[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 99 (Wednesday, May 22, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23617-23620]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10639]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-85872; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2019-34]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Allow $1
Strike Price Intervals Above $200 on Options on the QQQ and IWM
Exchange-Traded Funds

May 16, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on May 10, 2019, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.4-O. 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 purpose of this filing is to amend Rule 6.4-O (Series of
Options Open for Trading) to allow for the interval between strike
prices of series of options on Exchange-Traded Fund Shares (``ETFs'')
of the PowerShares QQQ Trust (``QQQ'') and the iShares Russell 2000
Index Fund (``IWM'') to be $1 or greater where the strike price is
greater than $200. This proposal would align the rules of the Exchange
with that of other options exchanges.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85754 (April 30,
2019) (SR-CBOE-2019-15) (Order approving proposal to amend
Interpretation and Policy .08(b) to Rule 5.5 to allow strike
intervals of $1.00 or more on series of options on QQQ and IWM where
the strike price is greater than $200). See also Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 85295 (March 12, 2019), 84 FR 9851 (March 18, 2019)
(Notice).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, Commentary .05(d) to Rule 6.4-O allows for the interval
between strike prices of series of options on SPDR[supreg] S&P
500[supreg] ETF (``SPY''), iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (``IVV''), and the
SPDR[supreg] Dow Jones[supreg] Industrial Average ETF (``DIA'') to be
$1 or greater where the strike price is greater than $200. Per
Commentary .05(a) to Rule 6.4-O, the interval between strike prices of
series of options on all other ETFs is currently $5.00 or greater where
the strike price is greater than $200. Specifically, the Exchange
proposes to modify the interval setting regime to allow $1 strike price
intervals where the strike price is above $200 for IWM and QQQ
options.\6\ The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would
make QQQ and IWM options easier for investors and traders to use and
more tailored to their investment needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See proposed Commentary .05(d) to Rule 6.4-O.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The QQQ and IWM are designed to provide investors different ways to
efficiently gain exposure to the equity markets and execute risk
management, hedging, asset allocation and income generation strategies.
The QQQ is an ETF investment trust designed to closely track the price
and performance of a the Nasdaq-100 Index (``NDX''), which represents
the largest and most active nonfinancial domestic and international
issues listed on The Nasdaq Stock Market based on market
capitalization. Likewise, the IWM is an index ETF designed to closely
track the price and performance of the Russell 2000 Index (``RUT''),
which represents the small capitalization sector of the U.S. equity
market. In general, QQQ and IWM options provide investors with the
benefit of trading broader markets in a manageably sized contract.
    The value of QQQ is designed to approximate 1/40 the value of the
underlying NDX. For example, if the NDX price level is 1400, QQQ strike
prices generally would be expected to be priced around $35. The value
of IWM is designed to approximate 1/10 the value of the underlying,
RUT. In the past year, the NDX has climbed above a price level of 7500,
and the RUT climbed to a price level of approximately 1700 (both prior
to the December 2018 market-wide decline).\7\ As the value of the
underlying ETF (and the index the ETF tracks) and resulting strike
prices for each option continues to appreciate, the Exchange has
received requests from OTP Holders and OTP Firms (``OTPs'') to list
additional strike prices ($1 increments) in QQQ and IWM options above
$200. The QQQ is among the most actively traded ETFs on the market. It
is widely quoted as an indicator of technology stock prices and
investor confidence in the technology and telecommunication market
spaces, a significant indicator of overall economic health. Similarly,
IWM is among the most actively traded ETFs on the market and provides
investors with an investment tool to gain exposure to small U.S. public
companies. Industry-wide trade volume in QQQ more than doubled from
2017 to 2018. As a result, QQQ options and IWM options have grown to
become two of the largest options contracts in terms of trading volume.
Investors use these products to diversify their portfolios and benefit
from market trends.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82094 (November 16,
2017), 82 FR 55686 (November 22, 2017) (SR-NYSEArca-2017-128)
(immediately effective filing to align Exchange rules with other
exchanges by amending Exchange strike listing rules to modify the
interval setting regimes for SPY and DIA to allow $1 strike price
intervals above $200, and noting the price levels for their
respective underlying ETFs hovered around 2000 and 1700, comparable
to the current NDX and RUT price levels at the time other exchanges
filed to modify their strike listing rules).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Exchange believes that offering a wider base of
QQQ and IWM options affords traders and investors important hedging and
trading opportunities, particularly in the midst of current price
trends. The Exchange believes that not having the proposed $1 strike
price intervals above $200 in QQQ and IWM significantly constricts
investors' hedging and trading possibilities. The Exchange therefore
believes that by having smaller strike intervals in QQQ and IWM,
investors would have more efficient hedging and trading opportunities
due to the lower $1 interval ascension. The proposed $1 intervals above
the $200 strike price will result in having at-the-money series based
upon the underlying ETFs moving less than 1%. The Exchange believes
that the proposed strike setting regime is in line with the slower
movements of broad-based indices. Considering the fact that $1
intervals already exist below the $200 price point and that both QQQ
and IWM have consistently inclined in price toward the $200 level, the
Exchange believes that continuing to maintain the current $200 level
(above which intervals increase 500% to $5), may have a negative effect
on investing, trading and hedging opportunities, and volume. The
Exchange believes that the investing, trading, and hedging
opportunities available with QQQ and IWM options far outweighs any
potential negative impact of allowing QQQ and IWM options to trade in
more finely tailored intervals above the $200 price point.
    The proposed strike setting regime would permit strikes to be set
to more closely reflect the increasing values in the underlying indices
and allow investors and traders to roll open positions from a lower
strike to a higher strike in conjunction with the price movements of
the underlying ETFs. Under the current rule, where the next higher
available series would be $5 away above a $200 strike price, the
ability to roll such positions is effectively negated. Accordingly, to
move a position from a $200 strike to a $205 strike under the current
rule, an investor would need for the underlying product to move 2.5%,
and would not be able to execute a roll up until such a large movement
occurred. As stated, the NDX and RUT have experienced continued, steady
growth. The Exchange believes that with the proposed rule change, the
investor would be in a significantly safer position of being able to
roll his open options position from a $200 to a $201 strike price,
which is only a 0.5% move for the underlying.
    As a result, the proposed rule change will allow the Exchange to
better respond to customer demand for QQQ and IWM strike prices more
precisely aligned with the smaller, longer-term incremental increases
in respective underlying ETFs. The Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change, like the other strike price programs currently offered by
the Exchange, will benefit investors by providing investors the
flexibility to more closely tailor their investment and hedging
decisions using QQQ and IWM options. Moreover, by allowing series of
QQQ and IWM options to be listed in $1 intervals between strike prices
over $200, the proposal will moderately augment the

