[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 47 (Monday, March 13, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 13390]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04952]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 12

Safety of Water Power Projects and Project Works

CFR Correction

0
In Title 18 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 1 to 399, revised
as of April 1, 2016, the term ``Energy Projects Licensing'' is replaced
by the term ``Energy Projects'' in the following locations: Page 214,
Sec.  12.2(a) and (b) and Sec.  12.3(b)(3); page 218, Sec.  12.22(a)(1)
introductory text and (a)(2) introductory text; and page 221, Sec.
12.31(e), Sec.  12.33(a), and Sec.  12.34.

[FR Doc. 2017-04952 Filed 3-10-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1301-00-D


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 244 (Wednesday, December 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75255-75257]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30621]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[U.S. DOT Docket Number NHTSA-2011-0126]

Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping Requirements

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

ACTION: Request for public comment on proposed collection of
information.

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

SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from
the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit
public comment on proposed collections of information, including
extensions and reinstatement of previously approved collections.
    This document describes one collection of information for which
NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 19, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the docket number in
the heading of this document, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on
the electronic docket site by clicking on ``Help'' or ``FAQ.''
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Regardless of how you submit comments, you should mention the docket
number of this document.
    You may call the Docket Management Facility at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov, or the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kil-Jae Hong, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., W52-232, NPO-520, Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Hong's
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER> and email address is<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB
for approval, it must first publish a document in the Federal Register
providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise consult with members of
the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of
information. The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what must
be included in such a document. Under OMB's regulation (at 5 CFR
1320.8(d)),\1\ an agency must ask for public comment on the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2012-title5-vol3/pdf/CFR-2012-title5-vol3-sec1320-5.pdf (last accessed Dec. 11,
2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) how to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected;
    (iv) how to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g. permitting electronic
submission of responses.
    In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks for public
comments on the following proposed collection of information for which
the agency is seeking approval from OMB:
    Title: 49 CFR 575--Consumer Information Regulations Consumer
Education Program Qualitative Research.
    OMB Control Number: Not Assigned.
    Form Number: None.
    Affected Public: Passenger vehicle consumers and users.
    Requested Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from approval
date.

Abstract

    The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), enacted in
December 2007, included a requirement that the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) develop a consumer information and
education campaign to improve consumer understanding of automobile
performance with regard to fuel economy, Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions
and other pollutant emissions; of automobile use of alternative fuels;
and of thermal management technologies used on automobiles to save
fuel. In order to achieve the objectives of the consumer education
program and fulfill its statutory obligations, NHTSA proposes a multi-
phased research project to gather the data and apply analyses and
results from the project to develop the consumer information program
and education campaign.
    As NHTSA develops content and materials related to the consumer
information program, it is important to test these materials to ensure
they are effective at providing important information about fuel
economy, GHGs and other emissions and alternative fuels. Although
previous research provided the data necessary to inform draft
development of these materials, including relevant knowledge gaps among
consumers and topics that are most interesting and compelling, this new
research will be to identify any refinements needed prior to finalizing
the NPRM content and proposed campaign direction. The purpose of this
research is to ensure that NHTSA's communication efforts utilize
materials that are interesting, appealing and easy to comprehend.
Asking consumers to share their opinions about the concepts, design and
content will help NHTSA refine materials so that the campaign
effectively engages and educates consumers, thus fulfilling NHTSA's
statutory requirements.
    NHTSA is seeking to conduct qualitative focus group research to
guide the development and refinement of materials that will be used in
this consumer information program. Specifically, the objectives guiding
this research include the following:
    1. Understand consumer perceptions of existing information on fuel
economy, GHGs and other emissions, thermal management technologies and
alternative fuels.
    2. Determine the most effective and compelling messages that will
improve understanding about fuel economy, GHGs and other emissions,
thermal management technologies and alternative fuels.
    3. Test materials and content developed to assess consumer
comprehension and likelihood to encourage behavior change.
    The materials that NHTSA expects to test in this research include
the following:

 Key messages
 Interactive infographic blueprint
 YouTube driving video game user experience brief
 Fuel economy video storyboard and script
 Online banner advertisements (as animated GIFs)
    [cir] 5 previously tested that have been adjusted to meet current
messaging
    [cir] 5 new ads

    Specifically, NHTSA seeks to conduct two (2) focus groups each,
homogeneous by gender, in three (3) cities (six groups in total). In
order to obtain consumer feedback in different regions of the country,
we recommend conducting these groups in one city in each of the
following regions: Northeast, South or Midwest, and West. With
consideration to the cities previously used for this research we plan
to conduct these groups in the following metro areas:
     Philadelphia, PA (high-congestion Northeast market)
     Portland, OR (``green'' West Coast market)
     St. Louis, MO (general consumer Midwest market)

