[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 14, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52664-52667]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24540]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2017-0266; FRL-9970-64-Region 1]

Air Plan Approval; NH; Approval of Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements and Single Source Order

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of New
Hampshire. The revisions establish recordkeeping and reporting
obligations for sources of air pollution. Additionally, we are
approving an order limiting emissions of volatile organic compounds
from a facility in the State. This action is being taken in accordance
with the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective January 16, 2018, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by December 14, 2017. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2017-0266 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob McConnell, Environmental Engineer,
Air Quality Planning Unit, Air Programs Branch (Mail Code OEP05-02),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, 5 Post Office Square,
Suite 100, Boston, Massachusetts 02109-3912;<PHONE_NUMBER>;
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background and Purpose
II. Description and Evaluation of State's Submittals
    a. Env-A 900: Owner or Operator Recordkeeping and Reporting
Obligations
    b. VOC Order for Sturm Ruger & Company
III. Final Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Purpose

    On February 10, 2017, NH DES submitted a single source order
limiting emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from Sturm
Ruger & Company as a SIP revision request. On May 11, 2017, NH DES
submitted a state regulation identified as Env-A 900, Owner or Operator
Recordkeeping and Reporting Obligations, as a SIP revision request. A
description of these submittals and our evaluation of them appears
below in Section II of this preamble. Please note that if EPA receives
adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of these rules
or on the VOC Order, and if that provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule or Order, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule or Order that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

II. Description and Evaluation of State's Submittals

a. Env-A 900: Owner or Operator Recordkeeping and Reporting
Obligations.

    On May 11, 2017, NH DES submitted a state regulation identified as
Env-A 900, Owner or Operator Recordkeeping and Reporting Obligations,
as a SIP revision request. New Hampshire provided additional material
supporting this request to EPA by letter dated September 14, 2017. EPA
previously approved a prior version of Env-A 900 within a direct final
rule published on November 5, 2012. 77 FR 66388. Since

then, the following changes have been made to Env-A 900.
    New Hampshire amended Env-A 907.01 by including specific language
outlining the types of general information that should be reported,
such as facility name, physical location, mailing address, and
operating time covered by the report. The State also added a
requirement that the source indicate whether the report is a revision
to a previously submitted report.
    New Hampshire revised sections Env-A 907.02 and .03 in a number of
ways affecting non-SIP pollutants, such as hazardous air pollutants and
carbon dioxide, and so only portions of the revisions are being
incorporated into the New Hampshire SIP. New Hampshire clarified which
portions of Env-A 900 are to be made part of the SIP within their
September 14, 2017 correspondence to EPA. Of relevance to criteria
pollutant reporting which is subject to SIP approval, within revised
Env-A 907.02, the State clarified the definition of ``emissions unit,''
and also provided clarification of which sources are subject to the
annual reporting requirement, and which sources are exempt. The State
also specifies which pollutant emissions must be reported, and lists
what information must be reported. The provisions of revised Env-A
907.03 now address annual compliance certifications for Title V
permittees, which is not required to be part of the SIP and was
therefore withdrawn by New Hampshire's September 14, 2017 letter
mentioned above.
    New Hampshire made a minor revision to Env-A 907.04 which
identifies recordkeeping requirements for unclassifiable processes, and
made a minor change to the form required for reporting by certain
coating and printing facilities.
    We have reviewed New Hampshire's changes to Env-A 900, Owner or
Operator Recordkeeping and Reporting Obligations, and determined that
they are acceptable. Additionally, the updated rule meets the anti-
backsliding requirements of section 110(l) of the CAA in that it will
not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress, or with any other applicable requirement
of the CAA. The regulation we are approving is not less stringent that
the version of the rule we previously approved. Therefore, we are
approving the updated Env-A 900 regulation, with the exception of the
portions that were withdrawn, into the New Hampshire SIP.

b. VOC Order for Sturm Ruger & Company

    On February 10, 2017, New Hampshire submitted a revised order
establishing reasonably available control technology (RACT) for control
of VOCs for Sturm Ruger & Company located in Newport, NH. EPA most
recently approved a previous version of RACT for this facility on
August 21, 2014. 79 FR 49458. Subsequently, the company added 13
dewaxing pre-heat kilns, the exhaust from which is controlled by
afterburners that achieve a minimum of 99% destruction of VOCs. The
revised order provides operational requirements for the afterburners,
including a required minimum operating temperature, a calibration
schedule for the thermocouple and temperature controller on the
afterburners, and recordkeeping requirements.
    Other changes made to the order reflect recent changes made to New
Hampshire's VOC regulations. For example, the emission rate for
rustproofing operations provided in section 3.b of the order was
lowered from 3.5 to 2.8 lbs VOC/gallon of coating in accordance with
Env-A 1212.04(a). Additionally, the limits for camouflage coatings in
section 3.d of the order were also lowered. Our review of the updated
order indicates that the proposed changes are acceptable. Additionally,
the updated order meets the requirements of section 110(l) of the CAA
in that it will not interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or with any
other applicable requirement of the CAA. Therefore, we are approving
the updated order into the New Hampshire SIP.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving portions of New Hampshire's revised regulation
Env-A 900, Owner or Operator Recordkeeping and Reporting Obligations,
and RACT Order ARD-03-001 issued to Sturm Ruger & Company, as revisions
to the New Hampshire SIP.
    The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates
no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
relevant adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective January
16, 2018 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant
adverse comments by December 14, 2017.
    If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a notice
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not
institute a second comment period on the proposed rule. All parties
interested in commenting on the proposed rule should do so at this
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this
rule will be effective on January 16, 2018 and no further action will
be taken on the proposed rule. 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.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference portions of
New Hampshire regulation Env-A 900, Owner or Operator Recordkeeping and
Reporting Obligations, and RACT Order ARD-03-001, which are described
in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. The EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov, and/or at the EPA Region 1 Office (please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).
    Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion
in the State implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference
by EPA into that plan, are fully Federally enforceable under sections
110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking
of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the
Director of the Federal Register in the next update to the SIP
compilation.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely

approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     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 Clean Air Act; 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, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 16, 2018. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed
rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so
that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in
the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: October 26, 2017.
Deborah A. Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
    Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart EE--New Hampshire

0
2. In Sec.  52.1520:
0
a. In paragraph (c), amend the table by revising the entry ``Env-A
900'': And
0
b. In paragraph (d), amend the table by:
0
i. Removing two entries ``Sturm, Ruger & Company, ARD-03-001'' and
``Sturm, Ruger & Company, Order No. ARD-03-001''; and
0
ii. Adding an entry to the end of the table entitled ``Sturm Ruger &
Company''.
    The revision and addition read as follows:

Sec.  52.1520  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                     EPA-Approved New Hampshire Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
          State citation              Title/subject        effective     EPA approval  date      Explanations
                                                             date               \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Env-A 900........................  Owner or Operator         7/18/2015  11/14/2017,[Insert   The following
                                    Obligations.                         Federal Register     sections withdrawn
                                                                         citation].           by state and not
                                                                                part of approved
                                                                                SIP: Env-A
                                                                                907.01(d) and (e);
                                                                                907.02(a)(1),
                                                                                (d)(1) a. and c.,
                                                                                (2), and (e);
                                                                                907.03; 911.04(b)
                                                                                and (c); 911.05.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In order to determine the EPA effective date for a specific provision listed in this table, consult the
  Federal Register notice cited in this column for the particular provision.

    (d) EPA-approved State Source specific requirements.

                             EPA-Approved New Hampshire Source Specific Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State                                Additional
          Name of source                Permit No.         effective     EPA approval  date   explanations/Sec.
                                                             date               \2\           52.1535  citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Sturm Ruger & Company............  ARD-03-001.........        2/2/2017  11/14/17, [Insert    VOC RACT Order.
                                                                         Federal Register
                                                                         citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In order to determine the EPA effective date for a specific provision listed in this table, consult the
  Federal Register notice cited in this column for the particular provision.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-24540 Filed 11-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 84 (Monday, May 2, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 24546]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10772]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Thursday, May 5,
2011 at 1 p.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the
scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Walter, as duty officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday,
May 5, 2011 will be:

    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions; institution
and settlement of administrative proceedings; a litigation matter;
and other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 28, 2011.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-10772 Filed 4-28-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 61 (Wednesday, March 30, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17749-17751]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07100]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77441; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2016-44]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
of Proposed Rule Change Amending NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.31P(h) To
Add a New Discretionary Pegged Order

