[Federal Register: August 4, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 148)]
[Notices]
[Page 38678-38679]
[DOCID:fr04au09-86]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60395; File No. SR-CHX-2009-10]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Add the Quote@CHX and
Reprice@CHX Order Types to Brokerplex System

July 28, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on July 23, 2009, Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (``CHX'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by CHX. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The CHX proposes to amend its rules to allow Exchange-registered
Institutional Brokers to enter two new order types, known as Quote@CHX
and Reprice@CHX, when using the Brokerplex[reg] order entry system. The
text of this proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web
site at (http://www.chx.com) and in 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 CHX included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule changes and
discussed any comments it received regarding the proposal. The text of
these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV
below. The CHX has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B and C
below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to add Interpretations and Policies .04 to
the Article 17 obligations of CHX-registered Institutional Brokers to
permit the entry of two new order types within Brokerplex for
Institutional Brokers to use when submitting orders to the CHX Matching
System for display and potential execution. The new order types are
known as ``Quote@CHX'' and<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    The Brokerplex system is an order entry and management system
developed and operated by the Exchange for use on a non-exclusive basis
by CHX-registered Institutional Brokers to receive and hold orders from
their clients while seeking execution on the CHX or elsewhere in the
National Market System. The Exchange seeks to add two new order types
within Brokerplex for Institutional Brokers to use when submitting
orders to the CHX Matching System for display and potential execution.
    In many instances, Institutional Brokers would like to display
orders in the CHX Matching System when seeking trade execution rather
than simply hitting bids or lifting offers already displayed in the
marketplace. By doing so, they could achieve a level of price
improvement for their customers. Rapidly changing quotes in today's
market environment often make it difficult to successfully post a bid
or offer, however, since a standard limit order entered by the
Institutional Broker may lock or cross the National Best Bid or Offer
(``NBBO'') by the time that order entry is complete (by our rules, the
Matching System automatically rejects orders in such circumstances).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ It is important to keep in mind that Institutional Brokers
manually enter orders into the Matching System through Brokerplex
and those orders are often competing for priority with system-
generated orders of algorithmic order senders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The new Quote@CHX order type would allow the Institutional Broker
to submit an order to be priced within Brokerplex at a defined limit
price which is one minimum price increment (normally 1 cent for most
securities) from the relevant side of the National Best Bid or Offer
(``NBBO'') at the time of order submission. For buy orders, the
relevant side of the NBBO is the offer; for sell orders it is the bid.
The pricing of the Quote@CHX (and Reprice@CHX) order is done solely
within Brokerplex and the order is then sent as a limit order by
Brokerplex to the Matching System. For example, if the Institutional
Broker has set the incremental offset at 1 cent and the NBBO was 20.10
x 20.13, a Quote@CHX buy order would be automatically priced and
submitted by Brokerplex to the Matching System as a 20.12 limit order.
The systematic pricing of the Quote@CHX (and Reprice@CHX) orders is
non-dynamic, i.e., the order does not automatically reprice upon
changes to the NBBO once it has been accepted by the Matching System.
    The Reprice@CHX order type allows an Institutional Broker to change
an existing limit order residing in the Matching System and replace it
with an order generated in the same manner as a Quote@CHX order type.
Submission of a Reprice@CHX order would generate an instruction to (1)
cancel a limit order previously submitted by an Institutional Broker to
the Matching System and (2) generate a new order to either buy or sell
(priced by Brokerplex in the same manner as for Quote@CHX orders as
described above) and send it to the Matching System as a limit order.

    Generally, usage of an agency Quote@CHX or Reprice@CHX order by an
Institutional Broker should be confined to situations in which it is
handling a non-marketable or ``not held'' limit order on behalf of a
customer.\4\ There may be limited circumstances in which it could be
appropriate for an Institutional Broker handling a market order to
submit a Quote@CHX (but not a Reprice@CHX) order. Institutional Brokers
handling a customer limit order would be required to enter the limit
price into Brokerplex when submitting a Quote@CHX or Reprice@CHX order.
In pricing the Quote@CHX and Reprice@CHX orders, Brokerplex will reject
any entries if the systematically-generated price would be outside the
customer's specified limit price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A ``not held'' order is one in which the Institutional
Broker has been given price and time discretion by its customer. See
Article 1, Rule 2(w).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our standard Matching System validations for locked and crossed
markets would apply equally to these orders upon receipt. Neither the
Quote@CHX nor Reprice@CHX order type would be available for
Institutional Brokers submitting orders to destinations other than the
CHX Matching System. The Matching System itself will not be eligible to
receive these order types. As the owner and operator of the Brokerplex
system, the Exchange would collect and maintain all of the order
records relating to these two order types required by our rules,
although the responsibility for the accurate entry of transaction-
related information lies with the Brokerplex user.
    Our belief is that these two order types will permit Institutional
Brokers to enter displayable orders in a more efficient manner and
avoid the delays associated with reentering a rejected order at a new
price. This functionality is optional, so an Institutional Broker which
does not want its order priced by Brokerplex can simply enter a
traditional limit order.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act in general,\5\ and furthers the objectives
of Section 6(b)(5) in particular,\6\ in that it is designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transaction in
securities, to remove impediments and perfect the mechanisms of a free
and open market, and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest. In this case, providing Institutional Brokers with the
ability to enter display-eligible orders on a more efficient basis
protects investors and removes an impediment to a free and open market
in that it improves the ability of Institutional Brokers to seek the
best execution of the orders which they are handling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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.