For the purposes of this study, the recommended screening criteria are
broad enough to include a cross-section of all vehicle drivers and
purchasers throughout the U.S. Potential subjects will be asked several
questions to determine their eligibility to participate in the focus
groups. Respondents will be screened based on the following criteria:
     Participants must be 18 years or older.
     Participants must currently possess a valid driver's
license.
     Participants must currently own or lease a vehicle.
     Participants must be the primary or a shared decision
maker for vehicle purchases in their household.
    Respondents in each city will be split into one of two groups: (1)
Females; and (2) Males. It is our experience that in mixed-gender focus
groups that cover technical or vehicle information, males will dominate
the conversation and the females in the room will defer to their
opinions. Splitting the groups in each city based on gender will allow
us to collect information and feedback from both genders to inform the
communications campaign.
    Each focus group will last approximately two hours, and will
include eight participants. Trends heard throughout various
conversations will inform the consumer education plan and will be
tested quantitatively

through additional research. Throughout these groups, there will be
opportunities to include quantitative aspects; however, strategic
recommendations will be based on an analysis of conversations that
explore whether or not consumers understand the fuel economy-related
content being communicated and whether or not the messages provide
consumers with the information they require and encourage them to seek
out additional relevant information.
    Estimated Annual Burden: 96 hours.
    Number of Respondents: 48.
    Comments are invited on: whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information on respondents.

Public Participation

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are filed correctly in the Docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments. Your comments must not be
more than 15 pages long (see 49 CFR 553.21). We established this limit
to encourage you to write your primary comments in a concise fashion.
However, you may attach necessary additional documents to your
comments. There is no limit on the length of the attachments.
    If you are submitting comments in hard copy, please submit two
copies of your comments, including the attachments, to DOT's Docket
Management at the address given under ADDRESSES.
    You may also submit your comments to the docket electronically by
logging onto http://www.regulations.gov. Click on ``Help'' at the top
of the screen to obtain instructions for filing the document
electronically.

How can I be sure that my comments were received?

    If you wish DOT's Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt
of your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the
envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket
Management will return the postcard by mail.

How do I submit confidential business information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given
above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you should
submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential
business information, to Docket Management at the address given above
under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing information claimed
to be confidential business information, you should include a cover
letter setting forth the information specified in our confidential
business information regulation (49 CFR part 512).

Will the agency consider late comments?

    We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives
before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated
above under DATES. To the extent possible, we also will consider
comments that Docket Management receives after that date. If Docket
Management receives a comment too late for us to consider it, we will
consider that comment as an informal suggestion for future rulemaking
action.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the
address given under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are indicated
above in the same location. You also may see the comments on the
Internet. To read the comments on the Internet, go to http://www.regulations.gov, and follow the instructions for accessing the
Docket.
    Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly,
we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.

Gregory A. Walter,
Senior Associate Administrator, Policy and Operations.
[FR Doc. 2012-30621 Filed 12-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: March 12, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 48)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 11734-11735]
[DOCID:fr12mr10-2]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 26

[Docket No. FAA-2005-21693; Amendment No. 26-4]
RIN 2120-AI32

Damage Tolerance Data for Repairs and Alterations

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is making minor
technical changes to a final rule published in the Federal Register on
December 12, 2007. That final rule required holders of design approvals
to make damage tolerance data for repairs and alterations to fatigue
critical airplane structure available to operators. After issuing the
final rule, the FAA determined that further changes were needed to
clarify the applicability of certain provisions and the compliance time
of another provision.

DATES: Effective Date: Effective on March 12, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions contact Greg
Schneider, Airframe and Cabin Safety Branch, ANM-115, Federal Aviation
Administration, 1601 Lind Ave., SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For legal questions contact Doug Anderson,
Office of the Chief Council, ANM-7, Federal Aviation Administration,
1601 Lind Ave., SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2166; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
published a final rule in the Federal Register on December 12, 2007 (72
FR 70486), which amended 14 CFR parts 26, 121, and 129. That final rule
requires holders of design approvals to make available to operators
damage tolerance (DT) data for repairs and alterations to fatigue
critical airplane structure. After issuing the final rule, the FAA
determined that minor technical changes are needed to clarify the
intent of and compliance with Sec.  26.43(e) and Sec.  26.45(b)(1) and
(e)(1).

