Proposed Rule: Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Subpart W

Meeting Documentation: Kinder Morgan  07/22/10

Date	Staff Contact Information (Name, email, phone #)	Name of Organization (Attach list of all attendees names and emails if possible) 	Summary of Discussion (e.g., applicability, reporting requirements, etc.)	Written Comments Provided?

Did they also submit to Docket?	Date sent to EPA- CCD

07/22/10

Roger Fernandez

Dirk Cockrum

Kinder Morgan

Kinder Morgan simply went over their official comments that they submitted to the docket.  	Written comments were submitted to the docket.

June 10, 2010


Glossary Exposure Factors Handbook Page August 1997 G 1 GLOSSARY Absorption fraction ( percent absorbed)  The relative Boneless equivalent  Weights of meat ( pork, veal, beef) amount of a substance that penetrates through a barrier into and poultry, excluding all bones, but including separable fat the body, reported as a unitless fraction. sold on retail cuts of red meat.

Accuracy  The measure of the correctness of data, as given Carcass weight  Weight of the chilled hanging carcass, by the difference between the measured value and the true which includes the kidney and attached internal fat ( kidney, or standard value. pelvic, and heart fat), excludes the skin, head, feet, and Activity pattern ( time use) data  Information on activities in which various individuals engage, length of time spent performing various activities, locations in which individuals spend time and length of time spent by individuals within Chronic intake  The long term period over which a those various environments. substance crosses the outer boundary of an organism Air exchange rate  Rate of air leakage through windows, doorways, intakes and exhausts, and " adventitious Comparability  The ability to describe likenesses and openings" ( i. e., cracks and seams) that combine to form the differences in the quality and relevance of two or more data leakage configuration of the building envelope plus natural sets. and mechanical ventilation.

Ambient  The conditions surrounding a person, sampling consumed per person in a population composed only of location, etc. individuals who ate the food item of interest during a Analytical uncertainty propagation  Examines how uncertainty in individual parameters affects the overall Contaminant concentration  Contaminant concentration uncertainty of the exposure assessment. The uncertainties is the concentration of the contaminant in the medium ( air, associated with various parameters may propagate through food, soil, etc.) contacting the body and has units of a model very differently, even if they have approximately mass/ volume or mass/ mass. the same uncertainty. Since uncertainty propagation is a function of both the data and the model structure, this procedure evaluates both input variances and model sensitivity.

As consumed intake rates  Intake rates that are based on the weight of the food in the form that it is consumed.

Average daily dose  Dose rate averaged over a pathway thermophoresis. specific period of exposure expressed as a daily dose on a per unit body weight basis. The ADD is used for exposure to chemicals with non carcinogenic non chronic effects. The ADD is usually expressed in terms of mg/ kg day or other mass/ mass time units.

Best Tracer Method ( BTM)  Method for estimating soil ingestion that allows for the selection of the most recoverable tracer for a particular subject or group of subjects. Selection of the best tracer is made on the basis of the food/ soil ( F/ S) ratio. unattached internal organs. The pork carcass weight includes the skin and feet but excludes the kidney and attached internal fat.

without passing an absorption barrier.

Consumer only intake rate  The average quantity of food specified period.

Creel Census  Approach used by fishery managers to obtain harvest data collected onsite from single anglers or from larger scale commercial type operations.

Deposition  The removal of airborne substances to available surfaces that occurs as a result of gravitational settling and diffusion, as well as electrophoresis and Diary study  Survey in which individuals are asked to record food intake, activities, or other factors in a diary which is later used to evaluate exposure factors associated with specific populations.

Distribution  A set of values derived from a specific population or set of measurements that represents the range and array of data for the factor being studied. Glossary Page Exposure Factors Handbook G 2 August 1997 Dose  The amount of a substance available for interaction Exposure route  The way a chemical pollutant enters an with metabolic processes or biologically significant organism after contact, e. g., by ingestion, inhalation, or receptors after crossing the outer boundary of an organism. dermal absorption. The potential dose is the amount ingested, inhaled, or applied to the skin. The applied dose is the amount of a substance presented to an absorption barrier and available for absorption ( although not necessarily having yet crossed the outer boundary of the organism). The absorbed dose is the amount crossing a specific absorption barrier ( e. g., the exchange boundaries of skin, lung, and digestive tract) through uptake processes. Internal dose is a more general term denoting the amount absorbed without respect to specific absorption barriers or exchange boundaries. The amount of a chemical available for interaction by any particular organ or cell is termed the delivered dose for that organ or cell.

Dose response relationship  The resulting biological responses in an organ or organism expressed as a function of a series of doses.

Dressed weight  The portion of the harvest brought into kitchens for use, including bones for particular species.

Dry weight intake rates  Intake rates that are based on the weight of the food consumed after the moisture content has been removed.

Employer tenure  The length of time a worker has been with the same employer.

Exposed foods  Those foods that are grown above ground and are likely to be contaminated by pollutants deposited on surfaces that are eaten.

Exposure duration  Total time an individual is exposed to the chemical being evaluated.

Exposure Assessment  The determination or estimation ( qualitative or quantitative) of the magnitude, frequency, or duration, and route or exposure.

Exposure concentration  The concentration of a chemical in its transport or carrier medium at the point of contact.

Exposure pathway  The physical course a chemical takes from the source to the organism exposed. Exposure scenario  A set of facts, assumptions, and interferences about how exposure takes place that aids the exposure assessor in evaluating estimating, or quantifying exposures.

