[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 181 (Monday, September 19, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64150-64151]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22479]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9952-58-OA]

National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of advisory committee teleconference.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92463,
EPA gives notice of a public meeting of the National Advisory Council
for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT). NACEPT provides
advice to the EPA Administrator on a broad range of environmental
policy, technology, and management issues. NACEPT members represent
academia, industry, non-governmental organizations, and state, local
and tribal governments. The purpose of this meeting is for NACEPT to
discuss the Council's draft report regarding actions that EPA should
take in response to technological and sociological developments in the
area of citizen science. A copy of the meeting agenda will be posted at
http://www2.epa.gov/faca/nacept.

DATES: NACEPT will hold a public teleconference on October 17, 2016,
from 12:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. (EDT).

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the EPA Headquarters, William
Jefferson Clinton Federal Building East, Room 1132, 1201 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eugene Green, Designated Federal
Officer<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(202) 564-2432, U.S. EPA, Office of
Resources, Operations and Management; Federal Advisory Committee
Management Division (MC1601M), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Requests to make oral comments or to provide
written comments to NACEPT should be sent to Eugene Green at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by October 10, 2016. The teleconference is open to
the public, with limited seating available on a first-come, first-
served basis. Members of the public wishing to participate in the
teleconference should contact Eugene Green via email or calling (202)
564-2432 no later than October 10, 2016.
    Meeting Access: Information regarding accessibility and/or
accommodations for individuals with disabilities should be directed to
Eugene Green at the email address or phone number listed above. To
ensure adequate time for processing, please make requests for
accommodations at least 10 days prior to the meeting.

    Dated: September 7, 2016.
Eugene Green,
Designated Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016-22479 Filed 9-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 178 (Friday, September 15, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43310-43312]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19593]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 312

[EPA-HQ-OLEM-2016-0786; FRL-9967-46-OLEM]
RIN 2050-AG94

Amendment to Standards and Practices for All Appropriate
Inquiries Under CERCLA

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the agency)
is taking final action to amend the Standards and Practices for All
Appropriate Inquiries to update an existing reference to a standard
practice revised by ASTM International, a widely recognized standards
development organization. Specifically, this final rule amends the All
Appropriate Inquiries Rule to reference ASTM International's E2247-16
``Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment Process for Forestland or Rural
Property'' and allow for its use to satisfy the statutory requirements
for conducting all appropriate inquires under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA).

DATES: This final rule is effective on March 14, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OLEM-2016-0786. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov Web site. Docket materials
are also available in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center Reading Room.
Please see https://www.epa.gov/dockets/epa-docket-center-reading-room
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> for more information on the Docket Center
Reading Room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact the
CERCLA Call Center at<PHONE_NUMBER> or TDD<PHONE_NUMBER> (hearing
impaired). In the Washington, DC metropolitan area, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
or TDD<PHONE_NUMBER>. For more detailed information on specific aspects
of this rule, contact Patricia Overmeyer, Office of Brownfields and
Land Revitalization (5105T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Purpose of This Regulatory Action

    EPA is publishing this final rule to revise an existing reference
in 40 CFR part 312 to include the updated version of a standard
practice recently made available by ASTM International (E2247-16).