potential total number of options series available on the Exchange.
However, the Exchange believes it and the Options Price Reporting
Authority (``OPRA'') have the necessary systems capacity to handle any
potential additional traffic associated with this proposed rule change.
The Exchange also believes that OTPs will not have a capacity issue due
to the proposed rule change. In addition, the Exchange represents that
it does not believe that this expansion will cause fragmentation of
liquidity, but rather, believes that finer strike intervals will serve
to increase liquidity available as well as price efficiency by
providing more trading opportunities for all market participants.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\8\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \9\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposed rule change to Commentary .05(d) to
Rule 6.4-O would allow investors to more easily use QQQ and IWM
options. Moreover, the proposed rule change would allow investors to
better trade and hedge positions in QQQ and IWM options where the
strike price is greater than $200, and ensure that investors in both
options are not at a disadvantage simply because of the strike price.
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(1) of the Act, which provides that the Exchange be
organized and have the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the
Exchange. The rule change proposal allows the Exchange to respond to
customer demand to allow QQQ and IWM options to trade in $1 intervals
above a $200 strike price. The Exchange does not believe that the
proposed rule would create additional capacity issues or affect market
functionality.
    As noted above, ETF options trade in wider $5 intervals above a
$200 strike price, whereby options at or below a $200 strike price
trade in $1 intervals. This creates a situation where contracts on the
same option class effectively may not be able to execute certain
strategies such as, for example, rolling to a higher strike price,
simply because of the $200 strike price above which options intervals
increase by 500%. This proposal remedies the situation by establishing
an exception to the current ETF interval regime for QQQ and IWM options
to allow such options to trade in $1 or greater intervals at all strike
prices. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, like other
strike price programs currently offered by the Exchange, will benefit
investors by giving them increased flexibility to more closely tailor
their investment and hedging decisions. Moreover, the proposed rule
change is consistent with current strike intervals on options on DIA
and SPY and align with rules in place for similarly situated options
and their underlying ETFs.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See supra notes 7 and 5, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With regard to the impact of this proposal on system capacity, the
Exchange believes it and OPRA have the necessary systems capacity to
handle any potential additional traffic associated with this proposed
rule change. The Exchange believes that its members will not have a
capacity issue as a result of this proposal.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the proposed rule
change would enable the Exchange to better compete with other options
exchanges that have already adopted the proposed strike setting
regime.\13\ Although the Exchange is able to match strikes listed by
other exchanges, this proposal would allow the initiate strikes in QQQ
and IWM regardless of strikes listed on other exchanges, which should
help level the playing field for investors investing in, trading and
utilizing hedging strategies on these options.
    Moreover, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would
result in additional investment options and opportunities to achieve
the investment and trading objectives of market participants seeking
efficient trading and hedging vehicles, to the benefit of investors,
market participants, and the marketplace in general. Specifically, the
Exchange believes that QQQ and IWM options investors and traders will
significantly benefit from the availability of finer strike price
intervals above a $200 price point. In addition, the interval setting
regime the Exchange proposes to apply to QQQ and IWM options is
currently applied to SPY, IVV, and DIA options, which are similarly
popular and widely traded ETF products and track indexes at similarly
high price levels. Thus, the proposed strike setting regime for QQQ and
IWM options would allow options on the most actively traded ETFs with
index levels at corresponding price levels to trade pursuant to the
same strike setting regime, which would, in turn, enable investors to
employ similar investment and hedging strategies for each of these
options.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \13\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \14\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so
that the

proposed rule change may become operative upon filing. The Exchange
asserts that waiving the operative delay would be consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest because the proposed
rule change would respond to investor demand and allow the Exchange to
implement the modified rule, which aligns with the rules of other
options exchanges, without delay. The Commission believes that the
proposal raises no new or substantive issues and that waiver of the 30-
day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. The Commission hereby waives the operative delay
and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission also has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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-NYSEArca-2019-34 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-NYSEArca-2019-34. 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-NYSEArca-2019-34 and should be submitted
on or before June 12, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-10639 Filed 5-21-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 93 (Friday, May 13, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29306-29307]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10357]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM01-5-000]

Electronic Tariff Filings; Notice of Discontinuance of FTP
Uploads to the eTariff Sandbox

    Take notice that on June 14, 2022, filers wanting to verify eTariff
filings in the eTariff sandbox will no longer have the ability to
upload XML files using FTP protocols as Microsoft is ending support for
FTP. Instead, users will be able to verify their filings by uploading
XML filings through a Commission website portal at https://etariff.ferc.gov/TariffSandbox.aspx.
    Until June 14, 2022, both the FTP portal and the new web portal
will be available for use and testing. More detailed instructions for
using the web

portal will be available on or before June 14th at: https://www.ferc.gov/sandbox-electronic-test-site.
    To report any problems with testing the new web portal or for more
information, contact the eTariff Advisory Staff at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
[email protected].

