[Federal Register: June 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 126)]
[Notices]
[Page 37564-37567]
[DOCID:fr30jn06-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PF06-25-000; Docket No. PF06-26-000]

Jordan Cove Energy Project, L.P. and Pacific Connector Gas
Pipeline, L.P.; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement for the Proposed Jordan Cove LNG and Pacific Connector Gas
Pipeline Projects, Request for Comments on Environmental Issues and
Notice of a Joint Public Meeting

June 23, 2006.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Coast Guard
(Coast Guard) are in the process of evaluating the Jordon Cove
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Project planned by Jordan Cove Energy
Project, L.P. (Jordan Cove), and the associated natural gas sendout
pipeline planned by Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline, L.P. (PCGP). The
project would consist of an onshore LNG import and storage terminal
located on the bay side of the north spit of Coos Bay, Coos County,
Oregon, and an approximately 223-mile-long, 36-inch-diameter natural
gas pipeline extending from the Jordon Cove LNG terminal southeastward
across Douglas, Jackson, and Klamath Counties, Oregon, to an
interconnection with the existing Pacific Gas and Electric Company's
(PG&E) pipeline system in Modoc County, California.
    As a part of this evaluation, the FERC staff will prepare an
environmental impact statement (EIS) that will address the
environmental impacts of the project and the Coast Guard will assess
the maritime safety and security of the project. The FERC will produce
a single comprehensive EIS to cover both the LNG terminal and sendout
pipeline combined. As described below, the FERC and the Coast Guard
will hold a joint public meeting in Coos Bay to allow the public to
provide input to these assessments. The FERC will host additional
public meetings along the pipeline route to provide input to the
assessment of the pipeline component of the project.
    The Commission will use the EIS in its decision-making process to
determine whether or not to authorize the project. This Notice of
Intent (NOI) explains the scoping process we \1\ will use to gather
information on the project from the public and interested agencies and
summarizes the process that the Coast Guard will use. Your input will
help identify the issues that need to be evaluated in the EIS and in
the Coast Guard's maritime safety and security assessment. Please note
that scoping comments are requested by July 24, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``We,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the FERC's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments on the project may be submitted in written form or
verbally. Further details on how to submit written comments are
provided in the Public Participation section of this NOI. In lieu of
sending written comments, we invite you to attend any of the following
public scoping meetings scheduled as follows:

Monday, July 10, 2006, 6:30 p.m.: Umpqua Community College, Campus
Center Dining Room/Timber Room, 1140 Umpqua College Rd., Roseburg, OR
97470.<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Tuesday, July 11, 2006, 6 p.m.: Southwestern Oregon Community College,
Hales Performing Arts Center, 1988 Newmark Ave., Coos Bay, OR 97420.
541-888-2525.
Wednesday, July 12, 2006, 7 p.m.: Red Lion Inn, Rogue River Ballroom,
200 N. Riverside Ave., Medford, OR 97501.<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Thursday, July 13, 2006, 6:30 p.m.: Oregon Institute of Technology,
Auditorium, College Union, 3201 Campus Dr., Klamath Falls, OR 97601.
41-885-1030.

    The second public scoping meeting listed above (Coos Bay) will be
combined with the Coast Guard's public meeting regarding the maritime
safety and security of the project. At the meeting, the Coast Guard
will discuss: (1) The waterway suitability assessment that the
applicant will conduct to determine whether or not the waterway can
safely accommodate the LNG carrier traffic and operation of the planned
LNG marine terminal; and (2) the facility security assessment that the
applicant will conduct in accordance with the regulations of the
Maritime Transportation Security Act to assist with the preparation of
a Facility Security Plan. The Coast Guard will be issuing a separate
meeting notice in the Federal Register for the maritime safety and
security aspects of the project under Coast Guard District 13 docket
number CGD13-06-028.
    The Coast Guard is responsible for matters related to navigation
safety, vessel engineering and safety standards, and all matters
pertaining to the safety of facilities or equipment located in or
adjacent to navigable waters up to the last valve immediately before
the receiving tanks. The Coast Guard also has authority for LNG
facility security plan review, approval, and compliance verification as
provided in Title 33 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 105, and
recommendation for siting as it pertains to the management of vessel
traffic in and around the LNG facility.
    Upon receipt of a letter of intent from an owner or operator
intending to build a new LNG facility, the Coast Guard Captain of the
Port conducts an analysis that results in a letter of recommendation
issued to the owner or operator and to the state and local governments
having jurisdiction, addressing the suitability of the waterway to
accommodate LNG vessels. Specifically the letter of recommendation
addresses the suitability of the waterway based on:
     The physical location and layout of the facility and its
berthing and mooring arrangements.
     The LNG vessels' characteristics and the frequency of LNG
shipments to the facility.
     Commercial, industrial, environmentally sensitive, and
residential areas in and adjacent to the waterway used by the LNG
vessels en route to the facility.
     Density and character of the marine traffic on the
waterway.
     Bridges or other manmade obstructions in the waterway.
     Depth of water.
     Tidal range.
     Natural hazards, including rocks and sandbars.
     Underwater pipelines and cables.
     Distance of berthed LNG vessels from the channel, and the
width of the channel.
    In addition, the Coast Guard will review and approve the facility's
operations manual and emergency response plan (33 CFR 127.019), as well
as the facility's security plan (33 CFR 105.410). The Coast Guard will
also provide input to other Federal, state, and local government
agencies reviewing the project.
    In order to complete a thorough analysis and fulfill the regulatory
mandates cited above, the applicant will be conducting a Waterway
Suitability Assessment (WSA), a formal risk assessment evaluating the
various safety and security aspects associated with the Jordan Cove LNG
proposed project. This risk assessment will be accomplished through a
series of workshops focusing on the areas of waterways safety, port
security, and consequence management, with involvement from a broad
cross-section of government and port stakeholders with expertise in
each of the respective areas. The workshops

will be by invitation only. However, comments received during the
public comment period will be considered as input in the risk
assessment process. The results of the WSA will be submitted to the
Coast Guard to be used in determining whether the waterway is suitable
for LNG traffic.
    This NOI is being sent to Federal, state, and local government
agencies; elected officials; affected landowners; environmental and
public interest groups; Indian tribes and regional Native American
organizations; commentors and other interested parties; and local
libraries and newspapers. We encourage government representatives to
notify their constituents of this planned project and encourage them to
comment on their areas of concern.

Summary of the Proposed Project

    The proposed project would consist of a 1.0 billion standard cubic
feet per day (bscfd) capacity LNG import/storage terminal facility and
a 223-mile-long, 36-inch-diameter sendout pipeline. A map depicting the
general location of the Jordan Cove LNG import terminal and PCGP's
proposed pipeline route is attached to this NOI as Appendix 1.\2\
Jordan Cove and PCGP indicated they intend to file their formal
applications with the FERC on January 31, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The appendices referenced in this notice are not being
printed in the Federal Register. Copies are available on the
Commission's Web site (excluding maps) at the ``e-Library'' link or
from the Commission's Public Reference Room or call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
For instructions on connecting to e-Library refer to the end of this
notice. Copies of the appendices were sent to all those receiving
this notice in the mail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jordan Cove LNG Import Terminal

    The proposed Jordon Cove LNG import terminal would include the
following elements:
     Dredged 1,700-foot-diameter turning basin/ship maneuvering
area located within Coos Bay;
     A single LNG ship unloading slip/berth, dredged from an
upland adjacent to Coos Bay;
     LNG unloading system at the berth, consisting of three 16-
inch-diameter unloading arms and one 16-inch-diameter vapor return arm,
with a unloading capacity rate of 12,000 cubic meters per hour
(m3/hr);
     LNG transfer system from the berth to the storage tanks,
consisting of one 2,600-foot-long, 36-inch-diameter cryogenic unloading
line;
     LNG storage system, consisting of two full-containment LNG
storage tanks, each with a capacity 160,000 m3 (or 1,006,000
barrels). Each tank would be equipped with two can-type fully submerged
LNG in-tank pumps with an individual capacity rate of 5,300 gallons per
minute (gpm);
     Boil-off gas (BOG) recovery system, consisting of three
cryogenic centrifugal BOG compressors, each with a rated capacity of
2,300 cubic feet per minute (ft3/min), and two non-cryogenic
reciprocating BOG pipeline compressors with an individual capacity
rated at 2,500 ft3/min;
     LNG transfer system from the storage tanks to the
vaporizers, consisting of six pot-mounted LNG booster pumps each sized
for 2,200 gpm;
     LNG vaporizer system, consisting of six submerged
combustion vaporizers each sized for 200 million standard cubic feet
per day;
     A natural gas liquids (NGL) extraction facility, with the
NGL to be sold to an entity other than Jordan Cove and transported from
the terminal using existing railroad lines;
     A 30 megawatt, natural gas-fired, simple cycle combustion
turbine power plant to provide a supplemental source of electric power
for the LNG terminal;
     Waste heat recovery system;
     Emergency vent system, LNG spill containment system, fire
water system, utility system, hazard detection system, and control
system; and
     Buildings and support facilities.
    Jordan Cove proposes to initiate construction of the terminal in
the winter of 2007-2008, and anticipates placing the project into
service in the fourth quarter of 2010.