B. Does this action apply to me?

    This action offers certain parties the option of using an available
industry standard to conduct all appropriate inquiries at certain
properties. Parties purchasing large tracts of forested land and
parties purchasing large rural properties may use the ASTM E2247-16
standard practice to comply with the all appropriate inquiries
requirements of CERCLA. This rule does not require any entity to use
this standard. Any party who wants to claim protection from liability
under CERCLA may follow the regulatory requirements of the All
Appropriate Inquiries Rule at 40 CFR part 312, use the ASTM E1527-13
Standard Practice for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments to comply
with the all appropriate inquiries provision of CERCLA, or use the
standard recognized in this final rule, the ASTM E2247-16 standard, as
applicable.
    Entities potentially affected by this action, or who may choose to
use the newly referenced ASTM standard to perform all appropriate
inquiries, include public and private parties who, as bona fide
prospective purchasers, contiguous property owners, or innocent
landowners, are purchasing large tracts of forested lands or large
rural properties and intend to claim a limitation on CERCLA liability
in conjunction with the property purchase. In addition, any entity
conducting a site characterization or assessment on a property that
consists of large tracts of forested land or a large rural property
with a brownfields grant awarded under CERCLA Section104(k)(2)(B)(ii)
may be affected by this action. This includes state, local and Tribal
governments that receive brownfields site assessment grants. A summary
of the potentially affected industry sectors (by North American
Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes) is displayed in the table
below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Industry category                       NAICS code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Real Estate...........................  531
Insurance.............................  52412
Banking/Real Estate Credit............  52292
Environmental Consulting Services.....  54162
State, Local and Tribal Government....  926110, 925120
Federal Government....................  925120, 921190, 924120
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The list of potentially affected entities in the above table may
not be exhaustive. Our aim is to provide a guide for readers regarding
those entities that EPA is aware potentially could be affected by this
action. However, this action may affect other entities not listed in
the table. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
preceding section entitled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

C. Statutory Authority

    This final rule amends the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule setting
federal standards for the conduct of ``all appropriate inquiries'' at
40 CFR part 312. The All Appropriate Inquiries Rule sets forth
standards and practices necessary for fulfilling the requirements of
CERCLA section 101(35)(B) as required to obtain CERCLA liability relief
and for conducting site characterizations and assessments with the use
of brownfields grants per CERCLA section 104(k)(2)(B)(ii).

II. Background

    On January 11, 2002, President Bush signed the Small Business
Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (``the Brownfields
Amendments''). In general, the Brownfields Amendments to CERCLA provide
funds to assess and clean up brownfields sites; clarify CERCLA
liability provisions related to innocent purchasers of contaminated
properties; and provide funding to enhance State and Tribal cleanup
programs. Subtitle B of the Brownfields Amendments revises some of the
provisions of CERCLA section 101(35) and limits Superfund liability
under Section 107 for bona fide prospective purchasers and contiguous
property owners, in addition to clarifying the requirements necessary
to establish the innocent landowner

defense under CERCLA. The Brownfields Amendments clarified the
requirement that parties purchasing potentially contaminated property
undertake ``all appropriate inquiries'' into prior ownership and use of
property prior to purchasing the property to qualify for protection
from CERCLA liability.
    The Brownfields Amendments required EPA to develop regulations
establishing standards and practices for how to conduct all appropriate
inquiries. EPA promulgated regulations that set standards and practices
for all appropriate inquiries on November 1, 2005 (70 FR 66070). In the
final regulation, EPA referenced, and recognized as compliant with the
final rule, the ASTM E1527-05 ``Standard Practice for Environmental
Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process.'' The
regulation was amended in December 2013 to recognize the revised ASTM
E1527-13, ``Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase
I Environmental Site Assessment Process'' (78 FR 79319). EPA also
amended the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule in December 2008 to
recognize another ASTM standard as compliant with the final rule, the
ASTM E2247-08 ``Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments:
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process for Forestland or Rural
Property'' (73 FR 78651). Therefore, the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule
(40 CFR part 312) currently allows for the use of both the ASTM E1527-
13 and the ASTM E2247-08 standards to conduct all appropriate
inquiries, in lieu of following requirements included in the final
rule. Note that in October 2014, EPA withdrew the reference to the ASTM
E1527-05 standard from the AAI rule (79 FR 60087).
    Since EPA promulgated the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule setting
standards and practices for the conduct of all appropriate inquiries,
ASTM International published a revised Phase I site assessment standard
for conducting Phase I environmental site assessments of large tracts
of rural and forestland properties. This standard, ASTM E2247-16,
``Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment Process for Forestland or Rural
Property,'' was reviewed by EPA, in response to a request for its
review by ASTM International, and determined by EPA to be compliant
with the requirements of the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule. EPA
proposed to amend the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule to recognize the
updated ASTM E2247-16 standard on June 20, 2017 (82 FR 28040).

