[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 173 (Thursday, September 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45236-45237]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19363]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0085; FRL-9983-45-OAR]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; NESHAP
for Radionuclides (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to
submit an information collection request (ICR), ``NESHAP for
Radionuclides (Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 1100.16, OMB Control No. 2060-
0191) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. Before doing
so, the EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects of the
proposed information collection as described below. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31,
2019. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before November 5, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2003-0085, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by
email to [[email protected]], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan P. Walsh, Radiation
Protection Division, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, Mail Code
6608T, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: 202-
343-2304; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act,
EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i)
Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the
accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, including the validity of

the methodology and assumptions used; (iii) enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv)
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. EPA will consider the comments received and
amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be
submitted to OMB for review and approval. At that time, EPA will issue
another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR
to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: On December 15, 1989, pursuant to Section 112 of the
Clean Air Act as amended in 1977 (42 U.S.C. 1857), the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) to control radionuclide emissions
from several source categories. The regulations are codified at 40 CFR
part 61. Of the seven subparts (B, H, I, K, R, T and W) included in the
1989 rule, as currently amended, four apply to privately-operated
facilities. In addition to requiring operational practices that limit
emissions, Subparts B, K, R, and W impose radionuclide dose and/or
emission limits, respectively, to underground uranium mines, elemental
phosphorous plants, phosphogypsum stacks, and uranium mill tailings
impoundments. Facilities must measure their radionuclide emissions,
perform analysis or calculations per EPA procedure, and report the
results to the EPA.
    Information collected is used by the EPA to ensure that public
health continues to be protected from the hazards of airborne
radionuclides by compliance with these standards. Compliance is
demonstrated through emissions testing and dose calculation when
appropriate.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: The North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) codes of facilities associated with the
activity of the respondents are: (1) Elemental Phosphorous--325180, (2)
Phosphogypsum Stacks--212392, (3) Underground Uranium Mines--212291,
and (4) Uranium Mill Tailings--212291.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (CAA, Sec, 112; 40
CFR part 61).
    Estimated number of respondents: 17 (total).
    Frequency of response: Annual, or one-time depending on the source
category and respondent activity.
    Total estimated burden: 1,880 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $447,850 (per year), which includes $328,000
annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs.
    Changes in estimates: There is a decrease of 1,898 hours in the
total estimated respondent burden compared with the 3,778 hours in the
ICR currently approved by OMB. This decrease is due to a combination of
factors. Fewer facilities, particularly uranium mines, are currently
active. The only operating elemental phosphorus plant has obtained a
waiver from annual testing and reporting. Compared to previous
estimates, the current calculation assumes that fewer phosphogypsum
stacks will require radon tests in any given year. The current
assumption represents an upper bound on costs due to radon testing and
reporting, compared to the actual observed activities of these
facilities.

    Dated: August 30, 2018.
Lee Ann B. Veal,
Director, Radiation Protection Division.
[FR Doc. 2018-19363 Filed 9-5-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


33690 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 108 / Thursday, June 5, 2003 / Notices OMB control number 2060   0348 in any correspondence.

Dated: May 21, 2003. Henry C. Thomas, Jr., Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. [ FR Doc. 03   14197 Filed 6   4   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ FRL   7507   6]

Adequacy Determination for the Kansas City Area Ozone Maintenance State Implementation Plan ( SIP) for Transportation Conformity Purposes AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice of adequacy determination.

SUMMARY: In this notice, EPA is informing the public that we have found the motor vehicle emissions budgets for volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides in the Kansas City area adequate for conformity purposes. The budgets were submitted with the Kansas City Maintenance Plan for Control of Ozone which addresses the second tenyear period from the years 2003 through 2012. The Plan was submitted under two separate SIP submittals by the state of Kansas and the state of Missouri. The motor vehicle emissions budgets in each SIP were for the Kansas City Maintenance area and the budgets were the same for both states. We have determined that the budget submitted by the state of Kansas is adequate, and that the budget submitted by the state of Missouri is adequate. DATE: This finding is effective June 20, 2003. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The finding and the response to comments will be available at EPA's conformity Web site: http:// www. epa. gov/ otaq/ transp/ traqconf. htm ( click on `` Adequacy Web Pages''). You may also contact Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, 901 N. 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101, or e mail at hamilton. heather@ epa. gov, telephone ( 913) 551   7039. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever `` we,'' `` us,'' or `` our'' is used, we mean EPA. We sent a letter to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources on March 17, 2003, stating that the motor vehicle emissions budgets in the Kansas City area submitted with the Kansas City Maintenance Plan for Control of Ozone were adequate. The Kansas City Maintenance Plan for Control of Ozone addresses the second ten year period from the years 2003 through 2012. On March 2, 1999, the D. C. Circuit Court ruled that submitted SIPs cannot be used for conformity determinations until EPA has affirmatively found them adequate. As a result of our adequacy finding, the Kansas City Area must use the motor vehicle emissions budgets from the submitted Kansas City Maintenance Plan for Ozone for future conformity determinations. We described our process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in a guidance memorandum dated May 14, 1999, entitled, `` Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision.'' We followed this guidance in making our adequacy determination. Transportation conformity is required by section 176( c) of the Clean Air Act. EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to SIPs and establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not they do. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards. The criteria by which we determine whether SIP motor vehicle emission budgets are adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118( e)( 4). We applied these criteria in finding that the submitted budgets are adequate. Please note that an adequacy review is separate from EPA's completeness review, and it also should not be used to prejudge EPA's ultimate approval of the SIP. Even if we find a budget adequate, the SIP could later be disapproved.

