[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 177 (Thursday, September 12, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48133-48135]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19752]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PF19-6-000]

Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for
the Planned Louisiana Connector Extension Project, Request for Comments
on Environmental Issues, and Notice of Public Scoping Sessions: Port
Arthur Pipeline, LLC

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) that
will discuss the environmental impacts of the Louisiana Connector
Extension Project involving construction and operation of facilities by
Port Arthur Pipeline, LLC (PAPL) in Cameron, Calcasieu, Beauregard,
Allen, Evangeline, St. Landry, Rapides, Grant, La Salle, Catahoula,
Franklin, and Richland Parishes, Louisiana and in Jefferson and Orange
Counties, Texas. The Commission will use this EIS in its decision-
making process to determine whether the project is in the public
convenience and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies about issues regarding the project. The National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) requires the Commission to take into account the
environmental impacts that could result from its action whenever it
considers the issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity. NEPA also requires the Commission to discover 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 the important environmental issues. By this
notice, the Commission requests public comments on the scope of issues
to address in the EIS. To ensure that your comments are timely and
properly recorded, please submit your comments so that the Commission
receives them in Washington, DC on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on
October 7, 2019.
    You can make a difference by submitting your specific comments or
concerns about the project. Your comments should focus on the potential
environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid
or lessen environmental impacts. Your input will help the Commission
staff determine what issues they need to evaluate in the EIS.
Commission staff will consider all filed comments during the
preparation of the EIS.
    If you sent comments on this project to the Commission before the
opening of this docket on June 21, 2019, you will need to file those
comments in Docket No. PF19-6-000 to ensure they are considered as part
of this proceeding.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives should notify their constituents of this planned
project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company
representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to
construct, operate, and maintain the planned facilities. The company
would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable easement agreement. You
are not required to enter into an agreement. However, if the Commission
approves the project, that approval conveys with it the right of
eminent domain. Therefore, if you and the company do not reach an
easement agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation
proceedings in court. In such instances, compensation would be
determined by a judge in accordance with state law.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled `An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?' is available for
viewing on the FERC website (www.ferc.gov) at https://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/gas/gas.pdf. This fact sheet addresses a number of
typically asked questions, including the use of eminent domain and how
to participate in the Commission's proceedings.

Public Participation

    The Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which
makes it easy to stay informed of all issuances and submittals
regarding the dockets/projects to which you subscribe. These instant
email notifications are the fastest way to receive notification and
provide a link to the document files which can reduce the amount of
time you spend researching proceedings. To sign up go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    For your convenience, there are four methods you can use to submit
your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic
filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-
3676 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please carefully follow these
instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to Documents and Filings. Using eComment is an easy
method for submitting brief, text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide
comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you
are making; a comment on a particular project is considered a ``Comment
on a Filing'';

    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address. Be sure to reference the project docket number
(PF19-6-000) with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington,
DC 20426; or
    (4) In lieu of sending written comments, the Commission invites you
to attend the public scoping sessions its staff will conduct in the
project area, scheduled as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Date and time                          Location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monday, September 23, 2019, 4:00-   Jack Hammons Community Center, 810
 7:00 p.m \1\.                       Adams Street, Winnsboro, LA, (318)
                                     439-0043.
Tuesday, September 24, 2019, 4:00-  Holiday Inn Lake Charles, Ballrooms
 7:00 p.m \1\.                       1, 2, & 3, 330 Arena Road, Sulphur,
                                     LA 70665,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Wednesday, September 25, 2019,      Coushatta Casino, Resort, and Golf
 4:00-7:00 p.m \1\.                  Course, Veranda Room & Chairman's
                                     Board Room, 777 Koasati Drive,
                                     Kinder, LA 70648,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Thursday, September 26, 2019, 4:00- Alexandria Convention Center,
 7:00 p.m \1\.                       Sapphire Room A&B, 2301 North
                                     MacArthur Drive, Alexandria, LA
                                     71301,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Please note that staff may conclude the session at 6:30 p.m. if all
  attendees planning to provide comments have done so.

    The primary goal of these scoping sessions is to have you identify
the specific environmental issues and concerns that should be
considered in the EIS. Individual verbal comments will be taken on a
one-on-one basis with a court reporter. This format is designed to
receive the maximum amount of verbal comments, in a convenient way
during the timeframe allotted.
    Each scoping session is scheduled from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Central. You may arrive at any time after 4:00 p.m. There will not be a
formal presentation by Commission staff when the session opens. If you
wish to speak, the Commission staff will hand out numbers in the order
of your arrival. Comments will be taken until 7:00 p.m. However, if no
additional numbers have been handed out and all individuals who wish to
provide comments have had an opportunity to do so, staff may conclude
the session at 6:30 p.m. Please see appendix 1 for additional
information on the session format and conduct.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Your scoping comments will be recorded by a court reporter (with
FERC staff or representative present) and become part of the public
record for this proceeding. Transcripts will be publicly available on
FERC's eLibrary system (see the end of this notice for instructions on
using eLibrary). If a significant number of people are interested in
providing verbal comments in the one-on-one settings, a time limit of 3
to 5 minutes may be implemented for each commentor.
    It is important to note that the Commission provides equal
consideration to all comments received, whether filed in written form
or provided verbally at a scoping session. Although there will not be a
formal presentation, Commission staff will be available throughout the
scoping session to answer your questions about the environmental review
process. Representatives from PAPL will also be present to answer
project-specific questions.
    Please note this is not your only public input opportunity; refer
to the review process flow chart in appendix 2.

