[Federal Register: February 14, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 30)]
[Notices]
[Page 7756]
[DOCID:fr14fe06-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[ Docket No. CP05-412-000]

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company; Notice of Availability of the
Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Northeast ConneXion Project--
New England

February 6, 2006.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) on the
natural gas pipeline facilities proposed by Tennessee Gas Pipeline
Company (Tennessee) in the above-referenced docket.
    The EA was prepared to satisfy the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act. The staff concludes that approval of the
proposed project, with appropriate mitigating measures, would not
constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality
of the human environment.
    The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the
installation of 55,400 horsepower (hp) and replacement of 10,500 hp for
a net total increase of 44,900 hp of compression at one new compressor
station and upgrade at six existing compressor stations which includes:
     Installation of two additional 3,550-hp CAT 3612
compressor units at each of the existing Compressor Stations 241, 245,
and 249 located in Onondaga, Herkimer, and Schoharie Counties, New
York;
     Replacement of an existing 4,500-hp compressor unit with a
single 10,300-hp Solar Taurus 70S turbine-driven compressor unit at
existing Compressor 254 in Columbia County, New York;
     Replacement of three existing compressor units totaling
6,000 hp with the installation of two 6,275-hp Solar Centaur 50L
turbine-driven compressor units (12,550 hp total) at existing
Compressor Station 264 in Worcester County, Massachusetts;
     Installation of one additional 3,550-hp CAT 3612
compressor unit at existing Compressor Station 313 in Potter County,
Pennsylvania; and
     Construction of new Compressor Station 405A, with a single
7,700-hp Solar Taurus 60S turbine-driven compressor unit in Steuben
County, New York.
    Tennessee indicates that the proposed facilities would enable it to
provide up to 136,300 decatherms per day of incremental firm
transportation capacity on Tennessee's Lines 200 and 400.
    The EA has been placed in the public files of the FERC. A limited
number of copies of the EA are available for distribution and public
inspection at: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Public Reference
Room, 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. (202) 502-
8371.
    Copies of the EA have been mailed to Federal, State and local
agencies, public interest groups, interested individuals, newspapers,
and parties to this proceeding.
    Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. To ensure
consideration prior to a Commission decision on the proposal, it is
important that we receive your comments before the date specified
below. Please carefully follow these instructions to ensure that your
comments are received in time and properly recorded:
     Send an original and two copies of your comments to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE.,
Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426;
     Label one copy of the comments for the attention of the
Gas Branch 2, PJ11.2.
     Reference Docket No. CP05-412-000; and
     Mail your comments so that they will be received in
Washington, DC on or before March 8, 2006.
    Please note that we are continuing to experience delays in mail
deliveries from the U.S. Postal Service. As a result, we will include
all comments that we receive within a reasonable time frame in our
environmental analysis of this project. However, the Commission
strongly encourages electronic filing of any comments or interventions
or protests to this proceeding. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the
instructions on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov under

the ``e-Filing'' link and the link to the User's Guide. Before you can
file comments you will need to create a free account which can be
created by clicking on ``Sign-up.''
    Comments will be considered by the Commission but will not serve to
make the commentor a party to the proceeding. Any person seeking to
become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene
pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedures (18 CFR 385.214).\1\ Only intervenors have the right to seek
rehearing of the Commission's decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Interventions may also be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper. See the previous discussion on filing
comments electronically.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Affected landowners and parties with environmental concerns may be
granted intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they
have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which would not be
adequately represented by any other parties. You do not need intervenor
status to have your comments considered.
    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at 1-866-208-FERC or on the
FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link.

Click on the eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the
docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number
field. Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to
the documents. Go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-2034 Filed 2-13-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 60 (Friday, March 28, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17457-17459]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06911]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0174; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-212-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; the Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain The Boeing Company Model 787-8 airplanes. This proposed AD was
prompted by a report indicating that, on a different Boeing airplane
model, there was an oxygen-fed fire, which caused extensive damage to
the flight deck. This proposed AD would require replacing the low-
pressure oxygen hoses with non-conductive hoses in the crew oxygen
system. We are proposing this AD to prevent inadvertent electrical
current from passing through an internal, anti-collapse spring of the
low pressure oxygen hose, which can cause the low-pressure oxygen hose
to melt or burn, leading to an oxygen-fed fire and/or smoke beneath the
flight compartment in the forward electronics equipment bay.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 12, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For Boeing service information identified in this proposed AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. For B/E Aerospace service information identified
in this proposed AD, contact B/E Aerospace, Inc., Commercial Aircraft
Products Group, 10800 Pfluum Road, Lenexa, KS 66215; phone: 913-338-
9800; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0174; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Monroe, Aerospace Engineer,

Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2014-0174;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-212-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We received a report indicating that, on a different Boeing
airplane model, a fire originated near the first officer's area, which
caused extensive damage to the flight deck. A Boeing investigation
found that the low pressure flexible hoses in the pressurized
flightcrew oxygen system can potentially be conductive because of the
anti-kink metallic spring inside the hose. This condition, if not
corrected, could result in inadvertent electrical current passing
through an internal, anti-collapse spring of the low-pressure oxygen
hose causing the low-pressure oxygen hose to melt or burn, leading to
an oxygen-fed fire and/or smoke beneath the flight compartment in the
forward electronics equipment bay.
    Some hoses on Model 787-8 airplanes are similar in design to those
on the Boeing airplane model on which the fire occurred; therefore,
Model 787-8 airplanes might be subject to the same unsafe condition.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB350001-00,
Issue 001, dated August 22, 2013. For information on the procedures and
compliance times, see this service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for Docket No. FAA-2014-0174.
    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB350001-00, Issue 001,
dated August 22, 2013, refers to B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin
4421086-35-001, Rev. 002, dated July 9, 2013, as an additional source
of guidance for reworking the crew oxygen distribution manifold
assembly.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require replacing the low-pressure oxygen
hoses with non-conductive hoses in the crew oxygen system, as specified
in the service information described previously.

Typographical Error in Service Information

    Paragraph III.A., ``Verification,'' of B/E Aerospace Service
Bulletin 4421086-35-001, Rev. 002, dated July 9, 2013, has a
typographical error. The last sentence in that paragraph states, ``If
the decal shows PN 4421086-101, continue with the retrofit steps in
paragraph II.B.'' The sentence should refer to paragraph III.B. of the
service information.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 6 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Parts
             Action                  Labor cost         cost        Cost per product      Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rework and replacement.........  Up to 2 work-hours     $1,798  Up to $1,968...........  Up to $11,808.
                                  x $85 per hour =
                                  $170.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, all of the costs of this proposed AD
may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on
affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. Amend Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2014-0174; Directorate Identifier
2013-NM-212-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by May 12, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 787-8 airplanes,
certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin B787-81205-SB350001-00, Issue 001, dated August 22, 2013.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 35, Oxygen.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report that, on a different Boeing
airplane model, there was an oxygen-fed fire, which caused extensive
damage to the flight deck. We are issuing this AD to prevent
inadvertent electrical current from passing through an internal,
anti-collapse spring of the low pressure oxygen hose, which can
cause the low-pressure oxygen hose to melt or burn, leading to an
oxygen-fed fire and/or smoke beneath the flight compartment in the
forward electronics equipment bay.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Rework of Crew Oxygen Distribution Manifold Assembly

    For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-
81205-SB350001-00, Issue 001, dated August 22, 2013: Within 60
months after the effective date of this AD, rework the crew oxygen
distribution manifold assembly from part number (P/N) 4421086-101 to
P/N 4421086-102, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB350001-00, Issue 001,
dated August 22, 2013; and B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 4421086-
35-001, Rev. 002, dated July 9, 2013; except as specified in
paragraph (i) of this AD.

(h) Replacement of Forward Crew Oxygen Supply Hose

    For airplanes identified as Group 2 in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin B787-81205-SB350001-00, Issue 001, dated August 22, 2013:
Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, replace the
forward crew oxygen supply hose with a new non-conductive forward
oxygen supply hose, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB350001-
00, Issue 001, dated August 22, 2013.

(i) Exception to Service Information

    Paragraph III.A., ``Verification,'' of B/E Aerospace Service
Bulletin 4421086-35-001, Rev. 002, dated July 9, 2013, has a
typographical error. The last sentence in that paragraph states,
``If the decal shows PN 4421086-101, continue with the retrofit
steps in paragraph II.B.'' The sentence should refer to paragraph
III.B. of B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 4421086-35-001, Rev. 002,
dated July 9, 2013.

(j) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a
distribution manifold having B/E Aerospace P/N 4421086-101; a
flexible supply hose having B/E Aerospace P/N 4421189-016; or a
supply hose having Boeing P/N 4421189-023; on any airplane.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (l)(1) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make
those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(l) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Susan Monroe,
Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch,
ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 425-
917-6590; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com. For B/E Aerospace service information
identified in this AD, contact B/E Aerospace, Inc., Commercial
Aircraft Products Group, 10800 Pfluum Road, Lenexa, KS 66215; phone:
913-338-9800; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may view this referenced
service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 19, 2014.
Ross Landes,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-06911 Filed 3-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE

ANN ARBOR, MI  48105-2498

									     OFFICE OF

									AIR AND RADIATION

November 5, 2013

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Meeting with Ford Motor Company regarding Tier 3

FROM: Michael Olechiw

TO:  EPA Docket # EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0135

This memo documents a meeting held on November 5, 2013 between representatives of Ford Motor Company and EPA to discuss Tier 3 US06 PM standards.

