Cooling Water Intake Structure ( CWIS) Information Data Required Rig Information Rig Name ENSCO 68 ENSCO 69 Rig Type Jackup Marathon LeTourneau 84S Modified Total Installed Power Generation Capacity 6600 HP Number of Cooling Water Intake Structures ( CWISs) 4 Brief description of each CWIS ( e. g., sea chest, simple pipe) 1 Sea chest Raw water tower deep well pumps Rough dimensions of each CWIS and indicate whether onboard CWIS has an existing flange 2 100HP & 1 75HP raw water tower pumps Sea chests used only while under tow Screen type ( e. g., strainer, wedge wire) with mesh size Basket Strainers, ¼ " Mesh on pump itself Total Design Specifications for Daily Maximum Water Intake Volume of each CWIS 1,727,964 gals ( 41,142 bbls)

Total Daily Water Intake Volume of each CWIS ( Set up/ Drilling) 1,727,964 gals ( 41,142 bbls)

Design Specs for Through Screen Velocity of each CWIS ( i. e., Q= V* A) ( Set up/ Drilling) 13.33 ft/ second List of Purposes of Cooling Water Intakes ( e. g., cool crude oil, produced water, power generators, drill pipe brakes) Brake water cooling List of Purposes of Non cooling Water Intakes ( e. g., fire water, hotel loads) Water makers, fire main, sanitary, pre load, jet spud cans, mud pits, shakers Total Volume of Water Intake for Ballasting, Duration of the Ballast intake, and the Through Screen Velocity of the Ballast intake 2,982,000 gals ( 71,000 bbls) to 3,265,500 gals ( 77,750 bbls) Duration = time on location. Through Screen Velocity = 13.33 ft. Per second Mitigation Measures for reducing Exotic Species Migration through Ballast water The rig does not carry much ballast water from location to location. It is taken on and dumped at the same location. Mitigation Measures for reducing Impingement and Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms, as well as Bio fouling Prevention Measures Sea chest screens, and baskets, cathodic protection Is the Rig equipped with a Radiator Cooling System for the Main Engines? Yes, 3 Radiators for the engines


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 124 (Thursday, June 27, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38591-38594]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15445]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 122

[EPA-HQ-OW-2003-0063; FRL-9829-2]
RIN 2040-AF47

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Regulation
Revision: Removal of the Pesticide Discharge Permitting Exemption in
Response to Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Decision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is amending its regulations to remove language added
by the EPA's 2006 NPDES Pesticides Rule which exempted the application
of pesticides from National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit requirements in two circumstances: When the application
of the pesticide is made directly to waters of the United States to
control pests that are present in the water, and when the application
of the pesticide is made to control pests that are over, including
near, waters of the United States. This rulemaking is in response to
the 2009 Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that vacated the EPA's
2006 NPDES Pesticides Rule.

DATES: This final rule is effective on June 27, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The record for this rulemaking is available for inspection
and copying at the Water Docket, located at the EPA Docket Center (EPA/
DC), EPA West 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20004. The
record is also available via the EPA Dockets at http://www.regulations.gov under docket number EPA-HQ-OW-2003-0063. The rule
and key supporting documents are also available electronically on the
Internet at http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pesticides.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information contact Prasad
Chumble, Water Permits Division, Office of Wastewater Management
(4203M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information
II. Background and Rationale for Action
III. Implementation
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory 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 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
    K. Congressional Review Act
V. Statutory Authority

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action may be of interest to you if you apply pesticides to or
over, including near, waters of the United States. Potentially affected
entities, as categorized in the North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS), may include, but are not limited to:

          Table 1--Entities Potentially Regulated by This Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Examples of
          Category                    NAICS         potentially affected
                                                          entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agriculture parties--General  111 Crop Production.  Producers of crops
 agricultural interests,                             mainly for food and
 farmers/producers,                                  fiber including
 forestry, and irrigation.                           farms, orchards,
                                                     groves,
                                                     greenhouses, and
                                                     nurseries that have
                                                     irrigation ditches
                                                     requiring pest
                                                     control.
                              113110 Timber Tract   The operation of
                               Operations.           timber tracts for
                                                     the purpose of
                                                     selling standing
                                                     timber.
                              113210 Forest         Growing trees for
                               Nurseries Gathering   reforestation and/
                               of Forest Products.   or gathering forest
                                                     products, such as
                                                     gums, barks, balsam
                                                     needles, rhizomes,
                                                     fibers, Spanish
                                                     moss, ginseng, and
                                                     truffles.
                              221310 Water Supply   Operating irrigation
                               for Irrigation.       systems.
Pesticide parties (includes   325320 Pesticide and  Formulation and
 pesticide manufacturers,      Other Agricultural    preparation of
 other pesticide users/        Chemical              agricultural pest
 interests, and consultants).  Manufacturing.        control chemicals.
Public health parties         923120                Government
 (includes mosquito or other   Administration of     establishments
 vector control districts      Public Health         primarily engaged
 and commercial applicators    Programs.             in the planning,
 that service these).                                administration, and
                                                     coordination of
                                                     public health
                                                     programs and
                                                     services, including
                                                     environmental
                                                     health activities.
Resource management parties   924110                Government
 (includes State departments   Administration of     establishments
 of fish and wildlife, State   Air and Water         primarily engaged
 departments of pesticide      Resource and Solid    in the
 regulation, State             Waste Management      administration,
 environmental agencies, and   Programs.             regulation, and
 universities).                                      enforcement of air
                                                     and water resource
                                                     programs; the
                                                     administration and
                                                     regulation of water
                                                     and air pollution
                                                     control and
                                                     prevention
                                                     programs; the
                                                     administration and
                                                     regulation of flood
                                                     control programs;
                                                     the administration
                                                     and regulation of
                                                     drainage
                                                     development and
                                                     water resource
                                                     consumption
                                                     programs; and
                                                     coordination of
                                                     these activities at
                                                     intergovernmental
                                                     levels.
                              924120                Government
                               Administration of     establishments
                               Conservation          primarily engaged
                               Programs.             in the
                                                     administration,
                                                     regulation,
                                                     supervision and
                                                     control of land
                                                     use, including
                                                     recreational areas;
                                                     conservation and
                                                     preservation of
                                                     natural resources;
                                                     erosion control;
                                                     geological survey
                                                     program
                                                     administration;
                                                     weather forecasting
                                                     program
                                                     administration; and
                                                     the administration
                                                     and protection of
                                                     publicly and
                                                     privately owned
                                                     forest lands.
                                                     Government
                                                     establishments
                                                     responsible for
                                                     planning,
                                                     management,
                                                     regulation and
                                                     conservation of
                                                     game, fish, and
                                                     wildlife
                                                     populations,
                                                     including wildlife
                                                     management areas
                                                     and field stations;
                                                     and other
                                                     administrative
                                                     matters relating to
                                                     the protection of
                                                     fish, game, and
                                                     wildlife are
                                                     included in this
                                                     industry.
Utility parties (includes     221 Utilities.......  Provide electric
 utilities).                                         power, natural gas,
                                                     steam supply, water
                                                     supply, and sewage
                                                     removal through a
                                                     permanent
                                                     infrastructure of
                                                     lines, mains, and
                                                     pipes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background and Rationale for Action

    On November 27, 2006, the EPA issued a final rule, Application of
Pesticides to Waters of the United States in Compliance with FIFRA (71
FR 68483) (``2006 NPDES Pesticides Rule''), which promulgated 40 CFR
122.3(h). Section 122.3(h) specified two circumstances in which an
NPDES permit would not be required for the application of pesticides to
waters of the United States. They were: (1) the application of
pesticides directly to waters of the United States to control pests;
and (2) the application of pesticides to control pests that are present
over waters of the United States, including near such waters, where a
portion of the pesticides will unavoidably be deposited to waters of
the United States to target the pests effectively; provided that the
application is consistent with relevant Federal Insecticide, Fungicide
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) requirements.
    On January 19, 2007, petitions for review of the 2006 NPDES
Pesticides Rule were filed in eleven federal circuit courts of appeals
by industry and environmental groups. Petitions were consolidated and
assigned to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. On January 7, 2009, the
Sixth Circuit Court concluded the EPA's 2006 NPDES Pesticides Rule was
inconsistent with the Clean Water Act. Nat' Cotton Council of Am. v.
EPA, 553 F.3d 927 (6th Cir. 2009). On January 17, 2012 the court issued
a mandate vacating the Rule.
    Today's action removes 40 CFR 122.3(h) from the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), in accordance with the vacatur of that section by
the Court. The EPA is not providing an opportunity for comment on this
final rule. Under the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA) an
agency may issue a final rulemaking without providing notice and an
opportunity for public comment in certain specific instances. This may
occur, in particular, when an agency for good cause finds (and
incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefore in
the rules issued) that public notice and comment procedures are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. See 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
    The EPA finds that notice and an opportunity for public comment are
unnecessary for today's action. This action is ministerial because the
Sixth Circuit Court vacated the 2006 NPDES Pesticides Rule effective
January 17, 2012. The EPA has no discretion in taking this action.
Based on the Court's decision, the 2006 NPDES Pesticides Rule is no
longer effective. Therefore, the EPA is removing the Rule from the CFR
to conform to the Court's decision. Providing an opportunity for notice
and comment is therefore unnecessary. The EPA finds that this
constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).