March 24, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on March 11, 2016, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') 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 self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.31P(h)
(Orders and Modifiers) to add a new Discretionary Pegged Order. The
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Arca Equites Rule 7.31P(h)
(Orders and Modifiers) (``Rule 7.31P'') to add a new Discretionary
Pegged Order. The proposed new order is based on the Discretionary Peg
Order as proposed by Investors' Exchange, LLC (``IEX'') in its Form 1
Application seeking registration as a national securities exchange
under Section 6 of the Act (``IEX Form 1 Application'').\4\ The
Exchange proposes to adopt the Discretionary Pegged Order for its
Pillar trading platform only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See proposed IEX Rules 11.190(a)(10) and 11.190(g) in
Exhibit B to IEX's Form 1 Application and Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 75925 (Sept. 15, 2015), 80 FR 57261 (Sept. 22, 2015)
(File No. 10-222).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed, Rule 7.31P(h)(3) would provide that a Discretionary
Pegged Order would be a Pegged Order \5\ to buy (sell) that upon entry
to the NYSE Arca Marketplace \6\ would be assigned a working price \7\
equal to the lower (higher) of the midpoint of the PBBO \8\ (``Midpoint
Price'') or the limit price of the order. Any untraded shares of such
order would be assigned a working price equal to the lower (higher) of
the PBB (PBO) or the order's limit price and would automatically be
adjusted in response to changes to the PBB (PBO) for buy (sell) orders
up (down) to the order's limit price. In order to trade with contra-
side orders on the NYSE Arca Book, a Discretionary Pegged Order to buy
(sell) would exercise the least amount of price discretion necessary
from its working price to its discretionary price (defined as the lower
(higher) of the Midpoint Price or the Discretionary Pegged Order's
limit price), except during periods of quote instability, as defined in
proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D), as described in greater detail below.
This proposed rule text is based on proposed IEX Rule 11.190(a)(10),
but with non-substantive differences to use Pillar terminology to
describe how the Discretionary Pegged Order would operate on the
Exchange. Unlike IEX, the Exchange proposes to price a Discretionary
Pegged Order based on the PBBO rather than the NBBO, which is the
reference price that the Exchange uses for its Pegged Orders under Rule
7.31P(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A ``Pegged Order'' is defined in Rule 7.31P(h) as a Limit
Order that does not route with a working price that is pegged to a
dynamic reference price. If the designated reference price is higher
(lower) than the limit price of a Pegged Order to buy (sell), the
working price will be the limit price of the order.
    \6\ The term ``NYSE Arca Marketplace'' is defined in Rule 1.1(e)
as the electronic securities communications and trading facility
designated by the Board of Directors through which orders of Users
are consolidated for execution and/or display.
    \7\ The term ``working price'' is defined in Rule 7.36P(a)(3) as
the price at which an order is eligible to trade at any given time,
which may be different from the limit price or display price of the
order. The term ``limit price'' is defined in Rule 7.36P(a)(2) as
the highest (lowest) specified price at which a Limit Order to buy
(sell) is eligible to trade.
    \8\ The term ``PBBO'' is defined in Rule 1.1(dd) as the highest
Protected Bid and the lowest Protected Offer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(A) would provide that Discretionary
Pegged Orders would not be displayed, must be designated Day, and would
be eligible to be designated for the Core Trading Session only.
Accordingly, the proposed rule would provide that Discretionary Pegged
Orders that include a designation for the Early Trading Session or Late
Trading Session would be rejected. This proposed rule text is based on
proposed IEX Rules 11.190(a)(10)(F) (a Discretionary Peg Order is
eligible to trade only during IEX's Regular Market Session) and
11.190(a)(10)(H) (a Discretionary Peg Order is not eligible to
display). Unlike IEX, the Exchange proposes that a Discretionary Pegged
Order be Day time-in-force and not include any other time-in-force
instruction. The descriptions set forth in proposed IEX Rule
11.190(a)(10)(A), (C), and (E) are set forth in current Rule 7.31P(h),
which defines Pegged Orders as a Limit Order that does not route.
Therefore, the Exchange proposes not to specify these requirements
separately for the proposed Discretionary Pegged Order. Unlike IEX's
proposed Discretionary Peg Order, the Exchange's proposed Discretionary
Pegged Order would have to include a limit price.
    Proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(B) would provide that when exercising
discretion, Discretionary Pegged Orders would maintain their time
priority at their working price as Priority 3--Non-Display Orders and
would be prioritized behind Priority 3--Non-Display Orders with a
working price equal to the discretionary price of a Discretionary
Pegged Order at the time of execution. If multiple Discretionary Pegged
Orders are exercising price discretion during the same book processing
action, they would maintain their relative time priority at the
discretionary price. This proposed rule text is based on the last two
full sentences of proposed IEX Rule 11.190(a)(10), with non-substantive
differences to use Pillar terminology to describe the relative ranking
and priority of Discretionary Pegged Orders.

    Proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(C) would provide that a Discretionary
Pegged Order would be eligible to exercise price discretion to its
discretionary price, except during periods of quote instability, as
specified in proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D). Proposed Rule
7.31P(h)(3)(C)(i) would provide that if the Corporation \9\ determines
the PBB for a particular security to be an unstable quote in accordance
with proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D), it would restrict buy Discretionary
Pegged Orders in that security from exercising price discretion to
trade against interest above the PBB. Proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(C)(ii)
would provide that if the Corporation determines the PBO for a
particular security to be an unstable quote in accordance with proposed
Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D), it would restrict sell Discretionary Pegged Orders
in that security from exercising price discretion to trade against
interest below the PBO. This rule text is based on proposed IEX Rule
11.190(a)(10)(K) with non-substantive differences to refer to the
Corporation instead of the ``System'' and to measure the PBBO rather
than the NBBO for quote instability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The term ``Corporation'' is defined in Rule 1.1(k) to mean
NYSE Arca Equities, as described in NYSE Arca Equities' Certificate
of Incorporation and Bylaws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D) would set forth how the Exchange would
determine quote stability, i.e., crumbling quote, of the PBBO. This
proposed rule text is based on proposed IEX Rule 11.190(g) with non-
substantive differences to use the term ``Corporation'' instead of
``System,'' and as described above, to measure the stability of the
PBBO rather than the NBBO. As proposed, when the Corporation determines
a quote, either the PBB or the PBO, is unstable, the determination
would remain in effect at that price level for ten (10) milliseconds.
As further proposed, the Corporation would only treat one side of the
PBBO as unstable in a particular security at any given time.
    The Exchange would determine quote instability or a crumbling quote
when the following factors occur:
     The PBB and PBO are the same as the PBB and PBO one (1)
millisecond ago (proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D)(i)(A)); and
     the PBBO spread is less than or equal to the thirty (30)
day median PBBO spread during the Core Trading Session (proposed Rule
7.31P(h)(3)(D)(i)(B)); and
     there are more protected quotations on the far side, i.e.
more protected quotations on the PBO than the PBB for buy orders, or
more protected quotations on the PBB than the PBO for sell orders
(proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D)(i)(C)); and
     the quote instability factor result from the quote
stability calculation is greater than the defined quote instability
threshold (proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D)(i)(D).
    The Exchange proposes that the quote stability calculation used to
determine the current quote instability factor would be defined by the
following formula that utilizes the quote stability coefficients and
quote stability variables defined below:

1/ (1 + e [supcaret] -(C0 + C1 * N + C2 * F + C3 * N-1 + C4 * F-1))

    (See proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D)(i)(D)(1)).