    Dated: May 9, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-10357 Filed 5-12-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 81 (Thursday, April 26, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24838-24840]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10020]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0001]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Magothy River, Sillery Bay, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone in certain
waters of the Magothy River, in Sillery Bay, Maryland. This safety zone
is necessary to provide for the safety of life, property and the
environment. This safety zone restricts the movement of vessels
throughout the regulated area during The Bumper Bash, held annually on
the fourth Saturday of July.

DATES: This rule is effective May 29, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket USCG-2012-0001 and are available online by going to
http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2012-0001 in the ``Keyword''
box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is also available for
inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Ronald Houck, Sector Baltimore Waterways Management
Division, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On February 27, 2012, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled ``Safety Zone; Magothy River, Sillery Bay, MD'' in the
Federal Register (77 FR 11423). We received no comments on the proposed
rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.

Basis and Purpose

    Each year, on the fourth Saturday in July, hundreds of recreational
boaters meet in Sillery Bay at Dobbins Island, Maryland for a gathering
called ``The Bumper Bash.'' The activity began in 2007. Due to the
growing presence of boaters in recent years, the annual gathering has
become increasingly congested. In recent years, an estimated 700
recreational boats were anchored or moored alongside other boats
(rafted). The crowds of persons on recreational vessels or other water
craft create large lines of rafted boats filling in the beachfront area
of Dobbins Island. The persons and vessels exceeded a safe limit.
Accidental drownings, personnel injuries, boat fires, boat capsizings
and sinkings, and boating collisions are safety concerns during such
overcrowded events. Access on the water for emergency response to the
beach area is critical. The Coast Guard has the authority to impose
appropriate controls on activities that may pose a threat to persons,
vessels and facilities under its jurisdiction. The Coast Guard sees the
need for a permanent safety zone that will be enforced annually on the
fourth Saturday in July, during a gathering of persons on recreational
vessels and other water craft held in the Magothy River, in Sillery
Bay, Maryland. The zone is needed to control movement within a waterway
that is expected to be populated by persons and vessels seeking to
attend The Bumper Bash activity.

Background

    The Coast Guard anticipates a large recreational boating fleet in
the Magothy River, in Sillery Bay, during The Bumper Bash at Dobbins
Island, Maryland annually on the fourth Saturday in July. Due to the
need to provide for the safety of persons and vessels within the
regulated area vessel traffic will be restricted during the activity.
    The purpose of this rule is to promote maritime safety, and to
protect the environment and mariners transiting the area from the
potential hazards associated with a large gathering of recreational
vessels and other watercraft along a confined beachfront area with

swimmers and others present. This rule establishes a safety zone in all
waters of the Magothy River, in Sillery Bay, contained within lines
connecting the following positions: From position latitude
39[deg]04'40'' N, longitude 076[deg]27'44'' W; thence to position
latitude 39[deg]04'48'' N, longitude 076[deg]27'19'' W; thence to
position latitude 39[deg]04'59'' N, longitude 076[deg]27'45'' W; thence
to position latitude 39[deg]04'59'' N, longitude 076[deg]28'01'' W;
thence to position latitude 39[deg]04'41'' N, longitude 076[deg]27'51''
W; thence to the point of origin at position latitude 39[deg]04'40'' N,
longitude 076[deg]27'44'' W. All coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983.
The rule will impact the movement of all persons and vessels in the
regulated area, and will limit the density of vessels and other
watercraft operating, remaining or anchoring within the regulated area
at the discretion of the Captain of the Port Baltimore, to ensure an
open water route remains accessible to law enforcement and emergency
personnel during the effective period. Public vessels located within
the regulated area will not contribute to the density determination.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received no comments in response to the NPRM. No
public meeting was requested and none was held.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. The effect of this regulation will not be
significant due to the limited size and duration that the regulated
area will be in effect and vessels transiting the Magothy River may
proceed safely around the zone. In addition, notifications will be made
to the maritime community via marine information broadcasts so mariners
may adjust their plans accordingly.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which
might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending
to operate, remain or anchor within the safety zone, from 8 a.m. until
10 p.m. on the fourth Saturday in July annually. This safety zone will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities for the following reasons. Traffic would be allowed to pass
within the safety zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port
Baltimore. Vessels transiting the Magothy River may proceed safely
around the zone. Also, the Coast Guard will issue maritime advisories
widely available to users of the waterway before the effective period.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking
process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ``significant energy action'' under that
order because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator
of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated
it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a
Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of
the Instruction. This rule involves certain regulations for vessels
navigating the waters of the Magothy River, in Sillery Bay, and fits
within the category in paragraph 34(g) because it establishes a safety
zone.
    An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C.
191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-
295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.513 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.513  Safety Zone; Magothy River, Sillery Bay, MD.

    (a) Regulated area. The following area is a safety zone: All waters
of the Magothy River, in Sillery Bay, contained within lines connecting
the following positions: From position latitude 39[deg]04'40'' N,
longitude 076[deg]27'44'' W; thence to position latitude 39[deg]04'48''
N, longitude 076[deg]27'19'' W; thence to position latitude
39[deg]04'59'' N, longitude 076[deg]27'45'' W; thence to position
latitude 39[deg]04'59'' N, longitude 076[deg]28'01'' W; thence to
position latitude 39[deg]04'41'' N, longitude 076[deg]27'51'' W; thence
to the point of origin at position latitude 39[deg]04'40'' N, longitude
076[deg]27'44'' W. All coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section:
    (1) Captain of the Port Baltimore means the Commander, U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Baltimore, Maryland.
    (2) Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the
Port Baltimore to assist in enforcing the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons are required to comply with the
general regulations governing safety zones found in 33 CFR 165.23.
    (2) All vessels and persons are prohibited from entering and
accessing this safety zone, except as authorized by the Captain of the
Port Baltimore or his or her designated representative.
    (3) Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage within the
safety zone must request authorization from the Captain of the Port
Baltimore or his or her designated representative, by telephone at
(410) 576-2693 or by marine band radio on VHF-FM Channel 16 (156.8
MHz), from 8 a.m. until 10 p.m. on the fourth Saturday in July
annually. All Coast Guard vessels enforcing this safety zone can be
contacted on marine band radio VHF-FM Channel 16 (156.8 MHz).
    (4) All vessels and persons must comply with instructions of the
Captain of the Port Baltimore or his or her designated representative.
    (5) The operator of any vessel entering or located within this
safety zone shall:
    (i) Travel at no-wake speed,
    (ii) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by
any commissioned, warrant or petty officer on board a vessel displaying
a Coast Guard Ensign, and
    (iii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty
officer on board a vessel displaying a Coast Guard Ensign.
    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol
and enforcement of the safety zone by any Federal, State, and local
agencies.
    (e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 8 a.m.
until 10 p.m. on the fourth Saturday in July annually.