III. Summary of Comments

    EPA received one comment on the proposed rule published June 20,
2017. Although the commenter generally supports the Agency's proposed
action, the commenter raised a concern regarding the proposed effective
date of the action. The commenter offered that parties using the
previous version of the ASTM E2247 standard (ASTM E2247-08) would not
have sufficient time to transition to the new standard, given that EPA
proposed an effective date of 90 days following publication of a direct
final rule, which was published on the same day as the proposed rule.
Given the concern raised by the commenter, EPA decided to extend the
effective date of its action in this final rule. This final rule will
become effective 180 days following the publication of this final rule
in Federal Register. The extended effective date will give parties
using the ASTM E2247-08 standard sufficient time to transition to the
new standard, ASTM E2247-16. The Agency notes that this action does not
require any party to use the ASTM E2247-16 standard. Any party
conducting all appropriate inquiries to comply with the CERCLA
requirements at section 101(35)(B) for the innocent landowner defense,
the contiguous property owner liability protection, or the bona fide
prospective purchaser liability protection may continue to follow the
provisions of the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule at 40 CFR part 312,
use the ASTM E1527-13 Standard or use the ASTM E2247-16 standard, as
applicable.

IV. What does this action do?

    This final rule amends the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule to allow
the use of the recently revised ASTM standard, E2247-16 ``Standard
Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment Process for Forestland or Rural Property,'' for conducting
all appropriate inquiries, as required under CERCLA for establishing
the innocent landowner defense, as well as qualifying for the bona fide
prospective purchaser and contiguous property owner liability
protections.
    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272)) directs
agencies to use technical standards that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies, unless their use would be
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impracticable. ASTM
International is an internationally recognized voluntary consensus
standard body. The ASTM E2247-16 ``Standard Practice for Environmental
Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process for
Forestland or Rural Property'' includes an environmental site
assessment process that EPA finds is not inconsistent with the
standards and practices included in the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule.
    With this action, EPA is establishing that, parties seeking
liability relief under CERCLA's landowner liability protections, as
well as recipients of brownfields grants for conducting site
assessments, will be considered to be in compliance with the
requirements for all appropriate inquiries, as required in the
Brownfields Amendments to CERCLA, if such parties satisfy the
applicability requirements and comply with the procedures provided in
the ASTM E2247-16, ``Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process for
Forestland or Rural Property.'' EPA made this determination based upon
the Agency's finding that the ASTM E2247-16 standard is ``not
inconsistent with,'' and compliant with the All Appropriate Inquiries
Rule. The Agency notes that this action does not require any party to
use the ASTM E2247-16 standard. Any party conducting all appropriate
inquiries to comply with the CERCLA requirements at section 101(35)(B)
for the innocent landowner defense, the contiguous property owner
liability protection, or the bona fide prospective purchaser liability
protection may continue to follow the provisions of the All Appropriate
Inquiries Rule at 40 CFR part 312, use the ASTM E1527-13 Standard or
use the ASTM E2247-16 standard, as applicable.
    In taking this action, the Agency is allowing for the use of an
additional recognized standard or customary business practice, in
complying with a federal regulation. This action does not require any
person to use the newly revised standard. This action merely allows for
the use of ASTM International's E2247-16 ``Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Process for Forestland or Rural Property'' for those parties purchasing
relatively large tracts of rural property or forestlands who want to
use the ASTM E2247-16 standard in lieu of the following specific
requirements of the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule or the ASTM E1527-13
standard.
    The Agency notes that there are no significant differences between
the regulatory requirements in the All