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.

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CHX-2009-10 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CHX-2009-10. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of CHX. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CHX-2009-10 and should be
submitted on or before August 25, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18563 Filed 8-3-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40632-40634]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17597]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0016]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of denials.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to deny applications from 110
individuals who requested an exemption from the vision standard in the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected], FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at: http://www.regulations.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and/or Room W12-140 on the
ground level of the

West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed
at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    FMCSA received applications from 110 individuals who requested an
exemption from the vision standard in the FMCSRs.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
concluded that granting these exemptions would not provide a level of
safety that would be equivalent to or greater than, the level of safety
that would be obtained by complying with the regulation 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10).

III. Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C.31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption if
it finds such an exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that
is equivalent to, or greater then, the level that would be achieved
absent such an exemption.
    The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is
based on the eligibility criteria, the terms and conditions for Federal
exemptions, and an individualized assessment of each applicant's
medical information provided by the applicant.

IV. Conclusion

    The Agency has determined that these applicants do not satisfy the
criteria eligibility or meet the terms and conditions of the Federal
exemption and granting these exemptions would not provide a level of
safety that would be equivalent to or greater than, the level of safety
that would be obtained by complying with the regulation 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10). Therefore, the 110 applicants in this notice have been
denied exemptions from the physical qualification standards in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10).
    Each applicant has, prior to this notice, received a letter of
final disposition regarding his/her exemption request. Those decision
letters fully outlined the basis for the denial and constitute final
action by the Agency. This notice summarizes the Agency's recent
denials as required under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(4) by periodically
publishing names and reasons for denial.
    The following six applicants did not have sufficient driving
experience over the past three years under normal highway operating
conditions:

Emma D. Hyde Howe (WA)
Wallace T. Kraus (IN)
Luis M. Perez-Francisco (NJ)
Darrell Potteiger (PA)
Jeffrey J. Winter (KS)
Scott E. Zinn (CA)

    The following 35 applicants had no experience operating a CMV:

Eurico F. Barbosa (MA)
Michael A. Barone (TX)
Celine Burgos (NJ)
Geovanny J. Cano-Cruz (NJ)
Luis Cardona (CA)
Eduardo Carrasco (AZ)
Nelson D. Carvalho (TX)
Sergio Chavez-Nunez (IL)
Jeffrey M. Colson (NY)
Hunter W. Cook (MS)
James F. Duffy (NJ)
Michael S. Engel (CO)
David W. Frieze (MN)
Christopher D. Gilbert (ND)
Jose S. Hernandez (TX)
Jesse J. James (MI)
Tammy L. Loran (ND)
Jonathan B. Lovette (TN)
Russell T. Meyers (OH)
Giedrius Morkunas (IL)
Michael D. Narveson (MN)
Jose L. Olvera-Hernandez (PA)
Mohammed A. Omer (MN)
Timothy L. Porter (AL)
Robert L. Price (CO)
Jerad J. Riddle (IL)
Doral W. Robinson (MD)
Nicholas A. Smyth (NE)
Anes Tabakovic (IA)
Anthony R. VanAcker (IN)
John T. Vanderbeek (UT)
Andry A. Vargas (MA)
McKenley M. Victor (DE)
David W. Wiard (MI)
Tarrence R. Williams (MS)

    The following 23 applicants did not have three years of experience
driving a CMV on public highways with their vision deficiencies:

Matthew R. Beggs (IL)
Richard W. Bullard (FL)
Paulo G. Clemente (NC)
Hector A. Davila (GA)
Chad M. Diamond (HI)
Paul A. Gulotta (NV)
Burl V. Ingebretsen (MN)
Russell L. Kelly (SC)
Nicholas J. Luksha (TN)
Jerred R. Murray (NY)
Christopher J. Neville (ME)
Eric L. Nydick (KS)
Robert F. Reed (NV)
Wesley C. Riley (IL)
Dennis E. Sanches (CO)
Alexander P. Scardino (NY)
Jeffrey A. See (FL)
Don J. Smith (VA)
Terry L. Stanger (IL)
Robert B. Sundvor (ND)
Leonard H. Wesselman (IL)
Tommy A. Williamson (OK)
Ananias E. Yoder (IA)

    The following 14 applicants did not have three years of recent
experience driving a CMV on public highways with their vision
deficiencies:

David G. April (NH)
Jason W. Beer (NE)
David L. Dellinger (IN)
John D. Flatten (MN)
Armand P. Fortier (NH)
Jeri P. Hollingsworth (ND)
Suad Jukic (NY)
Jimmy R. Kite (TN)
William J. Mason (AR)
Akbar H. Mokhtarani (ID)
Scott A. Murphy (PA)
Asa R. Sessions (WI)
Stephen C. Stenberg (NY)
Blair D. Tunell (DE)

    The following seven applicants did not have sufficient driving
experience over the past three years under normal highway operating
conditions (gaps in driving record):

Wayne O. Campbell (FL)
James P. Flaherty (KY)
Aaron L. Knoblock (TX)
Ronald M. Lytle (PA)
Chad O'Brien (MN)
Reginald Smart (TX)
Levi J. Tindall (TX)