The agenda as well as the attendees are shown below.  The purpose of the meeting was to clarify points in the Tier 3 rule.

Attendees:

Michael Olechiw	EPA

Todd Rumpsa		Ford

Jeff Glodich		Ford

John Hedges		Ford

Tony Fernandez	EPA

Matti Maricq		Ford

Will Ruona		Ford

Dominic DiCicco	Ford

Tad Wysor		EPA

Don Kopinski		EPA

David Eiges		CARB (by phone)

Joe McDonald		EPA (by phone)

Agenda

US06 PM Standards


[Federal Register: April 21, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 76)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 20794-20795]
[DOCID:fr21ap10-17]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0190; Airspace Docket No. 09-ASW-5]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Hamilton, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace at Hamilton,
TX, adding additional controlled airspace to accommodate new Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAP) at Hamilton Municipal Airport,
Hamilton, TX. The FAA is taking this action to enhance the safety and
management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations for SIAPs at the
airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 7, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,

Washington, DC 20590-0001. You must identify the docket number FAA-
2009-0190/Airspace Docket No. 09-ASW-5, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the
proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in
the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527),
is on the ground floor of the building at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817-321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2009-0190/
Airspace Docket No. 09-ASW-5.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_
amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, TX 76137.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
to request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71, by adding additional Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface for SIAPs operations at Hamilton
Municipal Airport, Hamilton, TX. Adjustment to the geographic
coordinates would be made in accordance with the FAAs National
Aeronautical Charting Office. Controlled airspace is needed for the
safety and management of IFR operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9T, dated August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, section 106 describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
subtitle VII, part A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would add additional controlled airspace at Hamilton Municipal
Airport, Hamilton, TX.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

    1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 27,
2009, and effective September 15, 2009, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ASW TX E5 Hamilton, TX [Amended]

Hamilton Municipal Airport, TX
    (Lat. 31[deg]39'57'' N., long. 98[deg]08'55'' W.)
Hamilton NDB
    (Lat. 31[deg]37'13'' N., long. 98[deg]08'51'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Hamilton Municipal Airport, and within
3.7 miles each side of the 009[deg] bearing from the airport
extending from the 6.4-mile radius to 8.6 miles north of the
airport, and within 4 miles each side of the 189[deg] bearing from
the airport extending from the 6.4-mile radius to 9.6 miles south of
the airport, and within 8 miles east and 4 miles west of the
170[deg] bearing from the Hamilton NDB extending from the NDB to 16
miles south of the NDB.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on April 12, 2010.
Anthony D. Roetzel,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-9174 Filed 4-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 71 (Thursday, April 12, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 21978]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8815]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR12-21-000]

MGTC, Inc.; Notice of Petition for Rate Approval

    Take notice that on April 4, 2012, MGTC, Inc. (MGTC) filed a Rate
Election pursuant to 284.123(b)(1) of the Commission's regulations and
to revise its Statement of Operating Conditions. MGTC proposes to
utilize rates that are the same as those contained in MGTC's
transportation rate schedules for comparable intrastate service on file
with the Wyoming Public Service Commission as more fully detailed in
the petition.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate filing must file in
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered
by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken,
but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any
person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or
motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the
intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 16, 2012.

    Dated: April 6, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-8815 Filed 4-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 19, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65189-65190]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27407]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84818; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2018-75]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving a
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, Regarding
the Listing and Trading of Shares of the PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF

December 13, 2018.

I. Introduction

    On October 12, 2018, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to modify the rule governing the listing and
trading of shares (``Shares'') of the PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF
(``Fund''). The Commission previously approved the listing and trading
of the Shares subject to a representation that the Fund's investments
in OTC derivatives would not exceed 20% of the Fund's net assets.\3\
The Exchange now seeks to permit the Fund to invest up to 50% of its
net assets in OTC derivatives under certain circumstances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83319 (May 24,
2018), 83 FR 25097 (May 31, 2018) (SR-NYSEArca-2018-15) (``Prior
Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on October 31, 2018.\4\ On November 7, 2018, the Exchange
filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\5\ The Commission
has not received any comments on the proposed rule change. This order
approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84486 (Oct. 25,
2018), 83 FR 54794 (``Notice'').
    \5\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange: (1) Corrected its
description of the current listing rule applicable to the Shares;
(2) clarified the scope of the Fund's permitted investments in over-
the-counter (``OTC'') derivatives; (3) supplemented its arguments in
support of the proposed rule change; and (4) made technical changes.
Amendment No. 1 is available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nyseArca-2018-75/srnysearca201875-4628265-176398.pdf. Amendment No.
1 is not subject to notice and comment because it does not
materially alter the substance of the proposed rule change or raise
unique or novel regulatory issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 1