    As set forth in proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D)(i)(D)(1)(a), the
Exchange proposes to utilize the values below for the quote stability
coeffecients:

C0 = -2.39515; (ii) C1 = -0.76504; (iii) C2 = 0.07599; (iv) C3 =
0.38374; and (v) C4 = 0.14466.

    As set forth in proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D)(i)(D)(1)(b), the
Exchange proposes to utilize the following quote stability variables to
calculate the current quote instability factor: (i) N = the number of
protected quotations on the near side of the market, i.e. PBB for buy
orders and PBO for sell orders; (ii) F = the number of protected
quotations on the far side of the market, i.e. PBO for buy orders and
PBB for sell orders; (iii) N-1 = the number of protected quotations on
the near side of the market one (1) millisecond ago; and (iv) F-1 = the
number of protected quotations on the far side of the market one (1)
millisecond ago.
    As set forth in proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D)(i)(D)(2), the Exchange
proposes to utilize a quote instability threshold of 0.32. Finally, as
set forth in proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D)(i)(D)(3), the Exchange
reserves the right to modify the quote instability coeffecients or
quote instability threshold at any time, subject to a filing of a
proposed rule change with the SEC.
    Because of the technology changes associated with this proposed
rule change, the Exchange will announce by Trader Update the
implementation date.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\10\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\11\ in particular, because
it is 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 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market system by promoting transparency in
Exchange rules by adopting a new order type that is designed to
exercise discretion in order to provide price improvement to contra-
side orders. Similar to how MPL Orders operate, the Discretionary
Pegged Order is designed to be a non-displayed order that could execute
at the midpoint of the PBBO, and thus would enhance order execution
opportunities at the Exchange that provide price improvement
opportunities over the PBBO. However, unlike an MPL Order, the Exchange
would monitor the quality of the PBBO to assess whether a Discretionary
Pegged Order would be eligible to exercise its discretion. As proposed,
the Exchange would use a mathematical calculation (the ``quote
instability calculation'') to assess the probability of an imminent
change to the current PBB to a lower price or the PBO to a higher price
for a particular security (``quote instability factor''). When the
quoting activity meets predefined criteria and the quote instability
factor calculated is greater than the Exchange's proposed threshold
(``quote instability threshold''), the Exchange would treat the quote
as not stable (``quote instability'' or ``crumbling quote'').
    The Exchange believes that using the proposed quote instability
calculation to determine quote instability would remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system because the Exchange would be monitoring the PBBO on
behalf of its members in an objective and transparent manner to assess
the quality of the PBBO and whether it is appropriate for a
Discretionary Pegged Order to exercise its discretion. The Exchange
further believes that it would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system for
the Exchange to monitor the quote stability because it would assist ETP
Holders in obtaining best execution for their

customers by limiting executions at the midpoint of the PBBO when the
PBBO is not stable, thereby providing a more conservative alternative
for investors seeking to passively participate with contra-side order
flow. The proposed rule change would therefore facilitate transactions
in securities and improve trading within the national market system.
    As discussed above, the proposed rule change is based on the
proposed rules of IEX, which has not yet been approved as a registered
securities exchange. In a letter commenting on IEX's Form 1
Application, the Exchange previously stated that it did not oppose
IEX's proposed quote instability feature, but noted that it offers a
feature typically performed by broker-dealers.\12\ Generally, an
exchange's function is to reprice orders based on direction from its
members and input from market data, e.g., a Pegged Order is repriced
based on changes to the PBBO. By contrast, broker dealers generally
perform the function of evaluating the quality of the market to
determine whether to trade and at what price. The proposed quote
stability calculation would perform a similar function by monitoring
the quality of the market in order to assess whether to exercise price
discretion, and therefore the Exchange would be making pricing
decisions for its members based on the Exchange's evaluation of the
quality of the PBBO. In a separate context, the Commission has
disapproved a registered exchange from performing the same services as
a broker-dealer.\13\ While the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act for the reasons described above, the Exchange
respectfully requests that the Commission clearly articulate the
boundaries of when an exchange may and may not offer services that are
otherwise performed by broker dealers and, when it is appropriate for
an exchange to monitor the quality of the prices in a market to
determine how to price an order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Letter from Elizabeth K. King, General Counsel &
Secretary, New York Stock Exchange to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated November 12, 2015.
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68629 (Jan. 11,
2013), 78 FR 3928, 3931 (Jan. 17, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-059) (Order
disapproving proposal to establish ``benchmark orders'' because, in
part, the proposed functionality would create regulatory disparities
that would give Nasdaq an inappropriate advantage over broker-
dealers providing the same services and therefore the Commission
could not find that the proposal would be consistent with Section
6(b)(8) of the Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To this end, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
would achieve efficiency and cost savings for market participants that
rely on the Exchange to manage the price-discovery process on their
behalf because it presents an option for ETP Holders to have the
Exchange monitor the quality of the PBBO. Specifically, the
Discretionary Pegged Order will be an option to assist market
participants to achieve best execution on behalf of their customers by
reducing the potential to execute at a stale price. The manner by which
the Exchange would monitor the quality of the quote would be objective
and transparent, as specified in proposed Rule 7.31P(h)(3)(D). Market
participants that use the Discretionary Pegged Order would thus be able
to serve their customers better, thereby protecting investors and the
public interest.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that
the proposed Discretionary Pegged Order and related quote instability
would promote competition because it is based on the proposed rules of
IEX, which would implement the Discretionary Peg Order and related
quote instability if approved as a registered securities exchange under
Section 6 of the Act.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate 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 or disapprove 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 email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2016-44 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2016-44. 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 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 Web site 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; 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 File Number SR-NYSEArca-2016-44 and should
be submitted on or before April 20, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-07100 Filed 3-29-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 127 (Friday, July 2, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38412-38415]
[FR Doc No: 2010-16116]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0523]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; San Diego POPS Fireworks, San Diego, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone on the