PCGP Sendout Pipeline

    The PCGP sendout pipeline would consist of the following elements:
     A 223-mile-long, 36-inch-diameter steel underground
natural gas pipeline, extending from the proposed Jordon Cove LNG
terminal southeast, crossing Coos, Douglas, Jackson, and Klamath
Counties, Oregon, and into Modoc County, California, with capacity to
deliver 1.0 bscfd at a maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) of
1,440 pounds per square inch (psig);
     Butte Falls Compressor Station, at about Milepost (MP)
127, Jackson County, Oregon, consisting of two new 10,310 horsepower
compressor units;
     Interconnections with three existing natural gas pipeline
systems, including Williams Northwest Pipeline's Grants Pass Lateral,
PG&E's 400 and 401 pipelines, and potentially Tuscarora Gas
Transmission's pipeline;
     Four receipt or delivery meter stations, including the
Coos Bay Receipt Meter Station at MP 0.0 in Coos County, Oregon, the
Clarks Branch Delivery Meter Station at about MP 68, Douglas County,
Oregon, the Tulelake Delivery Station at MP 223, Modoc County,
California, and the potential Tuscarora Delivery Meter Station also at
MP 223;
     A gas control communication system, consisting of radio
towers at each meter station, and the compressor station, and
additional facilities at existing mountain top radio communication
towers, and two new additional master radio sites at unspecified
locations;
     Mainline block valves at 15 locations along the pipeline
route; and
     Pig launchers and receivers located at each end of the
pipeline (Coos Bay Meter Station and Tulelake Meter Station).
    PCGP proposes to begin construction of the sendout pipeline in the
summer of 2009, and anticipates the completion of installation and
restoration activities by the spring of 2011.

The EIS Process

    The NEPA requires the Commission to take into account the
environmental impacts that could result from an action when it
considers whether or not an LNG import terminal or an interstate
natural gas pipeline should be approved. The FERC will use the EIS to
consider the environmental impacts that could result if it issues
project authorizations to Jordan Cove and PCGP under sections 3 and 7
of the Natural Gas Act. The NEPA also requires us to discover and
address concerns the public may have about proposals. This process is
referred to as ``scoping.'' The main goal of the scoping process is to
focus the analysis in the EIS on important environmental issues. With
this NOI, the Commission staff is requesting public comments on the
scope of the issues to be addressed in the EIS. All comments received
will be considered during preparation of the EIS.
    In the EIS we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction, operation, maintenance, and abandonment of the
proposed project under these general headings:
     Geology and Soils.
     Water Resources.
     Vegetation and Wildlife.
     Land Use, Recreation, and Visual Resources.
     Cultural Resources.
     Socioeconomics.
     Air Quality and Noise.
     Reliability and Safety.
     Cumulative Impacts.
    We will also evaluate possible alternatives to the proposed project
or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to lessen
or avoid impacts on affected resources.

    Our independent analysis of the issues will be included in a draft
EIS. The draft EIS will be mailed to Federal, state, and local
government agencies; elected officials; affected landowners;
environmental and public interest groups; Indian tribes and regional
Native American organizations; commentors; other interested parties;
local libraries and newspapers; and the FERC's official service list
for this proceeding. A 90-day comment period will be allotted for
review of the draft EIS. We will consider all comments on the draft EIS
and revise the document, as necessary, before issuing a final EIS. We
will consider all comments on the final EIS before we make our
recommendations to the Commission. To ensure that your comments are
considered, please follow the instructions in the Public Participation
section of this NOI.
    Although no formal application has been filed, the FERC staff has
already initiated its NEPA review under its pre-filing process. The
purpose of the pre-filing process is to encourage early involvement of
interested stakeholders and to identify and resolve issues before an
application is filed with the FERC. In addition, the Coast Guard, which
would be responsible for reviewing the maritime safety and security
aspects of the planned project and regulating maritime safety and
security if the project is approved, has initiated its review of the
project as well.
    With this NOI, we are asking Federal, state, and local agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues, to express their interest in becoming cooperating
agencies for the preparation of the EIS. These agencies may choose to
participate once they have evaluated the proposal relative to their
responsibilities. The Coast Guard and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
have already agreed to be cooperating agencies for this project. In
letters dated May 9, 2006, we requested that the Oregon Department of
Energy (ODE), U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USFS),
U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau
of Land Management (BLM), and Fish and Wildlife Service also become
cooperating agencies. The ODE and NMFS have declined our invitation to
be cooperating agencies in the production of the EIS, but may
reconsider at any time during the pre-filing review process.
    The EIS will examine the proposed action and alternatives that
require administrative or other actions by other federal agencies. The
USFS has identified the possible need to amend the existing Umpqua,
Rouge River-Siskiyou, and Fremont-Winema National Forest Land and
Resource Management Plans. The BLM has identified the possible need to
amend the existing Resource Management Plans of the Coos Bay, Roseburg,
and Medford Districts and the Klamath Falls Resource Area.

Currently Identified Environmental Issues

    We have already identified issues that we think deserve attention
based on a preliminary review of the projects, and information provided
by Jordan Cove and PCGP. This preliminary list of issues, which is
presented below, may be revised based on your comments and our
continuing analyses.
     Impact of LNG vessel traffic on other Coos Bay users,
including commercial ships, fishing and recreational boaters.
     Potential impacts of dredging the turning basin and LNG
ship dock on water quality and estuarine fishery resources.
     Potential impacts of the LNG terminal on residents in the
Coos Bay area, including safety issues at the import and storage
facility, noise, air quality, and visual resources.
     Potential impact of the LNG terminal on air traffic at the
North Bend airport.
     Potential for geological hazards, including seismic
activity, to have impacts on both the proposed LNG import terminal and
sendout pipeline.
     Potential impacts of the pipeline on waterbodies and
wetlands, including issues of erosion control.
     Potential impacts of the pipeline on vegetation, including
the clearing of forest.
     Potential impacts of the pipeline on threatened and
endangered species, and wildlife habitat.
     Potential impacts of the pipeline on cultural resources.

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the planned project. By becoming a
commentor, your concerns will be addressed in the EIS and considered by
the Commission. Your comments should focus on the potential
environmental effects, reasonable alternatives (including alternative
facility sites and pipeline routes), and measures to avoid or lessen
environmental impacts. The more specific your comments, the more useful
they will be. To ensure that your comments are timely and properly
recorded, please follow these instructions:
     Send an original and two copies of your letter to: Magalie
R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
St., NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426 .
     Label one copy of your comments for the attention of DG2E/
G3.
     Reference Docket Nos. PF06-25-000 and PF06-26-000 on the
original and both copies.
     Mail your comments so that they will be received in
Washington, DC on or before July 24, 2006. We will provide the Coast
Guard with copies of all comments received by the FERC during the
scoping period.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing of any
comments in response to this NOI. For information on electronically
filing comments, please see the instructions on the Commission's Web
site at http://www.ferc.gov under the ``e-Filing'' link and the link to

the User's Guide as well as information in 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii).
Before you can file comments you will need to create a free account,
which can be accomplished on-line.
    The public scoping meetings (dates, times, and locations listed
above) are designed to provide another opportunity to offer comments on
the proposed project. Interested groups and individuals are encouraged
to attend the meetings and to present comments on the environmental
issues that they believe should be addressed in the EIS. A transcript
of each meeting will be generated so that your comments will be
accurately recorded.
    Once Jordan Cove and PCGP formally file their applications with the
Commission, you may want to become an ``intervenor,'' which is an
official party to the proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role
in the process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be
heard by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final
ruling. An intervenor formally participates in a Commission proceeding
by filing a request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an
intervenor are included in the User's Guide under the ``e-filing'' link
on the Commission's Web site. Please note that you may not request
intervenor status at this time. You must wait until a formal
application is filed with the Commission.