    Dated: April 4, 2012.
Mark P. O'Malley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Baltimore.
[FR Doc. 2012-10020 Filed 4-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 53 (Monday, March 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16710-16711]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05577]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Approval of John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) Noise
Compatibility Program

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of approval of the John F. Kennedy International Airport
(JFK) noise compatibility program.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces its
findings for the noise compatibility program submitted by JFK. See
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for details. On May 19, 2017, the FAA
determined that the noise exposure maps submitted by JFK were in
compliance with applicable requirements. On September 16, 2022, the FAA
determined that the noise compatibility program submitted by JFK would
be initiating final review for approval or disapproval. On March 14,
2023, the FAA approved the JFK noise compatibility program. The noise
compatibility program contained 22 recommended measures, including
seven noise abatement measures, three land use measures, and 12 program
management measures. Of the measures proposed, 15 were approved, four
were approved as voluntary, two were disapproved, and one was
determined to have no FAA action as continuations of existing mandatory
practices at JFK. Three of the seven noise abatement measures proposed
at JFK are related to new or revised flight procedures.

DATES: The effective date of the FAA's approval of the JFK noise
compatibility program is March 14, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Brooks, Regional Environmental
Program Manager, Airports Division, Federal Aviation Administration, 1
Aviation Plaza, Room 516, Jamaica, NY 11434. Phone Number: 718-553-
2511.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces FAA's approval of the
noise compatibility program (NCP) for JFK, effective on March 14, 2023.
Per United States Code section 47504 (49 U.S.C. 47504) and Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 150, an airport sponsor who
previously submitted a noise exposure map (NEM) may submit to the FAA a
noise compatibility program which sets forth the measures taken or
proposed by the airport sponsor for the reduction of existing non-
compatible land uses and prevention of additional non-compatible land
uses within the area covered by the NEMs. As required by 49 U.S.C.
47504, such programs must be developed in consultation with interested
and affected parties including local communities, government agencies,
airport users, and the FAA. The FAA does not substitute its judgment
for that of the airport sponsor with respect to which measures should
be recommended for action. The FAA approval or disapproval of an
airports recommendations in their noise compatibility program are made
in accordance with the requirements and standards pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
47504 and 14 CFR part 150, which is limited to the following
determinations:
    a. The noise compatibility program was developed in accordance with
the provisions and procedures of 14 CFR 150.23;
    b. Program measures are reasonably consistent with achieving the
goals of reducing existing non-compatible land uses around the airport
and preventing the introduction of additional non-compatible land uses;
    c. Program measures would not create an undue burden on interstate
or foreign commerce, unjustly discriminate against types or classes of
aeronautical uses, violate the terms of airport grant agreements, or
intrude into areas preempted by the Federal Government; and
    d. Program measures relating to the use of flight procedures can be
implemented within the period covered by the program without derogating
safety, adversely affecting the efficient use and management of the
navigable airspace and air traffic control systems, or adversely
affecting other powers and responsibilities of the Administrator
prescribed by law.
    Specific limitations of FAA's approval of NCPs are delineated in 14
CFR 150.5. Approval is not a determination concerning the acceptability
of land uses under Federal, state, or local law. Approval does not by
itself constitute an FAA implementing action. A request for Federal
action or approval to implement specific noise compatibility measures
may be required, and an FAA decision on the request may require an