    The Shares are Managed Fund Shares that do not satisfy all of the
criteria for generic listing set forth in Commentary .01 to NYSE Arca
Rule 8.600-E. Thus, the Exchange currently lists and trades the Shares
pursuant to a rule (``Listing Rule'') approved by Commission.\6\ The
Listing Rule requires that the Fund's portfolio meet all requirements
of Commentary .01 to NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E except for those set forth
in Commentary .01(a)(1), Commentary .01(b)(4) and Commentary
.01(b)(5).\7\ Accordingly, the Listing Rule limits the Fund's
investments in OTC derivatives to 20% of the Fund's assets and, for
purposes of calculating this limit, the portfolio's investment in OTC
derivatives is calculated using the aggregate gross notional value of
the OTC derivatives.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Prior Order, supra note 3.
    \7\ See id.
    \8\ See Commentary .01(e) to NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to allow: (1) Up to 50% of the Fund's assets
to be invested in OTC derivatives that are used to reduce currency,
interest rate, credit, or duration risk arising from the Fund's
investments (``Hedging Derivatives''); and (2) up to 20% of the Fund's
assets to be invested in OTC derivatives other than Hedging
Derivatives. For purposes of calculating the proposed alternative
limits, the portfolio's investments in OTC derivatives would be
calculated using the aggregate gross notional value of the OTC
derivatives.
    According to the Exchange, the Fund's adviser and sub-adviser
believe that it is important to provide the Fund with additional
flexibility to manage risk associated with its investments and,
depending on market conditions, it may be necessary for the Fund to
utilize additional OTC derivatives for this purpose.\9\ Generally,
according to the Exchange, OTC derivatives may be customized to a
greater degree than exchange-listed derivatives, which may allow the
Fund to better hedge its assets and may mitigate trading its costs.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Notice, supra note 3, 83 FR at 59794.
    \10\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also states that the Commission has previously
approved an exception from the requirements of Commentary .01(e)
relating to investments in OTC derivatives similar to those proposed
with respect to the Fund.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See id., 83 FR at 54794, n.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the Exchange's
proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, to amend the
Listing Rule applicable to the Shares consistent with the Act and the
rules and regulations

thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\12\ The
Exchange proposes to modify only the Listing Rule's limit on OTC
derivatives, and the proposed alternative limits are substantially
similar to OTC derivatives limits for another issue of Managed Fund
Shares that also invests principally in fixed-income securities.\13\
The Commission approved a listing rule allowing that fund to similarly
invest up to: (1) 50% of its assets in OTC derivatives to reduce
currency, interest rate, or credit risk arising from the fund's
investments; and (2) 20% of its assets in OTC derivatives other than
OTC derivatives used to hedge the fund's portfolio against currency,
interest rate, or credit risk.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80657 (May 11,
2017), 82 FR 22702 (May 17, 2017) (SR-NYSEArca-2017-09). The
Commission also notes that the proposed alternative limits are
consistent with derivatives requirements in listing rules for
another issue of Managed Fund Shares. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 84047 (September 6, 2018), 83 FR 46200 (September 12,
2018) (SR-NASDAQ-2017-128).
    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80657, supra note
13. The addition of duration risk to the uses of Hedging Derivative
in the current proposal does not alter the Commission's analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the foregoing reason, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with of the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act,\15\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2018-75),
as modified by Amendment No. 1 be, and it hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-27407 Filed 12-18-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 248 (Thursday, December 28, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 89752-89755]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28706]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-99234; File No. SR-DTC-2023-013]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Modify the DTC Settlement
Service Guide

December 22, 2023.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 20, 2023, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed
rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have
been prepared primarily by the clearing agency. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change \3\ consists of amendments to the DTC
Settlement Service Guide (``Settlement Guide'') \4\ to increase the
amount of the maximum Net Debit Cap for individual Participants,\5\ as
described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Each capitalized term not otherwise defined herein has its
respective meaning as set forth the Rules, By-Laws and Organization
Certificate of DTC (the ``Rules''), available at http://www.dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures.aspx.
    \4\ Available at https://www.dtcc.com/-/media/Files/Downloads/legal/service-guides/Settlement.pdf. The Settlement Guide is a
Procedure of DTC. Pursuant to the Rules, the term ``Procedures''
means the Procedures, service guides, and regulations of DTC adopted
pursuant to Rule 27, as amended from time to time. See Rule 1,
Section 1, supra note 3. Procedures are binding on DTC and each
Participant in the same manner that they are bound by the Rules. See
Rule 27, supra note 3.
    \5\ Pursuant to Rule 1, supra note 3, the term ``Net Debit Cap''
of a Participant means an amount determined by the Corporation in
the manner specified in the Procedures; provided, however, that the
maximum Net Debit Cap of the Participant shall be the least of (i) a
maximum amount applicable to all Participants based on the liquidity
resources of the Corporation, (ii) the Settling Bank Net Debit Cap
applicable to such Participant, or (iii) any other amount determined
by the Corporation, in its sole discretion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