Summary of the Planned Project

    PAPL plans to construct and operate a natural gas infrastructure
project (the Louisiana Connector Extension Project) in Louisiana and
Texas. The project would provide about 2.5 billion standard cubic feet
per day of natural gas to supply a previously approved natural gas
liquefaction and export project in Jefferson County, Texas.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This export project is referred to as the Port Arthur
Liquefaction Project. It, along with the Port Arthur Texas Connector
Project and Louisiana Connector Project, have been reviewed by FERC
under Docket Nos. CP17-20-000, CP17-21-000, and CP18-7-000, and
approved by the Commission in an Order dated April 18, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Louisiana Connector Extension Project would consist of the
following facilities:
     A new 166-mile-long, 48-inch-diameter natural gas pipeline
in Allen, Evangeline, Rapides, Grant, La Salle, Catahoula, Franklin,
and Richland Parishes, Louisiana;
     a new header system pipeline totaling 15 miles in length
with various diameters of pipeline;
     two new compressor stations, one in Allen Parish and one
in Richland Parish, Louisiana;
     up to eight new interconnects and meter stations in
Beauregard and Richland Parishes, Louisiana;
     appurtenant underground and aboveground facilities; and
     expansion of the previously approved Louisiana Connector
Project's pipeline diameter from 42 inches to 48 inches between
mileposts 0 and 86 in Jefferson County, Texas and Cameron, Calcasieu,
Beauregard, and Allen Parishes, Louisiana.
    The general location of the planned project facilities is shown in
appendix 3.

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the planned aboveground and pipeline facilities
would disturb about 3,000 acres of land. Following construction, PAPL
would maintain about 1,000 acres for permanent operation of the
project's facilities; the remaining acreage would be restored and
revert to former uses. About 70 percent of the planned pipeline route
parallels existing pipeline, utility, or road rights-of-way.

The EIS Process

    The EIS will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the
construction and operation of the planned project under these general
headings:
     Geology and soils;
     land use;
     water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
     cultural resources;
     vegetation and wildlife;
     socioeconomics;
     air quality and noise;
     endangered and threatened species;
     public safety; and
     cumulative impacts.
    Commission staff will also evaluate possible alternatives to the
planned project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on
how to lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    Although no formal application has been filed, Commission staff
have

already initiated a NEPA review under the Commission's 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 the Commission receives an application. As part of the
pre-filing review, Commission staff will contact federal and state
agencies to discuss their involvement in the scoping process and the
preparation of the EIS.
    The EIS will present Commission staff's independent analysis of the
issues. The draft EIS will be available in electronic format in the
public record through eLibrary \3\ and the Commission's website
(https://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/enviro/eis.asp). If eSubscribed,
you will receive instant email notification when the draft EIS is
issued. The draft EIS will be issued for an allotted public comment
period. After the comment period on the draft EIS, Commission staff
will consider all timely comments and revise the document, as
necessary, before issuing a final EIS. To ensure Commission staff have
the opportunity to consider and address your comments, please carefully
follow the instructions in the Public Participation section, beginning
on page 2 of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to the end
of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With this notice, the Commission is asking agencies with
jurisdiction by law and/or special expertise with respect to the
environmental issues related to this project to formally cooperate in
the preparation of the EIS.\4\ Agencies that would like to request
cooperating agency status should follow the instructions for filing
comments provided under the Public Participation section of this
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing
cooperating agency responsibilities are at Title 40, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 1501.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultation Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, the Commission is using this notice to initiate
consultation with the applicable State Historic Preservation Office(s),
and to solicit their views and those of other government agencies,
interested Indian tribes, and the public on the project's potential
effects on historic properties.\5\ The EIS for this project will
document our findings on the impacts on historic properties and
summarize the status of consultations under section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Those
regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Currently Identified Environmental Issues

    Commission staff have already identified several issues that
deserve attention based on a preliminary review of the planned
facilities and the environmental information provided by PAPL. This
preliminary list of issues may change based on your comments and our
analysis.
     Impacts on wetlands;
     construction in and potential impacts on aquatic resources
in Sabine Lake;
     colocation with existing pipelines; and
     utilization of the same or similar rights-of-way as other
proposed pipeline projects.

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits
comments on the project. Commission staff will update the environmental
mailing list as the analysis proceeds to ensure that Commission notices
related to this environmental review are sent to all individuals,
organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially
affected by the planned project.
    A Notice of Availability of the draft EIS will be sent to the
environmental mailing list and will provide instructions to access the
electronic document on the FERC's website (www.ferc.gov). If you need
to make changes to your name/address, or if you would like to remove
your name from the mailing list, please return the attached ``Mailing
List Update Form'' (appendix 4).

Becoming an Intervenor

    Once PAPL files its application with the Commission, you may want
to become an intervenor which is an official party to the Commission's
proceeding. Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the
Commission's decision and be heard by the courts if they choose to
appeal the Commission's final ruling. An intervenor formally
participates in the proceeding by filing a request to intervene
pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedures (18 CFR 385.214). Motions to intervene are more fully
described at http://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp.
Please note that the Commission will not accept requests for intervenor
status at this time. You must wait until the Commission receives a
formal application for the project, after which the Commission will
issue a public notice that establishes an intervention deadline.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on General Search and enter the docket number in
the Docket Number field, excluding the last three digits (i.e., PF19-
6). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of all formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    Public sessions or site visits will be posted on the Commission's
calendar located at www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along
with other related information.