Change to Sec.  26.43(e)

    The change to Sec.  26.43(e) clarifies that this section does not
apply to type certificate (TC) holders of pending or future type
certified airplane models, including any airplane model type certified
after January 11, 2008. This change is relieving to TC holders and does
not impact a TC holder's ability to comply with Sec.  26.43(e). The FAA
did not intend to require TC holders to develop repair evaluation
guidelines (REG) for pending or future type certified airplane models.
The purpose of the REG is to enable operators to obtain DT data for
existing repairs for which DT data has not already been provided.
Section 26.43(b), (c), and (d) already require all TC holders to
develop and make available to operators DT data for all future repairs
they develop that affect fatigue critical baseline structure.
Operators, therefore, will have the DT data for TC holder repairs
necessary to support their compliance with 14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2) of the
Aging Airplane Safety rule. For repairs developed by the operator or
third parties, operators are responsible for developing or obtaining
the necessary DT data to comply with the certification bases for these
airplanes; it would not be appropriate to impose this obligation on the
TC holder.

Change to Sec.  26.45(b)

    The change to Sec.  26.45(b)(1) clarifies that Sec.  26.45(b)(1)
applies to both existing and future alterations and corrects an
inconsistency with Sec.  26.45(b). This change does not require
additional work, since Sec.  26.45(b) already applies to existing and
future alterations.

Change to Sec.  26.45(e)(1)

    The change to Sec.  26.45(e)(1) provides an appropriate compliance
time for submitting a list of fatigue critical alteration structure for
alteration data approved on or after January 11, 2008. This change is
relieving and necessary to correct an oversight in the original
regulatory text, which inadvertently imposes a compliance time that
cannot be met for future alterations. For alteration data approved on
or after January 11, 2008, this change would require that the list of
fatigue critical structure be submitted before the alteration data is
approved.

Justification for Immediate Adoption

    Since this action is relieving to holders of type certificates and
clarifies the intent of the regulations, the FAA finds that notice and
public comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) is unnecessary. For the same
reason, the FAA finds good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for
making this rule effective upon publication.

Technical Amendment

    The technical amendment clarifies the applicability of Sec.
26.43(e) and the scope of Sec.  26.45(b)(1). This technical amendment
also adds to Sec.  26.45(e)(1) an appropriate compliance time for
submitting fatigue critical alteration structure for alteration data
approved on or after January 11, 2008.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 26

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Continued airworthiness.

0
Accordingly, Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 26
is amended as follows:

PART 26--CONTINUED AIRWORTHINESS AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS FOR
TRANSPORT CATEGORY AIRPLANES

0
1. The authority citation for part 26 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44704.

0
2. Amend Sec.  26.43 by revising paragraph (e) introductory text to
read as follows:

Sec.  26.43  Holders of and applicants for type certificates--Repairs.

* * * * *
    (e) Repair evaluation guidelines. Except for airplane models whose
type certificate is issued after January 11, 2008, holders of a type
certificate for each airplane model subject to this section must--
* * * * *

0
3. Amend Sec.  26.45 by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (e)(1) to read
as follows:

Sec.  26.45  Holders of type certificates--Alterations and repairs to
alterations.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Review alteration data and identify all alterations that affect
fatigue critical baseline structure identified under Sec.  26.43(b)(1);
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) The list of fatigue critical alteration structure identified
under paragraph (b)(3) of this section must be submitted--
    (i) No later than 360 days after January 11, 2008, for alteration
data approved before January 11, 2008.
    (ii) No later than 30 days after March 12, 2010 or before initial
approval of the alteration data, whichever occurs later, for alteration
data approved on or after January 11, 2008.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 9, 2010.
Julie A. Lynch,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2010-5470 Filed 3-11-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: March 12, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 47)]
[Notices]
[Page 10790-10791]
[DOCID:fr12mr09-114]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549.

Extension:
    Rule 489 and Form F-N, SEC File No. 270-361, OMB Control No.
3235-0411.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to
submit this existing collection of information to the Office of
Management and Budget for extension and approval:
    Rule 489 (17 CFR 230.489) under the Securities Act of 1933 (15
U.S.C. 77a et seq.) requires foreign banks and foreign insurance
companies and holding companies and finance subsidiaries of foreign
banks and foreign insurance companies that are exempted from the
definition of ``investment company'' by virtue of Rules 3a-1 (17 CFR
170.3a-1), 3a-5 (17 CFR 270.3a-5), and 3a-6 (17 CFR 270.3a-6) under the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.) to file Form
F-N (17 CFR 239.43), under the Securities Act of 1933 to appoint an
agent for service of process when making a public offering of
securities in the United States. Approximately 19 entities are required
by Rule 489 to file Form F-N, which is estimated to require an average
of one hour to complete. The estimated annual burden of complying with
the rule's filing requirement is approximately 24 hours, as some of the
entities submitted multiple filings.
    The estimates of average burden hours are made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.) and are not derived from a comprehensive or even representative
survey or study of the cost of Commission rules and forms.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of