Exposure  Contact of a chemical, physical, or biological agent with the outer boundary of an organism. Exposure is quantified as the concentration of the agent in the medium in contact integrated over the time duration of the contact.

Exposure duration  Length of time over which contact with the contaminant lasts.

General population  The total of individuals inhabiting an area or making up a whole group.

Geometric mean  The nth root of the product of n values.

Homegrown/ home produced foods  Fruits and vegetables produced by home gardeners, meat and dairy products derived form consumer raised livestock, game meat, and home caught fish.

Inhaled dose  The amount of an inhaled substance that is available for interaction with metabolic processes or biologically significant receptors after crossing the outer boundary of an organism.

Insensible water loss  Evaporative water losses that occur during breastfeeding. Corrections are made to account for insensible water loss when estimating breast milk intake using the test weighing method.

Intake  The process by which a substance crosses the outer boundary of an organism without passing an absorption barrier ( e. g., through ingestion or inhalation).

Intake rate  Rate of inhalation, ingestion, and dermal contact depending on the route of exposure. For ingestion, the intake rate is simply the amount of food containing the contaminant of interest that an individual ingests during some specific time period ( units of mass/ time). For inhalation, the intake rate is the rate at which contaminated air is inhaled. Factors that affect dermal exposure are the amount of material that comes into contact with the skin, and the rate at which the contaminant is absorbed. Glossary Exposure Factors Handbook Page August 1997 G 3 Internal dose  The amount of a substance penetrating Occupational tenure  The cumulative number of years a across absorption barriers ( the exchange boundaries) of an person worked in his or her current occupation, regardless organism, via either physical or biological processes of number of employers, interruptions in employment, or ( synonymous with absorbed dose). time spent in other occupations.

Interzonal airflows  Transport of air through doorways, ductwork, and service chaseways that interconnect rooms or zones within a building.

Lifetime average daily dose  Dose rate averaged over a lifetime. The LADD is used for compounds with carcinogenic or chronic effects. The LADD is usually expressed in terms of mg/ kg day or other mass/ mass time units. Pica  Deliberate ingestion of non nutritive substances such Limiting Tracer Method ( LTM)  Method for evaluating soil ingestion that Population mobility  An indicator of the frequency at assumes that the maximum amount of soil ingested which individuals move from one residential location to corresponds with the lowest estimate from various tracer another. elements.

Local circulation  Convective and adjective air circulation material ingested, air breathed, or bulk material applied to and mixing within a room or within a zone. the skin.

Mass balance/ tracer techniques  Method for evaluating Precision  A measure of the reproducibility of a measured soil intake that accounts for both inputs and outputs of value under a given set of circumstances. tracer elements. Tracers in soil, food, medicine and other ingested items as well as in feces and urine are accounted for.

Median value  The value in a measurement data set such juices, and other preparation losses which include losses that half the measured values are greater and half are less. from paring or coring.

Microenvironment  The combination of activities and Probabilistic uncertainty analysis  Technique that assigns locations that yield potential exposure. a probability density function to each input parameter, then Moisture content  The portion of foods made up by water. The percent water is needed for converting food intake rates and residue concentrations between whole weight and dry weight values.

Monte Carlo technique  A repeated random sampling from the distribution of values for each of the parameters in a generic ( exposure or dose) equation to derive an estimate of the distribution of ( exposures or doses in) the population. Random samples  Samples selected from a statistical Occupational mobility  An indicator of the frequency at which workers change from one occupation to another. Pathway  The physical course a chemical or pollutant takes from the source to the organism exposed.

Per capita intake rate  The average quantity of food consumed per person in a population composed of both individuals who ate the food during a specified time period and those that did not.

as soil.

Potential dose  The amount of a chemical contained in Preparation losses  Net cooking losses, which include dripping and volatile losses, post cooking losses, which involve losses from cutting, bones, excess fat, scraps and randomly selects values from each of the distributions and inserts them into the exposure equation. Repeated calculations produce a distribution of predicted values, reflecting the combined impact of variability in each input to the calculation. Monte Carlo is a common type of probabilistic Uncertainty analysis.

Protected foods  Those foods that have outer protective coatings that are typically removed before consumption.

population such that each sample has an equal probability of being selected.

Range  The difference between the largest and smallest values in a measurement data set. Glossary Page Exposure Factors Handbook G 4 August 1997 Recreational/ sport fishermen  Individuals who catch fish Sensitivity analysis  Process of changing one variable as part of a sporting or recreational activity and not for the while leaving the others constant to determine its effect on purpose of providing a primary source of food for the output. This procedure fixes each uncertain quantity at themselves or for their families. its credible lower and upper bounds ( holding all others at Representativeness  The degree to which a sample is, or samples are, characteristic of the whole medium, exposure, or dose for which the samples are being used to make inferences.

Residential volume  The volume ( m ) of the structure in 3 which an individual resides and may be exposed to airborne contaminants.

Residential occupancy period  The time ( years) between a person moving into a residence and the time the person moves out or dies.

Resource utilization  For any quantity Y that is consumed by individuals in a population, the percentiles of the " resource utilization distribution" of Y can be formally defined as follows: Y ( R) is the pth percentile of the Test weighing  A method for estimating breast milk intake p resource utilization distribution if p percent of the overall over a 24 hour period in which the infant is weighed before consumption of Y in the population is done by individuals and after each feeding without changing its clothing. The with consumption below Y ( R) and 100 p percent is done sum of the difference between the measured weights over p by individuals with consumption above Y ( R). the 24 hour period is assumed to be equivalent to the p Retail weight equivalent  Weight of food as sold through retail foodstores; therefore, conversion factors are used to Total tapwater  Water consumed directly from the tap as correct carcass weight to retail weight to account for a beverage or used in the preparation of foods and trimming, shrinkage, or loss of meat and chicken at retail beverages ( i. e., coffee, tea, frozen juices, soups, etc.). outlets.