    The following applicant, Gregory P. Grimes (OK), had more than two
commercial motor vehicle violations during three-year period and/or
application process.
    The following applicant, Randall L. Bauman (IN), contributed to
accident(s) in which the applicant was operating a CMV, which is a
disqualifying offense.
    The following applicant, Daniel W. Schraven (IA), did not
demonstrate the level of safety required for interstate driving
(excessive moving/non-moving violations during three-year period).
    The following 16 applicants were denied for multiple reasons:

Jose G. Batres (PA)
Guillermo Casio Gamero (WA)
Edward J. Delehant (OK)
Kevin DeMarco (PA)
Anthony M. Goodman (TX)
Eduardo L. Gutierrez (CA)
Michael L. Johnson (SC)
Patrick E. Kuempel (IA)
Michael T. McGinty (PA)
Michael E. McGregor (ID)
Steven Ramirez (CA)
Robert L. Schwartz (ND)

Emmanuel A. Sepulveda (CA)
Tyrone Sipp (TN)
Calvin R. Stoltzfus (PA)
Latasha M. Williams-Barnes (CT)

    The following four applicants have not had stable vision for the
preceding three-year period:

Miguel M. Levario (NM)
Markell D. Riley (NC)
Michael J. Smith (MN)
Vernon L. Speakman (GA)

    The following applicant, Charles E. Chamberlain (KY), does not meet
the vision standard in his better eye.
    The following applicant, Jerry B. Gibson (KY), drove interstate
while restricted to intrastate driving.

    Issued on: August 9, 2018.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-17597 Filed 8-14-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 94 (Wednesday, May 15, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 21764]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10042]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. NJ19-12-000]

Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on April 30, 2019, the Oncor Electric Delivery
Company LLC submitted its tariff filing: Oncor Tex-La Tariff Rate
Changes to be effective July 1, 2018.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
eLibrary link and is available for review in the Commission's Public
Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the
website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a
document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any
FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call
(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on May 21, 2019.

    Dated: May 9, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-10042 Filed 5-14-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 41 (Monday, March 3, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11730-11731]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04653]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0591; Airspace Docket No. 13-AGL-21]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Amery, WI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace at Amery, WI.
Decommissioning of the Ameron non-directional radio beacon (NDB) at
Amery Municipal Airport has made airspace reconfiguration necessary for
standard instrument approach procedures and for the safety and
management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be received on or before April 17, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2013-0591/Airspace Docket No. 13-
AGL-21, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket
Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the
building at the above address.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2013-0591/
Airspace Docket No. 13-AGL-21.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Central Service Center, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by modifying Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Amery Municipal Airport, Amery, WI, for
standard instrument approach procedures at the airport. Airspace
reconfiguration is necessary due to the decommissioning of the Ameron
NDB and the cancellation of the NDB approach, thereby removing the 7.4-
mile segment north extending from the 6.4-mile radius of the airport.
Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of IFR
operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9X, dated August 7, 2013 and

effective September 15, 2013, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designation listed in this document
would be published subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend controlled airspace at Amery Municipal Airport,
Amery, WI.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9X,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 7, 2013, and
effective September 15, 2013, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

AGL WI E5 Amery, WI [Amended]

Amery Municipal Airport, WI
    (Lat. 45[deg]16'52'' N., long. 92[deg]22'31'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Amery Municipal Airport

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on February 2, 2014.
Kent M. Wheeler,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2014-04653 Filed 2-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: November 8, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 216)]
[Notices]
[Page 65488-65493]
[DOCID:fr08no06-66]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0881; FRL-8240-5]

Proposed Approvals of the Central Characterization Project's
Remote-Handled Waste Characterization Programs at Idaho National
Laboratory and Argonne National Laboratory

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of availability; opening of public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or we) is announcing
the availability of, and soliciting public comments for 45 days on, the
proposed approvals of the radioactive, remote-handled (RH), transuranic
(TRU) waste characterization programs implemented by the Central
Characterization Project (CCP) at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and
Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). This waste is intended for disposal
at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico. These are the
first proposed approvals for the characterization of RH waste.
    In accordance with the WIPP Compliance Criteria, EPA evaluated the
characterization of RH TRU debris waste from INL-CCP and ANL-CCP during
inspections conducted the weeks of June 12, 2006, and September 11,
2006, respectively. Using the systems and processes developed as part
of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO)
program to characterize RH TRU waste, EPA verified whether DOE could
adequately characterize RH TRU waste consistent with the Compliance
Criteria. The results of EPA's evaluations of the INL-CCP and ANL-CCP
programs and their proposed approvals are described in the Agency's
inspection reports, which are available for review in the public
dockets listed in ADDRESSES. We will consider public comments received
on or before the due date mentioned in DATES.
    This notice summarizes the waste characterization processes
evaluated by EPA and EPA's proposed approvals. As required by the 40
CFR 194.8, at the end of a 45-day comment period EPA will evaluate
public comments received, and if appropriate, finalize the reports
responding to the relevant public comments, and issue final reports and
approval letters to DOE.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 26, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0881, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0881. The Agency's policy is that all comments received will
be included in the public docket without change and may be made
available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal

information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site

is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. 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 http://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 electronically at
http://www.regulations.gov.