III. Implementation

    The EPA has determined that good cause exists to waive the
requirement under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) that a substantive rule's effective
date be not less than 30 days after the publication of the rule. The
APA authorizes exceptions to 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for substantive rules that
grant or recognize an exemption or relieve a restriction;
interpretative rules and statements of policy; and as otherwise
provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the
rule. The 2006 NPDES Pesticides Rule was vacated by the Sixth Circuit
Court effective January 17, 2012. This rule only amends the CFR to
reflect the Court's order. It does not impose any requirements or alter
the status quo in any way, and regulated parties will not need to
adjust their behavior in response to this rule. The EPA finds that this
constitutes good cause to waive the requirement that a rule be
published not less than 30 days before its effective date pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3). Therefore, this final rule is effective on June 27,
2013.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Executive Order
13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review)

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
Executive Order 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011) and is therefore
not subject to review under the Executive Orders.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). The Agency believes this action
does not impose a burden because it only removes the 2006 NPDES
Pesticides Rule from the CFR.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Today's action is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), which generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis for any rule that will have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The RFA applies only
to rules subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) or any other statute. This rule
is not subject to notice and comment requirements under the APA or any
other statute because although the rule is subject to the APA, it does
not impose any requirements or alter the status quo in any way, and
regulated parties will not need to adjust their behavior in response to
this rule. Therefore, the Agency has invoked the ``good cause''
exemption to the notice and comment requirement under 5 USC 553(b).

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for State, local, or tribal governments or the private
sector. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this action is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. This
action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA
because it contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly
or uniquely affect small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This action 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 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999),
because the action removes the 2006 NPDES Pesticides Rule from the CFR,
which has already been vacated by the Sixth Circuit Court. This rule
imposes no regulatory requirements on any State, tribal, or local
government. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

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

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires the 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 action does
not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). It imposes no

regulatory requirements or costs on any tribal government. It does 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. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it is not economically significant as defined
in Executive Order 12866, and because the Agency does not believe the
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs the EPA to provide
Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, explanations
when the Agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, the
EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

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

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 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.
    The EPA has determined that this final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This action merely removes the 2006 NPDES Pesticides Rule
from the CFR which was vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. Section 808 allows the issuing agency to make a rule
effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes
a good cause finding that notice and public procedure is impracticable,
unnecessary or contrary to the public interest. This determination must
be supported by a brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As stated
previously, the EPA has made such a good cause finding, including the
reasons therefore, and established an effective date of June 27, 2013.
The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

V. Statutory Authority

    This rule is issued under the authority of sections 101, 301, 304,
306, 308, 402, and 501 of the CWA. 33 U.S.C. 1251, 1311, 1314, 1316,
1317, 1318, 1342, and 1361.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 122

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous substances, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control.

    Dated: June 21, 2013.
Bob Perciasepe,
Acting Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 122 is amended
as follows:

PART 122--EPA ADMINISTERED PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT
DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM

0
1. The authority citation for part 122 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

Sec.  122.3  [Amended]

0
2. Section 122.3 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (h).

[FR Doc. 2013-15445 Filed 6-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 51 (Thursday, March 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15407-15409]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6237]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66559; File No. SR-EDGA-2012-07]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Amendments to the EDGA Exchange, Inc. Fee Schedule