information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Charles Boucher, Director/
CIO, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432
General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312; or send an e-mail to: PRA_
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: March 5, 2009.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-5298 Filed 3-11-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 18, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 180)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 47910-47911]
[DOCID:fr18se09-13]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2005-0463; FRL-8957-2]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; State of
Colorado; Revisions to the Denver Emergency Episode Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions to the Denver Emergency Episode Plan submitted by the State
of Colorado on September 16, 1997. EPA has determined that the Denver
Emergency Episode Plan revisions meet the requirements for the
prevention of air pollution emergency episodes with ambient
concentrations of air pollutants that may endanger public health and
welfare. In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this 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 non-
controversial SIP revision and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the preamble to the
direct final rule. If EPA receives no adverse comments, EPA will not
take further action on this proposed rule. If EPA receives adverse
comments, EPA will withdraw the direct final rule and it will not take
effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so
at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 19, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2005-0463, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> (please alert the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
     Mail: Callie Videtich, Director, Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.
     Hand Delivery: Callie Videtich, Director, Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only accepted
Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.

Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section
of this Federal Register for detailed instruction on how to submit
comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domenico Mastrangelo, Air Program,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the information provided in the Direct
Final

action of the same title which is located in the Rules and Regulations
section of this Federal Register.

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

    Dated: September 4, 2009.
Carol Rushin,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. E9-22281 Filed 9-17-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: May 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 94)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 27786-27788]
[DOCID:fr14my08-26]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2008-0181; FRL-8565-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Section 110(a)(1) 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and 2002
Base-Year Inventory for the Somerset County Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) submitted a
SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan that provides for
continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) for at least 10 years after the April 30, 2004
designations, as well as a 2002 base-year inventory for the Somerset
County Area. EPA is proposing approval of the maintenance plan and the
2002 base-year inventory in accordance with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 13, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2008-0181 by one of the following methods:
    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2008-0181, Cristina Fernandez, Chief, Air
Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2008-0181. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the
State submittal are available at Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468,
400 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Becoat,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 17, 2007, PADEP formally

submitted for approval, under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, a SIP
revision for the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan and the 2002 base-year
inventory for the Somerset County Area.

I. Background

    Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires that states submit to EPA
plans to maintain the NAAQS promulgated by EPA. EPA interprets this
provision to require that areas that were maintenance areas for the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS, but attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, submit a
plan to demonstrate the continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
    On May 20, 2005, EPA issued guidance that applies to areas that are
designated unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. The
purpose of this guidance is to address the maintenance requirements in
section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, and to assist the states in the
development of a SIP. The components from EPA's guidance include: (1)
An attainment emissions inventory, which is based on actual ``typical
summer day'' emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) for a 10-year maintenance period, from
a base-year chosen by the state; (2) a maintenance demonstration, which
demonstrates how the area will remain in compliance with the 8-hour
ozone standard for a period of 10 years following the effective date of
designation unclassifiable/attainment (June 15, 2004); (3) an ambient
air monitoring network, which will be in continuous operation in
accordance with 40 CFR Part 58 to verify maintenance of the 8-hour
ozone standard; (4) a contingency plan, that will ensure that in the
event of a violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, measures will be
implemented as promptly as possible; (5) a verification of continued
attainment, indicating how the state intends on tracking the progress
of the maintenance plan.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has requested approval of its 8-
hour ozone maintenance plan and 2002 base-year inventory for the
Somerset County Area. The PADEP 8-hour ozone maintenance plan addresses
the five components of EPA's May 20, 2005 guidance, which pertains to
the maintenance requirements in section 110(a)(1) of the CAA.
    Attainment Emission Inventory: An attainment emissions inventory
includes emissions during the time period associated with the
monitoring data showing attainment. PADEP has provided an emissions
inventory for VOCs and NOX, using 2002 as the base-year from
which to project emissions. The 2002 inventory is consistent with EPA
guidance, is based on actual ``typical summer day'' emissions of VOCs
and NOX, and consists of a list of sources and their
associated emissions. PADEP prepared comprehensive VOCs and
NOX emissions inventories for the Somerset County Area. In
the maintenance plan, PADEP included information on the man-made
sources of ozone precursors, VOCs and NOX (e.g.,
``stationary sources,'' ``stationary area sources,'' ``highway
vehicles,'' and ``nonroad sources'').
    Pennsylvania projected emissions for beyond 10 years from the
effective date of the April 30, 2004 designations for the 8-hour ozone
standard. PADEP has developed an emissions inventory for ozone
precursors for the year 2002, 2009, and 2018. Tables 1 and 2 show the
VOCs and NOX emissions reduction summary for 2002, 2009, and
2018.

