hearing, declare an initial Form ATS-N ineffective no
later than 120 days from the date of filing with the Commission, or, if
applicable, the extended review period. June 8, 2019 is 120 calendar
days from the date of filing. Pursuant to Rule 304(a)(1)(iv)(B), the
Commission may extend the initial Form ATS-N review period for up to an
additional 120 calendar days if the initial Form ATS-N is unusually
lengthy or raises novel or complex issues that require additional time
for review.
    Instinet BlockCross was operating pursuant to an initial operation
report on Form ATS on file with the Commission as of January 7,
2019.\1\ Instinet BlockCross filed an initial Form ATS-N on February 8,
2019. During the initial 120 calendar day review period, the Commission
staff has been reviewing the disclosures on Instinet BlockCross's
initial Form ATS-N. In addition, the staff has been engaged in ongoing
discussions with Instinet BlockCross about its disclosures and manner
of operations, as well as the requirements of Form ATS-N, to facilitate
complete and comprehensible disclosures that reflect the complexities
of those operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ An NMS Stock ATS (as defined in Rule 300(k) of Regulation
ATS) that was operating pursuant to an initial operation report on
Form ATS on file with the Commission as of January 7, 2019 is a
``Legacy NMS Stock ATS.'' 17 CFR 242.301(b)(2)(viii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Form ATS-N requires NMS Stock ATSs to file with the Commission, and
disclose to the public for the first time, certain information,
including descriptions by the NMS Stock ATSs of their fees, the trading
activities by their broker-dealer operators and their affiliates in the
NMS Stock ATSs, their use of market data, their written standards for
granting access to trading on the NMS Stock ATSs, and their written
safeguards and procedures for protecting their subscribers'
confidential trading information required by revised Rule 301(b)(10) of
Regulation ATS. The initial Form ATS-N disclosures and discussions with
Commission staff have revealed complexities about the operations of
Legacy NMS Stock ATSs including, among other things, matching
functionalities, means of order entry, order interaction and execution
procedures, conditional order processes, segmentation of orders, and
counterparty selection protocols. The Commission staff needs additional
time to review novel and complex issues such as these, which Commission
staff has discussed with Instinet BlockCross. Extending the initial
Form ATS-N Commission review period for an additional 120 calendar days
will provide Commission staff an opportunity to continue its review of
the initial Form ATS-N disclosures and discussions with Instinet
BlockCross.
    In the conversations between Instinet BlockCross and Commission
staff about the initial Form ATS-N disclosures and the ATS operations,
Commission staff and Instinet BlockCross have discussed a potential
amendment to update Instinet BlockCross's disclosures regarding the
complexities of its operations. Extending the review period will enable
the NMS Stock ATS to amend its disclosures, if appropriate, and allow
Commission staff to conduct a thorough review of amendments to the
initial disclosures provided on the initial Form ATS-N.
    For the reasons given above, the Commission is extending the review
period of the initial Form ATS-N submitted by Instinet BlockCross.
Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 304(a)(1)(iv)(B), October 6, 2019 is the
date by which the Commission may declare the initial Form ATS-N
submitted by Instinet BlockCross ineffective.

    By the Commission.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-11892 Filed 6-5-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 223 (Tuesday, November 19, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69406-69407]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27613]

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

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: ER10-3246-002; ER13-1266-002.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp, CalEnergy, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to June 28, 2013 Triennial Market Power
Update of PacifiCorp, et al.
    Filed Date: 11/8/13.
    Accession Number: 20131108-5028.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1179-004.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.'s Informational Filing of
Revised Readiness Metrics for Integrated Marketplace.
    Filed Date: 11/1/13.
    Accession Number: 20131101-5148.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1857-000.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.
    Description: Idaho Power Company submits November 2013 Supplement
to Triennial (DPT) to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 11/7/13.
    Accession Number: 20131107-5100.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-343-000.
    Applicants: NV Energy, Inc.
    Description: OATT Order No. 764, 764-A Compliance--Section 13.8,
14.6, Attachment N to be effective 11/12/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/7/13.
    Accession Number: 20131107-5074.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-344-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: 549R6 Board of Public Utilities, Springfield, MO NITSA
and NOA Notice of Cancell to be effective 10/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/7/13.
    Accession Number: 20131107-5077.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-345-000.
    Applicants: Scotia Commodities Inc.
    Description: Scotia Commodities Inc. submits Notice of Cancellation
to be effective 11/8/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/7/13.
    Accession Number: 20131107-5104.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-346-000.
    Applicants: MATL LLP.
    Description: MATL LLP submits Order 1000 Compliance--Attachment K
to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 11/7/13.
    Accession Number: 20131107-5105.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-347-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Notice of Termination of Service Agreement No. 95,
Electric