March 9, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on February 29, 2012 the EDGA Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
the ``EDGA'') 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 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\ 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 its fees and rebates applicable to
Members \3\ of the Exchange pursuant to EDGA Rule 15.1(a) and (c). All
of the changes described herein are applicable to EDGA Members. The
text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Internet Web site at http://www.directedge.com, at the Exchange's
principal office, and at the Public Reference Room of the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A Member is any registered broker or dealer, or any person
associated with a registered broker or dealer, that has been
admitted to membership in the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to make a technical amendment to the
description of Footnote 9 and Flag CL to reflect the Commission's
approval of the BATS BZX Exchange (``BATS BZX'') as a primary listing
exchange.\4\ Therefore, Footnote 9 will state that Flag O will be
yielded and a fee of $0.0005 per share will be assessed if an order is
routed to NYSE Arca & BATS BZX's closing process. This fee in footnote
9 ($0.0005 per share) gives a flat rate for the NYSE Arca & BATS BZX's
closing processes, which is lower than other primary listing markets.
Flag CL will apply to orders routed to a primary listing market's
closing process except NYSE Arca and BATS BZX. In addition, the
Exchange proposes to revise the descriptions on Flags CL, 8, and 9 to
broaden their applicability to several routing strategies rather than
just ROOC.\5\ Therefore, the Exchange proposes that Flag CL state
``Routed to listing market closing process except NYSE Arca & BATS
BZX.'' The Exchange proposes conforming amendments to Flags 8 and 9 to
delete the ROOC routing strategy from the descriptions of these flags.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 65225 (August
30, 2011), 76 FR 55148 (September 6, 2011) (SR-BATS-2011-018).
    \5\ See EDGA Exchange Rule 11.9(b)(3)(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to delete Flag H, which represents all non-
displayed orders that add or remove liquidity, and bifurcate it by
replacing it with Flags HA and HR. Flag HA will identify all non-
displayed orders that add liquidity to EDGA and the Exchange will
assess a fee of $0.0010 per share. Flag HR will identify all non-
displayed orders that remove liquidity from EDGA and the Exchange will
assess a fee of $0.0010 per share. Additionally, footnote 2 is proposed
to be revised to read ``rate contingent upon Member adding or removing
(emphasis added) greater than 1,000,000 shares hidden on a daily basis
* * * '' as both Flags HA and HR count toward this tier since they are
both forms of hidden liquidity. This change allows Members who utilize
both forms of hidden liquidity (add and remove) to satisfy this tier.
Footnote 4 is proposed to be clarified that only non-displayed orders
that add liquidity count toward the following tier listed there: ``If a
Member, on a daily basis, measured monthly, posts more than 1% of the
Total Consolidated Volume (``TCV'') in average daily volume on EDGA,
including all non-displayed orders (H Flag), then the Member will
receive a rebate of $0.0005 per share. TCV is defined as volume
reported by all exchanges and trade reporting facilities to the
consolidated transaction reporting plans for Tapes A, B and C
securities for the month prior to the month in which the fees are
calculated. If a Member, on a daily basis, measured monthly, posts more
than .25% of the TCV on EDGA, including all non-displayed orders (H
Flag), and removes more than .25% of TCV in average daily volume, then
the Member will receive a rebate of $0.0005 per share.'' To correspond
with these changes, footnotes 2 and 4 are proposed to be appended to
Flag HA and footnote 2 is proposed to be appended to Flag HR. Finally,
the references to the yielded flags (B, H, V, Y, 3-4) in text of
footnotes 2 and 4 [sic] are duplicative of the footnotes next to the
applicable Flags in the fee schedule and are therefore proposed to be
deleted to simplify the schedule.
    The Exchange proposes to amend Flag 9 and add new Flag 10 to its
fee schedule. At this time, NYSE Arca offers its Members a rebate of
$0.0021 for orders that add liquidity on Tapes A or C and a rebate of
$0.0022 for orders that add liquidity on Tape B. The Exchange proposes
to amend Flag 9 to account for the pass-through of the NYSE Arca rebate
for adding liquidity through Tapes A or C and to create Flag 10 to
account for the pass-through of the NYSE Arca rebate for adding
liquidity on Tape B. Finally, the Exchange proposes to make technical
amendments to Flags N, 3, and 9 to replace the ``and'' connector with
``or'' (i.e., ``Tapes A or C'' instead of ``Tapes A and C'') to make
these references accurate.
    The Exchange proposes to add Flag PA for orders that utilize the
midpoint routing strategy RMPT \6\ and add