          Table 1.--VOC Emissions Summary: 2002, 2009 and 2018
                          [Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Major source category            2002         2009         2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary Point Sources.........         0.21         0.18         0.24
Stationary Area Sources..........         5.63         5.09         5.24
Highway Vehicles.................         6.10         3.11         1.81
Nonroad Sources..................         3.05         3.04         2.29
                                  --------------------------------------
    Total........................        14.99        11.42         9.58
------------------------------------------------------------------------

          Table 2.--NOX Emissions Summary: 2002, 2009 and 2018
                          [Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Major source category            2002         2009         2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary Point Sources.........         0.62         0.66         0.74
Stationary Area Sources..........         0.54         0.57         0.57
Highway Vehicles.................        15.44         8.15         3.14
Nonroad Sources..................         5.39         4.22         3.25
                                  --------------------------------------
    Total........................        21.99        13.60         7.70
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA believes Pennsylvania has demonstrated that the VOCs and
NOX emissions in the Somerset County Area will improve due
to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIP, federal measures, and other state-adopted
measures.
    Maintenance demonstration: As Table 1 and 2 indicate, the Somerset
County Attainment Area plan shows maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
by demonstrating that future emissions of VOCs and NOX
remain at or below the 2002 base-year emissions levels through the year
2018.
    Based upon the comparison of the projected emissions and the 2002
base-year inventory emissions, along federal and state measures, EPA
concludes that PADEP successfully demonstrates that the 8-hour ozone
standard will be maintained in the Somerset County Area. Further
details of Somerset County Attainment Area's 8-hour ozone maintenance
demonstration can be found in a Technical Support Document (TSD)
prepared for this rulemaking.
    Ambient Air Quality Monitoring: With regard to the ambient air
monitoring component of the maintenance plan, Pennsylvania commits to
continue operating its current air quality

monitoring stations in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, to verify the
attainment status of the area, with no reductions in the number of
sites from those in the existing network unless pre-approved by EPA.
    Contingency Plan: Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires that the
state develop a contingency plan which will ensure that any violation
of a NAAQS is promptly corrected. The purpose of the contingency plan
is to adopt measures, outlined in the maintenance plan, in order to
assure continued attainment in the event of a violation of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. The maintenance plan should identify the events that would
``trigger'' the adoption and implementation of a contingency
measure(s), the contingency measure(s) that would be adopted and
implemented, and the schedule indicating the time frame by which the
state would adopt and implement the measure(s).
    Since the Somerset County Area does not have a monitor, contingency
measures will be considered if for two consecutive years the fourth
highest 8-hour ozone concentrations at the design monitor for the
Cambria County Area are above 84 parts per billion (ppb). If this
trigger point occurs, PADEP will evaluate whether additional local
emission control measures should be implemented in Somerset County in
order to prevent a violation of the air quality standard. PADEP will
analyze the conditions leading to the excessive ozone levels and
evaluate what measures might be most effective in correcting the
excessive ozone levels. PADEP will also analyze the potential emissions
effect of federal, state, and local measures that have been adopted but
not yet implemented at the time the excessive ozone levels occurred.
PADEP will then begin the process of implementing the contingency
measures outlined in their maintenance plan.
    Verification of continued attainment: PADEP will track the
attainment status of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for Somerset County by
reviewing air quality at the design monitor for the Cambria County Area
and emissions data during the maintenance period. An annual evaluation
of vehicle miles traveled and emissions reported from stationary
sources will be performed and compared to the assumptions about the
factors used in the maintenance plan. PADEP will also evaluate the
periodic (every three years) emission inventories prepared under EPA's
Consolidated Emission Reporting Regulation (40 CFR part 51, subpart A)
for any unanticipated increases. Based on these evaluations, PADEP will
consider whether any further emission control measures should be
implemented.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the maintenance plan and the 2002 base-
year inventory for the Somerset County Area, submitted on December 17,
2007, as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA is proposing to approve
the maintenance plan and 2002 base-year inventory for the Somerset
County Area because it meets the requirements of section 110(a)(1) of
the CAA. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in
this document. These comments will be considered before taking final
action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed rule to approve the maintenance plan and
the 2002 base-year inventory for the Somerset County Area in the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.

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

    Dated: May 1, 2008.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III. 2 3 11
[FR Doc. E8-10813 Filed 5-13-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 208 (Thursday, October 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66709-66710]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27831]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP12-5-000]

Trunkline Gas Company, LLC, Sea Robin Pipeline Company, LLC;
Notice of Application