environmental assessment of the proposed action. Approval does not
constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially assist in the
implementation of the noise compatibility program nor a determination
that all measures covered by the NCP are eligible for grant-in-aid
funding from the FAA. Where federal funding is sought, requests must be
submitted to the FAA New York Airports District Office at 1 Aviation
Plaza, Room 111, Jamaica, New York 11434.
    JFK submitted the noise exposure maps, descriptions, and other
documentation produced during the noise compatibility planning study to
the FAA and the FAA determined that the NEMs for JFK were in compliance
with applicable requirements under 14 CFR 150, effective May 19, 2017
(Noise Exposure Map Notice for John F. Kennedy International Airport,
New York City, New York, 82 FR 24770-24771, May 30, 2017). The FAA
formally received the NCP based on the accepted NEMs for JFK on
September 7, 2022. The airport operator requested that the FAA review
the submitted material and that the noise mitigation measures, to be
implemented jointly by the airport and surrounding communities, be
approved as an NCP. The formal review period, limited by law to a
maximum of 180 days with the exception of noise abatement procedures,
was initiated on September 16, 2022. Notice of the intent to review the
NCP was published in the Federal Register on September 21, 2022 (Notice
of Receipt and Request for Review of Noise Compatibility Program, 87 FR
57748, September 21, 2022). That Federal Register Notice also announced
the start of a 60-day period of public review for the NCP
documentation. The FAA received no comments from interested parties
during the public review period.
    The JFK proposed NCP is comprised of actions designed for phased
implementation by airport management and adjacent jurisdictions within
the next one to five years. It was requested that the FAA evaluate and
approve this material as a noise compatibility program as described in
49 U.S.C. 47504. The FAA began its review of the program on September
16, 2022 and was required by a provision of 49 U.S.C. 47504 to approve
or disapprove the program within 180 days, other than the use of new or
modified flight procedures for noise control in accordance with 14 CFR
part 150.35(a). Failure to approve or disapprove such program within
the 180-day period shall be deemed an approval of such program.
    The submitted program contained 22 proposed measures to minimize
impacts of aviation noise on and off the airport. The FAA completed its
review and determined that the procedural and substantive requirements
of the 49 U.S.C. 47504 and 14 CFR part 150 were satisfied. A Record of
Approval for the overall program was issued by the FAA effective March
14, 2023.
    The specific program elements and their individual determinations
are as follows:
    Noise Abatement (NA) Measure 1: Implement ``Tighten SKORR''
Departure Procedure--Approved as Voluntary.
    NA Measure 2: Turn Runway 22L and 22R Departures to Heading 240 at
Night--Approved as Voluntary.
    NA Measure 3: Reduce Runway 31L Intersection Departures at Night--
Approved as Voluntary.
    NA Measure 4: Combine ``Tighten SKORR'' Departure Procedure with
Reduce Runway 31L Intersection Departures at Night--Approved as
Voluntary.
    NA Measure 5: Implement Noise Abatement Departure Profiles on a
Voluntary Basis for Each Runway End--Disapproved for Purposes of Part
150.
    NA Measure 6: Implement Nighttime Optimized Profile Descent
Procedures--Disapproved for Purposes of Part 150.
    NA Measure 7: Continue Existing Mandatory Departure Noise Limit and
$250 Penalty--No Action.
    Land Use (LU) Measure 1: Sound-Insulate Eligible Dwelling Units--
Approved.
    LU Measure 2: Sound-Insulate Eligible Non-Residential Noise-
Sensitive Structures--Approved.
    LU Measure 3: Include Aircraft Noise in Real Estate Disclosures--
Approved.
    Program Management (PM) Measure 1: Maintain Noise Office--Approved.
    PM Measure 2: Maintain Noise and Operations Management System--
Approved.
    PM Measure 3: Maintain Public Flight Tracking Portal--Approved.
    PM Measure 4: Maintain Noise Complaint Management System--Approved.
    PM Measure 5: Maintain Noise Office website--Approved.
    PM Measure 6: Continue Community Outreach Activities--Approved.
    PM Measure 7: Establish and Manage a Fly Quiet Program--Approved as
Voluntary.
    PM Measure 8: Make Aircraft Noise Contours Available in a
Geographic Information System (GIS)--Approved.
    PM Measure 9: Update the Noise Exposure Map--Approved.
    PM Measure 10: Update the Noise Compatibility Program--Approved.
    PM Measure 11: Post Monthly Color-Coded DNL Values on Port
Authority website--Approved.
    PM Measure 12: The Port Authority to Coordinate with the FAA on
Development and Implementation of NextGen Procedures--Approved.
    These determinations are set forth in detail in the Record of
Approval signed by the FAA Airports Eastern Division Director on March
14, 2023. The Record of Approval, as well as other evaluation materials
and the documents comprising the submittal, are available for review at
the FAA office listed above. The Record of Approval also will be
available on the internet on the FAA's website at https://www.faa.gov/airports/environmental/airport_noise/part_150/states/ and the Port
Authority of New York and New Jersey's website at https://panynjpart150.com/JFK_documents.asp.

    Issued in Jamaica, NY, on March 15, 2023.
David A. Fish,
Director, Airports Division, Eastern Region.
[FR Doc. 2023-05577 Filed 3-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: February 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 33)]
[Notices]
[Page 9162-9165]
[DOCID:fr19fe08-106]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Solicitation of Applications and Notice of Funding Availability
for the Capital Assistance to States--Intercity Passenger Rail Service
Program

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of funding availability; solicitation for applications.

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

SUMMARY: Under this Notice, the FRA encourages interested State
departments of transportation to submit applications for grants to fund
capital improvements and planning activities necessary to support
improved or new intercity passenger rail service.

DATES: FRA will begin accepting grant applications on Monday, March 18,
2008. Applications may be submitted until the earlier of Wednesday,
September 30, 2009, or the date on which all available funds will have
been committed under this program. The last-mentioned date will be
announced in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Applications must be submitted electronically to http://www.grants.gov
 (``Grants.Gov''). Grants.Gov allows organizations