Appropriate Inquiries Rule and the standards and practices included in
the two ASTM standards (ASTM E1527-13 and ASTM E2247-16). To facilitate
an understanding of the revisions to the ASTM E2247-08 Standard
Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment Standard for Forestland or Rural Property, which was
recognized by EPA as compliant with the requirements of the all
appropriate inquiries regulation in 2013, and the revised ASTM E2247-16
Standard, which replaces the ASTM E2247-08 standard, EPA developed, and
placed in the docket for this action, the document ``Summary of Updates
and Revisions to ASTM E2247 Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process for
Forestland or Rural Property.'' Also in the docket for this action is
the document ``Comparison of the All Appropriate Inquiries Regulation,
the ASTM E1527-13 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process and the
ASTM E2247-16 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process for
Forestland or Rural Property Standard.'' This document provides an
overview of the similarities and slight differences between the AAI
regulatory requirements and the requirements included in the two ASTM
phase I environmental site assessment standards.
    This action includes no changes to the All Appropriate Inquiries
Rule other than to update the reference in the regulation for the ASTM
E2247 standard. This action replaces the reference to the ASTM E2247-08
``Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment Process for Forestland or Rural
Property'' in the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule with the updated ASTM
E2247-16 standard of the same name. EPA's only action with this final
rule is recognition of the ASTM E2247-16 standard as compliant with the
All Appropriate Inquires Rule.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
Executive Order 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this action is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore not subject to
OMB review. Further, this action will not have a significant impact on
a substantial number of small entities and, as a result, is not subject
to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this
action does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in
expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate or the private sector in any one year,
and does not contain regulatory requirements that might significantly
or uniquely affect small governments, it is not subject to Sections
202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
(Pub. L. 104-4). This action does not create new binding legal
requirements that substantially and directly affect Tribes under
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action does
not have significant Federalism implications under Executive Order
13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Because this final rule was not
reviewed under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

A. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This action involves technical standards. This action allows for
the use of the ASTM International Standard known as Standard E2247-16
and entitled ``Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments:
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process for Forestland or Rural
Property.''

B. Congressional Review Act

    This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act (CRA), and
the EPA will submit a rule report to each House of Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 312

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Superfund.

    Dated: August 31, 2017.
Barry N. Breen,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Land and Emergency
Management.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency amends title 40 chapter I of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:

PART 312--INNOCENT LANDOWNERS, STANDARDS FOR CONDUCTING ALL
APPROPRIATE INQUIRIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 312 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Section 101(35)(B) of CERCLA, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
9601(35)(B).

0
2. Amend Sec.  312.11 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  312.11   References.

* * * * *
    (a) The procedures of ASTM International Standard E2247-16 entitled
``Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment Process for Forestland or Rural
Property.'' This standard is available from ASTM International at
www.astm.org, 1-610-832-9585.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-19593 Filed 9-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 139 (Monday, July 20, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 43827]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15609]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

    Docket Number: PR20-55-001.
    Applicants: The East Ohio Gas Company.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)/: Amend Operating
Statement for The East Ohio Gas Company 4/30/2020 to be effective.
    Filed Date: 7/10/20.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>74.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/24/2020.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-1019-000.
    Applicants: Midwestern Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Operational Flow Orders to be
effective 8/8/2020.
    Filed Date: 7/9/20.
    Accession Number: 20200709-5110.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/21/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-1020-000.
    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: REX--2020-07-09 Administrative
Change to be effective 6/26/2020.
    Filed Date: 7/9/20.
    Accession Number: 20200709-5136.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/21/20.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 13, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-15609 Filed 7-17-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: January 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 16)]
[Notices]
[Page 4123]
[DOCID:fr25ja06-55]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER06-146-000 and ER06-146-001]

Alliance Energy Marketing, LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order

January 18, 2006.
    Alliance Energy Marketing, LLC (Alliance) filed an application for
market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule. The
proposed market-based rate schedule provides for the sales of energy,
capacity and ancillary at market-based rates. Alliance also requested
waiver of various Commission regulations. In particular, Alliance
requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part
34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability
by Alliance.
    On January 18, 2006, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director,
Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the request
for blanket approval under Part 34. The Director's order also stated
that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the Federal
Register establishing a period of time for the filing of protests.
Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket
approval of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by
Alliance should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to
intervene or protest is February 17, 2006.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above,
Alliance is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or
liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect
of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or
assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of
Alliance, compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably
necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approval of Alliance's issuances of securities or assumptions
of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-835 Filed 1-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 137 (Tuesday, July 19, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43035-43036]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15382]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0162; FRL-10022-01-OCSPP]