Authority: 42 U. S. C. 7401   7671 q.

Dated: May 22, 2003.

James B. Gulliford,

Regional Administrator, Region 7. [ FR Doc. 03   14195 Filed 6   4   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPP   2003   0334; FRL   7311   1]

Exposure Modeling Work Group; Notice of Public Meeting AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Exposure Modeling Work Group ( EMWG) will hold a 1   day meeting on June 10, 2003. This notice announces the location and time for the meeting and sets forth the tentative agenda topics. DATES: The meeting will be held on June 10, 2003, from 9 a. m. to 3 p. m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Office of Pesticide Programs ( OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Crystal Mall # 2, Room 1126 ( Fishbowl), 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael R. Barrett, Environmental Fate and Effects Division ( 7507C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 703) 305   6391; fax number: ( 703) 305   6309; email address: barrett. michael@ epa. gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of particular interest to those persons who are or may be required to conduct testing of chemical substances under the Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA), the Federal, Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ( FFDCA), or the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act ( FIFRA). Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPP   2003   0334. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action.

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 14: 58 Jun 04, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 05JNN1. SGM 05JNN1 33691 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 108 / Thursday, June 5, 2003 / Notices Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number.

II. Background On a quarterly interval, the Exposure Modeling Workgroup meets to discuss current issues in modeling pesticide fate, transport, and exposure to pesticides in support of risk assessment in a regulatory context.

III. How Can I Request to Participate in this Meeting?

You may submit a request to participate in this meeting to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

IV. Tentative Agenda This section provides tentative agenda topics for the 1   day meeting: 1. Welcome and introductions. 2. Old action items. 3. Brief updates.   European Union activities.   U. S. Department of Agriculture/ Agricultural Research Service ( USDA/ ARS) Pesticide Properties Database.   Pesticide Root Zone Model/ Exposure Analysis Modeling System ( PRZM/ EXAMS) Model.   Rice modeling.   Watershed Regression for Pesticides ( WARP) Model.   Spray Drift Task Force progress.   AgDrift EPA review.   EXAMINER.   Pesticide Leaching U. S. ( PLUS).   Cumulative and Aggregate Risk Evaluation System ( CARES).   Drinking water exposure estimates for dietary risk.   Environmental Fate and Effects Division's ( EFED) water quality projects.   Perspective Groundwater ( PGW) Database.   EFED current issues in fate modeling. 4. Major topics:   A rapid laboratory method for studying synergism.   Techniques for estimating exposure time series and peak exposure levels.   Geographic Information System ( GIS) watershed analysis for refined aquatic risk assessments.   Update on pesticide usage estimation procedures to support interpretation of monitoring data.   PRZM/ EXAMS quality control issues update.   Software integrating frameworks for pesticide models. 5. Wrap up and action items.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides, Pests, Modeling.

Dated: June 2, 2003. Elizabeth Leovey, Acting Director, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. [ FR Doc. 03   14311 Filed 6   3   03; 1: 31 pm]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ FRL   7507   7]

Meeting of the National Drinking Water Advisory Council ( NDWAC)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 10( a)( 2) of Public Law 92   423, `` The Federal Advisory Committee Act,'' notice is hereby given of the forthcoming conference call meeting of the National Drinking Water Advisory Council ( Council), established under the Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended ( 42 U. S. C. 300f et seq.). The Council will discuss follow up actions relating to a report presented at the May 2003 meeting by NDWAC's work group on Affordability. The Council will determine whether it will make specific recommendations to EPA relating to the Affordability report.

DATES: The Council meeting will be held on June 20, 2003, from 11 a. m. to 1 p. m., Eastern Standard Time.

ADDRESSES: Council members teleconference into Room 2123 of the EPA East Building, which is physically located at 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Members of the public that would like to attend the meeting, present an oral statement, submit a written statement in advance, or make arrangements to teleconference call into the meeting should contact Brenda Johnson, Designated Federal Officer, National Drinking Water Advisory Council, by June 13, 2003. Ms. Johnson can be reached at ( 202) 564   3791; by e mail at johnson. brendap@ epa. gov, or by regular mail at U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water ( M/ C 4601M), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20460.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Council encourages the public's input and will allocate 30 minutes for this purpose. A limited number of additional phone lines may be available for members of the public that are outside of the Washington, DC, metropolitan commuting area and are unable to attend in person. Any additional teleconferencing lines that are available will be reserved on a first come, firstserve basis by the Designated Federal Officer. To ensure adequate time for public involvement, oral statements will be limited to five minutes, and it is preferred that only one person present the statement on behalf of a group or organization. Any person who wishes to file a written statement can do so before or after a Council meeting. Written statements received prior to the meeting will be distributed to all members of the Council before any final discussion or vote is completed. Any statements received after the meeting will become part of the permanent meeting file and will be forwarded to the Council members for their information. Any person needing special accommodations at this meeting, including wheelchair access, should contact the Designated Federal Officer, at the number or e mail listed under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, at least five business days before the meeting so that the appropriate arrangements can be made.

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 14: 58 Jun 04, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 05JNN1. SGM 05JNN1


[Federal Register: October 20, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 203)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 62229]
[DOCID:fr20oc08-18]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 40

[Docket No. RM06-22-000]

Mandatory Reliability Standards for Critical Infrastructure
Protection; Notice of Extension of Time

Issued October 10, 2008.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Order on Proposed Clarification: Extension of comment date.