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

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The proposed rule change would modify the Settlement Guide to
increase the amount of the maximum Net Debit Cap for individual
Participants, as described below.
Background
    Through its settlement services, DTC provides book-entry transfer
and pledge of interests in Eligible Securities and end-of-day net funds
settlement. DTC maintains a liquidity structure designed to facilitate
its maintenance of sufficient financial resources to complete
settlement each business day notwithstanding the failure to settle of a
defaulting Participant, or Affiliated Family of Participants,\6\ with
the largest settlement obligation. In this regard, the Collateral
Monitor \7\ and Net Debit Cap risk controls are employed by DTC to
provide that each Delivery Versus Payment \8\ is contingent on the
Participant that is the Receiver \9\ satisfying its end-of-day net
settlement obligation, if any.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Pursuant to Rule 1, supra note 3, the term ``Affiliated
Family'' means each Participant that controls or is controlled by
another Participant and each Participant that is under the common
control of any Person. For purposes of this definition, ``control''
means the direct or indirect ownership of more than 50% of the
voting securities or other voting interests of any Person.
    \7\ Pursuant to Rule 1, supra note 3, the term ``Collateral
Monitor'' of a Participant, as used with respect to its obligations
to the Corporation, means, on any Business Day, the record
maintained by the Corporation for the Participant which records, in
the manner specified in Procedures, the algebraic sum of (i) the Net
Credit or Debit Balance of the Participant and (ii) the aggregate
Collateral Value of the Collateral of the Participant.
    \8\ Pursuant to Rule 1, supra note 3, the term ``Delivery Versus
Payment'' means a Delivery against a settlement debit to the Account
of the Receiver, as provided in Rule 9(A) and Rule 9(B) and as
specified in the Procedures.
    \9\ Pursuant to Rule 1, supra note 3, the term ``Receiver'', as
used with respect to a Delivery of a Security, means the Person
which receives the Security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Collateral Monitor prevents the completion of transactions that
would cause a Participant's Net Debit Balance to exceed the value of
Collateral in its account.\10\ In this regard, the settlement
obligation of each Participant must be fully collateralized, based on
the Collateral Monitor, which is DTC's process for measuring the
sufficiency of the Collateral in a Participant's account to cover the
Participant's net settlement obligation.\11\ This is designed so if a
Participant fails to pay for its settlement obligation, DTC will have
sufficient Collateral to obtain funding for settlement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Pursuant to Rule 1, supra note 3, the term ``Collateral''
of a Participant, as used with respect to its obligations to the
Corporation, means, on any Business Day, the sum of (i) the Actual
Participants Fund Deposit of the Participant, (ii) the Actual
Preferred Stock Investment of a Participant, (iii) all Net Additions
of the Participant and (iv) any settlement progress payments
(``SPP'') wired by the Participant to the account of the Corporation
at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in the manner specified in
the Procedures. A SPP is Collateral that increases a Participant's
Collateral Monitor, but also reduces a Participant's Net Debit
Balance. See Settlement Guide, supra note 4, at 73. Instructions for
submission of a SPP are provided in the Settlement Guide. See
Settlement Guide, supra note 4, at 69. Pursuant to Rule 1, supra
note 3, the term ``Net Debit Balance'' of a Participant means the
amount by which the Gross Debit Balance of the Participant exceeds
its Gross Credit Balance. Id. The term ``Gross Credit Balance'' of a
Participant on any Business Day means the aggregate amount of money
the Corporation credits to all the Accounts in all the Account
Families of the Participant without accounting for any amount of
money the Corporation debits or charges thereto. Id. The term
``Gross Debit Balance'' of a Participant on any Business Day means
the aggregate amount of money the Corporation debits or charges to
all the Accounts in all the Account Families of the Participant
without accounting for any amount of money the Corporation credits
thereto. Id.
    \11\ See Settlement Guide, supra note 4, at 5 and 72.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Net Debit Cap limits the Net Debit Balance that each
Participant can incur to an amount, based upon activity level, which
would be covered by DTC's liquidity resources. The Net Debit Cap is
structured so that DTC will have sufficient liquidity to complete
settlement should any single Participant or Participant family fail to
settle. The Net Debit Cap limits the Net Debit Balance of an individual
Participant at any point during DTC's processing day.\12\ The Aggregate
Affiliated Family Net Debit Cap \13\ limits the sum of Net