Route  The way a chemical or pollutant enters an organism including tapwater, milk, soft drinks, alcoholic beverages, after contact, e. g., by ingestion, inhalation, or dermal and water intrinsic to purchased foods. absorption.

Sample  A small part of something designed to show the nature or quality of the whole. Exposure related measurements are usually samples of environmental or ambient media, exposures of a small subset of a population for a short time, or biological samples, all for the purpose of inferring the nature and quality of parameters important to evaluating exposure.

Screening level assessments  Typically examine exposures that would fall on or beyond the high end of the expected exposure distribution. their nominal values, such as medians) and computes the results of each combination of values. The results help to identify the variables that have the greatest effect on exposure estimates and help focus further informationgathering efforts.

Serving sizes  The quantities of individual foods consumed per eating occasion. These estimates may be useful for assessing acute exposures.

Soil adherence  The quantity of soil that adheres to the skin and from which chemical contaminants are available for uptake at the skin surface.

Subsistence fishermen  Individuals who consume fresh caught fish as a major source of food.

amount of breast milk consumed daily.

Total fluid intake  Consumption of all types of fluids Tracer element studies  Soil ingestion studies that use trace elements found in soil and poorly metabolized in the human gut as indicators of soil intake.

Uncertainty  Uncertainty represents a lack of knowledge about factors affecting exposure or risk and can lead to inaccurate or biased estimates of exposure. The types of uncertainty include: scenario, parameter, and model.

Upper percentile  Values at the upper end of the distribution of values for a particular set of data.

Uptake  The process by which a substance crosses an absorption barrier and is absorbed into the body. Glossary Exposure Factors Handbook Page August 1997 G 5 Variability  Variability arises from true heterogeneity across people, places or time and can affect the precision of exposure estimates and the degree to which they can be generalized. The types of variability include: spatial, temporal, and inter individual.

Ventilation rate ( VR)  Alternative term for inhalation rate or breathing rate. Usually measured as minute volume, i. e. volume ( liters) of air exhaled per minute.

Volume of exhaled air ( V )  Product of the number of E respiratory cycles in a minute and the volume of air respired during each respiratory cycle ( tidal volume, V ). T


[Federal Register: March 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 48)]
[Notices]
[Page 12755-12758]
[DOCID:fr13mr06-92]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53431; File No. SR-CBOE-2004-65]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendments Nos. 1
and 2 Thereto Relating to Restrictions on Arbitrators Serving on CBOE's
Arbitration Committee

March 7, 2006.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'')\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on October 14, 2004, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc.
(``CBOE'' or the ``Exchange'') 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 by CBOE. On
December 13, 2005 and February 15, 2006, CBOE filed Amendments Nos. 1
and 2, respectively, to the proposed rule change.\3\ The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Amendment No. 1 replaces the original filing in its
entirety. Amendment No. 2 replaces the rule text in the original
filing and Amendment No. 1 in their entirety. Also, Amendment No. 2
supplements the ``Purpose'' section of Amendment No. 1 with
additional explanation as to the bases for certain proposed rule
amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange rules relating to
arbitrations. Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed
new language is in italics; proposed deletions are in brackets.
* * * * *

Chapter XVIII

Rule 18.10--Designation of Number of Arbitrators

    Rule 18.10. (a)-(b) No change.
    (c) Arbitrator Restrictions. The following restrictions shall apply
to persons who serve on the Arbitration Committee.
    (i) No member of the Arbitration Committee shall represent a party
as counsel in any dispute, claim or controversy submitted for CBOE
arbitration (``CBOE Arbitration'') while that member is serving on the
Arbitration Committee and for a period of six months after the date on
which that member ceases being a member of the Arbitration Committee
and,
    (ii) if a Committee member is appointed as an arbitrator in a
pending CBOE Arbitration (``Pending CBOE Arbitration'') and
subsequently ceases being a member of the Committee, but continues to
serve as an arbitrator in the Pending CBOE Arbitration, that person
cannot represent a party as counsel in a separate CBOE Arbitration
until he or she has ceased serving as an arbitrator in the Pending CBOE
Arbitration.
* * * * *

Rule 18.13--Disclosures Required of Arbitrators

    Rule 18.13. (a)-(c) No Change.
    (d) Removal by the Director.
    (1) The Director of Arbitration may remove an arbitrator based on
information that is required to be disclosed pursuant to this Rule.
    (2) After [Prior to] the beginning of (A) the first pre-hearing
conference or (B) the first hearing session, whichever is earlier, the
Director of Arbitration may remove an arbitrator based on information
not known to the parties when the arbitrator was selected. [disclosed
pursuant to this section. The Director of Arbitration shall also inform
the parties of any information disclosed pursuant to this section, if
the arbitrator who disclosed the information is not removed.]
    (3) The Director of Arbitration will grant a party's request to
disqualify an arbitrator if it is reasonable to infer, based on
information known at the time of the request, that the arbitrator is

biased, lacks impartiality, or has an interest in the outcome of the
arbitration. The interest or bias must be direct, definite, and capable
of reasonable demonstration, rather than remote or speculative.
    (4) The Director of Arbitration shall inform the parties to an
arbitration proceeding of any information disclosed to the Director of
Arbitration under this Rule unless either the arbitrator who disclosed
the information withdraws voluntarily as soon as the arbitrator learns
of any interest, relationship, or circumstances described in paragraph
(a) that might preclude the arbitrator from rendering an objective and
impartial determination in the proceeding, or the Director of
Arbitration removes the arbitrator.
* * * * *