electronically to find and apply for competitive grant opportunities
from all Federal grant-making agencies. Any State wishing to submit an
application pursuant to this notice should immediately initiate the
process of registering with Grants.Gov at http://www.grants.gov. Please confirm all Grants.Gov submissions by e-mailing<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    For application materials that an applicant is unable to submit via
Grants.Gov (such as oversized engineering drawings), applicants may
submit an original and two (2) copies to the Federal Railroad
Administration at the following address: Federal Railroad
Administration, Attention: Peter Schwartz, Office of Railroad
Development (RDV-11), Mail Stop 20, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590.
    Due to delays caused by enhanced screening of mail delivered via
the U.S. Postal Service, applicants are encouraged to use other means
to assure timely receipt of materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Schwartz, Office of Railroad
Development (RDV-11), Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Fax: (202)
493-6333, or Desmond Brown, Grants Officer, Office of Acquisition and
Grants Services (RAD-30), Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Fax:
(202) 493-6171.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Capital Assistance to States--Intercity
Passenger Rail Service Program (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA) Program Number 20.317) will be supported with $30,000,000 of
Federal funds provided to FRA as part of the Transportation, Housing
and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008
(Division K of Pub. L. 110-161 (December 26, 2007)). Funds provided
under this program may constitute no more than 50 percent of the total
cost of a selected project, with the remaining cost funded from other
sources. FRA anticipates awarding grants to multiple eligible
participants. Eligible projects include capital improvements (fixed
facilities and rolling stock) necessary to support improved or new
intercity passenger rail services, and planning activities that lead
directly to the development of a passenger rail corridor investment
plan. FRA anticipates that no further public notice will be made with
respect to selecting grantees under this program.
    Purpose: In 2002, then-Secretary of Transportation, Norman Y.
Mineta, announced a number of principles to guide the future of
intercity passenger rail in the United States. One of these principles
was to ``establish a long-term partnership between States and the
Federal Government to support intercity passenger rail.'' In
furtherance of that principle, the President's Fiscal Year (FY) 2008
Budget proposed, and the Congress enacted, a program that would
increase the States' role in intercity passenger rail development by
establishing Federal-State partnerships for intercity passenger rail
investment along the model of those that currently exist for other
modes of transportation. This program makes $30,000,000 in Federal
funding available directly to States through grants to fund up to 50
percent of the cost of capital investments and planning activities
necessary to achieve tangible improvements to, or institute new,
intercity passenger rail service. Examples of such improvements include
(but are not strictly limited to) the purchase of passenger rolling
stock, the improvement of existing track to allow for higher maximum
speeds, the addition or lengthening of passing tracks to increase
capacity, the improvement of interlockings to increase capacity and
reliability, and the improvement of signaling systems to increase
capacity and maximum speeds, and improve safety.
    Authority: The authority for the Program can be found in the
Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Division K of Pub. L. 110-161 (December 26,
2007)).
    Funding: The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008, provides $30,000,000, and
directs FRA to award one or more grants covering up to 50 percent of
the cost of capital investments (and limited planning activities)
necessary to support improved intercity passenger rail services. The
funding provided under these grants will be made available to grantees
on a reimbursement basis. It is anticipated that the available funding
could support the projects proposed by multiple applicants. FRA may
choose to award a grant or grants within the available funds in any
amount. Funding made available through grants provided under this
program, together with funding from other sources that is committed by
a grantee as part of a grant agreement, must be sufficient to complete
the funded project and achieve the anticipated improvement to intercity
passenger rail service.
    Schedule for Capital Grant Program: FRA will begin accepting grant
applications on Monday, March 18, 2008. Applications must be submitted
by Wednesday, September 30, 2009 or the date (to be announced) on which
all available funds will have been committed. Due to the limited
funding

available under this program: (1) Applicants are encouraged to submit
their applications at the earliest date practicable in order to
maximize the consideration of their application in the competition; and
(2) FRA may request that an applicant submit a revised application
reflecting a refined scope of work and budget. FRA anticipates making
the first award(s) pursuant to this notice during FY 2008.
    Eligible Participants: The department of transportation of any
State (including, for the purposes of this program, the District of
Columbia) is eligible to apply for funding under this Notice, provided
that the applicant State includes intercity passenger rail service as
an integral part of statewide transportation planning as required under
section 135 of title 23, United States Code. If the proposed project is
in more than one State, a single State department of transportation
should apply on behalf of all the participating States.
    Eligible Projects: Eligible projects must be for the primary
benefit of intercity passenger rail service. Only new projects will be
eligible; projects that have either commenced before the time of award
or have been completed will not be considered. Proposed projects must
be specifically included in the applicant State's Statewide
Transportation Improvement Plan at the time of application to be
eligible. Matching funding must be in the form of new financial
commitments toward the proposed project by the applicant and/or its
partners. Expenditures which occurred prior to the passage into law of
the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008, and expenditures on unrelated projects will
not be considered.
    Eligible Planning Projects: Congress has allowed up to ten percent
($3,000,000) of the funding available under the program to be used for
planning activities that lead directly to the development of a
passenger rail corridor investment plan. Only proposed planning
projects that incorporate the methodologies set forth in FRA's
publication, entitled ``Railroad Corridor Transportation Plans: A
Guidance Manual,'' available at http://www.fra.dot.gov/Downloads/RRdev/corridor_planning.pdf
, will be given priority for consideration,

subject to the Selection Criteria outlined below.
    Selection Criteria: The following will be considered to be positive
selection factors in evaluating applications for grants under this
program:
    1. The ability of the proposed project to result directly in
appreciable benefits to intercity passenger rail services, including,
but not limited to, improved safety (particularly at railroad-highway
at-grade crossings), and improved intercity passenger rail reliability
(particularly involving a commitment by host freight railroads to an
enforceable on-time performance standard of 80 percent or greater).
    2. The extent to which, following the completion of the proposed
project, the total, fully allocated operating expenses of the intercity
passenger rail service benefiting from the project are projected to be
offset by the total of (a) revenues attributable to the service, and
(b) committed state financial support, with little or no need for
Federal operating support.
    3. The extent to which the proposed project involves a commitment
by States or railroads of financial resources to improve the safety of
highway/rail grade crossings over which the passenger service operates.
    4. The relative emphasis of the proposed project on the
implementation of tangible capital improvements, rather than planning.
    5. The ability of the proposed project to result in reduced and
reliable line-haul and/or total travel times for intercity rail
passengers, increased intercity passenger service frequencies, and/or
enhanced service quality for intercity train passengers.
    6. The extent to which the project promotes seamless intermodal
connections between passenger rail service and other modes of
transportation, such as mass transit and commercial air service.
    7. The extent to which the proposed project has stand-alone value
as a transportation improvement, and the extent to which the benefits
resulting from the project are not contingent upon future additional
Federal funding, or on additional capital investments other than those
to which the applicant or the applicant's partners have committed at
the time of the submission of the grant application.
    8. For proposed grant-funded projects involving improvements or
alterations to, or use of, assets owned or used by other entities (such
as freight or commuter railroads), the extent to which the applicant
has completed written agreements (covering issues including, but not
limited to, project design, project implementation, and assurance and/
or enforcement of achievement of anticipated project benefits) between
the applicant and the other affected entities.
    9. The existence and quality of a comprehensive, realistic
transportation plan (a) covering the rail line(s), facilities, and
services employed or affected by the benefiting project and (b)
reflecting the improved operation of the benefiting service.
    10. The progress toward completing any environmental documentation
or clearance required for the proposed project under the National
Environmental Policy Act, the National Historic Preservation Act,
section 4(f) of the DOT Act, the Clean Water Act, or other applicable
Federal or State laws and regulations (federal environmental and
historic preservation review requirements will apply to all projects
funded through the Capital Assistance to States--Intercity Passenger
Rail Service Program).
    11. The projected lapse in time between a grant award and the
initiation and completion of, and realization of the benefits resulting
from, the proposed project, and the veracity of such projections.
    12. The extent to which the State commits funds or contributions as
a match for the funds potentially available under this program for the
project of a value in excess of 50 percent of the total cost of the
project, and the extent to which such funds are from non-Federal
sources. For purposes of this criterion, all monetary and other
resources of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) are
considered to be Federal sources.
    13. The extent to which matching funds or contributions committed
by the State would be contributions from private or other non-State
entities, such as host freight railroads and local governments, and the
extent to which the commitment by the host freight railroad of
financial resources is commensurate with the benefit expected to their
operations.
    Requirements for Grant Applications: The following points describe
the minimum content which will be required in grant applications. These
requirements may be satisfied through a narrative statement submitted
by the applicant, supported by spreadsheet documents, tables, drawings,
and other materials, as appropriate. Each grant application will:
    1. Designate a point of contact for the applicant and provide their
name and contact information, including phone number, mailing address
and e-mail address.
    2. Include a complete Standard Form 424, ``Application for Federal
Assistance'', and, as applicable, Standard Form 424B, ``Assurances--
Non-Construction Programs'' or Standard Form 424D, ``Assurances--
Construction Programs.'' Also include signed copies of FRA's Additional
Assurances and Certifications, available