Environmental Mailing List

    If you wish to remain on the environmental mailing list, please
return the attached Mailing List Retention Form (Appendix 2 of this
NOI). If you do not return this form, we will remove your name from our
mailing list.
    To reduce printing and mailing costs, the draft and final EIS will
be issued in both compact disk (CD-ROM) and hard copy formats. The FERC
strongly encourages the use of CD-ROM format in its publication of
large documents. Thus, all recipients will automatically receive the
EIS on CD-ROM. If you wish to receive a paper copy of the draft EIS
instead of a CD-ROM, you must indicate that choice on the return
mailer.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at 1-866-208-FERC (3372) or on
the FERC Internet website (http://www.ferc.gov) using the ``eLibrary

link.'' Click on the eLibrary link, select ``General Search'' and enter
the project docket number excluding the last three digits (i.e., PF06-
25 or PF06-26) in the ``Docket Number'' field. Be sure you have
selected an appropriate date range. For assistance with eLibrary, the
eLibrary helpline can be reached at 1-866-208-3676, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The eLibrary link on the
FERC Internet Web site also provides access to the texts of formal
documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule
makings.
    In addition, the FERC now offers a free service called
eSubscription that allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and
submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you
spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. To register for this service, go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm
.

    Public meetings or site visits will be posted on the Commission's
calendar located at http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx

along with other related information.
    Finally, Jordan Cove and PCGP have established their own Internet
websites for this project. The Web sites includes a project overview,
status, answers to frequently asked questions, and links to related
documents. The Jordan Cove Web site is at http://www.jordancoveenergy.com The PCGP Web site is at http://.

http://www.pacificconnectorgp.com. Additional information can be obtained

directly from Jordan Cove by calling Bob Braddock at<PHONE_NUMBER> (e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or from PCGP by calling Jan Camp at
360-666-2106 (e-mail: pacificconnector@williams.com).

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-10304 Filed 6-29-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 50 (Wednesday, March 17, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14656-14659]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05451]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91297; File No. SR-NYSE-2021-16]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Its Price List

March 11, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on March 1, 2021, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-
regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List to cap the maximum
average number of shares per day for the billing month in calculating
the average monthly consolidated average daily volume (``CADV'') and
NYSE CADV for purposes of Step Up Adding Tier 3. The Exchange proposes
to implement the fee changes effective March 1, 2021. The proposed rule
change is available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List to cap the maximum
average number of shares per day for the billing month in calculating
CADV and NYSE CADV for purposes of Step Up Adding Tier 3.
    The proposed changes respond to the current volatile market
environment that has resulted in unprecedented average daily volumes
and the temporary closure of the Trading Floor,\4\

which are both related to the ongoing spread of the novel coronavirus
(``COVID-19''), by providing a degree of certainty to member
organizations adding liquidity to the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Beginning on March 16, 2020, in order to slow COVID-19
through social distancing measures, significant limitations were
placed on large gatherings throughout the country. As a result, on
March 18, 2020, the Exchange determined that beginning March 23,
2020, the physical Trading Floor facilities located at 11 Wall
Street in New York City would close and that the Exchange would
move, on a temporary basis, to fully electronic trading. See Press
Release, dated March 18, 2020, available here: https://ir.theice.com/press/press-releases/allcategories/2020/03-18-2020-
204202110. On May 14, 2020, the Exchange announced that on May 26,
2020 trading operations on the Trading Floor would resume on a
limited basis to a subset of Floor brokers, subject to health and
safety measures designed to prevent the spread of COVID-19. See
Trader Update, dated May 14, 2020, available here: https://www.nyse.com/traderupdate/history#110000251588. The Trading Floor
continues to operate with reduced headcount and additional health
and safety precautions. See Trader Update, dated June 15, 2020,
available here: https://www.nyse.com/trader-update/history#110000272018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to implement the fee changes effective March
1, 2021.
Background
Current Market and Competitive Environment
    Beginning in March 2020 and continuing into 2021, markets worldwide
have experienced unprecedented volatility given the ongoing spread of
the novel coronavirus (``COVID-19''). Trading volumes on the Exchange
have surged and remain high. For instance, between March 1 and March
30, 2020, NYSE CADV was 7.4 billion shares, 95% higher than the average
NYSE CADV between 2018 and 2020. In January 2021, NYSE CADV was 5.5
billion shares, 56% higher than the average NYSE CADV for 2019.
    The Exchange also operates in a highly competitive market. The
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services
in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and
SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the
market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting market
competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors
and listed companies.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37495, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (Final Rule)
(``Regulation NMS'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While Regulation NMS has enhanced competition, it has also fostered
a ``fragmented'' market structure where trading in a single stock can
occur across multiple trading centers. When multiple trading centers
compete for order flow in the same stock, the Commission has recognized
that ``such competition can lead to the fragmentation of order flow in
that stock.'' \6\ Indeed, equity trading is currently dispersed across
16 exchanges,\7\ 31 alternative trading systems,\8\ and numerous
broker-dealer internalizers and wholesalers, all competing for order
flow. Based on publicly available information, no single exchange has
more than 16% market share.\9\ Therefore, no exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of equity order flow. More
specifically, the Exchange's market share of trading in Tape A, B and C
securities combined is less than 10%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61358, 75 FR 3594,
3597 (January 21, 2010) (File No. S7-02-10) (Concept Release on
Equity Market Structure).
    \7\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S. Equities Market Volume
Summary, available at http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/. See generally https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/divisionsmarketregmrexchangesshtml.html.
    \8\ See FINRA ATS Transparency Data, available at https://otctransparency.finra.org/otctransparency/AtsIssueData. A list of
alternative trading systems registered with the Commission is
available at https://www.sec.gov/foia/docs/atslist.htm.
    \9\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Equities Market Volume Summary,
available at http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
move order flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes. With respect to non-marketable
order flow that would provide displayed liquidity on an Exchange,
member organizations can choose from any one of the 16 currently
operating registered exchanges to route such order flow. Accordingly,
competitive forces constrain exchange transaction fees that relate to
orders that would provide liquidity on an exchange.
    The proposed rule change accordingly responds to these
unprecedented events and the current competitive landscape where market
participants can and do move order flow, or discontinue or reduce use
of certain categories of products, in response to fee changes.
Proposed Rule Change
    Under the Step Up Adding Tier 3, the Exchange provides an
incremental $0.0006 credit in Tapes A, B and C securities for all
orders from a qualifying member organization market participant
identifier (``MPID'') or mnemonic that sets the NBBO \10\ or a new BBO
\11\ if the MPID or mnemonic:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Rule 1.1(q) (defining ``NBBO'' to mean the national
best bid or offer).
    \11\ See Rule 1.1(c) (defining ``BBO'' to mean the best bid or
offer on the Exchange).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Has adding ADV in Tapes A, B and C Securities as a
percentage of Tapes A, B and C CADV,\12\ excluding any liquidity added
by a DMM, that is at least 50% more than the MPID's or mnemonic's
Adding ADV in Tapes A, B and C securities in June 2020 as a percentage
of Tapes A, B and C CADV, and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The terms ``ADV'' and ``CADV'' are defined in footnote * of
the Price List.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     is affiliated with a Supplemental Liquidity Provider
(``SLP'') that has an Adding ADV in Tape A securities at least 0.10% of
NYSE CADV, and
     has Adding ADV in Tape A securities as a percentage of
NYSE CADV, excluding any liquidity added by a DMM, that is at least
0.20%.
    The credit is in addition to the MPID's or mnemonic's current
credit for adding liquidity and also does not count toward the combined
limit on SLP credits of $0.0032 per share provided for in the
Incremental Credit per Share for affiliated SLPs whereby SLPs can
qualify for incremental credits of $0.0001, $0.0002 or $0.0003.
    For purposes of calculating Tapes A, B and C CADV as currently used
in Step Up Adding Tier 3, the Exchange proposes to establish a monthly
maximum average cap of 11.5 billion shares per day for Tapes A, B and C
CADV in the billing month for MPIDs or mnemonics of qualifying member
organizations that are SLPs. To effectuate this change, the Exchange
would add text to the tier specifying that, in a month where Tapes A, B
and C CADV equals or exceeds 11.5 billion shares per day for the
billing month, Tapes A, B and C CADV for that month will be subject to
a cap of 11.5 billion shares per day for the billing month.
    Similarly, for purposes of calculating NYSE CADV as currently used
in Step Up Adding Tier 3, the Exchange proposes to establish a monthly
maximum average cap of 5.5 billion shares per day for NYSE CADV in the
billing month for MPIDs or mnemonics of qualifying member organizations
that are SLPs. To effectuate this change, the Exchange would add text
to the tier specifying that for MPIDs or mnemonics of qualifying member
organizations that are SLPs, in a month where NYSE CADV equals or
exceeds 5.5 billion shares per day for the billing month, NYSE CADV for
that month will be subject to a cap of 5.5 billion shares per day for
the billing month.
    For example, assume in the billing month that a member organization
that is an SLP has an average daily adding volume of 11.5 million
shares. Further assume that Tapes A, B and C CADV was 14.0 billion
shares during that month. To calculate the adding ADV as