Rule 18.14--Disqualification or Other Disability of Arbitrators

    Rule 18.14(a). Disqualification by Director of Arbitration Due to
Conflict of Interest or Bias. After the appointment of an arbitrator
and prior to the beginning of (A) the first pre-hearing conference or
(B) the first hearing session, whichever is earlier, if the Director of
Arbitration or a party objects, pursuant to Rule 18.12(b), to the
continued service of an arbitrator, the Director shall determine if the
arbitrator should be disqualified. If the Director of Arbitration
determines that an arbitrator should be disqualified then the Director
of Arbitration will notify both parties of the decision. The parties
will have 5 days to retain the arbitrator, notwithstanding the Director
of Arbitration's decision to disqualify the arbitrator. The parties
must agree to retain the arbitrator unanimously and convey their
decision to the Director of Arbitration in writing not later than 5
days after the Director of Arbitration's notice to disqualify.
    (b) Removal by Director. After the beginning of (A) the first pre-
hearing conference or (B) the first hearing session, whichever is
earlier, the Director of Arbitration may remove an arbitrator from an
arbitration panel based on information that is required to be disclosed
pursuant to Rule 18.13 and that was not previously disclosed.
    (c) Standards for Deciding Challenges for Cause. The Director of
Arbitration will grant a party's request to disqualify an arbitrator if
it is reasonable to infer, based on information known at the time of
the request, that the arbitrator is biased, lacks impartiality, or has
an interest in the outcome of the arbitration. The interest or bias
must be direct, definite, and capable of reasonable demonstration,
rather than remote or speculative.
    (d) Vacancies. In the event that any arbitrator, after the
[commencement] beginning of the first hearing session and prior to the
rendition of the award, should resign, die, withdraw, be disqualified
or otherwise be unable to perform as an arbitrator, the remaining
arbitrator(s) may continue with the hearing and determination of the
controversy, unless such continuation is objected to by any party
within five (5) days of notification of such resignation, death,
withdrawal, disqualification, or other inability. Upon objection, the
Director of Arbitration shall appoint a new member to the panel to fill
any vacancy. The Director of Arbitration shall inform the parties as
soon as possible of the name and employment history of the replacement
arbitrator pursuant to Rule 18.11, as well as any other information
disclosed pursuant to Rule 18.13. A party may make further inquiry of
the Director of Arbitration concerning the replacement arbitrator's
background and within the time remaining prior to the next scheduled
hearing session or the five (5) day period provided under Rule 18.12,
whichever is shorter, may exercise its right to challenge the
replacement arbitrator as provided in Rule 18.12.
* * * * *

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

    In its filing with the Commission, CBOE 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. CBOE has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    This proposed rule change would amend CBOE Rules 18.10, 18.13 and
18.14 relating to arbitrators who serve as members of the CBOE
Arbitration Committee (``Committee'') and the removal of arbitrators.
    Proposed Changes to CBOE Rule 18.10. The Exchange is proposing to
amend CBOE Rule 18.10 to codify its unwritten policy that restricts
members of the Committee from representing parties as counsel \4\ in
any arbitration dispute, claim or controversy that has been submitted
to CBOE for resolution (``CBOE Arbitration''). This restriction would
extend for six months after the date on which a Committee member ceases
being a member of the Committee. Moreover, if a member of the Committee
is an appointed arbitrator in a pending CBOE Arbitration (``Pending
Arbitration'') when that person ceases to be a member of the Committee,
that Committee member cannot represent a party as counsel in any other
CBOE Arbitration until the Pending Arbitration is closed, regardless of
whether six months have passed since the date on which the former
member ceased being a Committee member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ CBOE Rule 18.17 provides: ``All parties shall have the right
to representation by counsel at any stage of the proceedings.''
Since persons who are eligible to act as ``counsel'' in CBOE
arbitration proceedings are not limited to licensed attorneys, the
proposed rule change would apply to any person acting as ``counsel''
in a CBOE arbitration proceeding whether the person is a licensed
attorney or not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under CBOE rules, any CBOE Arbitration between parties who are
members or persons associated with a member shall be resolved by an
arbitration panel that consists of three members of the Committee.\5\
The Committee is maintained primarily as a means for managing a pool of
qualified industry arbitrators that is composed of a cross-section of
Exchange members and/or former members or associated persons of members
or other individuals who are knowledgeable about the securities
industry.\6\ All Committee members are appointed in accordance with
Exchange governance rules and guidelines.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See CBOE Rule 18.2(a). Rule 18.2(a) specifically provides
that the arbitration panel appointed to resolve member-to-member
arbitrations shall consist of ``not less than three members of the
Arbitration Committee.'' However, as a matter of practice,
arbitration panels typically consist only of three members of the
Arbitration Committee.
    \6\ Unlike other Exchange committees, the Arbitration Committee
does not meet as a whole except for training or to administer the
annual Committee orientation. For a CBOE Arbitration involving
customers or non-Exchange members and a member(s), CBOE rules
require that the dispute be resolved by an arbitration panel that
consists of no less than three arbitrators, the majority of which
consists of arbitrators who are not from the securities industry
(``Public Arbitrators''). (See CBOE Rule 18.10). In non-member CBOE
Arbitrations, members of the Arbitration Committee may be appointed
as industry arbitrators.
    \7\ See CBOE Rule 18.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has long adhered to an unwritten policy that prohibits
a Committee member who is an attorney from representing a party in a
CBOE Arbitration while that person is serving on the Committee. This
policy is