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

SUMMARY: On September 18, 2008, the Commission issued an order
proposing to clarify that the facilities within a nuclear generation
plant in the United States that are not regulated by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission are subject to compliance with the eight
mandatory ``CIP'' Reliability Standards approved in Commission Order
No. 706. The date for filing comments on the Commission's proposal is
being extended at the request of the Edison Electric Institute and the
Nuclear Energy Institute.

DATES: Comments are due November 3, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number by any
of the following methods:
     Agency Web Site: http://ferc.gov. Documents created
electronically using word processing software should be filed in native
applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned format.
     Mail/Hand Delivery: Commenters unable to file comments
electronically must mail or hand-deliver an original and 14 copies of
their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of
the Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan First (Legal Information),
Office of General Counsel, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,
(202) 502-8529; Regis Binder (Technical Information), Office of
Electric Reliability, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,
(202) 502-6460.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 10, 2008, the Edison Electric
Institute (EEI) and the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) filed a joint
motion for an extension of time to file comments in response to the
Commission's Order on Proposed Clarification issued September 18, 2008,
in the above-referenced proceeding. (Mandatory Reliability Standards
for Critical Infrastructure Protection, 124 FERC ] 61,247 (2008)
(Proposed Clarification)). EEI and NEI state that because a majority of
their members will be required to implement CIP Reliability Standards
and NRC cybersecurity requirements in accordance with the clarification
to be issued in this docket and because of the complex of the issues
addressed in the Proposed Clarification, additional time is needed to
submit well-developed comments.
    Upon consideration, notice is hereby given that an extension of
time for filing comments is granted to and including November 3, 2008.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-24630 Filed 10-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: June 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 123)]
[Notices]
[Page 36160-36161]
[DOCID:fr25jn08-139]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

In the Matter of: Acclaim Entertainment, Inc., Benguet Corp.,
Clean Systems Technology Group, Ltd., Family Golf Centers, Inc.,
Graham-Field Health Products, Inc., Lechters, Inc., Symbiat, Inc.,
Texfi Industries, Inc., and Value Holdings, Inc. (n/k/a Galea Life
Sciences, Inc.); Order of Suspension of Trading

Date: June 23, 2008.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Acclaim Entertainment, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended March 31, 2004.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Benguet Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended December 31, 2002.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Clean Systems Technology Group Ltd. because it has not filed any
periodic reports since the period ended September 30, 2004.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Family Golf Centers, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended September 30, 2000.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information

concerning the securities of Graham-Field Health Products, Inc. because
it has not filed any periodic reports since the period ended September
30, 1999.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Lechters, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended May 5, 2001.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Symbiat, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended December 31, 2002.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Texfi Industries, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended July 30, 1999.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Value Holdings, Inc. (n/k/a Galea Life Sciences, Inc.) because it has
not filed any periodic reports since the period ended July 31, 2001.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the
above-listed companies is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT
on June 23, 2008, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on July 7, 2008.

    By the Commission.
J. Lynn Taylor,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 08-1388 Filed 6-23-08; 10:50 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: April 2, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 64)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 17940-17944]
[DOCID:fr02ap08-21]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086, FRL-8549-9]
RIN 2060-AN80

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Semiconductor Manufacturing

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On October 19, 2006, EPA proposed amendments to the National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Semiconductor
Manufacturing, published on May 22, 2003. The purpose of the proposed
amendments was to clarify the emission requirements for process vents
by establishing a new maximum achievable control technology floor level
of control for existing combined hazardous air pollutants process vent
streams containing inorganic and organic hazardous air pollutants and
adding requirements for new and reconstructed combined hazardous air
pollutants process vents. For existing combined hazardous air
pollutants process vents, EPA had proposed that the floor was no
control. In light of Sierra Club v. EPA, we are re-proposing the
requirements for existing and new combined hazardous air pollutants
process in this supplemental proposal.

DATES: Comments must be received by EPA on or before May 2, 2008,
unless a public hearing is requested by April 14, 2008. If a hearing is
requested, EPA will hold a public hearing on April 17, 2008. If a
hearing is requested, written comments must be received by May 19,
2008. If you are interested in attending the public hearing, contact
Mr. John Schaefer at<PHONE_NUMBER> to verify that a hearing will be
held.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>
     Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send comments to: EPA Docket
Center (2822T), Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total
of two copies.
    Hand Delivery: In person or by courier, deliver comments to: EPA
Docket Center (2822T), Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086,
EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information. Please include a total of two
copies.
    Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPAHQ-OAR-2002-
0086. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be confidential
business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
Send or deliver information identified as CBI to only the following
address: Mr. Roberto Morales, OAQPS Document Control Officer, EPA
(C404-02), Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. The www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/
epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket. All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0086, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the EPA
Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. A reasonable fee may be charged for
copying docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John Schaefer, EPA, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division,
Measurement Policy Group (D243-05), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711;
telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Regulated Entities. Entities potentially affected by the proposed
amendments to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Semiconductor Manufacturing include:

                   Table 1.--Regulated Entities Table
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Examples of regulated
           Category                NAICS \1\            entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry......................          334413  Semiconductor crystal
                                                 growing facilities,
                                                 semiconductor wafer
                                                 fabrication facilities,
                                                 semiconductor test and
                                                 assembly facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that may potentially be
affected by this action. To determine whether your facility is
regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the
applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.7181 of the rule. If you have
questions regarding the applicability of the proposed amendments to a
particular entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Send or deliver information identified
as CBI only to the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this
document. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you
claim to be CBI. For CBI information submitted on a disk or CD-ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version
of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the
comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be
submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
    Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of today's proposal will also be available through
the WWW. Following the Administrator's signature, a copy of this action
will be posted on EPA's Technology Transfer Network (TTN) policy and
guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. Information may also be obtained from the Web
page for the proposed rulemaking at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/pcem/
pcempg.html. The TTN at EPA's Web site provides information and
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at 10
a.m. at the EPA's Environmental Research Center Auditorium, Research
Triangle Park, NC, or at an alternate site nearby.
    Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as
follows:

I. Background
II. Summary of the Proposed Amendments
III. Rationale for the Proposed Amendments
IV. Impacts of the Proposed Amendments
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations

I. Background

    On May 22, 2003 (68 FR 27913), we issued the national emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for semiconductor
manufacturing (40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBB). The NESHAP implement
section 112(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) by requiring all major
sources to meet emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (HAP)
reflecting application of the maximum achievable control technology
(MACT). The NESHAP establish emission limitations for emission sources
at operations used to manufacture p-type and n-type semiconductors and
active solid-state devices from a wafer substrate.
    After promulgation of the NESHAP, it was brought to our attention
that while the NESHAP established separate emission standards for
organic and inorganic HAP from process vents, there was one plant that
has a different process vent approach system. Specifically, this plant
combines inorganic and organic vent streams into a single atmospheric
process vent. At the time we developed the MACT standard, we were not
aware of any sources that combined their inorganic and organic vent
streams, and, therefore, we had no data on such sources. Rather, during
the development phase of the rule, we determined that since 1980
industry practice has been to strictly separate process vent emissions
into streams containing either organic or inorganic HAP (71 FR 61701,
61702-03, October 19, 2006). In order to address the combined process
vent stream segment of which we are now aware, on October 19, 2006, we
proposed amending the final rule by establishing emission standards for
existing and new combined process vent streams (71 FR 61701). For the
limited number of existing combined process vents, we proposed no
control. For new and reconstructed combined HAP process vents, we
proposed the same requirements that currently apply to new inorganic
HAP process vents and new organic HAP process vents (71 FR 61703).
    In light of the DC Circuit's decision in Sierra Club v. EPA, 479
F.3d 875 (DC Circuit 2007), we are issuing this supplementary proposal
to change the requirements for existing and new combined HAP process
vents that we proposed in the October 2006 amendments. This
supplementary proposal is limited to revising the emission standards
for existing and new combined HAP process vents, and we are requesting
comments only on these proposed changes.

II. Summary of the Proposed Amendments

    The October 2006 proposed amendments proposed no control
requirements for existing combined HAP process vents. In addition, for
new and reconstructed combined HAP process vents, we proposed the
requirement for inorganic HAP components to be the same as the current
requirement for inorganic HAP process vents and the requirement for
organic HAP to be the same as the requirement for organic HAP process
vents (71 FR 61703).
    These proposed amendments establish the following emission limit
for HAP emitted from new and existing combined HAP process vents: 14.22
parts per million by volume (ppmv).

III. Rationale for the Proposed Amendments

    In the October 2006 proposed amendments, we proposed the
requirements for existing combined HAP process vents would be no
reductions in emissions or no control. Subsequently, the DC Circuit in
Sierra Club v. EPA, 479 F.3d 875 (DC Circuit 2007) found that EPA's
decision to set no control emission floors for source categories where
the best performing sources did not use emission control technology was
in direct contravention of CAA section 112(d)(3). In response to this
decision, we are proposing revised standards for existing and new
combined HAP process vents in this supplementary proposal.
    Specifically, we are proposing that existing combined HAP process
vents achieve a control level of 14.22 ppmv, which is the average level
of emissions control achieved by the best performing four combined HAP
process vents that we are aware of at maximum representative operating
conditions. We are basing the MACT floor on four combined HAP process
vents because we only identified four such vents in our recent
assessment of the semiconductor industry. This level of control
represents the level actually achieved by the best performing sources,
consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA 479 F.3d 875 (DC Circuit 2007) and
CAA section 112(d)(3).
    In addition, we are proposing that new combined HAP process vents
also achieve a control level of 14.22 ppmv. This is because, for new
and reconstructed sources, CAA section 112(d)(3) requires that we set
emissions limitations that are no less stringent than the emissions
control achieved in practice by the best performing similar source,
which in this instance are the existing four combined HAP process
vents. Our technical analysis of these four process vents, the
information used to develop the 14.22 ppmv limitation, and the beyond
the MACT floor analysis is available in the docket for this rulemaking.
    We examined establishing limitations beyond the floor level of
control for existing and new combined HAP process vents. Establishing a
meaningful control level below the 14.22 ppmv limitation would require
the segregation of organic and inorganic process vent streams and
process heat into separate vent streams. The separate organic and
inorganic process vents could then be controlled by add-on control
devices. We looked at one option that segregated the process vents into
organic and inorganic constituents and controlled the inorganic process
streams with a wet scrubber as needed to meet the existing emission
limit for inorganic process vent streams. We rejected this control
option because the associated costs were calculated to be in excess of
$7.5 million per ton of HAP controlled. We believe that this option is
not a reasonable beyond the floor control option because the associated
costs are prohibitive. Therefore, we are proposing the selected
limitation or control level of 14.22 ppmv as the floor level of control
for existing combined HAP process vents.