at http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/admin/assurancesandcertifications.pdf
.

    3. Identify and provide background information on the intercity
passenger rail services that the proposed project is intended primarily
to benefit. The required content under this heading will differ
according to the purpose of the project:
    a. Grant applications related to projects that are targeted toward
improving existing intercity passenger rail services. Describe in
detail the current state of the benefiting services. Include
descriptions of the geographic markets served, the current operating
characteristics of the services (including timetables, consist
diagrams, and measures of service reliability), and the financial
characteristics of the service (including profit and loss statements
and descriptions of past and/or current state financial support for
operations and capital investments). Describe the current annual
passenger utilization of the service (train ridership; passenger-mile
volumes; and train boardings plus alightings at each station), any
existing contractual arrangements for the operation of the service, the
characteristics of other rail service (e.g. commuter and freight)
currently operating on the route, and the extent to which the
benefiting service falls within the geographic scope of one or more
Federally-designated high-speed rail corridors. In addition, describe
and compare the existing transportation facilities and service
offerings (including travel times, frequencies, prices or perceived
costs, reliability, and service quality) afforded by other public and
private modes of transportation, as well as intercity passenger rail,
in the geographic market area.
    b. For grant applications related to projects that are targeted
toward the introduction of new intercity passenger rail service.
Describe the characteristics, including trip time and frequencies, of
any past intercity passenger rail service that has served the same
general geographic markets as the proposed service. Describe the
characteristics of other rail service (e.g. commuter and freight)
currently operating on the route. Describe the geographic market to be
served by the new service, the current level of completion and nature
of the planning for the new service, the extent to which the benefiting
service falls within the geographic scope of one or more Federally-
designated high-speed rail corridors, and the existing transportation
facilities and service offerings (including travel times, frequencies,
prices or perceived costs, reliability, and service quality) afforded
by other public and private modes of transportation in the geographic
market area.
    4. Define the scope of work for the proposed project and the
anticipated project schedule. Describe the proposed project's physical
location (as applicable), and the extent to which the proposed project
consists of planning and/or implementation of capital improvements.
Include any drawings, plans, or schematics that have been prepared
relating to the proposed project.
    5. Present a detailed budget for the proposed project. At a
minimum, the budget should separate total cost of the project into the
following categories: (1) Administrative and legal expenses; (2) Land,
structures, rights-of-way, and appraisals; (3) Relocation expenses and
payments; (4) Architectural and engineering fees; (5) Project
inspection fees; (6) Site work; (7) Demolition and removal; (8)
Construction labor, supervision, and management; (9) Materials, by type
(e.g. ties, rail, signals, switches, rolling stock; (10) Equipment;
(11) Miscellaneous; and (12) Contingencies. For each cost category,
specify (as defined under OMB Circular A-87, ``Cost Principles for
State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments'') the amount of costs that
are allowable for participation, and the amount of non-allowable costs.
Also specify the amount of allowable costs in each category that are
proposed to be funded under this program, and the amount to be funded
by non-program matching funds.
    6. Describe the operating changes to the target intercity passenger
rail services that are anticipated to result from the project, and
assess the operational feasibility of the proposed project. The
required level of detail for the descriptions of anticipated operating
changes and the feasibility assessment will depend upon the nature of
the project, as follows:
    a. Projects intended to improve the reliability of existing
intercity passenger rail services, but which are not intended to affect
the trip times, service frequencies, or passenger capacity of the
benefiting services. Describe, in quantitative terms, the delays that
would be incurred by the benefiting intercity passenger rail service
were the proposed project not to be completed. Describe, in
quantitative terms, the delays that would be avoided as a result of the
completion of the proposed project. Address proposed means for ensuring
and/or enforcing that the anticipated reliability improvements will be
realized following the completion of the proposed project.
    b. Projects, particularly those involving the purchase of rolling
stock, intended to increase capacity on existing intercity passenger
rail services, but which are not intended to affect the trip times or
service frequencies of the benefiting services. Describe evidence of
current under-capacity of the benefiting services, and the extent to
which such under-capacity conditions are projected to change in the
future. Include results of modeling performed using train performance
calculators demonstrating that current schedules may be maintained
following the introduction of the proposed new equipment. Address the
adequacy of existing infrastructure (e.g. station platforms,
maintenance facilities, passing tracks, and wyes) to accommodate any
proposed increased consist lengths. Present evidence that the proposed
new equipment meets the clearance requirements of the infrastructure
over which it is intended to operate, or provide details of what
infrastructure modifications will be required to achieve the physical
clearances required for the operation of the proposed new equipment.
Present evidence that existing or anticipated future station access
limitations (e.g. lack of transit access, shortage of parking), will
not create a capacity constraint that would limit the utility of
additional on-train capacity.
    c. Projects which, either by design or otherwise as a direct
consequence thereof, would affect trip times and frequencies of
existing intercity passenger rail services, or which are related to the
introduction of new intercity passenger rail service. Describe the
operating plan intended for the benefiting service following completion
of the grant-funded project. Include operating details, such as
proposed timetables, equipment consists, track charts of the proposed
route, descriptions of maintenance of equipment and maintenance of way
arrangements, station access plans, and quantitative projections of
operating reliability. Include the outputs, such as stringline (time
and distance) diagrams, of train performance calculator modeling and
dispatching modeling undertaken as part of the preparation of the
proposed operating plan. These outputs shall include all other rail
services--intercity, freight, and commuter--that will share facilities
with, or otherwise impact or be impacted by, the services that will
benefit from the improvements proposed in the application. Such
coverage of other services shall address both current conditions and
projected