    Take notice that on October 7, 2011, Trunkline Gas Company, LLC
(Trunkline) and Sea Robin Pipeline Company, LLC (Sea Robin), together
referred to as Applicants, both located at 5444 Westheimer Road,
Houston, Texas 77056-5306, filed jointly in Docket No. CP12-5-000 an
application, pursuant to sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act
(NGA), for permission and approval for Trunkline to abandon by sale to
Sea Robin and for Sea Robin to acquire certain natural gas facilities
located offshore Louisiana and Texas in the Gulf of Mexico and onshore
in the State of Louisiana, all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection.
    Specifically, Trunkline's facilities to be transferred to Sea Robin
include: (1) Facilities extending from Vermilion Block 23 offshore
Louisiana to Trunkline's onshore Kaplan Compressor Station in Vermilion
Parish, Louisiana (Vermilion System); (2) facilities extending from
South Marsh Island Block 268, Ship Shoal Block 274, Ewing Bank Block
826 and Grand Isle Block 82 offshore Louisiana to Trunkline's onshore
Patterson Compressor Station in St. Mary Parish, Louisiana (Terrebonne
System); and (3) Trunkline's 33.33 percent ownership interest in non-
contiguous facilities located in Brazos Area Block A-47 offshore Texas
(Brazos A-47 System). Upon completion of the transfer, Trunkline will
no longer have any offshore facilities. Applicants also propose changes
to their tariffs to reflect the transfer of the facilities and
commencement of service on those facilities under Sea Robin's tariff.
    Any questions regarding the application should be directed to
Stephen T. Veatch, Sr., Director, Certificates and Tariffs, Trunkline
Gas Company, LLC, P.O. Box 4967, Houston, Texas 77210-4967, or by
calling<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

    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 an original and 7 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.
    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 7 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 email notification when a document is added to a subscribed
docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: November 10, 2011.

    Dated: October 20, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-27831 Filed 10-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 84 (Monday, May 4, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20519-20522]
[FR Doc No: E9-10172]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59836; File No. SR-FINRA-2009-011]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment
No. 1 Thereto To Amend the Panel Composition Rules of the Code of
Arbitration Procedure for Industry Disputes

April 28, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') (f/k/a
National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (``NASD'')) filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') on
March 4, 2009 the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and
III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by FINRA. On
April 7, 2009, FINRA filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change.\3\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Amendment No. 1 replaces and supersedes the initial filing
in its entirety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA is proposing to amend the Code of Arbitration Procedure for
Industry Disputes (``Industry Code'') to change the criteria for
determining the panel composition when the claim involves an associated
person in industry disputes.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA, 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, FINRA 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 these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. FINRA has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A,
B,

and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    Currently, Rule 13402(a) of the Industry Code requires an all non-
public panel for disputes between members, and for employment disputes
between or among members and associated persons that relate exclusively
to employment contracts, promissory notes, or receipt of
commissions.\4\ In all other disputes between or among members and
associated persons, Rule 13402(b) requires a majority public panel,
where one arbitrator would be a non-public arbitrator and two would be
public arbitrators.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ If the panel consists of one arbitrator, the arbitrator will
be a non-public arbitrator selected from the non-public chairperson
roster described in Rule 13400(c). See Rule 13402(a).
    \5\ If the panel consists of one arbitrator, the arbitrator will
be a public arbitrator selected from the chairperson roster
described in Rule 12400(c) of the Code of Arbitration Procedure for
Customer Disputes (``Customer Code''). See Rule 13402(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA is proposing to amend the Industry Code to change the
criteria for determining panel composition when the claim involves an
associated person in industry disputes.\6\ Specifically, FINRA is
proposing to amend Rule 13402 and related rules of the Industry Code
to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The proposed changes discussed in this rule filing will not
apply to claims filed under the Customer Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Require that the parties receive a majority public panel
for all industry disputes involving associated persons (excluding
disputes involving statutory employment discrimination claims which
require a specialized all public panel); \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The proposal would not apply to disputes involving a claim
of statutory employment discrimination. See Rule 13802.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Clarify that in disputes involving only members, parties
will receive an all non-public panel; and
     Provide that if a party amends its pleadings to add an
associated person to a previously all member case, parties will receive
a majority public panel.