IV. Impacts of the Proposed Amendments

    The proposed amendments do not affect the level of emissions
control required by the existing NESHAP and therefore, there is no
change to the analysis of nonair, health, environmental, and energy
impacts from the final rule. This is because the proposed MACT level of
control is achieved by three of the four process vents evaluated. We
expect the fourth process vent will be able to meet the standard
through operational changes rather than through the use of add on
control devices. In addition, we do not expect new semiconductor
manufacturing facilities will utilize combined HAP process vents, so we
do not expect any new combined HAP process vents will be constructed in
the future. Therefore, a re-evaluation of costs associated with the
final rule was not necessary.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is a ``significant regulatory action.'' Accordingly, EPA
submitted this action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review under Executive Order 12866 and any changes made in response to
OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket for this action.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
The information collection requirements in the final rule have not been
changed by these proposed amendments. However, OMB has previously
approved the information collection requirements contained in the
existing regulations (40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBB) under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and
has assigned OMB control number 2060-0591. The OMB control numbers for
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administrations' regulations at 13 CFR 121.201;
(2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city,
county, town, school district or special district with a population of
less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-
profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
proposed rule will not impose any requirements on small entities.
    We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the
proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related
to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable
law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other
than the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an
explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before EPA
establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it
must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government
agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected
small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to
have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
    EPA has determined that this proposed rule does not contain a
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more
for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the
private sector in any one year. This rule affects only one facility in
the nation. Total rule impacts were estimated to be approximately
$22,000. Thus, this proposed rule is not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. EPA has determined that this proposed
rule contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments because it contains no requirements
that apply to such governments or impose obligations upon them.
Therefore, the proposed rule is not subject to section 203 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have
federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects 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.''
    This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will
not have substantial direct effects 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,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. None of the affected
semiconductor facilities are owned or operated by State or local
governments. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this
proposed rule.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule
from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) requires EPA to develop
an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by
tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not have tribal
implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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. No tribal governments own or operate
semiconductor manufacturing facilities and are not subject to the
proposed standards. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
proposed rule. EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this
proposed rule from tribal officials.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. This proposed rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based on technology
performance and not on health or safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as
defined in Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. This rule
does not require the use of add-on control devices and will therefore
not have any adverse energy effects.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 112(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104-113, 12(d)(15 U.S.C. 272 note),
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. VCS are technical standards
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The
NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when
the Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
    This proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any VCS.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it increases the
level of environmental protection for all affected populations without
having any

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on any population, including any minority or low-income
population. This proposed rule affects one facility in the nation. This
facility emits approximately one ton per year of regulated HAP and does
not significantly affect the local population.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental Protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: March 27, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
63, of the Code of the Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as
follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart BBBBB--[Amended]

    2. Section 63.7184 is amended by adding paragraph (f) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.7184  What emission limitations, operating limits, and work
practice standards must I meet?

* * * * *
    (f) Process vents--combined HAP emissions. For each combined HAP
process vent, other than process vents from storage tanks, you must
reduce or maintain the concentration of emitted HAP from the process
vent to less than or equal to 14.22 ppmv. These limitations can be met
by venting emissions from your process vent through a closed vent
system to any combination of control devices meeting the requirements
of Sec.  63.982(a)(2).

 [FR Doc. E8-6816 Filed 4-1-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 248 (Monday, December 29, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78082-78083]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30326]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC14-126-000.
    Applicants: Wisconsin Energy Corporation, Integrys Energy Group,
Inc.
    Description: Response to Staff Letter requesting additional
information of Wisconsin Energy Corporation and Integrys Energy Group,
Inc.
    Filed Date: 12/18/14.
    Accession Number: 20141218-5387.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/8/15.

    Docket Numbers: EC15-54-000.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company, PacifiCorp.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization for Disposition of
Jurisdictional Facilities of Idaho Power Company and PacifiCorp.
    Filed Date: 12/19/14.
    Accession Number: 20141219-5342.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER10-1103-004.
    Applicants: AmerenEnergy Medina Valley Cogen, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing per 35.37: Triennial Market Power
Update and MBR Tariff Changes to be effective 12/20/2014.
    Filed Date: 12/19/14.
    Accession Number: 20141219-5324.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/17/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1119-004.
    Applicants: Ameren Illinois Company.
    Description: Compliance filing per 35.37: Triennial Market Power
Update and MBR Tariff Changes to be effective 12/20/2014.
    Filed Date: 12/19/14.
    Accession Number: 20141219-5308.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/17/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1123-004.
    Applicants: Union Electric Company.
    Description: Compliance filing per 35.37: Triennial Market Power
Update and MBR Tariff Changes to be effective 12/20/2014.
    Filed Date: 12/19/14.
    Accession Number: 20141219-5320.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/17/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2848-006; ER11-1939-008; ER11-2754-008; ER12-
999-006; ER12-1002-006; ER12-1005-006; ER12-1006-006; ER12-1007-007.
    Applicants: AP Holdings, LLC, AP Gas & Electric (IL), LLC, AP Gas &
Electric (MD), LLC, AP Gas & Electric (NJ), LLC, AP Gas & Electric
(NY), LLC, AP Gas & Electric (OH), LLC, AP Gas & Electric (PA), LLC, AP
Gas & Electric (TX), LLC.
    Description: Notification of Non-Material Change in Status of AP
Holdings Subsidiaries.
    Filed Date: 12/19/14.
    Accession Number: 20141219-5222.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-162-011; ER11-3876-014; ER11-2044-014; ER10-
2611-012.
    Applicants: Bishop Hill Energy II LLC, Cordova Energy Company LLC,
MidAmerican Energy Company, Saranac Power Partners, L.P.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis Update for the Central
Region of Bishop Hill Energy II LLC, et. al. under ER12-162, et. al.
    Filed Date: 12/19/14.
    Accession Number: 20141219-5264.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/17/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1822-004.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing per 35: Minimum Oil Burn Settlement
Agreement No. 2178 TC Ravenswood, et. al. to be effective 5/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 12/19/14.
    Accession Number: 20141219-5272.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-674-000.