a percent of Tapes A, B and C CADV, the Exchange would use the CADV cap
of 11.5 billion shares, yielding an adding percent of Tapes A, B and C
CADV of 0.10% rather than 0.082% if the Exchange had used 14.0 billion
shares. The example would work the same for the NYSE CADV cap of 5.5
billion shares if NYSE CADV was over 5.5 billion shares.
    The Exchange does not propose to change the requirements to qualify
for or the credits associated with Step Up Adding Tier 3.
    The proposed changes are not otherwise intended to address other
issues, and the Exchange is not aware of any significant problems that
market participants would have in complying with the proposed changes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\13\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\14\ in particular,
because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons
using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between
customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) & (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Change Is Reasonable
    As discussed above, beginning March 2020, markets worldwide have
experienced unprecedented volatility because of the ongoing spread of
COVID19. As a result of this volatility, the equity markets have
experienced unprecedented trading volumes. Moreover, as also discussed
above, the Exchange operates in a highly fragmented and competitive
market. In view of these unprecedented events, and the current
competitive landscape where market participants can and do move order
flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of products,
in response to fee changes, the Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change is reasonable. Specifically, the Exchange believes that
capping the monthly Tape A, B and C CADV at a maximum of 11.5 billion
shares and the monthly NYSE CADV at a maximum of 5.5 billion shares
when calculating CADV for Step Up Adding Tier 3 for MPIDs or mnemonics
of qualifying member organizations that are SLPs is reasonable because
such extraordinarily high market volumes would make it significantly
harder for member organizations that are SLPs, whose adding volume is
limited to proprietary adding liquidity, to meet the adding
requirements for the tier. The Exchanges notes that the CADV share
volumes cap levels are the same levels as the current CADV caps for SLP
tiers in the fee schedule.
The Proposal Is an Equitable Allocation of Fees
    The Exchange believes the proposal equitably allocates its fees
among its market participants by fostering liquidity provision and
stability in the marketplace. The Exchange believes that the proposed
cap for calculating CADV for Step Up Adding Tier 3 credits in a month
where Tape A, B and C CADV is equal to or greater than 11.5 billion
share or when NYSE CADV is equal to or greater than 5.5 billion shares
constitutes an equitable allocation of fees because the proposed change
would apply to all similarly situated member organizations that are
SLPs, all of whom would continue to be subject to the same fee
structure, and access to the Exchange's market would continue to be
offered on fair and nondiscriminatory terms.
The Proposal Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is not unfairly
discriminatory. In the prevailing competitive environment, member
organizations are free to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they
believe that alternatives offer them better value.
    The proposal is not unfairly discriminatory because it neither
targets nor will it have a disparate impact on any particular category
of market participant. The proposed caps for calculating monthly
combined CADV for Step Up Adding Tier 3 credits for adding liquidity to
the Exchange also does not permit unfair discrimination because the
proposed changes would apply to all similarly situated member
organizations that are SLPs, who would all benefit from use of the
lower volume threshold to calculate the relevant adding tier CADV
across tapes on an equal basis.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal
is consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\15\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. Instead, as discussed above, the Exchange believes
that the proposed changes would encourage the submission of additional
liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for member organizations. As a result, the Exchange believes that the
proposed change furthers the Commission's goal in adopting Regulation
NMS of fostering integrated competition among orders, which promotes
``more efficient pricing of individual stocks for all types of orders,
large and small.'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
    \16\ Regulation NMS, 70 FR at 37498-99.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Intramarket Competition. The proposed changes are designed to
attract additional order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes
that the proposed changes would continue to incentivize market
participants to direct displayed order flow to the Exchange. Greater
liquidity benefits all market participants on the Exchange by providing
more trading opportunities and encourages member organizations to send
orders, thereby contributing to robust levels of liquidity, which
benefits all market participants on the Exchange. The current credits
would be available to all similarly-situated market participants, and,
as such, the proposed change would not impose a disparate burden on
competition among market participants on the Exchange. As noted, the
proposal would apply to all similarly situated member organizations on
the same and equal terms, who would benefit from the changes on the
same basis. Accordingly, the proposed change would not impose a
disparate burden on competition among market participants on the
Exchange.
    Intermarket Competition. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily choose to
send their orders to other exchange and off-exchange venues if they
deem fee levels at those other venues to be more favorable. In such an
environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its fees and rebates
to remain competitive with other exchanges and with off-exchange
venues. Because competitors are free to modify their own fees and
credits in response, and because market participants may readily adjust
their order routing practices, the Exchange does not believe its
proposed fee change can impose any burden on intermarket competition.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \17\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \18\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \19\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2021-16 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2021-16. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2021-16, and should be submitted on
or before April 7, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-05451 Filed 3-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 24 (Tuesday, February 5, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8119-8120]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02493]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP13-459-000.
    Applicants: Trailblazer Pipeline Company LLC.
    Description: 4Q 2012 Penalty Credit Revenue Report.
    Filed Date: 1/22/13.
    Accession Number: 20130122-5241.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/4/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-473-000.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Secondary Scheduling Priorities to be effective 4/1/
2013.
    Filed Date: 1/24/13.
    Accession Number: 20130124-5072.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/5/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-474-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: 01/24/13 Negotiated Rates--Sequent Energy Management
(HUB) 3075-89 to be effective 1/23/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/24/13.
    Accession Number: 20130124-5104.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/5/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-475-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: 01/24/13 Negotiated Rates--United Energy Trading (HUB)
5095-89 to be effective 1/23/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/24/13.
    Accession Number: 20130124-5106.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/5/13.

    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.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP13-110-001.
    Applicants: Discovery Gas Transmission LLC.
    Description: NAESB V2.0--2nd Compliance to be effective 12/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 1/24/13.
    Accession Number: 20130124-5100.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/5/13.

    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must
file in

accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR
385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, and service 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 (202) 502-
8659.

    Dated January 25, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-02493 Filed 2-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 206)]
[Notices]
[Page 60710]
[DOCID:fr25oc07-117]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Airport Level Designation for John F. Kennedy
International Airport for the Summer 2008 Scheduling Season

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

ACTION: Notice of schedule coordination.