    As of September 22nd, 2006, the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) Public
Reading Room will be temporarily inaccessible to the public until
November 6th, 2006, due to construction. Public access to docket
materials will still be provided. We strongly encourage you to visit
the EPA Dockets Web site frequently (http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
) in order to receive the latest status concerning the

Public Reading Room and public access to docket materials.
    If you wish to obtain materials from a docket in the EPA/DC, please
go first to Regulations.gov (http://www.regulations.gov) and obtain

electronic copies. If the materials are listed in the docket index but
the documents themselves are not available in Regulations.gov, please
call<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail the applicable Program Office Docket.
    EPA Docket Center operations will still continue during this
period. In addition to electronic access through regulations.gov,
public inspection of docket materials will be available by appointment
during this period. Appointments may be made by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>
or by e-mailing the appropriate Docket Office.
    If you wish to hand deliver comments during this period, you may
drop them off between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. eastern
standard time (EST), Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays
at the EPA Headquarters, Room 6146F in the EPA West Building located at
1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.
    EPA visitors are required to show photographic identification and
sign the EPA visitor log. After processing through the X-ray and
magnetometer machines, visitors will be given an EPA/DC badge that must
be visible at all times, and be escorted to Room 6146F to drop off
comments.

    If you have any other questions concerning the temporary closing of
the EPA/DC Public Reading Room, you may call<PHONE_NUMBER> between the
hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. eastern standard time.
    These documents are also available for review in hard-copy form at
the following three EPA WIPP informational docket locations in New
Mexico: In Carlsbad at the Municipal Library, Hours: Monday-Thursday,
10 a.m.-9 p.m., Friday-Saturday, 10 a.m.-6 p.m., and Sunday, 1 p.m.-5
p.m., phone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; in Albuquerque at the Government
Publications Department, Zimmerman Library, University of New Mexico,
Hours: Vary by semester, phone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; and in Santa Fe at
the New Mexico State Library, Hours: Monday-Friday, 9 a.m.-5 p.m.,
phone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>. As provided in EPA's regulations at 40 CFR
Part 2, and in accordance with normal EPA docket procedures, if copies
of any docket materials are requested, a reasonable fee may be charged
for photocopying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rajani Joglekar or Ed Feltcorn,
Radiation Protection Division, Center for Federal Regulations, Mail
Code 6608J, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of

the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in 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.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
     Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

    DOE is developing the WIPP, near Carlsbad in southeastern New
Mexico, as a deep geologic repository for disposal of TRU radioactive
waste. As defined by the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act (LWA) of 1992 (Pub.
L. 102-579), as amended (Pub. L. 104-201), TRU waste consists of
materials that have atomic numbers greater than 92 (with half-lives
greater than twenty years), in concentrations greater than 100
nanocuries of alpha-emitting TRU isotopes per gram of waste. Much of
the existing TRU waste consists of items contaminated during the
production of nuclear weapons, such as rags, equipment, tools, and
sludges.
    TRU waste is itself divided into two categories, based on its level
of radioactivity. Contact-handled (CH) TRU waste accounts for about 97
percent of the volume of TRU waste currently destined for the WIPP. It
is packaged in 55-gallon metal drums or in metal boxes and can be
handled under controlled conditions without any shielding beyond the
container itself. The maximum radiation dose at the surface of a CH TRU
waste container is 200 millirems per hour. CH waste primarily emits
alpha particles that are easily shielded by a sheet of paper or the
outer layer of a person's skin.
    Remote-handled (RH) TRU waste emits more radiation than CH TRU
waste and must therefore be both handled and transported in shielded
casks. Surface radiation levels of unshielded containers of remote-
handled transuranic waste exceed 200 millirems per hour. RH waste
primarily emits gamma radiation, which is very penetrating and requires
concrete, lead, or steel to block it.
    On May 13, 1998, EPA announced its final compliance certification
decision to the Secretary of Energy (published May 18, 1998, 63 FR
27354). This decision stated that the WIPP will comply with EPA's
radioactive waste disposal regulations at 40 CFR Part 191, Subparts B
and C.
    The final WIPP certification decision includes conditions that (1)
Prohibit shipment of TRU waste for disposal at WIPP from any site other
than the Los Alamos National Laboratories (LANL) until the EPA
determines that the site has established and executed a quality
assurance program, in accordance with Sec.  194.22(a)(2)(i),
194.24(c)(3), and 194.24(c)(5) for waste characterization activities
and assumptions (Condition 2 of Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 194); and (2)
(with the exception of specific, limited waste streams and equipment at
LANL) prohibit shipment of TRU waste for disposal at WIPP (from LANL or
any other site) until EPA has approved the procedures developed to
comply with the waste characterization requirements of Sec.
194.22(c)(4) (Condition 3 of Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 194). The EPA's
approval process for waste generator sites is described in Sec.  194.8
(revised July 2004).
    Condition 3 of the WIPP Certification Decision requires EPA to
conduct independent inspections at DOE's waste generator/storage sites
of their TRU waste characterization capabilities before approving their
program and the waste for disposal at the WIPP. EPA's inspection and
approval process gives EPA (a) Discretion in establishing technical
priorities, (b) the ability to accommodate variation in the site's
waste characterization capabilities, and (c) flexibility in scheduling
site WC inspections.
    As described in Section 194.8(b), EPA's baseline inspections
evaluate each WC process component (equipment, procedures, and
personnel training/experience) for its adequacy and appropriateness in
characterizing TRU waste destined for disposal at WIPP. During an
inspection, the site demonstrates its capabilities to characterize TRU
waste(s) and its ability to comply with the regulatory limits and
tracking requirements under Sec.  194.24. A baseline inspection may
describe any limitations on approved waste streams or waste
characterization processes [Sec.  194.8(b)(2)(iii)]. In addition, a
baseline inspection approval must specify what subsequent WC program
changes or expansion should be reported to EPA [Sec.  194.8(b)(4)]. The