    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc., Niagara
Mohawk Power Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 205--
Cost Reimbursement Agreement 2177 between NiMo and NYPA to be effective
11/21/2014.
    Filed Date: 12/19/14.
    Accession Number: 20141219-5225.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-675-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii):
Revisions to OATT Schedules 4 and 9 to be effective 3/19/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/19/14.
    Accession Number: 20141219-5318.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-678-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): SIC
Changes in Availability to be effective 2/17/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/19/14.
    Accession Number: 20141219-5328.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-679-000.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2015
SDGE TRBAA TACBAA update to Transmission Owner Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/19/14.
    Accession Number: 20141219-5329.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-680-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Idaho
Power Bridger, JOOA, Termination Agreements to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 12/19/14.
    Accession Number: 20141219-5354.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    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.
    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: December 19, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-30326 Filed 12-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 101 (Friday, May 24, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24197-24198]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10901]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary of Transportation

[DOT-OST-2018-0210]

Traffic Safety and the 5.9 GHz Spectrum Conference

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to inform the public that the
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) is planning to hold a
conference entitled Traffic Safety and the 5.9 GHz Spectrum on June 3,
2019 to seek input regarding Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X)
Communications. This event is a critical element for the Department in
identifying areas of common ground that can assist deployers and
investors in V2X technologies in advancing the use of the 5.9 GHz
spectrum for traffic safety and congestion mitigation. The Department
seeks to gain a greater understanding of industry leaders' current and
future investment strategies, as well as potential considerations for
efficient use of spectrum that will foster greater opportunities for
some level of interoperability and compatibility moving forward.

DATES: Meeting: The meeting will be held at U.S. DOT Headquarters, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, on Monday, June 3, 2019
from 1:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m. (Eastern Daylight Time). Further information
concerning registration and the availability of the agenda can be found
below in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. Comments: The
Department has reopened the docket for comments associated with this
meeting, which will close on Monday July 8, 2019. See the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section below for more information about written comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Karen Van
Dyke,<PHONE_NUMBER>; Suzanne Sloan,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Department has reviewed the comments that were recently
submitted under the Request for Comments (RFC) on V2X Communications,
DOT-OST-2018-0210, and understands the desire for greater stability on
addressing the complex issues surrounding spectrum and use of the band.
With over 75 connected vehicle projects in the U.S. alone, 54 currently
operational, there is a need to identify a common path forward that
ensures current deployments can continue without the risk of loss of
investment and/or jeopardizing the intended safety and mobility
benefits due to deployment delays.

Meeting Details

    This conference is open to the general public by registration only.
For those who would like to attend the conference, we request that you
register no later than May 28, 2019. Please use the following link to
register: [https://www.eventbrite.com/e/59-ghz-spectrum-conference-tickets-61242857034].
    You must include:

 Name
 Organization
 Telephone number
 Mailing and email addresses
 Country of citizenship

    The U.S. Department of Transportation is committed to providing
equal access to this conference for all participants. If you need
alternative formats or services because of a disability, please contact
Karen Van Dyke or Suzanne Sloan (contact information above) with your
request by close of business May 28, 2019.
    Several days leading up to the conference, an email containing the
agenda will be provided, as well as posted on https://www.transportation.gov/v2x. The Department will also be providing a
livestream of the event, the link to which will be posted on https://www.transportation.gov/v2x shortly before the meeting. Further, the
Department will include a transcript from the conference in the docket
as soon as practicable following the conference.

Written Comments

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are filed correctly in the docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments.
    Please submit one copy (two copies if submitting by mail or hand
delivery) of your comments, including the attachments, to the docket
following the instructions given above. Please note, if you are
submitting comments electronically as a PDF (Adobe) file, we ask that
the documents submitted be scanned using an Optical Character
Recognition (OCR) process, thus allowing the agency to search and copy
certain portions of your submissions.
    Comments should be submitted by one of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
    Privacy Act: Except as provided below, all comments received into
the docket will be made public in their entirety. The comments will be
searchable by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an associations,
business, labor union, etc.). You should not include

information in your comment that you do not want to be made public You
may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.

How do I submit confidential business information?

    Any submissions containing Confidential Information must be
delivered to OST in the following manner:
     Submitted in a sealed envelope marked ``confidential
treatment requested'';
     Accompanied by an index listing the document(s) or
information that the submitter would like the Departments to withhold.
The index should include information such as numbers used to identify
the relevant document(s) or information, document title and
description, and relevant page numbers and/or section numbers within a
document; and
     Submitted with a statement explaining the submitter's
grounds for objecting to disclosure of the information to the public.
    OST also requests that submitters of Confidential Information
include a non-confidential version (either redacted or summarized) of
those confidential submissions in the public docket. In the event that
the submitter cannot provide a non-confidential version of its
submission, OST requests that the submitter post a notice in the docket
stating that it has provided OST with Confidential Information. Should
a submitter fail to docket either a non-confidential version of its
submission or to post a notice that Confidential Information has been
provided, we will note the receipt of the submission on the docket,
with the submitter's organization or name (to the degree permitted by
law) and the date of submission.