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

SUMMARY: Under this notice, the FAA announces that New York's John F.
Kennedy International Airport (JFK) has been designated a Level 3
Coordinated Airport for the summer 2008 scheduling season in accordance
with the International Air Transport Association (IATA) Worldwide
Scheduling Guidelines. This notice supercedes the September 24, 2007,
notice that designated JFK a Level 2 Schedules Facilitated Airport. 72
FR 54317. Based on a recently completed capacity analysis, a review of
last summer's demand, the projections for summer 2008, and the agency's
decision to seek voluntary schedule reductions from domestic air
carriers, the FAA has determined that a Level 3 airport declaration is
warranted. The primary coordination constraint is runway/air traffic
control capacity.
    JFK is experiencing increased congestion and delay. Comparing the
period of October 2006 through July 2007 to the same period in the
previous year, the average daily operations at JFK increased 23
percent; the average daily arrivals with delays greater than one hour
increased 114 percent; and on-time gate arrivals within 15 minutes of
scheduled time decreased from 69.7 percent to 61.2 percent. The average
taxi-out delay increased 19 percent from 30 to almost 36 minutes. On-
time departures within 15 minutes of scheduled time declined from 74.7
percent to 65.2 percent. Much of this delay is attributed to volume and
is not likely to be entirely mitigated by short-term air traffic
control procedural enhancements, airport or airspace efficiency gains,
or airport infrastructure changes. For example, from February 2007
through July 2007, JFK's average airport capacity was 81 operations per
hour while demand during the busiest hour, 4 p.m., was over 110
scheduled arrivals and departures during summer 2007. Adjacent hours
had fewer scheduled flights but still above the average hourly capacity
rate.
    Under a preliminary review of the schedule submissions for summer
2008, the FAA notes that there are proposed schedule increases by
domestic carriers and foreign flag carriers. These proposed schedules
will result in a significant increase of operations at JFK. While JFK
has available capacity for additional flights during some periods of
the day, certain hours are currently beyond capacity and would get only
worse if the schedules were implemented as proposed. Thus, based on the
level of congestion experienced this past summer season, the planned
increases for next summer, and the decision to seek voluntary
reductions of existing schedules from domestic operators through a
scheduling reduction meeting,\1\ an immediate Level 3 designation is
warranted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 41722, the FAA Acting
Administrator and the Secretary of Transportation have determined
that a scheduling reduction meeting is needed to address peak hour
schedules that exceed capacity. The meeting will begin on October
23, 2007. Notice of the meeting was published in the Federal
Register on October 22, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has established a target of 80 total operations per hour at
JFK from 6 a.m. through 9:59 p.m., local time, except for the hours
between 3 p.m. and 7:59 p.m., when the target will be 81 total
operations per hour. A copy of the notice including additional details
of the FAA analyses and the airport's capacity is available on the FAA
Web site at http://www.faa.gov and in Docket No. FAA-2007-29320.

    Under this Level 3 designation, the FAA will accept the schedule
information previously submitted to the FAA. The FAA will grant
historic status for the operations of foreign flag air carriers based
on their summer 2007 flights if requested for summer 2008. For domestic
air carriers, the base level of operations, both international and
domestic, will be determined as part of the scheduling reduction
meeting process. The FAA will continue to seek voluntary solutions to
accommodate flight requests but overall demand must be within the
airport's practical capacity if there is to be a successful reduction
of delays. Carriers with new flights planned for peak hours should
consider alternative schedules, especially for those planned in the
late afternoon and evening hours.

ADDRESSES: Any change to schedule information for summer 2008 may be
submitted by mail to Slot Administration Office, AGC-240, Office of the
Chief Counsel, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591;
facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; ARINC: DCAYAXD; or by e-mail to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Komal K. Jain, Regulations Division,
Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone number: 202-
267-3073.

    Issued in Washington, DC on October 19, 2007.
Rebecca B. MacPherson,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. 07-5269 Filed 10-22-07; 9:30 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 177 (Thursday, September 14, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63189-63194]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19893]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket # FAA-2023-1261]

Airport Terminal Program; FY 2024 Funding Opportunity

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

ACTION: Notice of Funding Opportunity.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation (DOT), Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) announces the opportunity to apply for
approximately $1 billion in FY 2024 discretionary funds for the Airport
Terminal Program (ATP), made available under the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 (IIJA), Public Law 117-58, herein
referred to as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). The purpose of
the ATP is to make annual grants available to eligible airports for
airport terminal and airport-owned Airport Traffic Control Towers
development projects that address the aging infrastructure of our
nation's airports.
    In addition, ATP grants will align with DOT's Strategic Framework
FY2022-2026 at https://www.transportation.gov/administrations/office-policy/fy2022-2026-strategic-frameworkhttps://www.transportation.gov/administrations/office-policy/fy2022-2026-strategic-framework. The FY
2024 ATP will be implemented consistent with law and in alignment with
the priorities in Executive Order 14052, Implementation of the
Infrastructure Investments and Jobs Act (86 FR 64355), which are to
invest efficiently and equitably; promote the competitiveness of the
U.S. economy; improve job opportunities by focusing on high labor
standards; strengthen infrastructure resilience to all hazards
including climate change; and to effectively coordinate with State,
local, Tribal, and territorial government partners.

DATES: Airport sponsors that wish to be considered for FY 2024 ATP
discretionary funding should submit an application that meets the
requirements of this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) as soon as
possible, but no later than 5:00 p.m. Eastern time, October 16, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit applications electronically at www.faa.gov/bil/airport-terminals per instructions in this NOFO.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robin K. Hunt, Manager, BIL Branch
APP-540, FAA Office of Airports, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or our FAA BIL email
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Program Description

    BIL established the ATP, a competitive discretionary grant program,
which provides approximately $1 billion in grant funding annually for
five years (Fiscal Years 2022-2026) to upgrade, modernize, and rebuild
our nation's airport terminals and airport-owned Airport Traffic
Control Towers (ATCTs). This includes bringing airport facilities into
conformity with current standards; constructing, modifying, or
expanding facilities as necessary to meet demonstrated aeronautical
demand; enhancing environmental sustainability; encouraging actual and
potential competition; and providing a balanced system of airports to
meet the roles and functions necessary to support civil aeronautical
demand. The FAA is committed to advancing safe, efficient
transportation, including projects funded under the ATP. The ATP also
supports the President's goals to mobilize American ingenuity to build
modern infrastructure and an equitable, clean energy future. In support
of Executive Order 13985, Advancing Racial Equity and Support for
Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government (86 FR 7009),
the FAA encourages applicants to consider how the project will address
the challenges faced by individuals in underserved communities and
rural areas, as well as accessibility for persons with disabilities.
    The ATP falls under the project grant authority for the Airport
Improvement Program (AIP) in 49 United States Code (U.S.C.) Sec.
47104. Per 2 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 200--Uniform
Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements
for Federal Awards, the AIP Federal Assistance Listings Number is
20.106, with the objective to assist eligible airports in the
development and improvement of a nationwide system that adequately
meets the needs of civil aeronautics. The FY 2024 ATP will be
implemented, as appropriate and consistent with BIL, in alignment with
the priorities in Executive Order 14052, Implementation of the
Infrastructure Investments and Jobs Act (86 FR 64355), which are to
invest efficiently and equitably; promote the competitiveness of the
U.S. economy; improve opportunities for good-paying jobs with the free
and fair choice to join a union by focusing on high labor standards;
strengthen infrastructure resilience to all hazards including climate
change; and to effectively coordinate with State, local, Tribal, and
territorial government partners. Consistent with statutory criteria and
Executive Order 14008, Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad
(86 FR 7619), the FAA also seeks to fund projects under the ATP that
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and are designed with specific elements
to address climate change impacts. Specifically, the FAA is looking to
award projects that align with the President's greenhouse gas reduction
goals, promote energy efficiency, support fiscally responsible land use
and transportation efficient design, support terminal development
compatible with the use of sustainable aviation fuels and technologies,
increase climate resilience, incorporate sustainable and less
emissions-intensive pavement and construction materials as allowable,
and reduce pollution.
    The FAA will also consider projects that advance the goals of the
Executive Orders listed under Section E.2.