Agency is required to assign Tier 1 (T1) and Tier 2 (T2) to the
reportable changes depending on their potential impact on data quality.
A T1 designation requires that the site must notify EPA of proposed
changes to the approved components of an individual WC process (such as
radioassay equipment or personnel), and EPA must also approve the
change before it can be implemented. A WC element with a T2 designation
allows the site to implement changes to the approved components of
individual WC processes (such as visual examination procedures) but
requires EPA notification. The Agency may choose to inspect the site to
evaluate technical adequacy before approval. EPA inspections conducted
to evaluate T1 or T2 changes are follow-up inspections under the
authority of Sec.  194.24(h). In addition to the follow-up inspections,
if warranted, EPA may opt to conduct continued compliance inspections
at TRU waste sites with a baseline approval under the authority of
Sec.  194.24(h).
    The site inspection and approval process outlined in Sec.  194.8
requires EPA to issue a Federal Register notice proposing the baseline
compliance decision, docket the inspection report for public review,
and seek public comment on the proposed decision for a period of 45
days. The report must describe the WC processes EPA inspected at the
site, as well as their compliance with Sec.  194.24 requirements.
    All waste characterization site approvals for WIPP, up until this
point, have been applicable only to contact-handled (CH) TRU waste. The
aforementioned inspections at INL-CCP and ANL-CCP mark the first two
inspections related to RH waste.
    EPA previously issued a preliminary approval of DOE's general
framework for characterizing RH waste on March 26, 2004 (Docket A-98-
49, Item II-B2-21). This approval requires DOE to provide site-specific
RH waste characterization plans and characterization procedures for EPA
approval prior to implementing them for characterizing RH waste.

III. Proposed Baseline Compliance Decisions

    EPA has performed baseline inspections of RH TRU waste
characterization activities of INL-CCP (EPA Inspection No. EPA-INL-CCP-
RH-06-06-8) and ANL-CCP (EPA Inspection No. EPA-ANL-CCP-RH-09-06-8).
    The purpose of EPA's inspections were to verify that the RH waste
characterization programs implemented at both INL-CCP and ANL-CCP for
characterizing RH TRU, retrievably-stored, debris waste (S5000) are
adequate. EPA evaluated whether the RH waste characterized meets the
regulatory requirements at 40 CFR 194.24. During these inspections, EPA
evaluated the adequacy, implementation, and effectiveness of the waste
characterization activities at INL-CCP and ANL-CCP. The Agency's
evaluation focused on the individual components--equipment, procedures,
and personnel training/experience of the following waste
characterization processes: acceptable knowledge (AK), radiological
characterization using a dose-to-curie (DTC) procedure, visual
examination (VE), and load management. The RH waste characterization
programs at INL-CCP and ANL-CCP are based on DOE-provided upper-tier
documents.

A. June 2006 INL-CCP RH Inspection Results

    At INL, EPA's inspection team identified one finding in the area of
VE and six concerns that needed to be addressed by DOE. Two of these
concerns were in VE and four in AK. DOE responded to the EPA finding
and concerns and the Agency determined the DOE responses were
satisfactory. EPA's inspection team determined that INL-CCP's RH WC
program activities were technically adequate. (For complete discussion
of EPA's findings, concerns, and technical evaluation, see EPA INL CCP
RH Inspection Report A-98-42, II-A4-69 in the accompanying EPA Docket.)
EPA is proposing to approve CCP's AK, DTC, and VE processes implemented
at INL in the configuration observed during a June 2006 inspection and
during two subsequent follow-up inspections (July & August), and as
described in the inspection report A-98-42, II-A4-69. The proposed
approval includes the following:
    (1) The AK process for RH retrievably-stored TRU debris in one
waste stream, Idaho National Laboratory Waste Stream No. ID-ANLE-S5000,
Lots 1 through 20, as defined in CCP-AK-INL-500, Revision 2, June 1,
2006.
    (2) The radiological characterization process using dose-to-curie
(DTC) and modeling-derived scaling factors for assigning radionuclide
values to one RH waste stream for which the scaling factors are
applicable, as described in CCP-AK-INL-501, Revision 1.
    (3) The VE process used for a total of 8 retrievably-stored RH
debris waste drums included in three batch data reports--BDR No.'s
RHINLVE 6001-03. CCP has terminated the use of VE process for this
waste until further notice. If CCP decides to use VE in the future EPA
inspection and approval is necessary.
    Any changes to the WC activities from the date of the baseline
inspection must be reported to and, if applicable, approved by EPA,
according to Table 1 below.