Thus, cases involving only members would have an all non-public panel;
cases involving a member and an associated person (excluding cases
involving a claim for statutory discrimination) would have a majority
public panel; and cases involving an associated person with a statutory
discrimination claim would have a specialized all public panel.\8\
Moreover, if a member amends its pleadings to add an associated person,
the case would receive a majority public panel, and the rules that
apply to cases between associated persons and members would govern list
selection and the administration of the arbitration proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Rule 13802(c) (panel composition rule for statutory
employment discrimination claims).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Employment Disputes Involving Associated Persons
    Currently, in employment disputes between or among members and
associated persons, FINRA requires that the panel consist of all non-
public arbitrators in cases that arise out of the employment or
termination of employment of an associated person, and that relate
exclusively to (1) Employment contracts, (2) promissory notes, or (3)
receipt of commissions. However, if a party adds a claim that does not
meet these criteria, the parties receive a majority public panel.
    FINRA is concerned that parties may be manipulating the rules to
secure what they hope will be a favorable panel, which, in many cases,
they believe to be a majority public panel. For example, if a party
files a claim in which the sole cause of action involves an issue of
compensation, FINRA requires parties to select an all non-public panel.
However, if a party adds a claim that falls outside of the three causes
of action described in the preceding paragraph (e.g., adds a cause of
action involving a tort), then the parties receive a majority public
panel instead.
    FINRA also finds Rule 13402(a) cumbersome to implement. Because the
three causes of action under the rule are the only exceptions to the
requirement for a majority public panel in employment cases, the
parties will receive a majority public panel if there is any ambiguity
concerning whether a claim falls outside of the three exceptions. The
lack of an objective standard for determining panel composition,
therefore, makes the rule difficult to apply and often requires Dispute
Resolution staff (``staff'') to interpret the parties' pleadings to
determine the appropriate panel composition. Underscoring this concern,
staff regularly receives inquiries from parties questioning whether
their panel composition is proper under Rule 13402.
    FINRA is proposing, therefore, to amend Rule 13402 of the Industry
Code to clarify that for all employment disputes between or among
members and associated persons (except for statutory employment
discrimination cases), the parties must select a majority public
panel.\9\ Rule 13402(a) would be amended to delete the title of the
rule, which contains the exceptions to the majority public panel
requirement, and replace it with a concise description, which clarifies
that Rule 13402(a) would apply to disputes involving only members. Rule
13402(b) would be amended to modify the title of the rule to clarify
that for all industry disputes involving associated persons (excluding
disputes involving statutory employment discrimination claims), the
parties would receive a majority public panel. FINRA is also proposing
to make similar title changes to Rules 13403(a) and 13403(b), which
govern generating and sending lists to parties, and to Rules 13406(a)
and 13406(b), which govern appointment of arbitrators and discretion to
appoint arbitrators not on the list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The proposed change would be consistent with the rules and
procedures of the former New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'')
arbitration forum. In the NYSE arbitration forum, cases involving
associated persons received a majority public panel because the
rules classified associated persons as non-members, and non-members
received a majority public panel. See NYSE Rule 607(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes the proposed amendments would establish an objective
standard for determining panel composition and ensure that panel
composition is determined by the types of parties involved, and not by
the types of claims filed (other than claims for employment
discrimination).
Employment Disputes Involving Only Members
    FINRA is proposing to amend Rule 13402(a) to clarify that, in
disputes involving only members, the parties will receive an all non-
public panel. FINRA notes that the proposed amendment to Rule 13402(a)
is consistent with the current rule and its intent, which is that
disputes involving only members should receive an all non-public panel.
FINRA believes that simplifying the rule, by amending the title as
described above, will make the rule easier to apply for staff and
easier to understand for users of the forum.
Amendments to Pleadings That Add an Associated Person
    Occasionally, in a case that began with an all non-public
arbitrator panel, a party will amend its pleadings in such a way that a
majority public panel would be required. For example, this might occur
when a party added a tort claim to prior claims that fit within the
three exceptions to the majority public