B. Federal Award Information

    This NOFO announces up to $1,000,000,000, subject to availability
of funds, for the Fiscal Year 2024 ATP. The ATP is a $5 billion grant
program, distributed as approximately $1 billion annually for five
years (Fiscal Years 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025, and 2026), subject to
annual allocations limitations based on airport roles found in the
published National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS), as
updated with current year data. In general, the $5 billion in ATP grant
funding is subject to the following annual award allocation
limitations: not more than 55 percent shall be for large hub airports,
not more than 15 percent shall be for medium hub airports, not more
than 20 percent shall be for small hub airports, and not less than 10
percent shall be for nonhub and nonprimary airports.
    The FAA will consider projects that increase capacity and passenger
access; projects that replace aging infrastructure; projects that
achieve compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C.
12101, et seq.) and expand accessibility for persons with disabilities;
projects that improve airport access for historically disadvantaged
populations; projects that improve energy efficiency, including
upgrading environmental systems, upgrading plant facilities, and
achieving Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
accreditation standards; projects that improve airfield safety through
terminal relocation; and projects that encourage actual and potential
competition. This includes applicable Executive Orders as listed in
Section E.2. Additionally, the FAA will provide preference to projects
that achieve a complete development objective even if awards for the
project must be phased, and priority to projects that have received
partial awards.
    Projects for relocating, reconstructing, repairing, or improving an
airport-owned ATCT will also be considered. In addition to the
considerations above, these projects will also be evaluated based on
overall impact on the National Airspace System, including age of
facility, operational constraints, and nonstandard facilities.
    The FAA will publish a NOFO annually to announce additional funding
made available, approximately $1 billion per year, for Fiscal Years
2025-2026.

C. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants

    Eligible applicants are those airport sponsors normally eligible
for Airport Improvement Program (AIP) discretionary grants as defined
in 49 U.S.C. 47115. This includes a public agency, private entity,
state agency, Indian Tribe or Pueblo owning a public-use NPIAS airport,
the Secretary of the Interior for Midway Island airport, the Republic
of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the
Republic of Palau.

2. Cost Sharing or Matching

    The Federal cost share of ATP grants is 80 percent for large and
medium hub airports, and 95 percent for the remainder of airports
eligible to receive ATP grants, which includes small hub, nonhub, and
nonprimary airports.

3. Project Eligibility

    All projects funded from the ATP must be:
    i. Airport terminal development, defined in 49 U.S.C. 47102(28) as
development of an airport passenger terminal building, including
terminal gates; access roads servicing exclusively airport traffic that
leads directly to or from an airport passenger terminal building; and
walkways that lead directly to or from an airport passenger terminal
building. Under the ATP, the FAA may consider projects that qualify as
``terminal development'' (including multimodal terminal development),
as that term is defined in 49 U.S.C. 47102(28); or
    ii. On-airport rail access projects as set forth in Passenger
Facility Charge (PFC) Update 75-21 (86 FR 48793, August 31, 2021); or
    iii. Airport-owned ATCT that includes relocating, reconstructing,
repairing, or improving the ATCT; and
    iv. Justified based on civil aeronautical demand.

D. Application and Submission Information

1. Address To Request Application Package

    An application for ATP terminal or ATCT projects, FAA Form 5100-
144, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Airport Terminal and Tower Project
Information, can be found at: www.faa.gov/bil/airport-terminals.
    Direct all inquiries regarding applications to the appropriate
Regional Office (RO) or Airports District Office (ADO). RO/ADO contact
information is available at: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/arp/offices/regional_offices. Or to the BIL Team
at: [email protected].

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

    Applicants are required to submit FAA Form 5100-144, Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law, Airport Terminal and Tower Project Information. The
applicant should submit Form 5100-144 as a fillable digitally signed
PDF document via email. If the applicant cannot provide a digital
signature, the application may be submitted as two documents: (1) the
completed fillable PDF without a signature and (2) a scanned version of
the completed application with a written signature. Applicants should
follow the instructions and provide a response to applicable items on
the form.
    The ``Submit by Email'' button at the bottom of the form will
generate an email for the applicant to send to the FAA BIL Team at: [email protected]. If the ``Submit by Email'' button does not
generate an email the applicant can save the fillable PDF by selecting
``File>Save As'' to save as a fillable PDF. Once saved, the applicant
can email the application to the FAA BIL Team at [email protected]. The fillable PDF application must contain either a
digital signature or the applicant's written signature in accordance
with the procedures described above.
    Applicants selected to receive an ATP grant will then be required
to follow AIP grant application procedures prior to award, which
include meeting all prerequisites for funding, and submission of
Standard Form SF-424, Application for Federal Assistance, and FAA Form
5100-100, Application for Development Projects.
    Airports covered under the FAA's State Block Grant Program or
airports in a channeling act state should coordinate with their
associated state agency on the process for who should submit an
application, via the procedures listed above.
    Applicants must address Administration and Departmental priorities
in safety, climate change and sustainability, equity, and workforce
development which are further defined in Section E.1 Criteria.
    Grant Funds, Sources and Uses of Project Funds: The FAA requests
that each project application have a financial plan (or project budget)
available for review upon request. Project budgets should show how
different funding sources will share in each activity and present those
data in dollars and percentages. The budget should identify other
Federal funds the applicant is applying for or has been awarded, if
any, that the applicant intends to use. Funding sources should be
grouped into three categories: non-Federal, ATP, and other Federal with
specific amounts from each funding source.
    Sharing of Application Information: The FAA may share application

information within the Department or with other Federal agencies if the
FAA determines that sharing is relevant to the respective program's
objectives.

3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)

    Applicants must comply with 2 CFR part 25--Universal Identifier and
System for Award Management. All applicants must have a unique entity
identifier provided by SAM. Additional information about obtaining a
Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) and registration procedures may be found
at http://www.sam.gov. Each applicant is required to: (1) be registered
in SAM; (2) provide a valid UEI prior to grant award; and (3) continue
to maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all
times during which the applicant has an active Federal award or an
application or plan under consideration by the FAA. Under the ATP, the
UEI and SAM account must belong to the entity that has the legal
authority to apply for, receive, and execute ATP grants.
    Once awarded, the FAA grant recipient must maintain the currency of
its information in SAM until the grantee submits the final financial
report required under the grant or receives the final payment,
whichever is later. A grant recipient must review and update the
information at least annually after the initial registration and more
frequently if required by changes in information or another award term.
    The FAA may not make an award until the applicant has complied with
all applicable UEI and SAM requirements. If an applicant has not fully
complied with the requirements by the time the FAA is ready to make an
award, the FAA may determine that the applicant is not qualified to
receive an award and use that determination as a basis for making a
federal award to another applicant.
    Non-federal entities that have received a federal award are
required to report certain civil, criminal, or administrative
proceedings to SAM (currently the Federal Awardee Performance and
Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) www.fapiis.gov) to ensure
registration information is current and complies with federal
requirements. Applicants should refer to 2 CFR 200.113 for more
information about this requirement.

4. Submission Dates and Times

    Airports that wish to be considered for FY 2024 ATP discretionary
funding must submit an application that meets the requirements of this
NOFO as soon as possible, but no later than 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on
October 16, 2023. Submit applications electronically to [email protected] per instructions in this NOFO.

5. Intergovernmental Review

    Not applicable.

6. Funding Restrictions

    All projects funded from the ATP must be airport terminal
development or for relocation, reconstruction, repair, or improvement
of an airport-owned air traffic control tower, defined under Section C-
3 Project Eligibility. ATP funds may not be used to support or oppose
union organizing.
    Pre-Award Authority: All project costs must be incurred after the
grant execution date unless specifically permitted under 49 U.S.C.
47110(c). Certain airport development costs incurred before execution
of the grant agreement, but after November 15, 2021, are allowable,
only if certain conditions under 49 U.S.C. 47110(c) are met [see Table
3-60 of the AIP Handbook, FAA Order 5100.38 D Change 1, for a specific
list of the guidance regarding when project costs can be incurred in
relation to section 47110(c)].

7. Other Submission Requirements

    Applications will only be accepted on FAA Form 5100-144 fillable
PDF via email and must be received on or before October 16, 2023, 5:00
p.m. Eastern time. No other forms of applications will be accepted.