Tariff Volume No. 5 of Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 11/7/13.
    Accession Number: 20131107-5127.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-348-000.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Louisville Gas and Electric Company submits Order No.
764 Compliance Filing to be effective 11/12/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/8/13.
    Accession Number: 20131108-5016.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-349-000.
    Applicants: Tampa Electric Company.
    Description: Tampa Electric Company submits OATT Order No. 764
Compliance Filing to be effective 11/12/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/8/13.
    Accession Number: 20131108-5019.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-350-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
    Description: NorthWestern Corporation submits OATT Order No. 764
Compliance Filing (Montana) to be effective 1/7/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/8/13.
    Accession Number: 20131108-5020.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-351-000.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Louisville Gas and Electric Company submits EKPC 2d
Amd IA to be effective 12/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/8/13.
    Accession Number: 20131108-5021.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-352-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Public Service Company of New Mexico submits Order No.
764 Compliance Filing to be effective 11/12/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/8/13.
    Accession Number: 20131108-5032.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-353-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
    Description: NorthWestern Corporation submits OATT Order No. 764
Compliance Filing (South Dakota) to be effective 1/7/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/8/13.
    Accession Number: 20131108-5040.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-354-000.
    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company.
    Description: Florida Power & Light Company submits OATT Order No.
764 Compliance Filing of Florida Power & Light Company to be effective
1/13/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/8/13.
    Accession Number: 20131108-5067.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-355-000.
    Applicants: Startrans IO, LLC.
    Description: Startrans IO, LLC submits 2014 Update to TRBAA in
Appendix I to be effective 1/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/8/13.
    Accession Number: 20131108-5076.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

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

    Docket Numbers: ES14-10-000.
    Applicants: Portland General Electric Company.
    Description: Application of Portland General Electric Company for
Authority to Issue Short-Term Debt Securities.
    Filed Date: 11/7/13.
    Accession Number: 20131107-5126.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following public
utility holding company filings:

    Docket Numbers: PH14-1-000.
    Applicants: Isolux Infrastructure Netherlands, B.V.
    Description: Isolux Infrastructure Netherlands, B.V. submits FERC-
65-B Waiver Notification.
    Filed Date: 11/8/13.
    Accession Number: 20131108-5033.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/13.

    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: November 8, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-27613 Filed 11-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 2, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 232)]
[Notices]
[Page 73324]
[DOCID:fr02de08-66]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Docket Nos. EL07-56-006; EL07-58-006]

Virginia State Corporation Commission; Notice of Filing

November 25, 2008.
    Take notice that on November 7, 2008, the Virginia State
Corporation Commission filed its Confidentiality Certification,
pursuant to section 18.17.4 of the Operating Agreement of the PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on December 9, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-28574 Filed 12-1-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76408-76410]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29990]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0074; Notice 2]

BMW of North America, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of Petition.

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

SUMMARY: BMW North America, LLC,\1\ a subsidiary of BMW AG
(collectively referred to as BMW),\2\ has determined that certain model
year (MY) 2012 BMW X3 SAV multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPV)
manufactured between April 1, 2011 and March 14, 2012, do not fully
comply with paragraph S4.3.3 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 110, Tire selection and rims and motor home/recreation
vehicle trailer load carrying capacity information for motor vehicles
with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less. BMW has filed
an appropriate report dated March 28, 2012, pursuant to 49 CFR part
573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ BMW North America, LLC is a U.S. company that manufactures
and imports motor vehicles.
    \2\ BMW AG is a German company that manufactures motor vehicles.

ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Ms. Amina
Fisher, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. BMW's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and
the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, BMW has
petitioned for an exemption from the notification and remedy
requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day
public comment period, on October 16, 2012 in the Federal Register (77
FR 63415). One comment was received from Anne K. Mayer which supported
granting BMW's petition. To view the petition, the comment and all
supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online
search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2012-0074.''
    II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 1,409 MY 2012 BMW
X3 SAV MPVs manufactured between April 1, 2011 through March 14, 2012.
    III. Rule Text: Section S4.3.3 of FMVSS No. 110 specifically
states:

    S4.3.3 Additional labeling information for vehicles other than
passenger cars. Each vehicle shall show the size designation and, if
applicable, the type designation of rims (not necessarily those on
the vehicle) appropriate for the tire appropriate for use on that
vehicle, including the tire installed as original equipment on the
certification label required by part 567.4 or part 567.5 of this
chapter. This information shall be in the English language, lettered
in block capitals and numerals not less than 2.4 millimeters high
and in the following format:

GVWR: 2,441 kilograms (5381 pounds).
GAWR: Front--1,299 kilograms (2,864 pounds) with P265/70R16 tires,
16 x 8.0 rims at 248 kPa (36 psi) cold single.
GAWR: Rear--1,299 kilograms (2,864 pounds) with P265/70R16 tires, 16
x 8.00 rims, at 248 kPa (36 psi) cold single.