panel requirement under Rule 13402(a). Under the proposed amendments,
this change in panel composition would occur solely in disputes
involving only members in which an associated person is later added.
Thus, FINRA is proposing to add a provision to Rule 13402(a) to address
amended pleadings that add an associated person as a party.
    The proposed rule change would mean that if a member (in a dispute
involving only members) amends a pleading to add a party who is an
associated person, the parties will receive a majority public panel. If
lists of potential arbitrators have not been sent to parties, the
Neutral List Selection System (NLSS) would generate three lists as
outlined in Rule 13403(b)(2) of the Industry Code. Specifically, FINRA
would send a public chairperson list, a public arbitrator list, and a
non-public arbitrator list. If the panel consists of one
arbitrator,\10\ NLSS would generate a public chairperson list, and
FINRA would send this list only to the parties.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In a dispute between members, if the panel consists of one
arbitrator, the arbitrator will be selected from FINRA's non-public
chairperson arbitrator roster. See Rule 13402(a).
    \11\ See Rule 13403(b)(1). FINRA has raised the amount in
controversy that will be heard by a single chair-qualified
arbitrator to $100,000. The rule became effective on March 30,
2009.See Securities Exchange Release No. 59340 (February 2, 2009),
74 FR 6335 (February 6, 2009) (File No. FINRA-2008-047); see also
Regulatory Notice 09-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the lists have been sent to parties but are not yet due, FINRA
would send two new lists to the parties: a public chairperson list and
a public arbitrator list as outlined in Rule 13403(b)(2).\12\ The
parties would keep the non-public chairperson list provided to them as
described in Rule 13403(a), and would select the non-public arbitrator
from this list. The arbitrator selected from the public chairperson
list would be the chairperson of the panel. If the panel consists of
one arbitrator, FINRA would send only a new public chairperson list to
the parties.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Pursuant to Rule 13407(a), FINRA will send the list of non-
public arbitrators to the new party, with employment history for the
past 10 years and other background information for each arbitrator
listed. The newly added party may rank and strike arbitrators in
accordance with Rule 13404.
    \13\ See supra note 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the ranked lists are due, then the parties may not amend a
pleading to add a new party until a panel has been selected and the
panel grants a motion to add the party.\14\ If the panel grants the
motion to add an associated person, FINRA will retain the non-public
chairperson from the panel, and remove the remaining non-public
arbitrators.\15\ The parties would select two public arbitrators from
new lists that FINRA would send to them in the same manner as if the
ranked lists are not yet due. The arbitrator selected from the public
chairperson list would be the chairperson of the panel. If the panel
consists of one arbitrator and the arbitrator grants a motion to add an
associated person, the arbitrator would be replaced with a public
chair-qualified arbitrator that the parties select from a new public
chairperson list that NLSS would generate.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Rule 13309(c) of the Industry Code.
    \15\ Pursuant to Rule 13407(b), the newly added party may not
strike the non-public arbitrator but may challenge the arbitrator
for cause in accordance with Rule 13410.
    \16\ See supra note 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes that these procedures would be consistent with the
intent of the proposal to require that a majority public panel be
selected if a dispute involves associated persons, and would clarify
that amending a pleading to add an associated person would require a
change to the panel composition.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\17\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. The proposed rule change is consistent with FINRA's
statutory obligations under the Act to protect the public interest by
minimizing the parties' ability to manipulate the panel composition
rules by filing certain types of claims in industry cases. Moreover,
FINRA believes that the proposed rule change will protect the public
interest by simplifying the criteria for panel composition in industry
disputes, establishing an objective standard for determining panel
composition, and ensuring that panel composition is determined by the
types of parties involved, and not by the types of claims filed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received by FINRA.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) by order approve such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2009-011 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2009-011. 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 Room. 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 the File Number SR-FINRA-2009-011 and
should be submitted on or before May 26, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-10172 Filed 5-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: July 29, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 144)]
[Notices]
[Page 37699-37700]
[DOCID:fr29jy09-57]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP09-445-000]

Riviera Drilling & Exploration Company, Complainant, v. SG
Interests I, Ltd and Gunnison Energy Corporation, Respondents; Notice
of Complaint

July 21, 2009.
    Take notice that on July 16, 2009, Riviera Drilling & Exploration
Company (Complainant) filed a formal complaint against SG Interests I,
Ltd and Gunnison Energy Corporation (Respondents) under section 7 of
the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Rule 206 of the Commission's Rule of
Practice and Procedure alleging that Respondents' proposed Bull
Mountain Pipeline Project is subject to the Commission's NGA
jurisdiction and requires that Respondents seek Commission approval
under Parts 157 and 284 of the Commission's regulations prior to
beginning construction.
    The Complainant certifies that copies of the complaint were served
on the contacts for SG Interests I, Ltd and Gunnison Energy
Corporation.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 10, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-17984 Filed 7-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


 TABLE 2 Annual Agency Burden and Cost NSPS for Portland Cement Plants ( 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart F)

REPORTING/ RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENT EPA Hours/

Occurence ( A) Occurences/

Plant/ Year ( B) Total Hours/ Year ( C) Plants/ Year ( D) Technical Hours/ Yr ( E) Management Hours/ Yr ( F)

( E x .05) Clerical Hours/ Yr ( G)

( E x .10) Total Hours ( H) Total Cost /

Year ( I)

INITIAL PERFORMANCE TESTS New or Modified Facility 24 1 24 2 48 2.40 4.80 55.20 $ 2,183 REPEAT PERFORMANCE TEST New or Modificed Facility 24 0.2 4.8 2 9.6 0.48 0.96 11.04 $ 437 REPORT REVIEW New or Modified Facility Notification of Construction/ Reconstruction 2 1 2 2 4 0.20 0.40 4.60 $ 182 Notification of Actual Startup 0.5 1 0.5 2 1 0.05 0.10 1.15 $ 45 Notification fo Physical and Operational Change 2 1 2 2 4 0.20 0.40 4.60 $ 182 Notification of Demonstration of CMS 0.5 1 0.5 2 1 0.05 0.10 1.15 $ 45 Notification of Initial Performance Test 0.5 1.2 0.6 2 1.2 0.06 0.12 1.38 $ 55 Review Test Results 8 1.2 9.6 2 19.2 0.96 1.92 22.08 $ 873 Review of Semiannual Reports 4 2 8 118 944 47.20 94.40 1,085.60 $ 42,941 TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN 1,187 $ 46,943 ( Rounded) ( Rounded)