service levels in the time horizon year adopted in the application.
Address the operating feasibility of the proposed service, and
summarize any identified risks associated with the operating plan.
Describe any contractual arrangements that will be in place for the
operation of the service. Include a description of the methodology
employed in developing the operating plan. Operating plans developed in
accordance with FRA's publication, entitled ``Railroad Corridor
Transportation Plans: A Guidance Manual,'' available at http://www.fra.dot.gov/Downloads/RRdev/corridor_planning.pdf
, will be

considered to fulfill these requirements. Address proposed means for
ensuring and/or enforcing that the anticipated operating plan will be
implemented with a high degree of reliability following the completion
of the proposed project.
    7. Describe any additional planning activities or capital
improvements, beyond those project elements included in the grant
proposal, that would be required in order to realize the operating
benefits intended to be generated by the proposed project. Indicate the
extent to which funding from other sources has been committed to and/or
work has commenced on these additional requirements.
    8. Describe proposed project implementation and project management
provisions. Include descriptions of expected arrangements for project
contracting, contract oversight, change-order management, risk
management, and conformance to Federal requirements for project
progress reporting.
    9. Present a financial plan reflecting the anticipated financial
performance of the benefiting service following completion of the
grant-funded project. Include a detailed projected profit and loss
statement, along with forecasts for revenues, ridership, passenger-
miles, and expenses generated by the proposed service. Demonstrate the
extent to which the benefiting service will not require Federal
financial assistance to support its operation following the completion
of the grant-funded project.
    10. Describe the benefits forecasted to result from the proposed
project, specifically as they relate to improvements in safety
(particularly at railroad-highway grade crossings) and increases in
intercity passenger rail reliability (particularly to the extent the
proposed project would result in a commitment by host freight railroads
to an enforceable on-time performance standard of 80 percent or
greater).
    11. Describe the extent to which the proposed project will result
in reduced line-haul and/or total travel times for intercity rail
passengers, increased intercity passenger service frequencies, and/or
enhanced service quality for intercity train passengers.
    12. Describe the source(s) and amount(s) of matching funding to be
committed to the project by the applicant.
    13. Describe the anticipated ownership arrangement for the project
following completion.
    14. Describe any written agreements (or progress in negotiations)
between the applicant and other entities regarding proposed grant-
funded projects involving improvements or alterations to, or use of,
assets owned or used by other entities.
    15. Describe progress toward completing any environmental
documentation or clearance required for the proposed project under the
National Environmental Policy Act, the National Historic Preservation
Act, section 4(f) of the DOT Act, the Clean Water Act, or other
applicable Federal or State laws.
    16. Describe the degree to which intercity passenger rail is
included as an integral part of the applicant State's statewide
transportation planning, as required under section 135 of title 23,
United States Code, and present evidence that the specific proposed
project is included or mentioned in the applicant State's Statewide
Transportation Improvement Plan.
    Format: Excluding spreadsheets, drawings, and tables, the narrative
statement for grant applications may not exceed fifty pages in length.
With the exclusion of oversized engineering drawings (which may be
submitted in hard copy to the FRA at the address above), all
application materials should be submitted as attachments through
Grants.Gov.
    Spreadsheets consisting of budget or financial information should
be submitted via Grants.Gov as Microsoft Excel (or compatible)
documents.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 12, 2008.
Mark E. Yachmetz,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Development.
[FR Doc. E8-3018 Filed 2-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 210 (Monday, October 31, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 75400]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26217]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9954-64-OA]

Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of meeting of the Children's Health Protection Advisory
Committee.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee
Act, Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given that the next meeting of
the Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee (CHPAC) will be
held November 15 and 16, 2016 at the George Washington University
Milken Institute School of Public Health, located at 950 New Hampshire
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20037.

DATES: November 15 and 16, 2016.

ADDRESSES: 950 New Hampshire Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20037.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The meetings of the CHPAC are open to the
public. The CHPAC will meet on Thursday, November 15 from 1:00 p.m. to
5:30 p.m. and Friday, November 16 from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. An agenda
will be posted to www.epa.gov/children.
    Access and Accommodations: For information on access or services
for individuals with disabilities, please contact Martha Berger at 202-
564-2191 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>preferably at least 10 days prior to
the meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martha Berger, Designated Federal
Officer, U.S. EPA; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: November 24, 2016.
Martha Berger,
Designated Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016-26217 Filed 10-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P