    IV. Summary of BMW's Analyses: BMW explained that the noncompliance
is that the certification label required by 49 CFR part 567 does not
list rim information for the tires installed on the vehicles as
original equipment as required by paragraph S4.3.3 of FMVSS No. 110.
    BMW states that while the certification label required by 49 CFR
part 567 does not contain tire and rim information for tires and rims
that were installed as original equipment, the information pertains to
tires and rims that are appropriate for use on the vehicles. BMW also
argues that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety for the following reasons:
    1. If a driver only checks the certification label (which indicates
either 17-inch tires or 18-inch tires) or if the driver checks the
certification label and the FMVSS No. 110 tire and loading information
Vehicle Placard (which shows the size of the tires originally installed
on the vehicle), and is unsure as to the proper inflation pressure and
the size of the tires installed on the vehicle, there are a number of
information sources and services available which can be used to inform
the driver of the correct tire size and tire pressure.
    a. A driver could check the specific tires installed on the
vehicle. The information that is stamped onto the sidewall of those
tires corresponds to the information contained on the FMVSS No. 110
tire and loading information Vehicle Placard. A driver would be able to
determine that the tires installed on the vehicle correspond to the
tires indicated on the FMVSS No. 110 tire and loading information
Vehicle Placard. Therefore, a driver would be able to add the correct
amount of air pressure to the tires in order to achieve the proper
inflation level.
    b. If the driver were to use the tire size shown on the
certification label in order to look up the associated tire pressure in
the owner's manual and then pressurize the tires to that pressure the
Tire Pressure Monitoring System would not need to initiate.
    c. The driver will also be able to refer to the vehicle's Owner's
Manual which contains information pertaining to the various tire sizes
and tire pressures for the affected vehicles.
    d. BMW also offers Roadside Assistance and BMW AssistTM
(only included with Premium Package and as a stand-alone option) which
are available 24 hours/day with representatives that are available to
provide drivers with all of the available tires sizes and
specifications for the affected vehicles.
    BMW has received no customer complaints and are unaware of any
accidents or injuries regarding this noncompliance of the affected
vehicles.
    BMW has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected future
production and that all other required markings are present and
correct.
    BMW also explains that NHTSA has previously granted similar
petitions.
    In summation, BMW believes that the described noncompliance of the
subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that
its petition, to exempt from providing recall notification of
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.
    V. NHTSA Analysis and Reasoning: The affected vehicles, 1,409 2012
BMW X3/SAVs (MPVs), comply with FMVSS No. 110, paragraph S4.3(c) and
(d), identifying the recommended cold inflation pressures for the
front, rear and spare tires and the tire size designations,
respectively. The vehicles do not comply with paragraph S4.3.3, which
requires additional information for vehicles other than passenger cars:
the tires and rims must be identified on the 49 CFR part 567
certification label. BMW's certification label listed the tire and rim
size for the front and rear axles as 245/50R18, which is different from
the tires installed on affected vehicles, 245/45R19. Note: Information
for these vehicles states they were sold with either 18-inch or 19-inch
diameter tires.
    BMW's FMVSS No. 110 vehicle placard listed size 245/45R19 for the
front and rear tires with recommended inflation pressures 220 kPa/32
psi and 260 kPa/38 psi, respectively). The load ratings from the Tire
and Rim Association Handbook at those pressures are 675 kg/1,488 lb
(front) and 750 kg/1673 lb (rear). Paragraph S<IP_ADDRESS> specifies that
the load rating for a passenger car tire used on an MPV be divided by
1.1. The sum of the front axle tire ratings are 1,227 kg/2,705 lb and
the rear axle tires are 1,364 kg/3,007 lb. Tire size 245/50R18 at 220
kPa/32 psi (front) and 240 kPa/35 psi (rear--the maximum pressure
listed) are rated at 745 kg/1,642 lb (front) and 775 kg/1,709 lb
(rear). The resulting sums are 1,355 kg/2,987 lb (front) and 1,409 kg/
3,106 lb (rear). In both cases, the sums of the tire load ratings
exceed BMW's GAWRs of 1,110 kg/2447 lb (front) and 1,290 kg/2,844 lb
(rear).
    Two additional factors were considered: the difference between the
maximum inflation pressures of the two tire sizes and the effect of
those pressures on the vehicle's tire pressure monitoring system,
required by FMVSS No. 138.
    The non-installed tires listed on the certification label have a
maximum inflation pressure which is lower than the inflation pressure
listed on the vehicle placard. If a consumer purchased replacement
tires based on the 18-inch size listed on the certification label, he
would also need to purchase rims of the same diameter. Even if the 18-
inch diameter tires and rims were installed, each tire's maximum
inflation pressure is still specified on the sidewall and listed in
other documents available to tire dealers.
    Regarding the TPMS, there is no adverse effect for either size
front tires at 220 kPa/32 psi. The higher recommended inflation
pressure of the installed 19-inch diameter rear tires corresponds to a
required warning at 25 percent below the recommended pressure, i.e., at
195 kPa/28 psi. If the 19-inch diameter tires are replaced with 18-inch
tires, the warning would be required at 180 kPa/26 psi, which is equal
to a 19 percent under-inflation condition for those tires, exceeding
the FMVSS No. 138 requirement.
    VI. NHTSA Decision: Thus, NHTSA has determined that BMW has met its
burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 110 noncompliance of the tire
size labeling on the subject vehicles' certification label is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, BMW's petition is
hereby granted, and BMW is exempted from the obligation of providing
notification of, and a remedy for, the subject noncompliance under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision
only applies to the 1,409 vehicles that BMW no longer controlled at the
time it determined that a noncompliance existed. However, the granting
of this petition does not relieve distributors and dealers of the
prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery
for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles
under their control after BMW notified them that the subject
noncompliance existed.

    Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8)

    Issued on: December 11, 2013.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2013-29990 Filed 12-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: February 15, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 31)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 7361-7365]
[DOCID:fr15fe07-17]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2006-0568; FRL-8278-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
New Mexico; Albuquerque/Bernalillo County; Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) and New Source Review

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County, New
Mexico, area that were submitted to EPA by the Governor of New Mexico
on May 24, 2006. The proposed revisions modify the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration and Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR)
regulations in the SIP. They were submitted to make the area's PSD and
NNSR rules consistent with Federal NNSR and PSD revised regulations,
which were promulgated by EPA on December 31, 2002 (67 Federal Register
(FR) 80186) and reconsidered with minor changes on November 7, 2003 (68
FR 63021) (collectively, these Federal actions are called the ``2002
New Source Review

(NSR) Reform Rules''). The revisions include provisions for baseline
emissions calculations, an actual-to-projected-actual methodology for
calculating emissions changes, options for plantwide applicability
limits (PALs), and recordkeeping and reporting requirements. We are
proposing to approve these revisions pursuant to section 110, part C,
and part D of the Federal Clean Air Act (Act).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 19, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R06-OAR-2006-0568, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     U.S. EPA Region 6 ``Contact Us'' Web site: http://epa.gov/region6/r6coment.htm.
 Please click on ``6PD'' (Multimedia) and select

``Air'' before submitting comments.
     E-mail: Mr. Stanley M. Spruiell at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
     Fax: Mr. Stanley M. Spruiell, Air Permits Section (6PD-R),
at fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Mr. Stanley M. Spruiell, Air Permits Section (6PD-
R), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200,
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
     Hand or Courier Delivery: Mr. Stanley M. Spruiell, Air
Permits Section (6PD-R), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Such deliveries are
accepted only between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. weekdays except
for legal holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries
of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID Number EPA-R06-OAR-
2006-0568. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal

information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the
disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail if you believe that it is CBI or otherwise protected from disclosure. The http://

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which

means that EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov
, your e-mail address will be automatically captured

and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment along with any disk or CD-ROM
submitted. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters and any form of encryption and should be free of any
defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov
 index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only
in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air

Permits Section (6PD-R), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. The file will be made
available by appointment for public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA
Review Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays
except for legal holidays. Contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph below to make an appointment. If
possible, please make the appointment at least two working days in
advance of your visit. A 15 cent per page fee will be charged for
making photocopies of documents. On the day of the visit, please check
in at the EPA Region 6 reception area on the seventh floor at 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas.
    The State submittal is also available for public inspection at the
State Air Agency listed below during official business hours by
appointment:
    Albuquerque Environmental Health Department, Air Pollution Control
Division, One Civic Plaza, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Stanley M. Spruiell, Air Permits
Section (6PD-R), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Throughout this document, any reference to ``we,'' ``us,'' or
``our'' shall mean EPA.