                         Table 1.--Tiering of RH TRU WC Processes Implemented by INL-CCP
            [For details see EPA's INL-CCP RH inspection report in EPA Docket No.: A-98-49, II-A4-69]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                INL-CCP RH WC process--T2
        RH WC process elements              INL-CCP RH WC process--T1 changes                changes*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acceptable Knowledge (AK).............  Any new waste streams not approved under  Changes to AK documentation as
                                         this baseline..                           a result of WCPIP
                                        Load management for any RH waste stream.   revisions.**
                                        Substantive modification(s)*** that have  AK accuracy report for Lot 16
                                         the potential to affect the               (or the appropriate Lot)
                                         characterization process to the           wherein individual drum data
                                         following documents: CCP-AK-INL-500,      assessed by INL (e.g., P030)
                                         Revision 2; CCP-AK-INL-501, Revision 1;   will be compared against DTC-
                                         or CCP-AK-INL-502, Revision 0.            derived values; all other AK
                                        Addition of K Cell or other debris         Accuracy reports prepared
                                         wastes to ID-ANLE-S5000.                  annually at a minimum.
                                                                                Waste stream data package for
                                                                                debris waste stream once
                                                                                completed, and any
                                                                                modifications to the WSPF
                                                                                including the CRR and AK
                                                                                Summary.
                                                                                Completed Correlation or
                                                                                Surrogate Summary Form of RH
                                                                                containers identified in this
                                                                                waste stream identified as CH
                                                                                based upon measured dose
                                                                                rates that present NDA
                                                                                results for assayed
                                                                                containers, including
                                                                                isotopic ratios.
                                                                                Updates to CCP-INL-AK-500, 501
                                                                                and 502 made available when
                                                                                each update is approved.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radiological Characterization,          Use of any alternate radiological         Revisions of CCP-AK-INL-501or
 including Dose-To-Curie (DTC).          characterization procedure other than     CCP-TP-504 that require CBFO
                                         DTC with established scaling factors as   approval.**
                                         documented in CCP-TP-504, Revision 3,
                                         or substantive modification of the DTC
                                         procedure.***.
                                        Application of new scaling factors for
                                         isotopic determination other than those
                                         documented in CCP-AK-INL-501, Revision
                                         0.
                                        Any new waste stream not approved under
                                         this baseline or addition of containers
                                         to waste stream ID-ANLE-S5000 that
                                         require a change to the established
                                         radionuclide scaling factors.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visual Examination (VE)...............  Implementation of VE following this       None.
                                         Baseline approval is a T1 change. If
                                         CCP decides to use VE in the future EPA
                                         approval is necessary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Real Time Radiography (RTR)...........  Any use of RTR requires EPA approval....  None.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WIPP Waste Information System (WWIS)..  Any use of WWIS requires EPA approval     None.
                                         prior to RH waste disposal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ Upon receiving EPA approval, INL-CCP will report all T2 changes to EPA every three months.
\**\ Excluding changes that are editorial in nature or are required to address administrative concerns.
\***\ Substantive modification refers to a change with the potential to affect INL's RH WC process, e.g., the
  use of an inherently different type of measurement instrument or the use of the high range probe as described
  in CCP-TP-504.

    EPA will notify the public of the results of its evaluations of
proposed T1 and T2 changes through the WIPP Web site and by forwarding
e-mails to the WIPP-NEWS list. All T1 changes must be submitted for
approval before their implementation and will be evaluated by EPA. Upon
approval, EPA will post the results of the evaluations through the WIPP
Web site and the WIPP-NEWS list, as described above. EPA will post T2
changes approximately every three months beginning with the date of
EPA's approval of the TRU WC program implemented at INL-CCP. EPA
expects the first report of INL-CCP's T2 changes approximately three
months from date of EPA's approval of the TRU WC program implemented at
INL-CCP.
    In this notice, EPA is not proposing to approve WIPP Waste
Information System (WWIS) for tracking of waste contents of RH debris
wastes. Although the WWIS is currently approved by EPA for tracking CH
waste, this system has not been demonstrated by DOE for the Agency for
tracking RH waste. Therefore, in accordance with 194.8(b)(2)(iii), EPA
is placing a limitation on this proposed baseline that requires DOE to
provide WWIS information as a T1 change. EPA will review the WWIS
database populated with actual RH waste content data when the RH
modules have been completed. EPA may conduct the evaluation of the WWIS
during this comment period; however, no final decision or approval of
the WWIS will be made until a baseline approval is finalized. No RH
waste can be shipped to WIPP for disposal until EPA approves the WWIS
database through the T1 process. Similarly, if INL-CCP intends to use
an RTR unit to evaluate RH drum contents, EPA will also evaluate this
process as a T1 change. Although EPA may evaluate INL-CCP's RTR prior
to a baseline approval, no decision or approval regarding RTR will be
made until a baseline approval is finalized.

B. September 2006 ANL-CCP RH Inspection Results

    At ANL, EPA's inspection team identified three concerns; two in VE
and one in AK. DOE responded to the EPA concerns and the Agency
determined that the DOE responses were satisfactory. EPA's inspection
team determined that ANL-CCP's RH WC program activities were
technically adequate. (For a complete discussion of

EPA's findings, concerns, and technical evaluation, see EPA ANL CCP RH
Inspection Report A-98-42, II-A4-70 in the accompanying EPA Docket.)
EPA is proposing to approve CCP's AK, DTC, and VE processes implemented
at ANL in the configuration observed during the September 2006
inspection and as described in the inspection report A-98-49, II-A4-70.
The proposed approval includes the following:
    (1) The AK process for RH retrievably-stored TRU debris in one
waste stream, Waste Stream AERHDM, as defined in CCP-AK-ANLE-501,
Revision 0, July 21, 2006.
    (2) The radiological characterization process using DTC and
modeling-derived scaling factors for assigning radionuclide values to
one RH waste stream for which the scaling factors are applicable, as
described in CCP-AK-ANL-501, Revision 1.
    (3) The VE process for retrievably-stored RH debris waste.
    Any changes to the WC activities from the date of the baseline
inspection must be reported to and, if applicable, approved by EPA,
according to Table 2 (as seen below).