consistent with the Exchange's belief that, while serving on the
Arbitration Committee, arbitrators should be committed to the impartial
resolution of any disputes that come before them and should avoid
circumstances that could disqualify them from being appointed in future
arbitrations or give rise to the appearance of partiality. The Exchange
does not believe that a Committee member should act as an advocate in a
CBOE Arbitration while serving as a member of the CBOE Arbitration
Committee. Accordingly, the Exchange feels it would be prudent to
codify its unwritten policy within the rules governing CBOE
Arbitrations. Additionally, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule
text relating to restricting an arbitrator from representing a party as
counsel in any CBOE Arbitration (proposed Rule 18.10(c)) also would
extend to restrict an arbitrator from representing a party as counsel
in any capacity, not just acting as an attorney.
    In addition, the Exchange believes that a sufficient period of time
should pass after an arbitrator is no longer a member of the Committee
before that individual may represent a party as counsel in a CBOE
Arbitration. Without this required separation period, a former
Committee member conceivably could appear as counsel to a party before
other members of the Committee in a CBOE arbitration immediately after
resigning from the Committee. Although CBOE does not believe that
membership on the Arbitration Committee necessarily creates meaningful
relationships with other Committee members, such that present Committee
members could not be impartial in considering a case on which a
recently retired Committee member serves as counsel, a prescribed
waiting period is a sensible precaution against the appearance of
partiality. The Exchange believes that a six-month waiting period would
be appropriate and would help to eliminate the appearance of partiality
that could otherwise exist.
    Finally, the rule proposal provides that, if a Committee member is
appointed as an arbitrator to a pending CBOE Arbitration and
subsequently ceases to be a member of the Committee, but continues to
serve as an arbitrator in the pending CBOE Arbitration, that person
cannot represent a party in a separate CBOE Arbitration as counsel
until the arbitrator ceases to be appointed as an arbitrator in the
pending CBOE Arbitration. This provision of the proposed rule would
address the unlikely, but possible, situation in which an arbitration
proceeding remains pending more than six months after the date on which
an appointed arbitrator to that case ceased being a member of the
Committee.\8\ The Exchange believes that this provision is consistent
with the purpose of this rule change, which is the avoidance of the
appearance of partiality on the part of a CBOE Arbitrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Proposed CBOE Rule 18.10(c)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rules supplement existing policies and procedures that
are in place to screen arbitrators for conflicts, potential conflicts,
and the appearance of conflicts prior, and subsequent, to appointment.
Specifically, CBOE policies and procedures require any arbitrator,
prior to or subsequent to appointment to a CBOE Arbitration, to
disclose any information that presents a conflict, existing or
potential, or creates the appearance of a conflict with any party,
fact, or circumstance related to the case in question.\9\ Arbitrators
also are required to disclose any new information or circumstances that
may arise after their appointment that would create a similar conflict
or potential for conflict. Thus, if a former member of the Arbitration
Committee were to serve as counsel to a party before a CBOE arbitration
panel, the appointed arbitrators would be required to disclose any past
relationships with the former Committee member regardless of how much
time has passed since that former member resigned from the
Committee.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See CBOE Rule 18.13.
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Changes to CBOE Rules 18.13 and 18.14. The Exchange also
proposes to adopt new rules governing the process for removing or
disqualifying arbitrators (1) when the appointed arbitrator has
conflicts of interest with the parties or subject matter or if there is
evidence of arbitrator bias or (2) for failing to comply with
arbitrator disclosure requirements. Specifically, Exchange Rules 18.13
and 18.14 would be amended to provide greater safeguards against the
possibility that a CBOE Arbitration could proceed with an appointed
arbitrator who should, by rule, not be hearing and resolving the
arbitration. These amendments would be substantially similar to those
recently proposed by the NASD.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51856 (June 15,
2005); 70 FR 36442 (June 23, 2005) (proposing new NASD Code of
Arbitration Procedure for Customer Disputes (``Proposed Customer
Code'')); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51857 (June 15, 2005);
70 FR 36430 (June 23, 2005) (proposing new NASD Code of Arbitration
Procedure for Industry Disputes (``Proposed Industry Code'')).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 18.13(a)-(c) currently outlines the disclosures that a CBOE
arbitrator must make that help to assess whether the arbitrator would
be precluded from rendering an objective and impartial decision in a
CBOE Arbitration.\12\ Proposed Rules 18.13(d)(1) and 18.13(d)(2)
provide that the Director of Arbitration may remove an arbitrator based
on the disclosures made under Rule 18.13(a)-(c) and information not
known to the parties when the arbitrator was selected. The Exchange
also proposes to amend Rule 18.13(d), in proposed Rule 18.13(d)(3), to
clarify that the Director of Arbitration will grant a party's request
to disqualify an arbitrator if it is reasonable to infer, based on
information known at the time of the request, that the arbitrator is
biased, lacks impartiality, or has an interest in the outcome of the
CBOE Arbitration. Such interest or bias must be direct, definite, and
capable of reasonable demonstration, rather than being remote or
speculative. In addition, proposed Rule 18.13(d)(4) would help to
ensure that parties to a CBOE Arbitration are informed of the
disclosure of any new information that is required to be disclosed by
an arbitrator under Rule 18.13 unless either the Director of
Arbitration removes the arbitrator or the arbitrator withdraws
voluntarily as soon as the arbitrator learns of any interest,
relationship, or circumstances described under Rule 18.13(a) that might
preclude the arbitrator from rendering an objective and impartial
determination in the CBOE Arbitration. These proposed changes are
substantially similar to the standards proposed by the NASD.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See CBOE Rule 18.13(a)-(c).
    \13\ See Proposed Customer Code and Proposed Industry Code,
supra note 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also, this proposal would amend CBOE Rule 18.14, which currently
provides the process by which the Exchange fills vacancies of an
arbitrator, who for any reason, is unable to perform as an
arbitrator.\14\ The Exchange proposes to provide within Rule 18.14 a
more detailed process by which the Director of Arbitration may remove
or disqualify an arbitrator based on: (1) Conflicts of interest or bias
involving an arbitrator; (2) challenges for cause; and (3) information
required to be disclosed pursuant to Rule 18.13 and that was not
previously disclosed.\15\ These proposed changes are also substantially
similar to