Debit Balances an Affiliated Family of Participants at any point during
the processing day [sic]. The Net Debit Cap of each Participant and the
Aggregate Affiliated Family Net Debit Cap of each Affiliated Family of
Participants are each set to an amount at or below DTC's liquidity
resources.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Settlement Guide, supra note 4, at 6.
    \13\ Pursuant to Rule 1, supra note 3, the term ``Aggregate
Affiliated Family Net Debit Cap'' means the sum of the Net Debit
Caps for the Participants that are part of an Affiliated Family in
the manner specified in the Procedures; provided, however, that the
maximum Aggregate Affiliated Family Net Debit Cap shall not exceed
the total available liquidity resources of the DTC.
    \14\ To determine a Participant's Net Debit Cap, DTC records the
Participant's three highest intraday net debit peaks over a rolling
70-Business Day period. The Participant's average of these net debit
peaks is calculated and multiplied by a factor to determine the
Participant's Net Debit Cap, but not to exceed $1.80 BN. See
Settlement Guide, supra note 4, at 73. The maximum Net Debit Cap for
a Participant was increased to $1.80 BN from $1.5 BN in 2001, to
reduce processing blockages relating to increased trading volumes
and settlement values. This increase was facilitated by a coinciding
increase to DTC's liquidity resources. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 44509 (July 3, 2001), 66 FR 36350 (July 11, 2001) (File
No. SR-DTC-2001-09).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DTC maintains two key liquidity resources that are considered
``qualifying liquid resources,'' as defined by Rule 17Ad-22(a)(14)
promulgated under the Act: \15\ specifically, (i) Required Participants
Fund Deposits across all Participants of $1.15 BN and (ii) a committed
line of credit facility (``LOC'') of $1.9 BN, to which DTC may pledge
Securities that are Collateral of the defaulting Participant in order
to complete settlement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(14).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Taken together, the Participants Fund and line of credit provide
DTC with $3.05 BN in total liquidity resources.
Current Net Debit Cap Amounts
    As noted above, the Net Debit Cap for an individual Participant is
$1.80 BN. DTC has established the maximum Aggregate Affiliated Family
Net Debit Cap at $2.85 BN, which is below DTC's total available
liquidity resources maintained by DTC to account for the possibility
that a defaulting Participant that is part of an Affiliated Family may
be a lender to the line of credit.
    Together, the Net Debit Cap and Aggregate Affiliated Family Net
Debit Cap control the total settlement obligation that any Participant
or Affiliated Family, respectively, may incur. Any transaction that
would cause a Participant or an Affiliated Family to exceed its Net
Debit Cap or Aggregate Affiliated Family Net Debit Cap, as applicable,
will not be processed.\16\ Instead, the transaction will remain in a
pending status until the Net Debit Balance is reduced sufficiently to
allow processing.\17\ The Net Debit Balance may be reduced during the
processing day by, among other things, receipt of a Delivery Versus
Payment, which generates credits to the Participant's settlement
account, or by a SPP, which are funds that may be wired to DTC during
the processing day, in order to avoid a Participant having its receipts
of Securities blocked by its Net Debit Cap. To reduce transaction
blockage and the need to make SPPs, Participants have requested that
DTC raise the maximum Net Debit Cap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Settlement Guide, supra note 4, at 73-74.
    \17\ Id. at 62 and 73. Prior to processing, the transaction must
also satisfy the Collateral Monitor risk management control and be
approved by the Receiver via the Receiver Authorized Delivery
function. Id. at 70-72 and 59-60.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Increase of the Net Debit Cap
    DTC proposes to increase the maximum Net Debit Cap for an
individual Participant from $1.80 BN to $2.15 BN. (DTC is not proposing
to change the maximum Aggregate Affiliated Family Net Debit Cap of
$2.85 BN.) The proposed increase of $350 MM is supported by available
liquidity resources from the $450 MM Core Fund,\18\ to which all
Participants contribute, and the $1.90 BN LOC, which is collectively
$2.35 BN.\19\ Proposing to raise the maximum Net Debit Cap for an
individual Participant to $2.15 BN and not $2.35 BN allows for a $200
MM buffer to account for the possibility that a defaulted Participant
may also be a lender to the LOC.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The aggregate Participants Fund includes four component
amounts, as set forth below: the ``Core Fund,'' the ``Base Fund,''
the ``Incremental Fund'' and the ``Liquidity Fund.'' The Core Fund
is set by DTC at an aggregate amount of $450 MM and is comprised of
the Base Fund and the Incremental Fund. The Base Fund is the sum of
minimum deposits by all Participants, i.e., the amount that is
$7,500, times the number of Participants, at any time. The
Incremental Fund is the balance of the Core Fund up to $450 MM; this
is the amount that must be ratably allocated among Participants that
are required to pay more than a minimum deposit, as described in the
Settlement Guide. The Liquidity Fund component (set at $700 MM)
applies to Participants whose Affiliated Families have Net Debit
Caps that exceed $2.15 BN. See Settlement Guide, supra note 4, at
53-56.
    \19\ The Liquidity Fund (set at $700 MM) is not included because
that amount only applies to Participants whose Affiliated Families
have Net Debit Caps that exceed $2.15 BN.
    \20\ The $200 MM buffer is an amount greater than the
contribution of any lender to the DTC LOC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed maximum Net Debit Cap increase better aligns the
maximum Net Debit Cap for an individual Participant with DTC's
available liquidity resources, as described above.
    DTC expects that increasing the maximum Net Debit Cap would benefit
Participants generally. An impact study (``Impact Study'') conducted by
DTC for the period January 3, 2022, through December 30, 2022, showed
that a number of Participants that are currently capped at a $1.80 BN
Net Debit Cap would realize an immediate benefit from the proposed Net
Debit Cap increase. The liquidity needs across legal entities were
determined by looking at Participants reaching 90% of the current $1.80
BN maximum Net Debit Cap, identifying the transactions pending under
Net Debit Cap limits, and any incoming SPPs. By increasing the maximum
Net Debit Cap, the proposed rule change would help improve transaction
processing by enabling more transactions to process without the need
for a Receiving Participant to wait for Delivery Versus Payment credits
or submit SPPs to reduce its intraday Net Debit Balance. Moreover, any
Participant that is a Deliverer of a Delivery Versus Payment may see
less of its Deliveries pend because the Receiver may maintain a higher
Net Debit Cap. Meanwhile, as described above, the proposed Net Debit
Cap increase would continue to be supported by adequate DTC liquidity
resources available to complete system-wide settlement in the event of
a failure to settle by the largest Participant or Affiliated Family.
Proposed Rule Change
    Pursuant to the proposed rule change, the Settlement Guide will be
revised to reflect the proposed increase to the Net Debit Cap.
Specifically, two references to the existing $1.80 BN Net Debit Cap
will be revised to reflect the proposed $2.15 BN Net Debit Cap.
Effective Date
    DTC would implement the proposed changes no later than 60 Business
Days after the approval of the proposed rule change by the Commission.
2. Statutory Basis
    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) \21\ of the Act requires that the rules of the
clearing agency be designed, inter alia, to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions. DTC
believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Impact Study results indicate that by increasing the maximum
Net Debit Cap, as described above, the proposed rule change would help
improve transaction processing by enabling more transactions to process
without the need for a Receiving Participant to wait for Delivery
Versus Payment-related credits or submit SPPs to reduce its intraday
Net Debit Balance. Moreover, any Participant that is a Deliverer of a