    Dated: September 5, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-19752 Filed 9-11-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 216 (Friday, November 12, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62811-62812]
[FR Doc No: 2021-24624]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0765; FRL-9220-02-ORD]

Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Executive Committee
Meeting--November 2021

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Research
and Development (ORD), gives notice of a series of additional PFAS
related virtual deliberation meetings of the Board of Scientific
Counselors (BOSC) Executive Committee (EC) Committee as a follow-up to
meetings held September 29-30, 2021. More information can be found on
the BOSC website at: https://www.epa.gov/bosc/bosc-executive-committee-meeting-september-october-2021. Due to unforeseen administrative
circumstances this notice was not published 15 days prior to the
meeting.

DATES: The deliberation meeting will be held over two days via
videoconference:
    a. Tuesday, November 23, 2021, from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. (EDT); and
    b. Wednesday, December 8, 2021, from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. (EDT).
    Attendees must register by November 22, 2021.
    Meeting times are subject to change. This series of meetings is
open to the public. Comments must be received by November 22, 2021, to
be considered by the subcommittee. Requests for the draft agenda or
making a presentation at the meeting will be accepted until November
22, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Instructions on how to connect to the videoconference will
be provided upon registration at: https://epa-bosc-e-c-mtg.eventbrite.com.
    Submit your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0765 by one
of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
    [ssquf] Note: comments submitted to the www.regulations.gov website
are anonymous unless identifying information is included in the body of
the comment.
     Email: Send comments by electronic mail (email) to:
[email protected], Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0765.
    [ssquf] Note: comments submitted via email are not anonymous. The
sender's email will be included in the body of the comment and placed
in the public docket which is made available on the internet.
    Instructions: All comments received, including any personal
information provided, will be included in the public docket without
change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov.
Information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute will not be
included in the public docket and should not be submitted through
www.regulations.gov or email. For additional information about the
EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/.
    Public Docket: Publicly available docket materials may be accessed
Online at www.regulations.gov.
    Copyrighted materials in the docket are only available via hard
copy. The telephone number for the ORD Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Designated Federal Officer (DFO),
Tom Tracy, via phone/voicemail at:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or via email at:
[email protected].
    Any member of the public interested in receiving a draft agenda,
attending the meeting, or making a presentation at the meeting should
contact Tom Tracy no later than November 22, 2021.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) is
a federal advisory committee that provides advice and recommendations
to EPA's Office of Research and Development on technical and management
issues of its research programs. The meeting agenda and materials will
be posted to https://www.epa.gov/bosc.
    Proposed agenda items for the meeting include, but are not limited
to, deliberation on EPA's charge questions on PFAS.

    Information on Services Available: For information on translation
services, access, or services for individuals with disabilities, please
contact Tom Tracy at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected]. To request
accommodation of a disability, please contact Tom Tracy at least ten
days prior to the meeting to give the EPA adequate time to process your
request.
    Authority: Pub. L. 92-463, 1, Oct. 6, 1972, 86 Stat. 770.

Mary Ross,
Director, Office of Science Advisor, Policy and Engagement.
[FR Doc. 2021-24624 Filed 11-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 224 (Tuesday, November 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 71405]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25330]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Hazardous Materials: Notice of Applications for Special Permits

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: List of applications for modification of special permits.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations, notice is hereby given
that the Office of Hazardous Materials Safety has received the
application described herein.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 7, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC
20590.
    Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include
a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Burger, Chief, Office of
Hazardous Materials Safety General Approvals and Permits Branch,
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department
of Transportation, East Building, PHH-13, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
Southeast, Washington, DC 20590-0001,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each mode of transportation for which a
particular special permit is requested is indicated by a number in the
``Nature of Application'' portion of the table below as follows: 1--
Motor vehicle, 2--Rail freight, 3--Cargo vessel, 4--Cargo aircraft
only, 5--Passenger-carrying aircraft.
    Copies of the applications are available for inspection in the
Records Center, East Building, PHH-13, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
Southeast, Washington, DC or at http://regulations.gov.
    This notice of receipt of applications for special permit is
published in accordance with part 107 of the Federal hazardous
materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5117(b); 49 CFR 1.53(b)).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 4, 2022.
Donald P. Burger,
Chief, General Approvals and Permits Branch.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Nature of the
 Application No.     Applicant      Regulation(s)      special permits
                                       affected            thereof
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Special Permits Data
------------------------------------------------------------------------
20333-M.........  Antonov, dp....  172.101(j),      To modify the
                                    172.203(a),      special permit to
                                    172.301(c),      authorize an
                                    173.27(b)(2),    additional
                                    175.30(a)(1).    hazardous material
                                                     and waive part of
                                                     49 CFR
                                                     107.109(a)(3).
                                                     (mode 4)
20906-M.........  Nouryon          173.28(b)(2),    To modify the
                   Functional       173.181.         special permit to
                   Chemicals LLC.                    authorize an
                                                     additional
                                                     packaging. (modes
                                                     1, 2, 3)
21012-M.........  Linde Gas &      172.203(a),      To modify the
                   Equipment Inc.   180.209,         special permit to
                                    172.301(c).      authorize
                                                     additional
                                                     hazardous
                                                     materials. (modes
                                                     1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-25330 Filed 11-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 10, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 62594]
[FR Doc No: 2021-24511]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Drone Advisory Committee: Notice of Charter Amendments