proposed NASD arbitration rules governing the same subject matter.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Such reasons include the disqualification, resignation,
death, disability, or withdrawal of the arbitrator.
    \15\ Proposed Rule 18.14(c) also would provide standards to be
used in deciding challenges for cause, which standards are identical
to those provided under proposed Rule 18.13(d).
    \16\ See Proposed Customer Code and Proposed Industry Code,
supra note 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act, in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) in particular, in that it is designed to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market by
strengthening the integrity of the CBOE Arbitration program.

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule amendments will impose
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes 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 amendments.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-CBOE-2004-65 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2004-65. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, Station
Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing
also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal
office of the CBOE. 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-CBOE-2004-65 and should be submitted by April 3, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-3513 Filed 3-10-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31449-31450]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13388]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Fourteenth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 227, Standards of
Navigation Performance

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

ACTION: Meeting Notice of RTCA Special Committee 227, Standards of
Navigation Performance.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
fourteenth meeting of the RTCA Special Committee 227, Standards of
Navigation Performance.

DATES: The meeting will be held June 15-19th from 9:00 a.m.-4:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: RTCA Headquarters, 1150 18th Street NW., Suite 910,
Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by

telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or Web site at http://www.rtca.org. In addition, Sophie Bousquet may be
contacted directly at email<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.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of Special Committee 227. The agenda will
include the following:

June 15-19

 Welcome/Introductions/Administrative Remarks
 Agenda Overview
 Overview of Planned Work Program for the Week
    [cir] Action Items Review
    [cir] MOPS Draft Review
    [cir] Miscellaneous Items
 Plenary Review/Discussion
    [cir] Planned Work Schedule (Note, schedule subject to change)
    [cir] Draft MOPS Issues
    [cir] CNS-ATM appendix: Interval Management Operations, addition or
not at this time.
    [cir] Status of new working group for map MOPS
    [cir] Release of the MOPS (Rev to DO-283A) for FRAC
    [cir] 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. each day
 Technical Requirements Breakout Sessions (as needed)
 Other Business

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to 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 May 28, 2015.
Mohannad Dawoud,
Management Analyst, NextGen, Program Oversight and Administration,
Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-13388 Filed 6-1-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 19)]
[Notices]
[Page 5203-5204]
[DOCID:fr29ja08-79]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0008]

Houston/Galveston Navigation Safety Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of meetings.

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

SUMMARY: The Houston/Galveston Navigation Safety Advisory Committee
(HOGANSAC) and its working groups will meet in Galveston, Texas to
discuss waterway improvements, aids to navigation, area projects
impacting safety on the Houston Ship Channel, and various other
navigation safety matters in the Galveston Bay area. All meetings will
be open to the public.

DATES: The next meeting of HOGANSAC will be held on Tuesday, February
26, 2008 from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. The meeting of the Committee's working
groups will be held on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 from 9 a.m. to 12
p.m. These meetings may close early if all business is finished.
Written material and requests to make oral presentations should reach
the Coast Guard five (5) working days before the meeting at which the
presentation will be made. Requests to have a copy of your materials
distributed to each member of the committee or working group should
reach the Coast Guard at least ten (10) working days before the meeting
at which the presentation will be made.

ADDRESSES: The full Committee will meet at Marine Safety Unit
Galveston, 2101 FM 2004, Texas City, Texas 77591,<PHONE_NUMBER>. The
working groups meeting will be held at the Houston Pilots Association,
8150 South Loop East, Houston, Texas 77011-1747,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Send
written material and requests to make oral presentations to LT Sean
Hughes, Assistant to the Executive Secretary of HOGANSAC, 9640 Clinton
Drive, Houston, Texas 77029. This notice is available in our online
docket, USCG-2008-0008, http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Commander Hal R. Pitts, Executive
Secretary of HOGANSAC, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Lieutenant Sean Hughes, Assistant to the

Executive Secretary of HOGANSAC, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Written materials and requests to make

presentations should be sent to Commanding Officer, Sector Houston/
Galveston, Attn: LT Hughes.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of these meetings is given pursuant
to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (Pub. L. 92-463).