navigable waters of San Diego Bay in support of the San Diego POPS
Fireworks. This safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of
the participants, crew, spectators, participating vessels, and other
vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and vessels will be
prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within
this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his
designated representative.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective in the CFR on July 2,
2010 through 10 p.m. on September 5, 2010. This rule is effective with
actual notice for purposes of enforcement at 8:30 p.m. on July 2, 2010.
This rule will remain in effect until 10 p.m. on September 5, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2010-0523 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-0523 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are 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
temporary rule, call or e-mail Petty Officer Shane Jackson, Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, CA; telephone 619-278-
7262, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing
the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
It would be impracticable to publish an NPRM with respect to this rule
because immediate action is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels,
spectators, participants, and others in the vicinity of the marine
event on the dates and times this rule will be in effect.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register because delaying the effective date
would be impracticable, since immediate action is needed to ensure the
public's safety.

Basis and Purpose

    The San Diego Symphony Orchestra and Copley Symphony Hall are
sponsoring the San Diego POPS Fireworks, which will include fireworks
presentations conducted from a barge in San Diego Bay. The barge will
be located near the navigational channel in the vicinity of North
Embarcadero.
    This safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the
crew, spectators, and other vessels and users of the waterway.

Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone to protect vessels
and persons during the fireworks presentations. The safety zone will be
enforced from 8:30 p.m. to 10 p.m. on the following days: July 2-3,
July 9-11, July 16-17, July 23-24, July 30-31, August 6-7, August 13-
14, August 20-21, August 27-28, and September 3-5, 2010. The limits of
the safety zone will be a 400 foot radius around the anchored firing
barge in approximate position 32[deg]42'12'' N, 117[deg]10'01'' W.
    The safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the
crews, spectators, and other vessels and users of the waterway. Persons
and vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting through,
or anchoring within the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of
the Port, or his designated representative. Additionally, the sponsor
will provide a chase boat to patrol the safety zone and inform vessels
of the safety zone.

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 and 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.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
    This determination is based on the size, location, and duration of
the safety zone. Vessel traffic will be able to pass safely around the
safety zone. Furthermore, the zone will be enforced only during certain
periods of the effective period. Before the periods of enforcement, the
Coast Guard will publish a local notice to mariners (LNM) and will
issue broadcast notice to mariners (BNM) alerts via marine channel 16
VHF.

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 will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. Vessel
traffic can pass safely around the safety zone. The Coast Guard will
publish a local notice to mariners (LNM) and will issue broadcast
notice to mariners (BNM) alerts via marine channel 16 VHF before the
safety zone is enforced.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can 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 the establishment of 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.

0
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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-338 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-338  Safety Zone; San Diego POPS Fireworks, San Diego, CA

    (a) Location. The limits of the safety zone will be a 400 foot
radius around the anchored firing barge in approximate position
32[deg]42'13'' N., 117[deg]10'01'' W.
    (b) Enforcement Period. This section will be enforced from 8:30
p.m. to 10 p.m. on July 2-3, July 9-11, July 16-17, July 23-24, July
30-31, August 6-7, August 13-14, August 20-21, August 27-28, and
September 3-5, 2010.
    (c) Definitions. The following definition applies to this section:
designated representative means any commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer of the Coast Guard on board a Coast Guard, Coast Guard
Auxiliary, or local, state, or federal law enforcement vessel who has
been authorized to act on the behalf of the Captain of the Port.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit through or anchoring
within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port of San Diego or his designated representative on scene.
    (2) Mariners requesting permission to transit through the safety
zone may request authorization to do so from the Sector San Diego
Command Center. The Command Center may be contacted on VHF-FM Channel
16.
    (3) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his designated representative.
    Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel by siren,
radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator of a vessel shall
proceed as directed.
    (4) The Coast Guard may be assisted by other federal, state, or
local agencies.