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

ACTION: Notice of charter amendments.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces charter amendments of the Drone Advisory
Committee, a Federal advisory committee that works with industry,
community stakeholders, and the public to improve the development of
the FAA's regulations. The charter amendments were filed with Congress
and took effect on October 26, 2021. The Committee will operate for 2
years unless its charter is renewed in accordance with the Federal
Advisory Committee Act.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kamisha Walker or Gary Kolb, UAS
Integration Office, Federal Aviation Administration, telephone (202)
267-4441; email [email protected] or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 14(a)(2)(A) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the FAA is giving
notice of amendments to the charter for the Drone Advisory Committee
(DAC), which is renamed the Advanced Aviation Advisory Committee
(AAAC). The DAC is a broad-based Federal advisory committee that
provides the FAA with advice on key UAS integration issues by helping
to identify challenges and prioritize improvements. The committee
advises the DOT through the FAA on improving the efficiency and safety
of integrating advanced aviation technologies--including unmanned
aircraft systems (UAS) and advanced air mobility (AAM), into the
National Airspace System (NAS)--while equipping and enabling
communities to inform how UAS, AAM and other technologies may operate
in ways that are beneficial to those communities. Members represent
airports and airport communities; pilot and controller labor groups;
local, state, and tribal governments; navigation, communication,
surveillance, and air traffic management capability providers;
research, development, and academia; agricultural interests,
traditional piloted aviation operators; UAS hardware component
manufacturers; UAS manufacturers; corporate UAS operators; citizen UAS
Operators; UAS software application manufacturers; advanced air
mobility; community advocates; and industry associations or other
specific areas of interest as determined by the FAA Administrator or
Secretary of Transportation. For more information see the AAAC website
at: https://www.faa.gov/uas/programs_partnerships/advanced_aviation_advisory_committee/.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Erik W. Amend,
Manager, Executive Office, AUS-10, UAS Integration Office, Federal
Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2021-24511 Filed 11-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

 I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

 The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

 I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they saved my life. I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

 I would also like to let you know I am an ex-smoker of over 20 years and on the beginning use of a personal vaporizer or (e-cig) I stopped smoking in less than three days and haven’t looked back. I believe the regulations purposed by the FDA may lesson my chances of staying off of traditional tobacco.

 I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.

         Sincerely concerned :


[Federal Register: May 4, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 86)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 25241]
[DOCID:fr04my07-16]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2007-0095; FRL-8309-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve an amendment to the Missouri State
Implementation Plan (SIP). This action approves an amendment to the
SIP-approved Doe Run Herculaneum Consent Judgment to remove language
specifying the exact bag technology to be used in the baghouses.
Related performance standard requirements will remain unchanged. This
action is independent and does not affect the revision to the Missouri
SIP due in April 2007, in response to the SIP Call issued April 14,
2006, to bring the area of Herculaneum into compliance with the lead
National Ambient Air Quality Standard.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by
June 4, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2007-0095 by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail: Gwen Yoshimura, Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City,
Kansas 66101.
    4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to Gwen
Yoshimura, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and
Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal
hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business
are Monday through Friday, 8 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays.
    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gwen Yoshimura at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of the Federal
Register, EPA is approving the state's SIP revision as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial revision amendment and anticipates no relevant adverse
comments to this action. The revisions will not increase emissions and
do not affect the stringency of the control requirement. Additionally,
the revisions have gone through the Missouri approval process,
including a public hearing and opportunity for public comment. EPA was
the only party to provide comments during Missouri's comment period.
Therefore, we do not anticipate any adverse comments. A detailed
rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no
relevant adverse comments are received in response to this action, no
further activity is contemplated in relation to this action. If EPA
receives relevant adverse comments, the direct final rule will be
withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on this proposed action. EPA will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on part of this rule
and if that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may
adopt as final those parts of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment. For additional information, see the direct final rule
which is located in the rules section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: April 26, 2007.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
 [FR Doc. E7-8566 Filed 5-3-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 224 (Monday, November 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71105-71106]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29317]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP11-18-000; PF10-13-000]

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Application

November 12, 2010.
    Take notice that on October 29, 2010, Transcontinental Gas Pipe
Line Corporation (Transco), P.O. Box 1396, Houston, Texas 77251-1396,
filed in Docket No. CP11-18-000 an application pursuant to Section 7(c)
of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the Commission's
regulations seeking authorization to construct and operate certain
pipeline and compression facilities in Alabama, Georgia, South
Carolina, and North Carolina that comprise its Mid-South Expansion
Project. Specifically, Transco requests (1) authorization to construct
a total of approximately 22.6 miles of 42-inch diameter pipeline
looping; (2) authorization to construct a new compressor station and
upgrade three existing compressor stations for a total of approximately
47,780 horsepower; (3) approve incremental transportation rates; and
(4) acceptance of the pro forma tariff sheets included in Exhibit P to
the application. Transco estimates that its Mid-South Expansion Project
facilities would cost $218,749,000 to construct, all as more fully set
forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open
to public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the Web at
http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Bill
Hammons, Team Leader, Rates and Regulatory, P.O. Box 1396, Houston,
Texas 77251, at<PHONE_NUMBER>. In addition, Transco has established a
toll-free telephone number,<PHONE_NUMBER>, so that parties can call
with questions about the Project, as well as an e-mail support address
(PipelineExpansion@williams.com).
    On March 9, 2009, the Commission staff granted Transco's March 2,
2009, request to use the pre-filing process and assigned Docket No.
PF10-13-000 for this proceeding during the pre-filing review of the
Mid-South Expansion. Now, as of the filing of Transco's application on
October 29, 2010, the pre-filing process for this project has ended.
From this time forward, Transco's proceeding will be conducted in
Docket No. CP11-18-000, as noted in the caption of this Notice.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's regulations, 18 CFR
157.9, within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission's staff will
either complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission's staff issuance of
the EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's
public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of
Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify Federal and
State agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary
reviews, and the subsequent need to reach a final decision on a request
for Federal authorization within 90 days of the date of issuance of the
Commission staff's EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to

participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon
as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in
opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a
comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the
proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments
in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to
the party or parties directly involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the
instructions on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing'' link.
    Comment Date: December 3, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-29317 Filed 11-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: January 9, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 5)]
[Notices]
[Page 1419]
[DOCID:fr09ja06-24]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-152-000]

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America; Notice of Petition for
Waiver and Request for Expedited Action

December 29, 2005.
    Take notice that on December 23, 2005, Natural Gas Pipeline Company
of America (Natural), pursuant to Rule 207 of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, submitted a
petition for waiver of tariff and request for expedited action to waive
certain secondary point rights provisions set forth in section 5.5 of
its General Terms and Conditions. Natural makes this request to provide
shippers with added flexibility in responding to capacity constraints
on Natural's Gulf Coast Line brought on by system testing and
maintenance. Natural requests that the Commission grant this petition
by January 20, 2006, so that shippers can utilize the waiver to set up
February business, thereby mitigating the impact of the capacity
reductions.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-50 Filed 1-6-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 19354]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8261]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER11-3187-000]

SBR Energy, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding
SBR Energy, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is April 19, 2011.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 30, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-8261 Filed 4-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 22, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 225)]
[Notices]
[Page 67675-67678]
[DOCID:fr22no06-138]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54755; File No. SR-NASD-2006-007]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to Option
Position and Exercise Limits and Position Reporting Obligations; and
Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to Amendment
No. 1 Thereto

 November 15, 2006.

I. Introduction

    On January 23, 2006, the National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc. (``NASD'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend NASD Rule 2860, which
relates to position and exercise limits and position reporting
obligations for members that hold positions in index and equity options
or that represent customers holding such positions. The proposed rule
change was published for comment in the Federal Register on February 6,
2006.\3\ The Commission received one comment on the proposal.\4\ In its
comment letter, the Securities Industry Association (``SIA'')
``endorse[d] the adoption of clear and objective criteria for
identifying those index options that would be exempt from NASD option
position and exercise limits.'' \5\ However, the SIA also recommended
``streamlining the relevant standards and easing the operational steps
necessary for NASD member firms to verify compliance with the Proposed
Rule Change.'' \6\ In response to this comment, NASD filed Amendment
No. 1 to the proposed rule change on September 20, 2006.\7\ This notice
and order solicits comments from interested persons on Amendment No. 1
and approves the proposal, as amended by Amendment No. 1, on an
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53189 (January 30,
2006), 71 FR 6117.
    \4\ See letter from John R. Vitha, Esq., Chairman, Securities
Industry Association Derivative Product Committee, to Nancy M.
Morris, Secretary, Commission, dated May 23, 2006 (``SIA Letter'').
    \5\ Id. at 1.
    \6\ Id.
    \7\ The text of Amendment No. 1 is available on the NASD's Web
site (http://www.nasd.com), at NASD's principal office, and at the

Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

A. Position Limits for OTC Index Options

    NASD currently prohibits its members, for their proprietary or
agency accounts, from holding positions in over-the-counter (``OTC'')
equity options \8\ that exceed certain position limits.\9\ NASD also
imposes exercise limits on a member that holds OTC equity options; the
member may not exercise, within a period of five consecutive business
days, a number of option contracts that exceeds the same number
established for the position limit.\10\ The position limits that NASD
imposes on its members for OTC equity options are based on similar
standards established by the option exchanges for ``standardized''
equity options.\11\ In contrast, NASD rules impose no position limits
on OTC index options, but do not clarify what constitutes an OTC index
option for this purpose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ An ``OTC option'' for the purposes of this approval order
means any option contract not issued or subject to issuance by the
Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'').
    \9\ These position limits vary depending on the characteristics
of the security underlying the OTC option. See NASD Rule
2860(b)(3)(A)(viii).
    \10\ See NASD Rule 2860(b)(4). NASD's proposal will impact its
exercise limits in the same way as it will change its position
limits.
    \11\ The term ``standardized equity option'' means any equity
options contract issued, or subject to issuance by, The Options
Clearing Corporation that is not a FLEX Equity Option. See NASD Rule
2860(b)(2)(UU).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASD believes that some indexes underlying OTC options might have
economic characteristics more closely resembling single securities than
broad-based indexes. This could be the case, for example, where the
index consisted of only a small number of securities or if one or a few
securities represented a significant percentage of the index's
weighting. In its initial filing, NASD proposed 11 criteria an index
would have to meet to be sufficiently broad-based for an option on that
index to be