Will the agency consider late comments?

    U.S. DOT will consider all comments received before the close of
business on the comment closing date indicated above under DATES. To
the extent possible, the agency will also consider comments received
after that date.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the comments received at the address given above. The
hours of the docket are indicated above in the same location. You may
also see the comments on the internet, identified by the docket number
at the heading of this notice, at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Issued this day of May 20, 2019, in Washington, DC under authority
delegated at 49 CFR 1.99.

Diana Furchtgott-Roth,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, U.S. Department
of Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2019-10901 Filed 5-23-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 225 (Wednesday, November 21, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69823-69824]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28208]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0631; FRL-9361-9]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), this
document announces that EPA is planning to submit a request for a new
Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). This ICR is entitled: ``Pesticide Spray Drift Reduction
Technologies,'' and identified by EPA ICR No. 2472.01 and OMB Control
No. 2070-NEW. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval,
EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed
information collection that is summarized in this document. The ICR and
accompanying material are available in the docket for public review and
comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 22, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0631 by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online

instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn Boyle, Field and External
Affairs Division, (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)),
EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility.
    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of
the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used.
    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected.
    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

II. What information collection activity or ICR does this action apply
to?

    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by the voluntary
collection activities under this ICR include pesticide application
equipment manufacturers, chemical manufacturers, pesticide registrants,
university researchers, and others who have an interest in reducing
spray drift. The North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) code for the principal respondents is:

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Producers of pesticide products...............................     32532
Crop Production...............................................       111
Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, Life       541710
 Sciences.....................................................
Colleges, universities, and professional schools..............    611310
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action.
    Title: Pesticide Spray Drift Reduction Technologies.
    ICR number: EPA ICR No. 2472.01.
    OMB control number: OMB Control No. 2070-NEW.
    ICR status: This ICR is for a new information collection activity.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), after appearing
in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are
displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by other
appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or
form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers for certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: EPA intends to initiate a voluntary information
collection for research to verify the effectiveness of application
technologies for agricultural pesticide sprays that have the potential
to significantly reduce pesticide spray drift. The focus of this
research is on technologies, including spray nozzles, shrouds and
shields, and drift reducing adjuvant chemicals used for aerial or
groundboom applications to row and field crops. Collectively these
technologies are referred to as drift reduction technologies (DRTs).
The voluntary program would encourage the identification and use of
DRTs that can substantially reduce drift of pesticide spray droplets
from the target application site (e.g., a corn field) downwind to non-
target areas. Exposures and adverse effects to humans, wildlife, and
crops and other vegetation from pesticide spray drift are well
recognized. Published research suggests 1-10% or more of applied
agricultural pesticide sprays drift from the target field. EPA believes
there are application technologies that have the potential to
significantly reduce the amount of spray drift. As these technologies
are identified, their drift-reducing potential needs to be verified.
    Burden statement: The average cost per response is $10,476. Burden
is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    The ICR, which is available in the docket along with other related
materials, provides a detailed explanation of the collection activities
and the burden estimate that is only briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 12 companies.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 1
or 2 submissions by each company.
    Estimated total annual costs: $73,000. There are no costs for
capital investment or maintenance and operational costs.

III. What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another
Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce
the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit
additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or
the approval process, please contact the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 5, 2012.
 James Jones,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2012-28208 Filed 11-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency's Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request: USEPA/ Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance/ Office of Compliance 2. OMB control number b. G None a. 2060 0071 __ __ __ __

3. Type of information collection ( check one) a. G New collection b. G Revision of a currently approved collection c. X Extension of a currently approved collection d. G Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e. G Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired f. G Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one) a. X Regular b. G Emergency  Approval requested by: / / c. G Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? G Yes X No For b f, note item A2 of Supporting Statement Instructions 6. Requested expiration date a. X Three years from approval date b. G Other Specify: / /___

7. Title NESHAP for Vinyl Chloride ( 40 CFR part 61, subpart F)( Renewal)

8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable) EPA ICR 0186.10 9. Keywords Vinyl chloride, hydrogen chloride, polyvinyl chloride, ethylene dichloride, polymerized vinyl chloride.

10. Abstract The owner/ operator must submit an application of approval of construction or modification, notification of startup, waiver of emissions test if desired, report within 10 days of each manual vent or relief valve discharge, and quarterly reports. EPA uses this information to directly determine the compliance status of sources in lieu of on site surveillance.

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. P Business or other for profit e. Federal Government c. _ Not for profit institutions f. State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. G Voluntary b. G Required to obtain or retain benefits c. P Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 28 b. Total annual responses 196 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 10 ____ _ % c. Total hours requested 11,825 d. Current OMB inventory 16,159 e. Difference  4,334 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 2. Adjustment  4,334 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars) a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs $ 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) $ 1,260 c. Total annualized cost requested $ 1,260 d. Current OMB inventory $ 1,980 e. Difference $ 720 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change 2. Adjustment $ 720 15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Application for benefits e. Program planning or management b. Program evaluation f. Research c. General purpose statistics g. P Regulatory or compliance d. __ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply) a. X Recordkeeping b. Q Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. X On occasion 2. Q Weekly 3. Q Monthly 4. X Quarterly 5. Q Semi annually 6. Q Annually 7. Q Biannually 8. X Other ( describe) Initially 17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes X No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) Name: Learia Williams Phone: ( 202) 564 4113 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