                         Table 2.--Tiering of RH TRU WC Processes Implemented by ANL-CCP
            [For details see EPA's ANL-CCP RH inspection report in EPA Docket No: A-98-49, II-A4-70]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                ANL-CCP RH WC process--T2
        RH WC process elements              ANL-CCP RH WC process--T1 changes                changes*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acceptable Knowledge (AK).............  Any new waste streams not approved under  Changes made to AK
                                         this baseline.                            documentation as a result of
                                        Load management for any RH waste stream.   WCPIP revisions.**
                                        Substantive modification(s)*** that have  AK accuracy reports, prepared
                                         the potential to affect the               annually at a minimum.
                                         characterization process to the          Waste stream data package for
                                         following documents: CP-AK-ANLE-500,      debris waste stream once
                                         Revision 1; CCP-AK-ANLE-501, Revision     completed, and any
                                         0; or CCP-AK-ANLE-502, Revision 0..       modifications to that WSPF
                                        Modification of the approved waste         including the CRR and AK
                                         stream AERHDM to include additional       Summary.
                                         containers beyond the approximately 45   Comparison of AK versus DTC-
                                         included in CCP-AK-ANLE-500, Revision     derived radiological data to
                                         3..                                       support the use of waste
                                                                                stream-specific instead of
                                                                                drum-specific radiological
                                                                                data and the completed DTC
                                                                                results for all containers in
                                                                                this waste stream.
                                                                                Updates to documents as
                                                                                follows:
                                                                                CCP-AK-ANLE-500 and
                                                                                CCP-AK-ANLE-502 to address
                                                                                freeze file changes.
                                                                                All future revisions
                                                                                of CCP-ANLE-AK-500, CCP-ANLE-
                                                                                AK-501 and CCP-ANLE-AK-502.
                                                                                Listing of the
                                                                                references that document the
                                                                                assembly of fuel pin data and
                                                                                review process.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radiological Characterization,          Use of any alternate radiological         Revisions of CCP-AK-ANLE-501
 including Dose-To-Curie (DTC).          characterization procedure other than     or CCP-TP-504 that require
                                         DTC with established scaling factors as   CBFO approval.**
                                         documented in CCP-TP-504, Revision 3,
                                         or substantive modification*** of the
                                         DTC procedure.
                                        Application of new scaling factors for
                                         isotopic determination other than those
                                         documented in CCP-AK-ANLE-501, Revision
                                         0.
                                        Any new waste stream not approved under
                                         this baseline or addition of containers
                                         to waste stream AERHDM that require
                                         changing the established radionuclide
                                         scaling factors.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visual Examination (VE)...............  VE by reviewing existing audio/visual     Changes made to any VE
                                         recordings for S4000 and S3000 wastes.    procedure(s) that require
                                        VE by any process other than review of     CBFO approval.
                                         existing audio/visual recordings for     Addition of new S5000 debris
                                         S5000 debris wastes..                     waste streams.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Real Time Radiography (RTR)...........  Any use of RTR requires EPA approval....  None.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WIPP Waste Information System (WWIS)..  Any use of WWIS requires EPA approval     None.
                                         prior to RH waste disposal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ Upon receiving EPA approval, ANL-CCP will report all T2 changes to EPA every three months.
\**\ Excluding changes that are editorial in nature or are required to address administrative concerns. New
  references that are included as part of the document revision may be requested by EPA.
\***\ Substantive modification refers to a change with the potential to affect ANL's RH WC process,e.g., the use
  of an inherently different type of measurement instrument or the use of the high range probe as described for
  CCP-TP-504.

    EPA will notify the public of the results of its evaluations of
proposed T1 and T2 changes through the WIPP Web site and by forwarding
e-mails to the WIPP-NEWS list. All T1 changes must be submitted for
approval before their implementation and will be evaluated by EPA. Upon
approval, EPA will post the results of the evaluations through the WIPP
Web site and the WIPP-NEWS list, as described above. EPA will post T2
changes approximately every three months beginning with the date of
EPA's approval of the TRU WC program implemented at ANL-CCP. EPA
expects

the first report of ANL-CCP's T2 changes approximately three months
from date of EPA's approval of the TRU WC program implemented at ANL-
CCP.
    In this notice, EPA is not proposing to approve WIPP Waste
Information System (WWIS) for tracking of waste contents of RH debris
wastes. Although the WWIS is currently approved by EPA for CH waste,
the system has not yet been demonstrated by DOE for the Agency for
tracking RH waste. Therefore, in accordance with 194.8(b)(2)(iii), EPA
is placing a limitation on this proposed baseline that requires DOE to
provide WWIS information as a T1 change. EPA will review the WWIS
database populated with actual RH waste content data when the RH
modules have been completed. EPA may conduct the evaluation of the WWIS
during this comment period; however, no final decision or approval of
the WWIS will be made until a baseline approval is finalized. No RH
waste can be shipped to WIPP for disposal until EPA approves the WWIS
database through the T1 process. In the future, if ANL-CCP intends to
use an RTR unit to evaluate RH drum contents, EPA will evaluate this
process as a T1 change.