deemed a ``conventional index option'' under proposed NASD Rule
2860(b)(2)(N).\12\ A position in a ``conventional index option'' would
continue to be free from any position limits imposed by NASD rules. In
addition, a position in an OTC option overlying the same index as an
exchange-traded option would not be subject to position limits. A
position in an OTC index option that did not either qualify as a
``conventional index option'' or overlie the same index as an exchange-
traded option would in effect be deconstructed into separate equity
option components, and NASD position limits would apply with respect to
each component.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The 11 criteria originally proposed by NASD to define a
``conventional index option'' were as follows:
    a) The option must be A.M.-settled;
    b) The index must be weighted pursuant to one of a number of
widely recognized methodologies;
    c) The index must consist of ten or more component securities;
    d) Each component security must be characterized by a minimum
market capitalization;
    e) Each component security must be characterized by a minimum
trading volume;
    f) The most highly weighted components of the index must be
characterized by heightened trading volume, as compared to the
remaining components;
    g) No single component security or group of five securities may
represent more than a maximum concentration of the index;
    h) All component securities are ``NMS securities'' as defined in
Regulation NMS;
    i) Certain non-U.S. component securities may not, in the
aggregate, represent more than a maximum weight of the index;
    j) An equal dollar-weighted index will be rebalanced once every
quarter; and
    k) If an underlying index is maintained by a broker-dealer, the
index must be calculated by a third party that has implemented
appropriate information barriers around its personnel who have
access to information about changes to the index.
    \13\ See NASD Rule 2860(b)(2)(JJ).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the SIA Comment Letter, NASD in Amendment No. 1
replaced the 11 originally proposed criteria for a ``conventional index
option'' with the following criteria:
     An index must contain nine or more equity securities.
     No equity security may comprise more than 30% of the
equity security component of the index's weighting.
     Each equity security in the index is either:
    1. A component security of the Russell 3000 Index or the FTSE All-
World Index Series; or
    2. Characterized by a minimum market capitalization and minimum
trading volume.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Specifically, each equity security in the index must: (A)
Have a market capitalization of at least $75 million, or, in the
case of the lowest weighted component securities in the basket or
index in the aggregate account for no more than 10% of the weight of
the index $50 million; and (B) have a trading volume for each of the
preceding six months of at least one million shares or, in the case
of each of the lowest weighted component securities in the basket or
index that in the aggregate account for no more than 10% of the
weight of the index, 500,000 shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SIA recommended basing the definition of a ``conventional index
option,'' in part, on the definition under the Exchange Act of what is
not a ``narrow-based security index.'' \15\ As provided in that
definition, the SIA recommended replacing the requirement that a
qualifying index be comprised of ten or more securities with a
requirement that an index be comprised of nine or more securities.
Similarly, the SIA also recommended that the NASD amend its proposal to
conform with the criterion under the Exchange Act definition described
above, to provide that no equity security in the index represent more
than 30% of the equity security component of the index. NASD adopted
both of these recommendations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(55)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its original filing, NASD required that the components of an
index underlying a ``conventional index option'' be characterized by
certain minimum market capitalization and liquidity standards.\16\ The
SIA suggested that NASD treat components of the Russell 3000 Index and
the FTSE All-World Index Series as meeting such quantitative standards
without measuring the actual market capitalization and trading volume
of such components.\17\ In Amendment No. 1, NASD retained the
quantitative standards for market capitalization and trading volume,
but allowed that condition to be met if an equity security is included
in the Russell 3000 Index or the FTSE All-World Index Series. NASD
believes that these indexes are reasonable surrogates for the
quantitative measurements, and that these alternative criteria would
reduce the compliance burden for members to monitor capitalization and
trading volume of the index components.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See supra note 14
    \17\ See SIA Letter at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASD believes that the criteria it proposed in Amendment No. 1 to
replace the original 11 criteria impose sufficient parameters on the
components of the index to ensure that a qualifying index would not be
so narrowly constructed as to have the economic characteristics of a
single security or small group of securities. Accordingly, NASD in
Amendment No. 1 eliminated the remaining criteria proposed in the
original filing.

B. Large Options Position Reporting

    Under existing NASD Rule 2860(b)(5)(A)(i)(a), an NASD member must
report a position of 200 contracts or more in any OTC option covering
an ``underlying security or index.'' \18\ On June 30, 2006, the
Commission approved an NASD rule change that, among other things,
eliminated the term ``underlying index,'' which was defined to mean
``an index upon which a Nasdaq index option contract is based.'' \19\
Accordingly, NASD rules currently provide no standard for the types of
OTC index options for which members must report large positions. NASD's
initial proposal would have clarified this situation by requiring a
member to report a position of 200 or more contracts in: (1) An OTC
option on an index underlying an exchange-traded option, or (2) a
``conventional index option,'' as defined in proposed NASD Rule
2860(b)(2)(N).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ When a member conducts a business in standardized (i.e.,
exchange-traded) options but is not a member of the exchange on
which the option is traded (i.e. is an ``access firm''), the member
also must report to NASD a position of 200 contracts or more in a
standardized option. See NASD Rule 2860(b)(5)(A)(i)(b). Nothing in
this proposal affects an access firm's obligation to report
positions in standardized options.
    \19\ The proposed rule change amended various NASD rules in
anticipation of the Nasdaq Stock Market's separation from NASD. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54084 (June 30, 2006), 71 FR
38935 (July 10, 2006) (SR-NASD-2005-087).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its comment letter, the SIA suggested that a position in an OTC
index option should be exempt from any position reporting requirements
unless the OTC option overlies the same index as an exchange-traded
option. NASD generally agrees with the SIA's approach and is proposing
to revise its Rule 2860(b)(5) to provide that a member must report a
position in a ``conventional index option'' only when such option is
based on an index that underlies, or is substantially similar to an
index that underlies, an exchange-traded option. This approach would
enable NASD Market Regulation staff to analyze the exchange-traded and
OTC markets in aggregate for options on the same or substantially
similar indexes.\20\ NASD believes that position reporting for other
conventional index options would be of little regulatory interest and
represents that, to the extent it requires information about a position
in a conventional index option on a specially negotiated index or group
of underlying securities, it can obtain such information from a member
pursuant to