E. Application Review Information

1. Criteria

    Applications for FY 2024 ATP will be rated using the following
criteria:
    i. Projects must meet eligibility requirements under the ATP, which
includes terminal development (including multimodal terminal
development) as defined in 49 U.S.C 47102(28): on-airport rail access
projects: or airport-owned ATCT relocation, reconstruction, repair, or
improvements.
    ii. The FAA will consider timeliness of implementation, with
priority given to those projects, including ``design only'' projects,
that can satisfy all statutory and administrative requirements for
grant award by June 2024.
    iii. Favorable consideration will be given to eligible and
justified (based on civil aeronautical demand) terminal development
projects (including multimodal terminal development), on-airport rail
access projects, and ATCT projects that:
    a. Increase capacity and passenger access: The applicant should
describe the extent to which the project contributes to the functioning
and growth of the economy, including the extent to which the project
addresses congestion or service gaps in rural areas. The applicant
should demonstrate how the proposed project increases capacity,
provides ongoing market access to the airport by competing carriers as
economic and competitive conditions change (such as by constructing
common use gates or updating gates and other areas with common use
equipment). The applicant should also demonstrate how the proposed
project increases capacity and market access or relieves congestion
based on current and/or forecast needs.
    b. Replace aging infrastructure: Applicants should describe how the
project addresses replacing or upgrading facilities that have reached
the end of their useful life. This includes information on the current
age and condition of the asset that will be affected by the project and
how the proposed project will improve asset condition. The applicant
should describe how the facility no longer meets the current or
forecasted operational needs of the airport. This includes the
renovation, expansion, or replacement of a facility that is too small
or cannot efficiently meet current or future demand. This also includes
projects aimed at terminal modernization or upgrades to meet the
changing user or community expectations. This can be met by including
multimodal terminal development, climate resiliency, sustainability
initiatives and practices incorporated therein, and the incorporation
of common-use equipment and practices, all with the goal of providing a
terminal that focuses on the most efficient movement of passengers and
baggage possible. This also includes projects that address changing
environmental conditions and improve resilience to climate change, and
that will be constructed consistent with the Federal Flood Risk
Management Standard, per the President's January 30, 2015, Executive
Order 13690, ``Establishing a Federal Flood Risk Management Standard
and a Process for Further Soliciting and Considering Stakeholder
Input'' to the extent consistent with current law.
    c. Achieve compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), including expand accessibility for persons with disabilities:
Applicants should describe how the project increases mobility, expands
access, and improves connectivity for people with disabilities both
inside and outside the terminal or ATCT. The information

should demonstrate how the proposed project will meet the requirements
under the Americans with Disabilities Act and improve equitable access
for people with disabilities.
    d. Improve airport access for historically disadvantaged
populations: Applicants should describe how the project increases
mobility, expands access, and improves connectivity for historically
disadvantaged populations. The information should demonstrate how the
proposed project provides a significant local and regional impact and
benefits historically disadvantaged populations. The applicant should
include a description of public engagement on a local and regional
level that has occurred, demonstrates proactive inclusivity of
historically disadvantaged communities, and the degree to which public
comments and commitments have been integrated into the project. DOT is
providing a list of communities that meet the definition of
Historically Disadvantaged Communities, available at https://adip.faa.gov/agis/public/#/disadvantagedCommunities.
    e. Improve energy efficiency, including upgrading environmental
systems, upgrading plant facilities, and achieving Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design (LEED) accreditation standards: Applicants
should provide information demonstrating how the proposed project will
reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from a reduction in
energy consumption through energy-efficient design. This includes how
the project may facilitate the airport in achieving LEED or similar
accreditation standards through reliance on alternative energy, water
use reduction, sustainable site selection and development, responsible
materials selection and waste management, incorporating lower-carbon
pavement and construction materials, enhanced indoor environmental
quality, use of terminal facility for renewable energy production, or
other sustainability efforts (e.g., vehicle charging stations attached
to the terminal) that further reduce long-term impact on the climate. A
proposed project, including utility support facilities, should be part
of an overall plan that sets targets to lower carbon emissions, working
toward a carbon-neutral airport by 2050.
    f. Improve airfield safety through terminal relocation: Applicants
should describe how the proposed terminal project is improving airfield
safety through the relocation of the terminal building or its
components. This could also include a project to relocate a terminal
that assists in addressing nonstandard airfield configurations.
    g. Encourage actual and potential competition: The applicant should
describe the extent to which the project promotes competition in air
service by providing greater ability to accommodate new entrants;
increasing the ability of competing air carriers to access constrained
facilities on an ongoing basis; and facilitating the efficient and
reliable movement of passengers and cargo. The applicant should
describe the extent to which the project leads to common use gates and
software (e.g., common use software updates, construction of common use
gates versus preferential use by a specific carriers). The applicant
may also wish to describe how the project will offer regional and
national impacts by improving the economic strength of regions and
cities; increase opportunities for tourism; result in long-term job
creation by supporting good-paying jobs with the free and fair choice
to join a union directly related to the project; and help the United
States compete in a global economy by encouraging the location of
important industries and future innovations and technology in the
United States.
    iv. ATCT projects that relocate, reconstruct, repair, or improve an
airport-owned ATCT will also be evaluated based on overall impact on
the National Airspace System, including age of facility, operational
constraints, and nonstandard facility conditions.
    v. The FAA will provide a preference to projects that achieve a
complete development objective, even if awards for the project must be
phased; and prioritize projects that have received partial awards.
    vi. The applicant should describe whether and how project delivery
and implementation create good-paying jobs with the free and fair
choice to join a union to the greatest extent possible; the use of
demonstrated strong labor standards, practices and policies (including
for direct employees, contractors, sub-contractors, and service workers
on airport property); use of project labor agreements; distribution of
workplace rights notices; union neutrality agreements; wage and/or
benefit standards; safety and health standards; the use of Local Hire
Provisions; \1\ registered apprenticeships; joint-labor management
partnerships; or other similar standards or practices. The applicant
should describe how planned methods of project delivery and
implementation (for example, use of Project Labor Agreements and/or
Local Hire Provisions,\2\ training, placement, and the provision of
supportive services for underrepresented workers) provide opportunities
for all workers, including workers underrepresented in construction
jobs to be trained and placed in good-paying jobs directly related to
the project. The FAA will consider this information in evaluating the
application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ IIJA div. B Section 25019 provides authority to use
geographical and economic hiring preferences, including local hire,
for construction jobs, subject to any applicable State and local
laws, policies, and procedures.
    \2\ Project labor agreement should be consistent with the
definition and standards outlined in Executive Order 14063.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Applicants are encouraged to submit projects that meet as many of
the above criteria as possible, but do not need to meet all criteria to
be considered.

2. Review and Selection Process

    Federal awarding agency personnel will evaluate applications based
on how well the projects meet the criteria in E.1, including project
eligibility, justification, readiness, impact on the National Airspace
System, and the availability of matching funds. The FAA will also
consider how well projects advance the goals of the following Executive
Orders, which are incorporated into the criteria under E.1.: the
President's January 20, 2021, Executive Order 13990, ``Protecting
Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the
Climate Crisis''; the President's January 20, 2021, Executive Order
13985, ``Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved
Communities Through the Federal Government''; the President's January
27, 2021, Executive Order 14008, ``Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home
and Abroad''; the President's May 20, 2021, Executive Order 14030,
``Climate Related Financial Risk''; and the President's July 9, 2021,
Executive Order 14036, ``Promoting Competition in the American
Economy.''
    Applications are first reviewed for eligibility, justification, and
timeliness of implementation consistent with the requirements of this
NOFO and the intent of the ATP. Applications are then reviewed for how
well the proposed project(s) meets the criteria in E.1. and ranked by
field and Regional office staff. The top projects for each airport
category (as outlined in BIL) are then evaluated by a National Control
Board (NCB). The NCB has representatives from each Region and
Headquarters management. The NCB recommends project and funding levels
to senior leadership.