    Dated: June 22, 2010.
T.H. Farris,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2010-16116 Filed 7-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 46 (Monday, March 10, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13365-13366]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05031]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71644; File No. SR-CBOE-2013-126]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Supervision

March 4, 2014.

I. Introduction

    On December 18, 2013, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to require each Trading Permit
Holder (``TPH'') \3\ to establish and maintain a system of supervision
and written supervisory procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Article 1, Section 1.1(f) of the Exchange's Bylaws defines
``Trading Permit Holder'' to mean ``any individual, corporation,
partnership, limited liability company or other entity authorized by
the Rules that holds a Trading Permit.'' The proposed rule would
also apply to CBOE Stock Exchange (``CBSX'') Trading Permit Holders.
CBSX is CBOE's stock trading facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on January 2, 2014.\4\ The Commission received no comments on
the proposal. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the
Exchange's Office of the Secretary, on the Exchange's Web site at
http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Exchange Act Release No. 71190 (Nov.14, 2013), 79 FR 169
(Jan. 2, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This order approves the proposed rule change.

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange believes that it does not currently have a
comprehensive rule that directly addresses the obligation of every TPH
to properly supervise its business and employees. The only supervision
obligations that are expressly codified in CBOE's Rules are in Rule 4.2
(Adherence to Law) and Rule 9.8 (Supervision of Accounts). While the
former requires a TPH to supervise persons associated with the TPH, it
does not expressly require the establishment and maintenance of a
system of supervision or written procedures covering each line of
business. The latter, a component of Chapter 9 of the CBOE Rulebook
(Doing Business with the Public), does provide explicit supervisory
obligations, however, it is applicable only to TPHs conducting non-TPH
customer business in options.
    CBOE proposes to adopt CBOE Rule 4.24, which would require every
TPH to establish and maintain a system of supervision and written
supervisory procedures for each of their business activities and the
activities of their associated persons. In particular, the proposed
rule would require TPHs to: (1) Establish, maintain, and enforce
written supervisory procedures; (2) inspect every office or location of
the TPH at least once every three calendar years; and (3) conduct an
annual review and submit to the Exchange on an annual basis a written
report on the TPH's supervision and compliance efforts during the
preceding year.
    The proposed rule would mirror many of the requirements in CBOE
Rule 9.8, such as requiring TPHs to: (1) Establish, maintain, and
enforce written supervisory procedures; (2) conduct office inspections;
and (3) conduct an annual review and submit to the Exchange an annual
written report on the TPH's supervision and compliance efforts during
the preceding year. The proposed rule would not, however, be limited to
supervision of activities related only to TPHs conducting non-TPH
customer business in options.
    CBOE believes that the proposed rule would impose a more definitive
supervision requirement on TPHs than is currently contained in the
Exchange's rules, and would cover all business activities of a TPH.\5\
In particular, the proposed rule would clearly place responsibility on
TPHs to establish and maintain a formal plan of supervision that covers
each of their business activities and associated persons. Consequently,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule would clarify: (1) The
responsibility of the TPH for the acts of its associated persons; and
(2) the requirement of each TPH to supervise those associated persons
for which it is responsible. In addition, CBOE believes that the
proposed rule would provide greater utility for enforcing TPH
obligations for all its business areas such as proprietary trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange modeled its proposed rule after rules of other
self-regulatory organizations, e.g., PHLX Rule 748, NASD Rule 3010,
FINRA Rule 3130, NYSE Amex Rule 320, NYSE Rule 342, and NYSE Arca
Options Rule 11.18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review of the proposal, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder that are applicable to a national
securities exchange.\6\ In particular, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,
which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national
securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
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.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In approving the proposal, the Commission has considered the
proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission ``has long emphasized that the responsibility of
broker-dealers to supervise their

employees is a critical component of the federal regulatory scheme.''
\8\ Effective and comprehensive supervisory policies and procedures,
among other things, are critical to a firm's ability to surveil for
misconduct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Commission, Division of Market Regulation (now known as
Division of Trading and Markets), Staff Legal Bulletin No. 17:
Remote Office Supervision (Mar. 19, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Commission believes the proposed rule change would
help TPHs prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices and
improve investor protection by requiring TPHs to clearly delineate
their supervisory obligations.
    In particular, the Commission believes that compelling every TPH to
establish and maintain written supervisory procedures regarding each of
their business activities and associated persons would provide TPHs and
their supervisory personnel with a clearer understanding of their
supervisory responsibilities to help them carry out those
responsibilities. In addition, the Commission believes that requiring
TPHs to inspect all of their offices or locations at least once every
three calendar years would strengthen TPHs' ability to carry out their
compliance and surveillance functions. Similarly, the Commission
believes that requiring TPHs to conduct an annual review and submit to
the Exchange on an annual basis a written report on the TPH's
supervision and compliance efforts during the preceding year would help
foster a culture of compliance within each TPH by promoting a dialogue
throughout the TPH of its compliance efforts and procedures.
    By requiring written supervisory procedures and inspections that
are reasonably designed to prevent and detect violations of applicable
securities laws and regulations, as well as Exchange rules, the
proposed rule would help to ensure that TPHs have the necessary
processes in place to identify potential rule violations or
inappropriate activity. Consequently, the Commission believes that the
Exchange's proposal would foster an environment within each TPH that is
more likely to help decrease the likelihood of fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices and increase investor protection.
    Accordingly, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change
is consistent with the Act.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\9\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2013-126) be, and hereby
is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-05031 Filed 3-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 226 (Monday, November 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 82879-82880]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26072]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER24-421-000]