Agendas of the Meetings

    Houston/Galveston Navigation Safety Advisory Committee (HOGANSAC).
The tentative agenda includes the following:
    (1) Opening remarks by the Committee Sponsor (RADM Whitehead) or
the Committee Sponsor's representative, Executive Director (CAPT Diehl)
and Chairperson (Ms. Tava Foret).
    (2) Approval of the 13 September, 2007 and 27 November, 2007
minutes.
    (3) Old Business:
    (a) Navigation Operations (NAVOPS)/Maritime Incident Review
subcommittee report;
    (b) Deep Draft Entry Facilitation (DDEF) subcommittee report;
    (c) Dredging subcommittee report;
    (d) Technology subcommittee report;
    (e) Area Maritime Security Committee (AMSC) Liaison's report;
    (f) Harbor of Safe Refuge subcommittee report;
    (g) HOGANSAC Outreach report;
    (h) Maritime Awareness subcommittee report.
    (4) New Business:
    Working Groups Meeting. The tentative agenda for the working groups
meeting includes the following:
    (1) Presentation by each working group of its accomplishments and
plans for the future;
    (2) Review and discuss the work completed by each working group;
    (3) Put forth any action items for consideration at full committee
meeting.

Procedural

    Working groups have been formed to examine the following issues:
Dredging and related issues, electronic navigation systems, AtoN
knockdowns, impact of passing vessels on moored ships, boater education
issues, facilitating deep draft movements, mooring infrastructure, and
safe refuge during hurricanes. Not all working groups will provide a
report at this session. Further, working group reports may not
necessarily include discussions on all issues within the particular
working group's area of responsibility.
    All meetings are open to the public. Please note that meetings may
close early if all business is finished. At the chairs discretion
members of the public may make oral presentations during the meetings.
Requests to make oral presentations should reach the Coast Guard five
(5) working days before the meeting at which the presentation will be
made. Written material for distribution at a meeting should reach the
Coast Guard no later than ten (10) working days before the meeting at
which the presentation will be made. If you would like a copy of your
material distributed to each member of the committee in advance of the
meetings, please submit your request along with nineteen (19) copies of
the materials to the Coast Guard at least ten (10) working days before
the meeting at which the presentation will be made.

Information on Services for Individuals With Disabilities

    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the meetings, contact
the Executive Secretary or Assistant to the Executive Secretary as soon
as possible.

    Dated: January 14, 2008.
J.H.Korn,
Captain. U.S. Coast Guard Commander, 8th Coast Guard District, Acting.
 [FR Doc. E8-1472 Filed 1-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 167 (Monday, August 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 59211]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20635]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1174-000.
    Applicants: Kern River Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: 2016 KRF-PK to be effective
9/17/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160817-5306.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/16.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP16-566-002.
    Applicants: Total Peaking Services, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing TPS Order No. 809 Compliance Filing
Order Changes to be effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160817-5392.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/16.
    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 18, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-20635 Filed 8-26-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: June 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 119)]
[Notices]
[Page 29685]
[DOCID:fr23jn09-39]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 503-048]

Idaho Power Company; Notice of Application Ready for
Environmental Analysis and Soliciting Comments, Recommendations, Terms
and Conditions, and Prescriptions

June 16, 2009.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: New license.
    b. Project No.: 503-048.
    c. Date filed: June 26, 2008.
    d. Applicant: Idaho Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: Swan Falls Project.
    f. Location: On the Snake River in Ada and Owyhee counties, Idaho,
about 35 miles southwest of Boise. The project occupies federal lands
administered by the Bureau of Land Management.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 USC 791 (a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Rex Blackburn, Senior Vice President and
General Counsel, Idaho Power Company, P.O. Box 70, Boise, Idaho, 83707,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Jim Puglisi,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, recommendations, terms and
conditions, and prescriptions is 60 days from the issuance of this
notice; reply comments are due 105 days from the issuance date of this
notice.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an
intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency.
    Comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions
may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. The
Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. See CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
(http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ferconline.asp) under the ``e-filing''
link. For a simpler method of submitting text only comments, click on
``Quick Comment.''
    k. This application has been accepted, and is ready for
environmental analysis at this time.
    l. The project consists of: (1) A 1,218-foot-long concrete gravity
and rock-fill dam composed of an abutment embankment, a spillway
section, a center island, the old powerhouse section, the intermediate
dam, and the new powerhouse; (2) a 12-mile-long 1,525-acre reservoir
with a normal maximum water surface elevation of 2,314 feet mean sea
level (msl); (3) twelve equal-width, concrete spillways with a capacity
of 105,112 cubic feet per second (cfs) at reservoir elevation 2,318
msl, divided into two sections (western and eastern)--the western
section, contiguous with the abutment embankment, is a gated, concrete
ogee section with eight radial gates, and the eastern section, which is
adjacent to the island, contains four radial gates; (4) two concrete
flow channels; (5) two pit-bulb turbine generators with a nameplate
rating of 25 MW; (6) a powerhouse completed in 1994; (7) a 1,400-foot-
long, 120-foot-wide excavated tailrace channel; (8) a 33,600-kilovolt
ampere (kVA) main power transformer; (9) a 1-mile-long, 138-kilovolt
(kV) transmission line; and (10) appurtenant equipment. The estimated
average annual energy production from the project is about 125,720
megawatt-hours (MWh), with an average monthly generation ranging from
8,740 MWh in June to 11,750 MWh in January. The applicant proposes to
continue the run-of-river operations of the project with a minor change
to the minimum flow regime and continuation of the existing ramping
rate restrictions. The applicant also proposes a net reduction in the
acreage within the project boundary.
    m. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-
866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is also available for
inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above.
    All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title
``COMMENTS'', ``REPLY COMMENTS'', ``RECOMMENDATIONS,'' ``TERMS AND
CONDITIONS,'' or ``PRESCRIPTIONS;'' (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person submitting the filing; and (4) otherwise comply
with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must
set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the
application directly from the applicant. Each filing must be
accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed on the service
list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with
18 CFR 4.34(b), and 385.2010.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    n. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following
the date of issuance of this notice: (1) A copy of the water quality
certification; (2) a copy of the request for certification, including
proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request;
or (3) evidence of waiver of water quality certification.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-14652 Filed 6-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 3, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31060-31062]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14267]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2018-0544]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone: City of Vallejo Fourth of July Fireworks Display,
Mare Island Strait, Vallejo, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the
navigable waters of San Francisco Bay near Mare Island Strait in
support of the City of Vallejo Fourth of July Fireworks Display on July
4, 2018. This safety zone is established to ensure the safety of
participants and spectators from the dangers associated with
pyrotechnics. Unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from
entering into, transiting through, or remaining in the safety zone
without permission of the Captain of the Port or their designated
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 4, 2018, from 8 a.m. through
10:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
USCG-2018-0544. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Emily Rowan, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San
Francisco; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Acronyms