a request under NASD Rule 8210.\21\ Thus, NASD believes that
eliminating this position reporting requirement would not prevent it
from accessing information relating to a conventional index option
position as needed to carry out its market oversight and enforcement
responsibilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Telephone conversation among Gary Goldsholle, Associate
General Counsel, NASD, Kathryn Moore, Assistant General Counsel,
NASD, and Tim Fox, Special Counsel, Commission, on October 31, 2006.
    \21\ However, a position in an OTC index option that did not
qualify as a ``conventional index option'' would in effect be
deconstructed into separate equity option components, and the
position reporting obligation would apply with respect to each
component. See NASD Rule 2860(b)(2)(JJ).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the SIA urged NASD to revisit the threshold at which
position reporting applies, for the OTC options where position
reporting is required.\22\ The SIA suggested raising the threshold from
the current 200 contracts to 10,000 contracts. NASD stated in Amendment
No. 1 that it does not believe such a change is appropriate or
necessary at this time. However, NASD stated that it will consider this
issue and subject it to further review and discussion with the other
self-regulatory organizations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See SIA Letter at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Position Limits for Options on Foreign Equity Securities

    Under existing NASD Rule 2860(b)(3)(A)(viii), the position limits
for conventional equity options parallel the limits for the
standardized options on the same security. Therefore, if a standardized
equity option is subject to a higher tier of position limits because of
the relatively liquid and deep nature of the market for the underlying
security, then a conventional option on the same security would be
subject to a higher tier as well. On the other hand, with respect to an
OTC option on an equally liquid foreign security, for which no
exchange-traded equivalent exists, a member is required to limit its
holdings (or its customer's holdings) to the lowest tier of position
limits, absent prior approval of NASD staff. To alleviate this
disparate treatment of OTC options on foreign equities, NASD proposed
in the original filing to allow the higher tiers of position limits for
OTC options overlying equity components of the FTSE All-World Index
Series \23\ meeting the volume and float criteria established by the
options exchanges for standardized options on domestic equity
securities.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ NASD has represented that, if it designates another index
in addition to or instead of the FTSE All-World Index Series, NASD
would publish the designation of the new index in a Notice to
Members and provide members at least 30 days' written notice of the
change.
    \24\ See Commentary .07 to American Stock Exchange Rule 904,
Section 7(c) of Chapter III of the Boston Options Exchange Rules,
Interpretation .02 to Chicago Board Options Exchange (``CBOE'') Rule
4.11; International Securities Exchange Rule 412(d); Commentary .06
to NYSE Arca Rule 6.8; Commentary .05 to Philadelphia Stock Exchange
Rule 1001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposed rule change, a member would file a post-trade
notice--within one business day--with NASD staff providing the
necessary trade volume data and/or current float data to support the
member's position limit calculation. NASD staff would review the
member's notice, and, if the staff determined that a member incorrectly
assigned a position limit, a staff member would instruct the firm to
reduce its position below the appropriate limits determined by NASD
staff. The Commission received no comments on this aspect of the
proposal.

D. Miscellaneous Issues

    The SIA also suggested revising the definition of ``conventional
index option'' to permit the inclusion of financial assets other than
equity securities.\25\ NASD believes that the originally proposed
definition of ``conventional index option'' permits the inclusion of
non-equity assets and is not proposing any change to the rule text to
accommodate SIA's suggestion. According to NASD, financial assets other
than equity securities could be part of an index and the option thereon
could still qualify as a ``conventional index option'' if the equity
security components of the index together met the criteria in the
definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See SIA Letter at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to changes in response to the SIA Letter, NASD in
Amendment No. 1 proposed to clarify the date on which an OTC index
option would or would not qualify as a ``conventional index option.''
The revised rules clarify that the definition's requirements apply as
of the date the option position is created.\26\ NASD designed this
approach to clarify that subsequent events that might impact an index's
components would not change how an option on that index is treated for
purposes of NASD's position limits and position reporting rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Telephone conversation between Gary Goldsholle, Associate
GeneralCounsel, NASD, and Tim Fox, Division of Market Regulation,
Commission on October 19, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is
consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities association
and, in particular, the requirements of Section 15A(b)(6) of the
Exchange Act,\27\ which requires that the rules of the NASD be designed
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to facilitate transactions in
securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.\28\ The Commission believes the proposed rule change
is reasonably designed to enhance the NASD's ability to monitor the
options positions of members and their customers and to clarify
applicable position limits. In particular, the Commission believes that
the NASD rules it is approving today reasonably differentiate between
broad-based indexes and indexes whose economic characteristics more
closely approximate those of a single security or a small number of
securities. The Commission believes that the proposal is designed to
balance between allowing the NASD to obtain information for surveilling
the market in OTC index options and limiting the burdens on NASD
members that hold positions in such options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
    \28\ In approving the proposal, the Commission has considered
the rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation.
See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds good cause for approving the proposal, as
amended by Amendment No. 1, prior to the thirtieth day after the
amended proposal is published for comment in the Federal Register
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act.\29\ The Commission
believes that Amendment No. 1 does not make any changes to the proposal
that would adversely impact investor protection or the public interest.
The Commission notes that it received only one comment letter in
response to NASD's original proposal.\30\ Amendment No. 1 is generally
responsive to the commenter's concerns and does not materially alter
the proposal. The Commission notes that accelerating approval will
enable NASD to implement the proposed rule changes without further
delay.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \30\ See SIA Letter, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning Amendment No. 1, including whether Amendment No. 1
is consistent with the Exchange 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASD-2006-007 on the subject line.