JGT2 Energy LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
JGT2 Energy LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is December 11, 2023.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all

interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of
this document via the internet through the Commission's Home Page
(http://www.ferc.gov) using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. At this time, the Commission has suspended access
to the Commission's Public Reference Room, due to the proclamation
declaring a National Emergency concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease
(COVID-19), issued by the President on March 13, 2020. For assistance,
contact the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at
[email protected] or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: November 20, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-26072 Filed 11-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 183 (Thursday, September 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57905-57907]
[FR Doc No: 2022-20521]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2019-N-1517]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Abbreviated New
Animal Drug Applications

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Submit written comments (including recommendations) on the
collection of information by October 24, 2022.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be submitted to https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under Review--Open for Public
Comments'' or

by using the search function. The OMB control number for this
information collection is 0910-0669. Also include the FDA docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel Showalter, Office of
Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-
12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Abbreviated New Animal Drug Applications--Section 512(b)(2) and (n)(1)
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360b(b)(2) and
(n)(1))

OMB Control Number 0910-0669--Extension

    Under section 512(b)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FD&C Act), any person may file an abbreviated new animal drug
application (ANADA) seeking approval of a generic copy of an approved
new animal drug. The information required to be submitted as part of an
ANADA is described in section 512(n)(1) of the FD&C Act. Among other
things, an ANADA is required to contain information to show that the
proposed generic drug is bioequivalent to, and has the same labeling
as, the approved new animal drug. We allow applicants to submit a
complete ANADA or to submit information in support of an ANADA for
phased review. Applicants may submit Form FDA 356v with a complete
ANADA or a phased review submission to ensure efficient and accurate
processing of information. Form FDA 356v is approved under OMB control
number 0910-0032. We use the information submitted, among other things,
to assess bioequivalence to the originally approved drug and thus, the
safety and effectiveness of the generic new animal drug.
    The information collection also includes applicant requests to
waive the requirement to establish bioequivalence through in vivo
studies (biowaiver requests) for soluble powder oral dosage form
products or certain Type A medicated articles based upon either of two
methods. We use the information submitted by applicants in the
biowaiver request as the basis for our decision whether to grant the
request. Therefore, the information collection references the guidance
document GFI #171 ``Demonstrating Bioequivalence for Soluble Powder
Oral Dosage Form Products and Type A Medicated Articles Containing
Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients Considered to Be Soluble in Aqueous
Media'' (https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/cvm-gfi-171-demonstrating-bioequivalence-soluble-powder-oral-dosage-form-products-and-type-medicated) (May 2021), which
discusses statutory bioequivalence requirements as well as
qualifications for requesting a waiver from the requirements. The
guidance document was developed consistent with the Agency's Good
Guidance Practice regulations in 21 CFR 10.115, which provide for
comment at any time.
    The reporting associated with ANADAs and related submissions is
necessary to ensure that new animal drugs are in compliance with
section 512(b)(2) of the FD&C Act. We use the information submitted,
among other things, to assess bioequivalence to the originally approved
drug and thus, the safety and effectiveness of the generic new animal
drug.
    Description of Respondents: The respondents for this collection of
information are veterinary pharmaceutical manufacturers.
    In the Federal Register of March 18, 2022 (87 FR 15436), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. We received and considered one comment
requesting the posting of new animal drug applications for public
access. While FDA posts a summary of the safety and effectiveness data
and information submitted in the application, which supports the basis
for FDA's approval (https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/approved-animal-drug-products-green-book/freedom-information-foi-summaries-approved-animal-drugs), we are prohibited from disclosing commercial
confidential information contained in an ANADA.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                        Average
                          Activity                            FDA form No.      Number of     responses per   Total annual     burden per    Total hours
                                                                               respondents     respondent       responses       response
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANADA......................................................            356v              20               1              20             159        3,180
Phased review with administrative ANADA....................            356v               6               5              30            31.8          954
Biowaiver request for soluble powder oral dosage form                   N/A               1               1               1               5            5
 product, using same formulation/manufacturing process
 approach..................................................
Biowaiver request for soluble powder oral dosage form                   N/A               5               1               5              10           50
 product, using same API/solubility approach...............
Biowaiver request for Type A medicated article, using same              N/A               2               1               2               5           10
 formulation/manufacturing process approach................
Biowaiver request for Type A medicated article, using same              N/A               5               1               5              20          100
 API/solubility approach...................................
                                                                            ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total..................................................  ..............  ..............  ..............              63  ..............        4,299
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    We base our estimates on our records of generic animal drug
applications. We estimate that we will receive 26 ANADA submissions per
year over the next 3 years and that 6 of those submissions will request
phased review. We estimate that each applicant that uses the phased
review process will have approximately five phased reviews per
application. We estimate that an applicant will take approximately 159
hours to prepare either an ANADA or the estimated five ANADA phased
review submissions and the administrative ANADA. Our estimates of the
burden of biowaiver requests for generic soluble powder oral dosage
form products and Type A medicated articles differ based on the type of
product and the basis for the request, as shown in table 1. We estimate
that an applicant will take between 5 and 20 hours to prepare a
biowaiver request.