Outline:

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing?
II. What Is the Background for This Action?
III. What Is EPA's Analysis of Albuquerque's NSR Rule Revisions?
IV. Does Approval of the NNSR and PSD Revised Rules Interfere With
Attainment, Reasonable Further Progress, or Any Other Applicable
Requirement of the Act?
V. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing?

    On May 24, 2006, the Governor of the State of New Mexico submitted
revisions to the SIP for Albuquerque/Bernalillo County. The submittal
consists of revisions to two regulations that are already part of the
Albuquerque/Bernalillo County SIP. The affected regulations are:
20.11.60 New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) (Permitting in
Nonattainment Areas) and 20.11.61 NMAC (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration). The revisions were made to update the Albuquerque/
Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board (AQCB) NNSR and PSD
regulations to ensure that the regulations are consistent with changes
to the Federal NSR regulations published on December 31, 2002 (67 FR
80186) and November 7, 2003 (68 FR 63021). These EPA rulemakings are
collectively referred to as the ``2002 NSR Reform Rules.''
    This SIP revision also includes other non-substantive changes to
AQCB's PSD and NNSR rules needed to update the regulatory citations,
make clarifying revisions to the regulatory text, correct typographical
errors, and ensure that the regulations are consistent with all current
Federal requirements for PSD and NNSR. These non-substantive changes do
not change the regulatory requirements. Please see the Technical
Support Document (TSD) for further information.

II. What Is the Background for This Action?

    On December 31, 2002, EPA published final rule changes to 40 Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 51 and 52, regarding the Clean Air
Act's PSD and NNSR programs. See 67 FR 80186. On November 7, 2003, EPA
published a notice of final action on the reconsideration of the
December 31, 2002, final rule changes. See 68 FR 63021. In the November
7th final action, EPA added the definition of ``replacement unit,'' and
clarified issues regarding PALs. The purpose of today's

action is to propose approval of the State's SIP submittal for
Albuquerque/Bernalillo County that includes revisions to the NNSR and
PSD SIP rules.
    The 2002 NSR Reform Rules are part of EPA's implementation of parts
C and D of Title I of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7470-7515, addressing major
sources and major modifications. Part C of Title I of the Act, 42
U.S.C. 7470-7492, is the PSD program, which applies in areas that meet
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)--``attainment
areas''--as well as in areas for which there is insufficient
information to determine whether the area meets the NAAQS--
``unclassifiable'' areas. Part D of Title I of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7501-
7515, is the NNSR program, which applies in areas that are not in
attainment of one or more of the NAAQS--``nonattainment areas.'' There
also is the section 110 requirement for a minor NSR preconstruction
permit program SIP. EPA regulations implementing the NNSR and PSD
programs are contained in 40 CFR 51.165, 51.166, 52.21, 52.24, and
appendix S of part 51.
    The Act's NSR programs are preconstruction review and permitting
programs applicable to new and modified stationary sources of air
pollutants regulated under the Act. These programs include a
combination of air quality planning and air pollution control
technology program requirements. Briefly, section 109 of the Act, 42
U.S.C. 7409, requires EPA to promulgate primary NAAQS to protect public
health and secondary NAAQS to protect public welfare. Once EPA sets
those standards, each State must develop, adopt, and submit to EPA for
approval, a SIP that contains emissions limitations and other control
measures to attain and maintain the NAAQS. Each SIP is required to
contain a preconstruction review program for the construction and
modification of stationary sources of air pollution to assure that the
NAAQS are achieved and maintained; to protect areas of clean air; to
protect air quality related values (such as visibility) in national
parks and other areas; to assure that appropriate emissions controls
are applied; to maximize opportunities for economic development
consistent with the preservation of clean air resources; and to ensure
that any decision to increase air pollution is made only after full
public consideration of the consequences of the decision.
    The 2002 NSR Reform Rules made changes to five areas of the NSR
programs. In summary, these rules: (1) Provide a new method for
determining baseline actual emissions in the NNSR and PSD programs; (2)
adopt for the NNSR and PSD programs an actual-to-projected-actual
methodology for determining whether a major modification has occurred;
(3) allow major stationary sources to comply with PALs to avoid having
a significant emissions increase that triggers the requirements of the
NNSR and PSD programs; (4) provide a new applicability provision in the
NNSR and PSD programs for emissions units that are designated clean
units; and (5) exclude pollution control projects from the NNSR and PSD
program definitions of ``physical change or change in the method of
operation.'' For additional information on the 2002 NSR Reform Rules,
see 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002) and http://www.epa.gov/nsr.