Pesticide Experimental Use Permit; Receipt of Application;
Comment Request June 2022

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's receipt of an application 524-EUP-
RRT from Bayer CropScience LP requesting an experimental use permit
(EUP) for the GA20ox_SUP miRNA. The Agency has determined that the
permit may be of regional and national significance. Therefore, because
of the potential significance, EPA is seeking comments on this
application.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 18, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0036, through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Additional
instructions on commenting and visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Smith, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511M), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. Although this
action may be of particular interest to those persons who conduct or
sponsor research on pesticides, the Agency has not attempted to
describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. 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 preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the
pesticide(s) discussed in this document, compared to the general
population.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    Under section 5 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136c, EPA can allow manufacturers to
field test pesticides under development. Manufacturers are required to
obtain an EUP before testing new pesticides or new uses of pesticides
if they conduct experimental field tests on 10 acres or more of land or
one acre or more of water.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 172.11(a), the Agency has determined that the
following EUP application may be of regional and national significance,
and therefore is seeking public comment on the EUP application:
    Experimental Use Permit Number: 524-EUP-RRT. Docket ID Number: EPA-
HQ-OPP-2022-0036. Submitter: Bayer CropScience LP 800 North Lindbergh
Blvd. St. Louis, Missouri 63167. Pesticide Chemical: GA20ox_SUP miRNA.
Summary of Request: Bayer CropScience LP is proposing to use 0.93 grams
of GA20ox_SUP miRNA in MON 94804 over 10,000 acres from 2023 to 2024 as
a plant-incorporated protectant for field corn. Proposed testing will
include the following states and U.S. territories: AL, AR, CA, CO,

FL, GA, HI, IA, IL, IN, KS, LA, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, OH, PA, PR, SC,
SD, TN, TX, WA, and WI to generate data to fulfill the requirements for
Section 3 product registration under FIFRA. Contact: BPPD.
    Following the review of the application and any comments and data
received in response to this solicitation, EPA will decide whether to
issue or deny the EUP request, and if issued, the conditions under
which it is to be conducted. Any issuance of an EUP will be announced
in the Federal Register.
    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: July 13, 2022.
Delores Barber,
Director, Information Technology and Resources Management Division,
Office of Program Support.
[FR Doc. 2022-15382 Filed 7-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 18 (Thursday, January 27, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4835-4838]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1771]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2010-0036; FRL-9258-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Ohio; Volatile Organic Compound Reinforced Plastics Composites
Production Operations Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a new rule for the control of
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from reinforced plastic
composites production operations to Ohio's State Implementation plan
(SIP). This rule applies to any facility that has reinforced plastic
composites production operations. This rule is approvable because it
satisfies the requirements for reasonably available control technology
(RACT) under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 28, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2010-0036, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: John Mooney, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
     Hand Delivery: John Mooney, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of

business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding
Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2010-0036. EPA'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 website
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 instructions on submitting comments, go to
Section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    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 either
electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This Facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Steven Rosenthal,
Environmental Engineer, at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting the Region 5
office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Rosenthal, Environmental
Engineer, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What action is EPA taking today and what is the purpose of this
action?
III. What is EPA's analysis of Ohio's reinforced plastics composites
rule?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

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

II. What action is EPA taking today and what is the purpose of this
action?

    EPA is proposing to approve into Ohio's SIP new rule OAC 3745-21-25
``Control of VOC Emissions from Reinforced Plastic Composites
Production Operations.'' This rule was submitted by the Ohio EPA to EPA
on November 10, 2010, and contains requirements that satisfy RACT
standards for VOC emissions from reinforced plastic composites
production operations. This rule is needed to establish VOC RACT
requirements for such operations to replace the requirements contained
in OAC rule 3745-21-07 (Control of emissions of organic materials from
stationary sources) because 3745-21-07 has been revised by Ohio, and
the revised rule (which is the subject of a separate Federal Register
action) excludes reinforced plastic composites production operations.