    Our estimated burden for the information collection reflects an
overall increase of 695 hours and a corresponding increase of 12
responses. Based on a review of the information collection since our
last request for OMB renewal, the increase in the burden hours estimate
is attributable to an increase in the number of respondents submitting
generic drug applications.

    Dated: September 16, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-20521 Filed 9-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 182 (Thursday, September 21, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 44242]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20130]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
Research, Engineering & Development Advisory Committee meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held on October 11, 2017--9:00 a.m. to 4:30
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Bessie Coleman Conference
Center (FOB 10A, Second Floor), Washington, DC 20591.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chinita A. Roundtree-Coleman at (609)
485-7149 or email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C. App. 2), notice is
hereby given of a meeting of the Research, Engineering and Development
(RE&D) Advisory Committee. The meeting agenda will include time
allocated to discuss recommendations provided by the advisory committee
to the FAA on research and development investments in the areas of air
traffic services, airports, aircraft safety, human factors and
environment and energy. Attendance is open to the interested public but
seating is limited. With the approval of the chairman, members of the
public may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to
attend the meeting, present statements, or obtain information should
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. Members of the public may present a written statement to the
Committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC on September 13, 2017.
Chinita A. Roundtree-Coleman,
Computer Specialist.
[FR Doc. 2017-20130 Filed 9-20-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 201 (Friday, October 17, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 62509]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24668]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2014-96]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of this notice is to
improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of
FAA's regulatory activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the
inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to
affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before November 6, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2014-
0781 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for 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).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jake Troutman,<PHONE_NUMBER>, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, 20951.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 8, 2014.
Lirio Liu,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2014-0781.
    Petitioner: Aviation Unmanned.
    Section of 14 CFR: 61.3(a)(1), 61.13, 91.7, 91.113, 91.203(a),
91.205(b), 91.207, 91.125, and 91.319.
    Description of Relief Sought: The petitioner is seeking an
exemption to commercially operate their Vanguard Defense Industries
ShadowHawk and MLB Company Super Bat unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) to
provide utility companies with power line inspections including: right
of way surveying; tower inspections for early detection or arcing; and
post-disaster aerial support, in the areas outside of Houston, Texas.

[FR Doc. 2014-24668 Filed 10-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 247 (Thursday, December 27, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 66724]
[FR Doc No: 2018-28143]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4409-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001]

Tohono O'odham Nation; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the Tohono O'odham Nation (FEMA-4409-DR), dated November
30, 2018, and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued November 30, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated November 30, 2018, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage to the lands associated with
the Tohono O'odham Nation resulting from severe storms and flooding
during the period of October 1-3, 2018, is of sufficient severity
and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42
U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare
that such a major disaster exists for the Tohono O'odham Nation.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance and Hazard
Mitigation for the Tohono O'odham Nation. Consistent with the
requirement that Federal assistance be supplemental, any Federal
funds provided under the Stafford Act for Hazard Mitigation will be
limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. Federal funds
provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance also will be
limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs, with the
exception of projects that meet the eligibility criteria for a
higher Federal cost-sharing percentage under the Public Assistance
Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for Debris Removal implemented
pursuant to Section 428 of the Stafford Act.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Mark Wingate, of FEMA is appointed
to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
    The following areas have been designated as adversely affected by
this major disaster:

    Tohono O'odham Nation for Public Assistance.
    The Tohono O'odham Nation is eligible to apply for assistance
under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2018-28143 Filed 12-26-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 147 (Tuesday, August 2, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47225-47226]
[FR Doc No: 2022-16481]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2022-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2255]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before October 31, 2022.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2255, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location
https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities
with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   San Luis Obispo County, California
Project: 18-09-0044S Preliminary Dates: September 28, 2021 and April 29,
                                  2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Arroyo Grande..................  City Hall, 300 East Branch
                                          Street, Arroyo Grande, CA
                                          93420.
City of El Paso de Robles..............  City Hall, 1000 Spring Street,
                                          Paso Robles, CA 93446.
City of Grover Beach...................  City Hall, 154 South Eighth
                                          Street, Grover Beach, CA
                                          93433.
City of Pismo Beach....................  City Hall, 760 Mattie Road,
                                          Pismo Beach, CA 93449.
City of San Luis Obispo................  City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San
                                          Luis Obispo, CA 93401.
San Luis Obispo County Unincorporated    San Luis Obispo County
 Areas.                                   Government Center, 1055
                                          Monterey Street, Room D-430,
                                          San Luis Obispo, CA 93408.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-16481 Filed 8-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P