liquidity to EDGA. The Exchange proposes to assess a charge of $0.0010
per share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See SR-EDGA-2012-06 (February 24, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to add Flag PT for orders that utilize the
midpoint routing strategy RMPT \7\ and remove liquidity. The Exchange
proposes to assess a charge of $0.0010 per share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to add Flag PX for orders that utilize the
midpoint routing strategy RMPT \8\ and are routed to other destinations
on the Exchange's System routing table. The Exchange proposes to assess
a charge of $0.0020 per share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In SR-EDGA-2011-39,\9\ the Exchange amended several routing options
contained in Rule 11.9(b)(3) to allow Users \10\ more discretion if
shares remain unexecuted after routing. In particular, Rule
11.9(b)(3)(c)(i)-(iii) was amended to provide that Users may elect that
any remainder of an order be posted to another destination on the
System routing table. In conjunction with this amendment, the Exchange
proposes to create the following new flags: \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65902 (December 6,
2011), 76 FR 77286 (December 12, 2011).
    \10\ As defined in EDGA Exchange Rule 1.5(cc) [sic].
    \11\ These flags account for all postable destinations that are
not already accounted for by other flags on the fee schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to add Flag RB for orders that are routed
from EDGA to Nasdaq OMX BX and add liquidity. The Exchange proposes to
assess a charge of $0.0018 per share to account for the pass-through of
the Nasdaq OMX BX fee for adding liquidity.
    The Exchange proposes to add Flag RC for orders that are routed
from EDGA to the National Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NSX'') and add
liquidity. The Exchange proposes to offer Members a rebate of $0.0026
per share to account for the pass-through of the NSX rebate for adding
liquidity.
    The Exchange proposes to add Flag RM for orders that are routed
from EDGA to the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (``CHX'') and add
liquidity. The Exchange proposes to assess no charge to account for the
pass-through of the CHX fee for adding liquidity.
    The Exchange proposes to add Flag RS for orders that are routed
from EDGA to the Nasdaq OMX PSX (``PSX'') and add liquidity. The
Exchange proposes to offer Members a rebate of $0.0024 per share to
account for the pass-through of the PSX rebate for adding liquidity.
    The Exchange proposes to add Flag RW for orders that are routed
from EDGA to the CBOE Stock Exchange, LLC (``CBSX'') and add liquidity.
The Exchange proposes to assess a charge of $0.0017 per share to
account for the pass-through of the CBSX fee for adding liquidity.
    The Exchange proposes to add Flag RY for orders that are routed
from EDGA to the BATS BYX and add liquidity. The Exchange proposes to
assess a charge of $0.0003 per share to account for the pass-through of
the BATS BYX fee for adding liquidity.
    The Exchange proposes to add Flag RZ for orders that are routed
from EDGA to the BATS BZX that add liquidity. The Exchange proposes to
offer Members a rebate of $0.0025 per share to account for the pass-
through of the BATS BZX rebate for adding liquidity to BATS BZX.
    The Exchange proposes to implement these amendments to its fee
schedule on March 1, 2012.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes are consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\12\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\13\ in particular, as it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its members and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed technical amendments to
Footnotes 2 and 4 and Flags 3, 9, and N add additional transparency to
its fee schedule for investors. The Exchange believes that the proposed
technical amendments to Footnote 9 and Flag CL to include BATS BZX as
one of the primary listing exchanges adds additional transparency to
its fee schedule for investors as it brings the schedule up-to-date to
account for a new listing exchange. The Exchange also believes that the
amendments to Flags 8, 9, and CL to remove the specific ``ROOC routing
strategy'' from those flags descriptions provides additional
transparency to the fee schedule by broadening those flags
applicability to several routing strategies. This encourages Members to
utilize the Exchange to route to various destinations. The Exchange
believes that the proposed amendment to delete Flag H and replace it
with Flags HA and HR support the quality of price discovery, promote
market transparency and improve investor protection by adding
additional transparency to its fee schedule for Members by more
precisely delineating for Members whether they have posted hidden
liquidity or removed hidden liquidity.
    In addition, the amendment to footnote 2 to allow Members that
remove hidden liquidity (Flag HR), rather than just add hidden
liquidity (Flag HA), to achieve a favorable rate of $0.0010 per share
opens this tier to those Members who remove hidden liquidity. The
Exchange believes that providing an additional way to achieve the lower
fee of $0.0010 per share (instead of $0.0030 per share) represents an
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges since
it allows Members another means to achieve this lower fee and
encourages Members to add to or remove liquidity from EDGA which is
greater than 1,000,000 shares hidden on a daily basis. Such increased
volume increases potential revenue to the Exchange, and would allow the
Exchange to spread its administrative and infrastructure costs over a
greater number of shares, leading to lower per share costs. These lower
per share costs would allow the Exchange to pass on the savings to
Members in the form of lower fees.
    The Exchange believes that the rate for flags PA/PT (the RMPT
routing strategy adding/removing liquidity) is designed to provide for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among its members and other person using its facilities. The rate of
$0.0010 for Mid-Point Peg Orders routed through the RMPT routing
strategy is equitable in that Mid-Point Peg Orders behave in a similar
fashion to non-displayed orders, which are currently priced at $0.0010
per share. Mid-Point Peg Orders like non-displayed orders are non-
displayed orders that remain hidden on the Exchange's book at various
price points. The rate is also comparable to fees for non-displayed
liquidity on other exchanges. For example, Nasdaq OMX BX charges
$0.0018 to add non-displayed liquidity,\14\ while BATS BYX charges
$0.001 to add non-displayed (hidden) liquidity to its order book.\15\
In addition, EDGA believes that it is reasonable and equitable to
charge the same rates for non-displayed orders, and it is non-
discriminatory because the charge will apply uniformly to all Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Nasdaq OMX BX fee schedule at: http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=bx_pricing.
    \15\ See BATS BYX fee schedule at: http://www.batstrading.com/FeeSchedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed fee of $0.0020 associated with
Flag PX is reasonable and equitable as it represents a flat rate
charged by different exchanges and is consistent