Delivery Versus Payment may see less of its deliveries pend because the
Receiver may maintain a higher Net Debit Cap. Meanwhile, the proposed
Net Debit Cap increase would continue to be supported by adequate DTC
liquidity resources available to complete system-wide settlement in the
event of a failure to settle by the largest Participant or Affiliated
Family. Therefore, DTC believes the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act, cited above, by helping to
promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions.
    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(i) \22\ promulgated under the Act requires,
inter alia, that DTC, a covered clearing agency, establish, implement,
maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to, as applicable, effectively measure, monitor, and manage
the liquidity risk that arises in or is borne by the covered clearing
agency, including measuring, monitoring, and managing its settlement
and funding flows on an ongoing and timely basis, and its use of
intraday liquidity by, at a minimum maintaining sufficient liquid
resources to effect same-day settlement of payment obligations with a
high degree of confidence under a wide range of foreseeable stress
scenarios that includes, but is not limited to, the default of the
participant family that would generate the largest aggregate payment
obligation for the covered clearing agency in extreme but plausible
market conditions (i.e., the ``Cover One standard'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DTC's liquidity needs for settlement are driven by protecting DTC
against the possibility that a Participant may fail to pay its
settlement obligations on a Business Day. The tools available to DTC
under its Rules, including the Net Debit Cap, allow it to regularly
test the sufficiency of liquid resources on an intraday and end-of-day
basis and adjust to stressed circumstances during a settlement day to
protect itself and Participants against liquidity exposure under normal
and stressed market conditions. DTC calculates its liquidity needs per
Participant (at a legal entity level) and further aggregates these
amounts at a family level (that is, including all affiliated
Participants, based on the assumption that all such affiliates may fail
simultaneously). In this regard, DTC monitors settlement flows and net-
debit obligations daily, and its current available liquidity resources
are sufficient to satisfy the Cover One standard.
    As described above, the proposed rule change would only increase
the maximum Net Debit Cap for individual Participants from $1.80 BN to
$2.15 BN, which is below DTC's available liquidity when considering the
Core Fund and LOC collectively, and it would not otherwise alter the
way DTC monitors settlement flows and net-debit obligations. Therefore,
DTC believes the proposal is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(i),
cited above, because the proposed increase would remain aligned with
DTC's continued maintenance of sufficient liquid resources to satisfy
its Cover One standard and not change DTC's monitoring of settlement
flows and net-debit obligations.