    After the 2002 NSR Reform Rules were finalized and effective (March
3, 2003), various petitioners challenged numerous aspects of the 2002
NSR Reform Rules, along with portions of EPA's 1980 NSR Rules (45 FR
5276, August 7, 1980). On June 24, 2005, the D.C. Circuit Court of
Appeals issued a decision on the challenges to the 2002 NSR Reform
Rules. See New York v. United States, 413 F.3d 3 (D.C. Cir. 2005)
rehearing en banc denied (December 9, 2005). In summary, the Court
vacated portions of the Rules pertaining to clean units and pollution
control projects; remanded a portion of the Rules regarding
recordkeeping, e.g., 40 CFR 51.165(a)(6) and 40 CFR 51.166(r)(6); and
either upheld or did not comment on the other provisions included as
part of the 2002 NSR Reform Rules. The EPA has not yet responded to the
Court's remand regarding the recordkeeping provisions. Today's action
is consistent with the decision of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals
because Albuquerque's submittal does not include any portions of the
2002 NSR Reform Rules that were vacated as part of the June 2005
decision.
    The 2002 NSR Reform Rules require that State agencies adopt and
submit revisions to their SIP permitting programs implementing the
minimum program elements of the 2002 NSR Reform Rules no later than
January 2, 2006. See 40 CFR 51.166(a)(6)(i) (requiring State agencies
to adopt and submit PSD SIP revisions within three years after new
amendments are published in the Federal Register). State agencies may
meet the requirements of 40 CFR Part 51 and the 2002 NSR Reform Rules
with regulations that are different than but equivalent to the Federal
regulations. If, however, a State decides not to implement any of the
new applicability provisions, that State must demonstrate that its
existing program is at least as stringent as the Federal program.
    On May 24, 2006, the Governor of New Mexico submitted a SIP
revision for the purpose of revising AQCB's NNSR and PSD permitting
regulations. These changes were made primarily to adopt EPA's 2002 NSR
Reform Rules. As discussed in further detail below, EPA believes the
revisions contained in the submittal are approvable for inclusion into
the SIP for Albuquerque/Bernalillo County.

III. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Albuquerque NSR Rule Revisions?

    The AQCB currently has an EPA-approved NSR program for new and
modified sources, including a minor NSR preconstruction permit program,
an NNSR preconstruction permit program, and a PSD preconstruction
permit program. Today, EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the
AQCB's existing NNSR and PSD regulations in the SIP. These proposed
revisions were submitted to EPA on May 24, 2006. Copies of the revised
rules, as well as the TSD, can be obtained from the Docket, as
discussed in the ``Docket'' section above. A discussion of the specific
AQCB rule changes that are proposed for inclusion in the SIP is
included in the TSD and summarized below.
    The AQCB's permitting requirements for major sources in or
impacting upon non-attainment areas are set forth at 20.11.60 NMAC
(Permitting in Nonattainment Areas). The current AQCB NNSR program
applies to the construction of any new major stationary source or major
modification of air pollution in a nonattainment area, as required by
part D of Title I of the Act. To receive approval to construct, a
source that is subject to this regulation must show that it will not
cause a net increase in pollution or create a delay in meeting the
NAAQS, and that it will install and use control technology that
achieves the lowest achievable emission rate.
    The AQCB's regulation 20.11.61 NMAC (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration) contains the preconstruction review program that
provides for the prevention of significant deterioration of ambient air
quality as required under part C of Title I of the Act. The program
applies to major stationary sources or modifications constructed or
installed in areas designated as attainment or unclassifiable with
respect to the NAAQS.