with how other exchanges pass through charges plus or minus a
differential for orders routed to a different exchange. The rate
represents a flat routing rate for EDGA members. The flat-rate provides
simplicity for Members instead of passing through the actual rates that
EDGA receives from various destinations on its schedule. This type of
rate is similar to other rates that EDGA charges, such as the flat
rates for the ROUT routing strategy (yielding Flag RT and priced at
$0.0025 per share) and for Flag 7 executions ($0.0027 per share). In
this rate, EDGA takes into account the rates that it is charged or
rebated when routing to other destinations. It is also consistent with
the processing of similar routing strategies by EDGA's competitors,
such as Nasdaq's DOTM routing strategy \16\ for which Nasdaq charges
$0.0030 per share. The Exchange believes that the proposed fee is non-
discriminatory in that it applies uniformly to all Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Nasdaq's DOTM routing strategy posts on a primary listing
market for the open and then acts like Nasdaq's STGY routing
strategy for the rest of the trading session. See NASDAQ Rule 4758
and NASDAQ Pricing List at: http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=PriceListTrading2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed pass-through
of rates for Flags RZ, 9, 10, RB, RC, RM, RS, RW, and RY represent an
equitable allocation or reasonable dues, fees and other charges since
it reflects the pass-through of the rates associated with transactions
done on other exchanges, as described above. In addition, EDGA believes
that it is reasonable and equitable to pass-through certain rates to
its Members. The Exchange also believes that the proposed pass-through
of rates is non-discriminatory because they apply to all Members.
    The Exchange also notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive. The proposed rule change reflects a competitive pricing
structure designed to incent market participants to direct their order
flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed rates are
equitable and non-discriminatory in that they apply uniformly to all
Members. The Exchange believes the fees and credits remain competitive
with those charged by other venues and therefore continue to be
reasonable and equitably allocated to Members.

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

    The proposed rule change does not 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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3) of the Act \17\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \18\ thereunder. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \18\ 17 CFR 19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-EDGA-2012-07 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-EDGA-2012-07. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
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. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-EDGA-2012-07 and should be
submitted on or before April 5, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-6237 Filed 3-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 88 (Wednesday, May 7, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26195-26198]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10377]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[Docket Number USCG-2013-0819]
RIN 1625-AA01

Anchorage; Ashley River Anchorage, Ashley River, Charleston, SC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the special anchorage area
located on the Ashley River, in Charleston, SC. The change is necessary
to accommodate the expansion of the Charleston City Marina and meet the
requirements of 33 CFR 109.10. The change will ensure that there is
sufficient space to accommodate vessels desiring to anchor in the area,
while allowing a sufficient buffer between the federal channel and
special anchorage.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before June 6, 2014. Requests for public meetings must be
received by the Coast Guard on or before June 6, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions
on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of
these three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Chief Warrant Officer Christopher Ruleman, Sector
Charleston Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard;

telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you
have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call
Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202)
366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at
http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when
it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number USCG-2013-0819 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number USCG-2013-0819 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES.
Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Regulatory History and Information

    On April 18, 2011 the Coast Guard Seventh District published a
final rule establishing a special anchorage area on the Ashley River in
Charleston, South Carolina in the Federal Register (76 FR 21636). The
anchorage area established is contained in 33 CFR 110.72d.

C. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for this rule is: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236,
2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to define
anchorage grounds.
    The purpose of the proposed rule is to relocate and reestablish the
Ashley River Anchorage to accommodate the approved expansion plans of
the Charleston City Marina. The City Marina Company received a permit
for the expansion of their marina in August, 2012. The expansion will
force the relocation of the centerline of the federal channel in the
vicinity of the marina. The new channel will impede on the current
special anchorage area. The special anchorage area will need to be
modified to prevent potential navigational hazards caused by the
proximity of vessels transiting the channel to vessels anchored in the
special anchorage area. This proposed rule would also maintain the
current size of the Anchorage, ensuring no reduction in space for
vessels needing to anchor.

D. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed rule would alter the bounds of the Ashley River
anchorage, while not reducing its size. The new special anchorage area
will encompass all waters of the Ashley River enclosed by a line
beginning at latitude 32[deg]46'40'' N longitude 79[deg]57'27'' W;
thence continuing north-northeasterly to latitude 32[deg]46'44'' N
longitude 79[deg]57'25'' W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude
32[deg]46'40'' N longitude 79[deg]57'22'' W; thence continuing
southeasterly to latitude 32[deg]46'27'' N longitude 79[deg]57'03'' W;
thence continuing west-southwesterly to latitude 32[deg]46'25'' N
longitude 79[deg]57'09'' W; thence continuing northwesterly to the
beginning point at latitude 32[deg]46'40'' N longitude 79[deg]57'27''
W.

E. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. The impacts on routine
navigation are expected to be minimal because the proposed anchorage
area would not unnecessarily restrict traffic as they are located
outside of the established navigation channel. Vessels would be able to
maneuver in, around, and through the anchorage. The proposed anchorage
maintains the same width as the existing anchorage and associated
special conditions ensure that navigational concerns are addressed.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    This proposed rule may affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels wishing to
anchor in or transit the special anchorage area established by this
rule. The rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities because the size of the current
special anchorage area will not be reduced and it will remain in the
same vicinity as the current anchorage. If you think that your
business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a
small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic
impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why
you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would
economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. This proposed
rule involves changing the location and size of a anchorage area as
described in figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(f), of the Commandant
Instruction. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 110 as follows:

PART 110--Anchorage Regulations

0
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, 2071;
33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Revise Sec.  110.72d to read as follows:

Sec.  110.72d  Ashley River, SC.

    All waters on the southwest portion of the Ashley River encompassed
within the following points: beginning at latitude 32[deg]46'40'' N
longitude 79[deg]57'27'' W; thence continuing north-

northeasterly to latitude 32[deg]46'44'' N longitude 79[deg]57'25'' W;
thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 32[deg]46'40'' N longitude
79[deg]57'22'' W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude
32[deg]46'27'' N longitude 79[deg]57'03'' W; thence continuing west-
southwesterly to latitude 32[deg]46'25'' N longitude 79[deg]57'09'' W;
thence continuing northwesterly to the beginning point at latitude
32[deg]46'40'' N longitude 79[deg]57'27'' W. All coordinates are North
American Datum 1983.

    Dated: April 10, 2014.
J.H. Korn,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Coast Guard Seventh
District.
[FR Doc. 2014-10377 Filed 5-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 10, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62522-62523]
[FR Doc No: 2021-24594]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP07-414-000; CP07-415-000; CP07-416-000]

Golden Triangle Storage, Inc.; Notice of Request for Extension of
Time

    Take notice that on October 29, 2021, Golden Triangle Storage, Inc.
(GTS) requested that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) grant an extension of time, until December 31, 2024, in
order to development of Storage Caverns 1 and 2 up to their maximum
certificated storage capacities in Jefferson and Orange Counties,
Texas. In a December 31, 2007 Order Issuing Certificates the Commission
Approved the construction and operation of the GTS project (2007 Order)
\1\ The 2007 Order required Golden Triangle Storage, Inc to complete
construction and make the facilities available for service within six
years of the certificate order, that is, by December 13, 2013, pursuant
to section 157.20(b) of the Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Golden Triangle Storage, Inc., 121 FERC ] 61,313 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its October 29, 2021 request GTS had stated the 2007 Order
recognized that after the caverns are placed in service, they will
undergo additional solution mining to increase the working gas capacity
of each cavern to its total certificated capacity. On October 15, 2013,
GTS filed a request for an extension of time for an additional four
years, until December 31, 2017, to complete the project.\2\ On November
15, 2013, the Commission granted an extension of time until and
including December 31, 2017, to complete construction of the
facilities.\3\ Due to the capacity of the leaching facilities, GTS
states that it must alternate the solution mining of each cavern, thus
GTS has requested by its August 29, 2017 letter an additional four year
extension of time to complete the leaching of their storage caverns to
their maximum certificated capacities.\4\ The Commission, on November
1, 2017, granted an additional extension of time until and including
December 31, 2021,