3. Integrity and Performance Check

    Prior to making a Federal award with a total amount of Federal
share greater than the simplified acquisition threshold, the FAA is
required to review and consider any information about the applicant
that is in the designated integrity and performance system accessible
through SAM (currently FAPIIS) (see 41 U.S.C. 2313). An applicant, at
its option, may review information in the designated integrity and
performance systems accessible through SAM and comment on any
information about itself that a federal awarding agency previously
entered. The FAA will consider any comments by the applicant, in
addition to the other information in the designated integrity and
performance system, in making a judgment about the applicant's
integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal
awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as
described in 2 CFR 200.206.

F. Federal Award Administration Information

1. Federal Award Notices

    BIL awards are announced through a Congressional notification
process and a DOT Secretary's Notice of Intent to Fund. The FAA RO/ADO
representative will contact the airport with further information and
instructions. Once all pre-grant actions are complete, the FAA RO/ADO
will offer the airport sponsor a grant for the announced project. This
offer may be provided through postal mail or by electronic means. Once
this offer is signed by the airport sponsor, it becomes a grant
agreement. Awards made under this program are subject to conditions and
assurances in the grant agreement.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

i. Grant Requirements
    All grant recipients are subject to the grant requirements of the
AIP, found in 49 U.S.C. chapter 471. Grant recipients are subject to
requirements in the FAA's AIP Grant Agreement for financial assistance
awards; the annual Certifications and Assurances required of
applicants; and any additional applicable statutory or regulatory
requirements, including nondiscrimination requirements and 2 CFR part
200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit
Requirements for Federal Awards. Grant requirements include, but are
not limited to, approved projects on an airport layout plan; compliance
with federal civil rights laws; Buy American requirements under 49
U.S.C. 50101; Build America, Buy America requirements in sections
70912(6) and 70914 in Public Law 117-58; the Department of
Transportation's Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program
regulations for airports (49 CFR part 23 and 49 CFR part 26); the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act; and prevailing wage rate
requirements under the Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 276a-
276a-5, and reenacted at 40 U.S.C. 3141-3144, 3146, and 3147).
    Domestic Preference Requirements: As expressed in Executive Order
14005, Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of America by All of
America's Workers (86 FR 7475), executive branch should maximize,
consistent with law, the use of goods, products, and materials produced
in, and services offered in, the United States. Funds made available
under this notice are subject to the domestic preference requirements
in the Buy American requirements under 49 U.S.C. 50101. The FAA expects
all applicants to comply with that requirement without needing a
waiver. However, to obtain a waiver, a recipient must be prepared to
demonstrate how they will maximize the use of domestic goods, products,
and materials in constructing their project.
    Civil Rights and Title VI: As a condition of a grant award, grant
recipients should demonstrate that the recipient has a plan for
compliance with civil rights obligations and nondiscrimination laws,
including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and implementing
regulations (49 CFR 21), the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
(ADA), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, all other civil
rights requirements, and accompanying regulations. This should include
a current Title VI plan, completed Community Participation Plan, and a
plan to address any legacy infrastructure or facilities that are not
compliant with ADA standards. DOT's and the applicable Operating
Administrations' Office of Civil Rights may work with awarded grant
recipients to ensure full compliance with Federal civil rights
requirements.
    Critical Infrastructure Security, Cybersecurity, and Resilience: It
is the policy of the United States to strengthen the security and
resilience of its critical infrastructure against all hazards;
including both physical and cyber risks, consistent with Presidential
Policy Directive 21--Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience
and the President's National Security Memorandum on Improving
Cybersecurity for Critical Infrastructure Control Systems. Each
applicant selected for Federal funding under this notice must
demonstrate, prior to the signing of the grant agreement, effort to
consider and address physical and cyber security risks relevant to the
transportation mode and type and scale of the project. Projects that
have not appropriately considered and addressed physical and cyber
security and resilience in their planning, design, and project
oversight, as determined by the Department and the Department of
Homeland Security, will be required to do so before receiving funds for
construction.
    Federal Contract Compliance: As a condition of grant award and
consistent with E.O. 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity (30 FR 12319,
and as amended), all Federally assisted contractors are required to
make good faith efforts to meet the goals of 6.9 percent of
construction project hours being performed by women, in addition to
goals that vary based on geography for construction work hours and for
work being performed by people of color.
    The U.S. Department of Labor's Office of Federal Contract
Compliance Programs (OFCCP) is charged with enforcing Executive Order
11246, Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Vietnam
Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974. OFCCP has a Mega
Construction Project Program through which it engages with project
sponsors as early as the design phase to help promote compliance with
non-discrimination and affirmative action obligations. OFCCP will
identify projects that receive an award under this notice and are
required to participate in OFCCP's Mega Construction Project Program
from a wide range of Federally-assisted projects over which OFCCP has
jurisdiction and that have a project cost above $35 million. DOT will
require project sponsors with costs above $35 million that receive
awards under this funding opportunity to partner with OFCCP, if
selected by OFCCP, as a condition of their DOT award.
    Performance and Program Evaluation: As a condition of grant award,
grant recipients may be required to participate in an evaluation
undertaken by the DOT, FAA, or another agency or partner. The
evaluation may take different forms, such as an implementation
assessment across grant recipients, an impact and/or outcomes analysis
of all or selected sites within or across grant recipients, or a
benefit/cost analysis or assessment of return on investment. DOT may
require applicants

to collect data elements to aid the evaluation. As a part of the
evaluation, as a condition of award, grant recipients must agree to:
(1) make records available to the evaluation contractor or DOT staff;
(2) provide access to program records and any other relevant documents
to calculate costs and benefits; (3) in the case of an impact analysis,
facilitate the access to relevant information as requested; and (4)
follow evaluation procedures as specified by the evaluation contractor
or DOT staff. Requested program records or information will be
consistent with record requirements outlined in 2 CFR 200.334-338 and
the grant agreement.
ii. Standard Assurances
    Each grant recipient must assure that it will comply with all
applicable federal statutes, regulations, executive orders, directives,
FAA circulars, and other federal administrative requirements in
carrying out any project supported by the ATP grant. The grant
recipient must acknowledge that it is under a continuing obligation to
comply with the terms and conditions of the grant agreement issued for
its project with the FAA. The grant recipient understands that federal
laws, regulations, policies, and administrative practices might be
modified from time to time and may affect the implementation of the
project. The grant recipient must agree that the most recent Federal
requirements will apply to the project unless the FAA issues a written
determination otherwise.
    The grant recipient must submit the Certifications at the time of
grant application and Assurances must be accepted as part of the grant
agreement at the time of accepting a grant offer. Grant recipients must
also comply with the requirements of 2 CFR part 200, which ``are
applicable to all costs related to Federal awards,'' and which are
cited in the grant assurances of the grant agreements. The Airport
Sponsor Assurances are available on the FAA website at: https://www.faa.gov/airports/aip/grant_assurances.

3. Reporting

    Grant recipients are subject to financial reporting per 2 CFR
200.328 and performance reporting per 2 CFR 200.329. Under the ATP, the
grant recipient is required to comply with all Federal financial
reporting requirements and payment requirements, including the
submittal of timely and accurate reports. Financial and performance
reporting requirements are available in the FAA October 2020 Financial
Reporting Policy, which is available at https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/airports/aip/grant_payments/aip-grant-payment-policy.pdf.
    The grant recipient must comply with annual audit reporting
requirements. The grant recipient and sub-recipients, if applicable,
must comply with 2 CFR part 200, subpart F, Audit Reporting
Requirements. The grant recipient must comply with any requirements
outlined in 2 CFR part 180, Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension.

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s)

    For further information concerning this notice, please contact the
FAA BIL Branch via email at [email protected]. In addition, the
FAA will post answers to frequently asked questions and requests for
clarifications on the FAA's website at www.faa.gov/bil/airport-terminals. To ensure applicants receive accurate information about
eligibility of the program, the applicant is encouraged to contact the
FAA directly, rather than through intermediaries or third parties, with
questions.
    All applicants, including those requesting full federal share of
eligible projects costs, should have a plan to address potential cost
overruns as part of an overall funding plan.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 11, 2023
Robin K. Hunt,
Manager, FAA Office of Airports BIL Branch.
[FR Doc. 2023-19893 Filed 9-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P