    These revisions to 20.11.60 NMAC and 20.11.61 NMAC update the
existing provisions to be consistent with the current Federal NNSR and
PSD rules, including the effects of the 2002 NSR Reform Rules. These
revisions address baseline actual emissions, actual-to-projected-actual
applicability tests, and PALs. The revisions included in AQCB's NNSR
and PSD programs are substantively the same as the 2002 NSR Reform
Rules. As part of our review of AQCB's regulations, we performed a
line-by-line review of the proposed revisions and have determined that
they are consistent with the program requirements for the preparation,
adoption and submittal of implementation plans for NSR set forth at 40
CFR 51.165 and 51.166. This review is contained in the TSD for this
action. The AQCB rules that we are reviewing do not incorporate the
portions of the Federal rules that were vacated by the D.C. Circuit
Court of Appeals, such as the clean unit provisions and the pollution
control projects exclusion.
    The revised AQCB rules include the recordkeeping provisions set
forth in the Federal rules at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(6) and 51.166(r)(6).
However, AQCB chose to exclude the phrase ``reasonable possibility.''
In the Federal rule, this phrase limits the recordkeeping provisions to
modifications at facilities that use the actual-to-future-actual
methodology to calculate emissions changes, where there is a
``reasonable possibility'' that the modifications will result in a
significant emissions increase. Therefore, by leaving out the phrase
``reasonable possibility'' from Subsection F of <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC and
Subsection E of <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, the AQCB rules require all
modifications that use the actual-to-future-actual methodology to meet
the recordkeeping requirements. As noted earlier, EPA has not yet
responded to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals remand of the
recordkeeping provisions of EPA's 2002 NSR Reform Rules. As a result,
EPA's final decision with regard to the remand may require EPA to take
further action on this portion of AQCB's rules. At present, however,
AQCB's recordkeeping provisions are at least as stringent as the
Federal requirements, and are therefore approvable.

IV. Does Approval of the NNSR and PSD Revised Rules Interfere With
Attainment, Reasonable Further Progress, or Any Other Applicable
Requirement of the Act?

    The Act provides in Section 110(l) that:

    Each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State
under this Act shall be adopted by such State after reasonable
notice and public hearing. The Administrator shall not approve a
revision of a plan if the revisions would interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress (as defined in section 171), or any other applicable
requirement of the Act.

Because, as discussed above and in the TSD, the revisions to the AQCB
NNSR and PSD programs are substantively the same as the 2002 NSR Reform
Rules, without including any vacated provisions, we conclude that these
rules do not interfere with attainment, reasonable further progress, or
any other applicable requirement of the Act. See 67 FR 80186 and 68 FR
63021 for EPA's detailed explanation of the legal basis for the 2002
NSR Reform Rules.

V. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    For the reasons discussed above, EPA is proposing to approve the
changes made in the two rules, 20.11.60 NMAC (Permitting in
Nonattainment Areas) and 20.11.61 NMAC (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration) as submitted May 24, 2006, as revisions to the
Albuquerque/Bernalillo County SIP.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This
proposed action merely proposes to approve State law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under State law and does not impose any
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by State law, it does
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (Public Law 104-4).
    This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because
it will not have a substantial direct effect on: One or more Indian
tribes, the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order
13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have
Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct
effects on the States, the relationship between the national government
and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely proposes to approve
a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities
established in the Clean Air Act. The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks such that the
analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has the
potential to influence the regulation. This proposed rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it would approve a state
program. Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994))
establishes federal executive policy on environmental justice. Because
this rule merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a
Federal standard, EPA lacks the discretionary authority to modify
today's regulatory decision on the basis of environmental justice
considerations.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Act. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Act. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This proposed rule does not impose
an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: February 5, 2007.
Richard E. Greene,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. E7-2671 Filed 2-14-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 108 (Monday, June 6, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34329-34330]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11870]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 34603]

Applications for Deregistration Under Section 8(f) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940

May 27, 2022.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'')

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The following is a notice of applications for deregistration under
section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for the month of May
2022. A copy of each application may be obtained via the Commission's
website by searching for the applicable file number listed below, or
for an applicant using the Company name search field, on the SEC's
EDGAR system. The SEC's EDGAR system may be searched at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/legacy/companysearch.html. You may also
call the SEC's Public Reference Room at<PHONE_NUMBER>. An order
granting each application will be issued unless the SEC orders a
hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by
emailing the SEC's Secretary at [email protected] and serving
the relevant applicant with a copy of the request by email, if an email
address is listed for the relevant applicant below, or personally or by
mail, if a physical address is listed for the relevant applicant below.
Hearing requests should be received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on June 21,
2022, and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in
the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service.
Pursuant to Rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the
nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the
desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request,
and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing
may request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary at
[email protected].

ADDRESSES: The Commission: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shawn Davis, Assistant Director, at
(202) 551-6413 or Chief Counsel's Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>; SEC,
Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office, 100 F Street
NE, Washington, DC 20549-8010.