APA Administrative Procedure Act
COTP U.S. Coast Guard Captain on the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
PATCOM U.S. Coast Guard Patrol Commander
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    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)
with respect to this rule. Since the Coast Guard received final details
of this event on June 25, 2018, notice and comment procedures would be
impracticable in this instance.
    For similar reasons as those stated above, 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.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The Captain of the Port (COTP) San Francisco has determined that
potential hazards associated with the planned fireworks display on July
4, 2018, will be a safety concern for anyone within a 100-foot radius
of the fireworks barge and anyone within a 420-foot radius of the
fireworks firing site. This rule is needed to protect spectators,
vessels, and other property from hazards associated with pyrotechnics.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone during the loading
and transit of the fireworks barge, until after completion of the
fireworks display. During the loading of the pyrotechnics onto the
fireworks barge, scheduled to take place from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on
July 4, 2018, at Mare Island Waterfront in Vallejo, CA, the safety zone
will encompass the navigable waters around and under the fireworks
barge within a radius of 100 feet.
    The fireworks barge will remain at Mare Island Waterfront until the
start of the transit to the display location. Towing of the barge from
Mare Island Waterfront to the display location is scheduled to take
place from 8:50 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. on July 4, 2018, where it will remain
until the conclusion of the fireworks displays.
    At 9:00 p.m. on July 4, 2018, 30 minutes prior to the commencement
of the 18-minute fireworks display, the safety zone will increase in
size and encompass the navigable waters around and under the fireworks
barge within a radius of 420 feet in approximate position
38[deg]06'03'' N, 122[deg]16'00'' W (NAD 83) for the City of Vallejo
Fourth of July Fireworks Display. The safety zone shall terminate at
10:30 p.m. on July 4, 2018.
    The effect of the temporary safety zone are to restrict navigation
in the vicinity of the fireworks loading, transit, and firing site.
Except for persons or vessels authorized by the COTP or the COTP's
designated representative, no person or vessel may enter or remain in
the restricted area. This regulation is needed to keep spectators and
vessels away from the immediate vicinity of the fireworks firing site
to ensure the safety of participants, spectators, and transiting
vessels.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the limited
duration and narrowly tailored geographic area of the safety zone.
Although this rule restricts access to the waters encompassed by the
safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be significant because
the local waterway users will be notified via public Broadcast Notice
to Mariners to ensure the safety zone will result in minimum impact.
The entities most likely to be affected are waterfront facilities,
commercial vessels, and

pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    This rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: Owners and operators of waterfront facilities,
commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in recreational
activities and sightseeing, if these facilities or vessels are in the
vicinity of the safety zone at times when this zone is being enforced.
This rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities for the following reasons: (i) This rule will
encompass only a small portion of the waterway for a limited period of
time, and (ii) the maritime public will be advised in advance of this
safety zone via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    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.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, 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. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. 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 expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in
this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that
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 involves a safety zone of limited size and duration. It is
categorically excluded from further review under Categorical Exclusion
L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01,
Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this
determination is available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-931 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-931  Safety Zone; City of Vallejo 4th of July Fireworks
Display, Mare Island Strait, Vallejo, CA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of the Mare Island Strait within 100 feet of the fireworks barge
during loading at Mare Island Waterfront, as well as transit and
arrival to launching location in Mare Island Strait, Vallejo, CA. From
8:00 a.m. until approximately 4:00 p.m. on July 4, 2018, the fireworks
barge will be loading at Mare Island Waterfront, Vallejo, CA. The
safety zone will expand to all navigable waters around and under the
firework barge within a radius of 420 feet in approximate positions
38[deg]06'03'' N, 122[deg]16'00'' W (NAD 83), 30 minutes prior to the
start of the 18-minute fireworks display, scheduled to begin at 9:30
p.m. on July 4, 2018.
    (b) Enforcement period. The zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section will be enforced from 8:00 a.m. until approximately 10:30 p.m.
on July 4, 2018. The Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP) will
notify the maritime community of periods during

which this zone will be enforced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners in
accordance with Sec.  165.7.
    (c) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer on a Coast Guard
vessel or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or assisting
the COTP in the enforcement of the safety zone.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in subpart C of
this part, entry into, transiting or anchoring within this safety zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or a designated representative.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the COTP or a designated representative to obtain
permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or
operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to
them by the COTP or a designated representative. Persons and vessels
may request permission to enter the safety zone on VHF-23A or through
the 24-hour Command Center at telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 27, 2018.
Anthony J. Ceraolo,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2018-14267 Filed 7-2-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P