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    DTC does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose a
burden on competition.\23\ The proposed rule change would increase the
maximum Net Debit Cap from $1.80 BN to $2.15 BN, and would apply to
each Participant equally to the extent a Participant's Net Debit
Balance, barring the effect of the Net Debit Cap control, could exceed
the existing $1.80 BN.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DTC believes the proposed rule change may promote competition
because it alleviates the need for some Participants to wait for
Delivery Versus Payment credits or submit SPPs for their transactions
to process.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    DTC has not received or solicited any written comments relating to
this proposal. If any written comments are received, they would be
publicly filed as an Exhibit 2 to this filing, as required by Form 19b-
4 and the General Instructions thereto.
    Persons submitting comments are cautioned that, according to
Section IV (Solicitation of Comments) of the Exhibit 1A in the General
Instructions to Form 19b-4, the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from comment submissions. Commenters should
submit only information that they wish to make available publicly,
including their name, email address, and any other identifying
information.
    All prospective commenters should follow the Commission's
instructions on how to submit comments, available at https://www.sec.gov/regulatory-actions/how-to-submitcomments. General questions
regarding the rule filing process or logistical questions regarding
this filing should be directed to the Main Office of the Commission's
Division of Trading and Markets at [email protected] or 202-
551-5777.
    DTC reserves the right to not respond to any comments received.

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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-DTC-2023-013 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to file number SR-DTC-2023-013. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the

public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official
business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of DTC and on DTCC's website (dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings). Do not include personal identifiable information in
submissions; you should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. We may redact in part or withhold entirely from
publication submitted material that is obscene or subject to copyright
protection. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-DTC-2023-013
and should be submitted on or before January 18, 2024.
    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

Christina Z. Milnor,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-28706 Filed 12-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 84 (Monday, May 2, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 26223]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10139]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER16-1467-000]

Palmco Power VA 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
Palmco Power VA 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 May 11, 2016.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 21, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-10139 Filed 4-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 78 (Monday, April 26, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 22047]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08608]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 15105-000]

Solia 9 Hydroelectric, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On March 1, 2021, Solia 9 Hydroelectric, LLC filed an application
for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power
Act, proposing to study the feasibility of the Llano County Pumped
Storage Project No. 15105-000 (Llano County Project, or project), a
closed-loop pumped storage project to be located in Llano County,
Texas. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant
the permit holder priority to file a license application during the
permit term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder
to perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands
or waters owned by others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed pumped storage project would consist of the following:
(1) A 3,500 acre-foot upper reservoir with a maximum water surface
elevation of 2,400 feet mean sea level (msl); (2) a 3,500 acre-foot
lower, underground, reservoir composed of eight, 115,000-foot-long,
concentric tunnels varying in diameter from 4,200 feet to 5,400 feet,
with a maximum water surface elevation of -1,425 feet msl; (3) a
pumping plant and water supply conduit connecting the upper reservoir
to the Llano River; (4) a 2,800-foot-long, 16-foot-diameter
underground, steel-lined penstock equipped with a bifurcation structure
connecting the upper reservoir to the powerhouse; (5) a 200-foot-long,
70-foot-wide, 130-foot-high underground powerhouse containing two, 333-
megawatt (MW) reversible pump-turbine units for a combined capacity of
666 MW; (6) a 500-foot-long, 345-kilovolt interconnection line leading
from the powerhouse to an existing transmission line; (7) a 200-foot-
long, 200-foot-wide substation; and (8) appurtenant facilities. The
estimated annual generation of the Llano Project would be 1,450
gigawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Douglas Spaulding, 8441 Wayzata Blvd., Suite
101, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55426; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    FERC Contact: Navreet Deo; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY).
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-15105) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: April 20, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-08608 Filed 4-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P