Paper comments

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

All submissions should refer to Amendment No. 1 to File Number SR-NASD-
2006-007. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-
mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments
more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post
all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, Station
Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing
also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal
office of NASD. All comments received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to Amendment No. 1 to
File Number SR-NASD-2006-007 and should be submitted on or before
December 13, 2006.

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act,\31\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NASD-2006-007) be,
and hereby is approved, and that Amendment No. 1 is approved on an
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-19732 Filed 11-21-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 120 (Friday, June 25, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 33705]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13558]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9057-1]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
Filed June 7, 2021 10 a.m. EST Through June 21, 2021 10 a.m. EST
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20210072, Draft, Caltrans, CA, El Camino Real Roadway Renewal
Project, Comment Period Ends: 08/09/2021, Contact: Yolanda Rivas 510-
506-1461.
EIS No. 20210073, Draft, USFS, WY, Invasive and Other Select Plant
Management on the Bighorn NF, Comment Period Ends: 08/09/2021, Contact:
Christopher D. Jones<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20210074, Draft, USFS, CA, Sugar Pine Project Water Right
Permit 15375 Extension and Radial Gates Installation, Comment Period
Ends: 08/24/2021, Contact: Timothy Cardoza<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20210075, Draft Supplement, USFS, MT, Gold Butterfly Project,
Comment Period Ends: 08/09/2021, Contact: Matthew Anderson 406-363-
7121.
EIS No. 20210076, Draft, FERC, NY, Enhancement by Compression Project,
Comment Period Ends: 08/09/2021, Contact: Office of External Affairs
866-208-3372.
EIS No. 20210077, Final, USFS, ID, Caribou-Targhee National Forest and
Curlew National Grassland Integrated Weed Management Analysis, Review
Period Ends: 08/09/2021, Contact: Heidi Heyrend<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20210078, Draft, UDOT, UT, Little Cottonwood Canyon
Environmental Impact Statement Wasatch Boulevard to Alta, Comment
Period Ends: 08/09/2021, Contact: Josh Van Jura<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20210079, Final, CHSRA, CA, Bakersfield to Palmdale Project
Section: Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact
Statement, Review Period Ends: 07/26/2021, Contact: Scott Rothenberg
916-403-6936.
EIS No. 20210080, Draft, FERC, DE, Marcus Hook Electric Compression
Project, Comment Period Ends: 08/09/2021, Contact: Office of External
Affairs<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20210081, Draft, FERC, AL, Coosa River Hydroelectric Project,
Comment Period Ends: 08/16/2021, Contact: Office of External Affairs
866-208-3372.
EIS No. 20210082, Final, FAA, GA, Spaceport Camden, Review Period Ends:
07/26/2021, Contact: Stacey Zee<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20210083, Draft, NOAA, PRO, Surveying and Mapping Projects in
United States Waters for Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition, Comment
Period Ends: 08/24/2021, Contact: Giannina DiMaio<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Amended Notice

EIS No. 20200223, Draft, NRC, NM, Disposal of Mine Waste at the United
Nuclear Corporation Mill Site in McKinley County, New Mexico, Comment
Period Ends: 11/01/2021, Contact: Ashley Waldron<PHONE_NUMBER>. Revision
to FR Notice Published 02/12/2020; Reopening the Comment Period to end
11/01/2021.
EIS No. 20210052, Draft, NMFS, PRO, Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement for the Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response Program,
Comment Period Ends: 07/28/2021, Contact: Stephen Manley<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Revision to FR Notice Published 05/14/2021; Extending the Comment
Period from 06/28/2021 to 07/28/2021.

    Dated: June 21, 2021.
Cindy S. Barger,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2021-13558 Filed 6-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 210 (Monday, October 31, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67179-67180]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28093]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14133-000]

Riverbank Hydro No. 5 LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On April 1, 2011, Riverbank Hydro No. 5 LLC filed an application
for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power
Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of a hydropower project
at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) Wright Patman Dam, located
on the Sulphur River in Bowie County, Texas. The sole purpose of a
preliminary permit, if

issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license
application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not
authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities
or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the
owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of: (1) A forebay; (2) an intake
structure; (3) a powerhouse containing two generating units with a
total capacity of 10.0 megawatts (MW); (4) a tailrace structure; and
(5) 10.1-mile-long, 25 kilo-volt (KV) transmission line. The project
would have an estimated average annual generation of 24.0 gigawatt-
hours (GWh), and operate run-of-river utilizing surplus water from the
Millwood Dam, as directed by the Corps.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Kuo-Bao Tong, Riverbank Power Corporation,
Royal Bank Plaza, South Tower, P.O. Box 166, 200 Bay Street, Suite
3230, Toronto, ON, Canada M5J2J4.<PHONE_NUMBER> x 154.
    FERC Contact: Michael Spencer<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(202) 502-
6093.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-(866) 208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14133-000) in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: October 25, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-28093 Filed 10-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P