( c) It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3):

( i) Why the information is being collected; ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( i) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement. Signature of Program Official Michael S. Alushin, Director Compliance Assessment and Media Programs Division Office of Compliance Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Oscar Morales, Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 4, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68792-68793]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21950]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98617; File No. SR-NYSENAT-2023-21]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE National, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 0

September 28, 2023.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that on September 27, 2023, NYSE National, Inc. (``NYSE National'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 0 (Regulation of the Exchange
and ETP Holders) to adopt new rule text based on based on [sic] Rule 0
(Regulation of the Exchange and its Member Organizations) of its
affiliate New York Stock Exchange LLC. The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 0 (Regulation of the Exchange
and ETP Holders) to adopt new rule text based on Rule 0 (Regulation of
the Exchange and its Member Organizations) of its affiliate New York
Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''). Specifically, the Exchange proposes a
new subsection (b) in conformity with NYSE Rule 0(b). NYSE Rule 0(b) is
in turn based on FINRA Rule 0140(a) (Applicability), Nasdaq Stock
Market LLC (``Nasdaq'') General 2 (Organization and Administration),
Section 6(a), and Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``Nasdaq BX'') General 2
(Organization and Administration), Section 6(a).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For purposes of this filing, Nasdaq and Nasdaq BX are
referred to collectively as the ``Nasdaq Exchanges.'' Nasdaq General
2, Section 6(a) and Nasdaq BX General 2, Section 6(a) are referred
to collectively as the ``Nasdaq Exchanges' Rules.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE Rule 0(b) provides that the NYSE's rules apply to all member
organizations and persons associated with a member organization and
that persons associated with a member organization shall have the same
duties and obligations as a member organization under the NYSE's rules.
NYSE Rule 0(b) mirrors FINRA Rule 0140(a) and the versions of FINRA
Rule 0140(a) adopted by the Nasdaq Exchanges, which similarly provide
that the rules of those self-regulatory organizations, as applicable,
apply to all members and persons associated with a member and that
persons associated with a member shall have the same duties and
obligations as a member under such rules.\5\ Proposed Rule 0(d) [sic]
is substantively identical to NYSE Rule 0(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``ETP Holder'' is defined in Rule 1.1 as an Exchange-
approved holder of an Equity Trading Permit issued by the Exchange
for effecting approved securities transactions on the Exchange. See
Rule 1.1(h) & (i). By way of comparison, FINRA uses the term
``member'' in its rules and NYSE uses the term ``member
organization.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would improve
the clarity of the Exchange's rules by reflecting that the Exchange's
rules apply to persons associated with an ETP Holder and that such
persons have the same duties and obligations as their Exchange ETP
Holder employer. An ETP Holder's compliance with Exchange rules may
depend on the actions of persons associated with the ETP Holder.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule, which
mirrors the rules of its affiliate NYSE, FINRA and the Nasdaq
Exchanges, would promote consistency in the Exchange's rules by
expressly providing that the Exchange may enforce its rules with
respect to persons associated with an ETP Holder, including by taking
appropriate disciplinary action against such persons for their ETP
Holder's violation of NYSE National rules. The Exchange notes that the
proposed rule does not contemplate disciplinary action against
individuals not involved in violations of Exchange rules.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\6\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\7\
in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and
the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the
public interest because the proposed changes would add clarity to the
Exchange's rules. As previously noted, the proposed rule text conforms
to current NYSE Rule 0(b) without change. The Exchange believes that
adopting separate rule text expressly providing that all Exchange rules
apply to persons associated with an ETP Holder, and that such persons
have the same duties and obligations as their Exchange ETP Holder
employer would benefit market participants by providing increased
clarity regarding the Exchange's ability to enforce compliance with its
rules by persons associated with an ETP Holder, thereby reducing any
potential confusion with respect to the Exchange's interpretation or
application of its rules. Adding these clarifying statements to the
Exchange's rules would also further the goals of transparency and
consistency across the Exchange's rules and would provide greater
harmonization between Exchange rules and the rules of NYSE, FINRA and
the Nasdaq Exchanges, resulting in less burdensome and more efficient
regulatory compliance. For the same reasons, the addition of the
proposed rule text would protect

investors and the public interest and would therefore be consistent
with Section 6(b)(5) \8\ of the Act. The proposed rule change would
accordingly foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
facilitating transactions in securities and will remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Finally, the Exchange further believes that the proposed change
would be consistent with Section 6(b)(1) \9\ of the Act because it
would provide increased clarity regarding the Exchange's ability to
enforce compliance with its rules by persons associated with an ETP
Holder, thereby reducing any potential confusion with respect to the
Exchange's interpretation or application of its rules. As such, the
proposed change would enable the Exchange to be so organized as to have
the capacity to be able to enforce compliance by its exchange members
and persons associated with its exchange members with the provisions of
the Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the
Exchange, consistent with Section 6(b)(1) \10\ of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
not intended to address competitive issues but rather is concerned
solely with adding clarity and transparency to the Exchange's rules and
providing greater harmonization with the rules of its affiliate NYSE
and the approved rules of FINRA and the Nasdaq Exchanges.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

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

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

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \13\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NYSENAT-2023-21on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to file number SR-NYSENAT-2023-21. 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 the Exchange. 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-NYSENAT-2023-21 and should
be submitted on or before October 25, 2023.

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

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

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-21950 Filed 10-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P