IV. Availability of the Baseline Inspection Report for Public Comment

    EPA has placed both reports discussing the results of EPA's
inspections of INL-CCP and ANL-CCP in the public docket as described in
ADDRESSES. In accordance with 40 CFR 194.8, EPA is providing the public
45 days to comment on these documents. The Agency requests comments on
the proposed approval decisions and tiering designations, as described
in EPA's inspection reports. EPA will accept public comment on this
notice and supplemental information as described in Section 1.B. above.
EPA will not make a determination of compliance before the 45-day
comment period ends. At the end of the public comment period, EPA will
evaluate all relevant public comments and revise the inspection reports
as necessary. If appropriate, the Agency will then issue approval
letters and final inspection reports, both of which will be posted on
the WIPP Web site. DOE must obtain EPA approval of the WWIS, through
the T1 change system prior to the disposal of RH waste at WIPP.
    Information on the certification decision is filed in the official
EPA Air Docket, Docket No. A-93-02 and is available for review in
Washington, DC, and at the three EPA WIPP informational docket
locations in New Mexico (as listed in ADDRESSES). The dockets in New
Mexico contain only major items from the official Air Docket in
Washington, DC, plus those documents added to the official Air Docket
since the October 1992 enactment of the WIPP LWA.

    Dated: October 31, 2006.
Elizabeth Cotsworth,
Director, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air.
[FR Doc. E6-18847 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Revised EGU GHG NSPS proposal

Peter Tsirigotis

to:

Mancini, Dom, Nathan_J._Frey

02/29/2012 08:07 AM

Cc:

"Wayland, Bob", "Culligan, Kevin", "Johnson, Mary", "Tsirigotis, Peter"

Hide Details

From:	Peter Tsirigotis/RTP/USEPA/US

	To:	"Mancini, Dom"<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>

	Cc:	"Wayland, Bob"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Culligan, Kevin" <EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Johnson, Mary" <EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Tsirigotis, Peter" <EMAIL_ADDRESS>

EO 12866 EGU GHG NSPS proposal FR notice 02_28_12.docx

EO 12866 EGU GHG NSPS preamble_02_28_12_v_02_08_12 redline.docx

Hi Dom and Nathan. Attached are two files of the revised version of the proposal, one file comparing this revision to what you already have with redline/strikeout, and one file that is clean. Feel free to call Bob, Kevin, or me to discuss.


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 109 (Thursday, June 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26495-26496]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11870]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86004; File No. 013-00120]

Initial Form ATS-N Filing; Notice of Extension of Commission
Review Period

June 3, 2019.
    On February 8, 2019, Magma ATS filed an initial Form ATS-N (``Form
ATS-N'') with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').
Pursuant to Rule 304 under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''), the Commission may, after notice and an opportunity for
hearing, declare an initial Form ATS-N ineffective no later than 120
days from the date of filing with the Commission, or, if applicable,
the extended review period. June 8, 2019 is 120 calendar days from the
date of filing. Pursuant to Rule 304(a)(1)(iv)(B), the Commission may
extend the initial Form ATS-N review period for up to an additional 120
calendar days if the initial Form ATS-N is unusually lengthy or raises
novel or complex issues that require additional time for review.
    Magma ATS was operating pursuant to an initial operation report on
Form ATS on file with the Commission as of January 7, 2019.\1\ Magma
ATS filed an initial Form ATS-N on February 8, 2019. During the initial
120 calendar day review period, the Commission staff has been reviewing
the disclosures on Magma ATS's initial Form ATS-N. In addition, the
staff has been engaged in ongoing discussions with Magma ATS about its
disclosures and manner of operations, as well as the requirements of
Form ATS-N, to facilitate complete and comprehensible disclosures that
reflect the complexities of those operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ An NMS Stock ATS (as defined in Rule 300(k) of Regulation
ATS) that was operating pursuant to an initial operation report on
Form ATS on file with the Commission as of January 7, 2019 is a
``Legacy NMS Stock ATS.'' 17 CFR 242.301(b)(2)(viii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Form ATS-N requires NMS Stock ATSs to file with the Commission, and
disclose to the public for the first time, certain information,
including descriptions by the NMS Stock ATSs of their fees, the trading
activities by their broker-dealer operators and their affiliates in the
NMS Stock ATSs, their use of market data, their written standards for
granting access to trading on the NMS Stock ATSs, and their written
safeguards and procedures for protecting their subscribers'
confidential trading information required by revised Rule 301(b)(10) of
Regulation ATS. The initial Form ATS-N disclosures and discussions with
Commission staff have revealed complexities about the operations of
Legacy NMS Stock ATSs including, among other things, matching
functionalities, means of order entry, order interaction and execution
procedures, conditional order processes, segmentation of orders, and
counterparty selection protocols. The Commission staff needs additional
time to review novel and complex issues such as these, which Commission
staff has discussed with Magma ATS. Extending the initial Form ATS-N
Commission review period for an

additional 120 calendar days will provide Commission staff an
opportunity to continue its review of the initial Form ATS-N
disclosures and discussions with Magma ATS.
    In the conversations between Magma ATS and Commission staff about
the initial Form ATS-N disclosures and the ATS operations, Commission
staff and Magma ATS have discussed a potential amendment to update
Magma ATS's disclosures regarding the complexities of its operations.
Extending the review period will enable the NMS Stock ATS to amend its
disclosures, if appropriate, and allow Commission staff to conduct a
thorough review of amendments to the initial disclosures provided on
the initial Form ATS-N.
    For the reasons given above, the Commission is extending the review
period of the initial Form ATS-N submitted by Magma ATS. Accordingly,
pursuant to Rule 304(a)(1)(iv)(B), October 6, 2019 is the date by which
the Commission may declare the initial Form ATS-N submitted by Magma
ATS ineffective.

    By the Commission.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-11870 Filed 6-5-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P