to complete construction of the facilities.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Golden Triangle Storage, Inc., Docket Nos. CP07-414-000, et
al., Request for Extension of Time filed October 15, 2013.
    \3\ Golden Triangle Storage, Inc., Docket Nos. CP07-414-000, et
al., (unpublished delegated letter order issued November 15, 2013,
granting request for extension of time).
    \4\ Golden Triangle Storage, Inc., Docket Nos. CP07-414-000, et
al., Request for Extension of Time to Complete Construction of
Jurisdictional Facilities filed August 29, 2017.
    \5\ Golden Triangle Storage, Inc., Docket Nos. CP07-414-000, et
al., (unpublished delegated letter order issued November 1, 2017,
granting request for extension of time).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Now on October 29, 2021 GTS requested an additional four-year
extension of time to require additional rewatering cycles to reach its
maximum certificated storage capacity cycle and recover any capacity
lost to gradual creep since the most recent prior rewatering.
    This notice establishes a 15-calendar day intervention and comment
period deadline. Any person wishing to comment on Golden Triangle
Storage, Inc request for an extension of time may do so. No reply
comments or answers will be considered. If you wish to obtain legal
status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this request, you
should, on or before the comment date stated below, file a motion to
intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the
Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Only motions to intervene from entities that were party to
the underlying proceeding will be accepted. Algonquin Gas
Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC ] 61,144, at P 39 (2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a matter of practice, the Commission itself generally acts on
requests for extensions of time to complete construction for Natural
Gas Act facilities when such requests are contested before order
issuance. For those extension requests that are contested,\7\ the
Commission will aim to issue an order acting on the request within 45
days.\8\ The Commission will address all arguments relating to whether
the applicant has demonstrated there is good cause to grant the
extension.\9\ The Commission will not consider arguments that re-
litigate the issuance of the certificate order, including whether the
Commission properly found the project to be in the public convenience
and necessity and whether the Commission's environmental analysis for
the certificate complied with the National Environmental Policy
Act.\10\ At the time a pipeline requests an extension of time, orders
on certificates of public convenience and necessity are final and the
Commission will not re-litigate their issuance.\11\ The OEP Director,
or his or her designee, will act on all of those extension requests
that are uncontested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Contested proceedings are those where an intervenor disputes
any material issue of the filing. 18 CFR 385.2201(c)(1) (2019).
    \8\ Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC ] 61,144, at P 40
(2020).
    \9\ Id. at P 40.
    \10\ Similarly, the Commission will not re-litigate the issuance
of an NGA section 3 authorization, including whether a proposed
project is not inconsistent with the public interest and whether the
Commission's environmental analysis for the permit order complied
with NEPA.
    \11\ Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC ] 61,144, at P 40
(2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to Commission's Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
[email protected] or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFile'' link at
http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically may mail
similar pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in
docketed proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 19, 2021.

    Dated: November 4, 2021.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-24594 Filed 11-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 29, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 228)]
[Notices]
[Page 71565]
[DOCID:fr29no05-106]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 1-32657]

Issuer Delisting; Notice of Application of Nabors Industries Ltd.
To Withdraw Its Common Shares, $.001 Par Value, From Listing and
Registration on the American Stock Exchange LLC

November 22, 2005.

    On November 3, 2005, Nabors Industries Ltd., a Bermuda exempted
company (``Issuer''), filed an application with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 12(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 12d2-2(d)
thereunder,\2\ to withdraw its common shares, $.001 par value
(``Security''), from listing and registration on the American Stock
Exchange LLC (``Amex'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(d).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.12d2-2(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the Board of Directors (``Board'') of the Issuer unanimously
approved a resolution on May 6, 2005, to withdraw the Security from
listing on Amex and to list the Security on the New York Stock
Exchange, Inc. (``NYSE''). The Issuer stated that the Board's reason to
withdraw the Security from Amex and list the Security on NYSE was to
avoid direct and indirect costs and the division of the market
resulting from dual listing on Amex and NYSE.
    The Issuer stated in its application that it has met the
requirements of Amex Rule 18 by complying with all applicable laws in
effect in Bermuda, in which it is incorporated, and providing written
notice of withdrawal to Amex.
    The Issuer's application relates solely to the withdrawal of the
Security from listing on Amex, and shall not affect its continued
listing on NYSE or its obligation to be registered under Section 12(b)
of the Act.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 781(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any interested person may, on or before December 15, 2005, comment
on the facts bearing upon whether the application has been made in
accordance with the rules of Amex, and what terms, if any, should be
imposed by the Commission for the protection of investors. All comment
letters may be submitted by either of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

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

the File Number 1-32657 or;

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.
    All submissions should refer to File Number 1-32657. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help us 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/delist.shtml).

Comments are also available for public inspection and copying in the
Commission's Public Reference Room. All comments received will be
posted without change; we do not edit personal identifying information
from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to
make available publicly.
    The Commission, based on the information submitted to it, will
issue an order granting the application after the date mentioned above,
unless the Commission determines to order a hearing on the matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(1).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\4\
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-6663 Filed 11-28-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P