General California Municipal Money Market Fund [File No. 811-04871]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On February 1, 2021, applicant made a
liquidating distribution to its shareholders based on net asset value.
Expenses of $4,271 incurred in connection with the liquidation were
paid by the applicant's investment adviser.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on April 6, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

General Government Securities Money Market Funds, Inc. [File No. 811-
03456]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. The applicant has transferred its assets to
Dreyfus Treasury Securities Cash Management, and on May 11, 2021 made a
final distribution to its shareholders based on net asset value.
Expenses of $241,982 incurred in connection with the reorganization
were paid by the applicant's investment adviser.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on May 10, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

Nuveen California Municipal Value Fund 2 [File No. 811-22272]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. The applicant
has transferred its assets to Nuveen California Municipal Value Fund,
and on April 1, 2021 made a final distribution to its shareholders
based on net asset value. Expenses of $624,205 incurred in connection
with the reorganization were paid by the applicant and the acquiring
fund.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on March 25, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

Nuveen High Income 2020 Target Term Fund [File No. 811-23051]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On October
30, 2020, applicant made liquidating distributions to its shareholders
based on net asset value. Expenses of $980 incurred in connection with
the liquidation were paid by the applicant.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on March 25, 2022, and
amended on May 17, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

Nuveen Maryland Quality Municipal Income Fund [File No. 811-07486]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. The applicant
has transferred its assets to Nuveen Quality Municipal Income Fund, and
on May 3, 2021 made a final distribution to its shareholders based on
net asset value. Expenses of $497,349 incurred in connection with the
reorganization were paid by the applicant and the acquiring fund.

    Filing Date: The application was filed on March 25, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

Nuveen Michigan Quality Municipal Income Fund [File No. 811-06383]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. The applicant
has transferred its assets to Nuveen AMT-Free Quality Municipal Income
Fund, and on March 1, 2021 made a final distribution to its
shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of $818,490 incurred in
connection with the reorganization were paid by the applicant and the
acquiring fund.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on March 25, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

Nuveen Municipal 2021 Target Term Fund [File No. 811-23102]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On February
26, 2021, and March 1, 2021, applicant made liquidating distributions
to its shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of $5,890
incurred in connection with the liquidation were paid by the applicant.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on March 25, 2022, and
amended on May 17, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

Nuveen New Jersey Municipal Value Fund [File No. 811-22274]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. The applicant
has transferred its assets to Nuveen AMT-Free Municipal Value Fund, and
on April 1, 2021 made a final distribution to its shareholders based on
net asset value. Expenses of $536,317 incurred in connection with the
reorganization were paid by the applicant, Nuveen Pennsylvania
Municipal Value Fund, and the acquiring fund.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on March 25, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

Nuveen New York Municipal Value Fund 2 [File No. 811-22271]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. The applicant
has transferred its assets to Nuveen New York Municipal Value Fund, and
on May 3, 2021 made a final distribution to its shareholders based on
net asset value. Expenses of $556,207 incurred in connection with the
reorganization were paid by the applicant and the acquiring fund.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on March 25, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

Nuveen Pennsylvania Municipal Value Fund [File No. 811-22273]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. The applicant
has transferred its assets to Nuveen AMT-Free Municipal Value Fund, and
on April 1, 2021 made a final distribution to its shareholders based on
net asset value. Expenses of $536,317 incurred in connection with the
reorganization were paid by the applicant, Nuveen New Jersey Municipal
Value Fund, and the acquiring fund.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on March 25, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

Putnam American Government Income Fund [File No. 811-04178]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. The applicant has transferred its assets to
Putnam Mortgage Securities Fund, and on April 18, 2018 made a final
distribution to its shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of
$376,203 incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by
the applicant and the acquiring fund.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on April 29, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

Putnam Global Natural Resources Fund [File No. 811-03061]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. The applicant has transferred its assets to
Putnam Focused Equity Fund, and on June 19, 2019 made a final
distribution to its shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of
$298,621 incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by
the applicant and the applicant's investment adviser.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on April 29, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

Putnam Global Utilities Fund [File No. 811-05989]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. The applicant has transferred its assets to
Putnam Focused International Equity Fund, and on June 12, 2019 made a
final distribution to its shareholders based on net asset value.
Expenses of $628,990 incurred in connection with the reorganization
were paid by the applicant and the applicant's investment adviser, and
the acquiring fund.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on April 29, 2022.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-11870 Filed 6-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P