III. What is EPA's analysis of Ohio's reinforced plastics composites
rule?

    As discussed below, this rule satisfies RACT requirements and is
consistent with the CAA and EPA regulations. A general discussion of
the main elements of OAC 3745-21-25 (Control of VOC emissions from
reinforced plastic composites production operations) follows:
    3745-21-25(A) Applicability
    (A)(1)--This rule applies to any facility that has reinforced
plastic composites production operations, except as otherwise provided
in paragraph (A)(2).
    (A)(2)--This paragraph exempts any facility in which potential VOC
emissions from all reinforced plastic composites production operations
combined is 10.0 tons per year or less and requires that up-to-date
records be kept of the potential to emit VOC from all reinforced
plastic composites production operations. However, consistent with
EPA's once in/always in policy, this exclusion is not available for any
facility that has, or once had, a potential to emit for VOC equal to or
greater than 10.0 tons per year for all reinforced plastic composites
production operations combined on or after December 14, 2010 (12 months
from the effective date of an earlier version of this rule).
    (A)(3)--Upon achieving compliance with this rule, the reinforced
plastic composites production operations at the facility are not
required to meet the requirements of 3745-21-07, which is Ohio's
general rule for the control of organic materials from stationary
sources that are not controlled by another specific VOC RACT rule. This
exemption from 3745-21-07 is appropriate because 3745-21-25 contains
VOC RACT requirements specific to reinforced plastic composites
production operations, whereas 3745-21-07 is a general rule that covers
a number of source categories.
    However, the applicability cutoff of 3745-21-07 is 8 lbs/hour or 40
pounds/day as compared to a 25 tons VOC/year cutoff for the control
requirements of 3745-21-25 for sheet molding compound (SMC)
manufacturing operations. The main purpose of this

rule is the control of such SMC operations because SMC machines were
previously covered by 3745-21-07. Ohio EPA submitted a October 25,
2010, demonstration under section 110(l) of the CAA that the less
stringent applicability cutoff in 3745-21-25 does not interfere with
attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, nor interfere
with any other requirement of the CAA. Ohio documented that the worst
case maximum theoretical increase in uncontrolled emissions is 159 tons
of VOC/year, but that the actual emission increase from this change in
applicability cutoffs would be 7.1 tons of VOC/year.
    In December, 2007, Ohio EPA promulgated rules in OAC Chapter 3745-
110, ``NOX RACT.'' These rules addressed the control of
emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) from stationary
sources such as boilers, combustion turbines, and stationary internal
combustion engines. The rules were made applicable as an attainment
strategy in the Cleveland-Akron-Lorain ozone moderate nonattainment
area. On September 15, 2009, EPA redesignated the Cleveland-Akron-
Lorain metropolitan area as attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
At the same time, EPA approved a waiver, for this area, from the
NOX RACT requirements of section 182(f) of the CAA. Ohio's
NOX RACT rules are, therefore, surplus and can be used to
offset any increase in emissions from SMC machines in Ohio. Ohio
obtained 538 tons NOX/year actual (and surplus) emission
reductions from the Arcelor-Mittal facility as a result of the
installation of low NOX burners in its three reheat
furnaces. The requirement for these low NOX burners is
permanent and enforceable because they are needed to comply with OAC
3745-110, Ohio's NOX RACT rule. In the Cleveland-Akron-
Lorain area, the ratio of NOX emissions to VOC emissions is
approximately 1.36 pounds NOx/pound VOC. Applying this factor, the VOC
offset potential for the Arcelor-Mittal facility NOX
reductions is 396 tons VOC/year.
    3745-21-25(B) Definitions--The definitions applicable to this rule
are contained in paragraph (GG) of (OAC) Rule 3745-21-01. These
definitions clearly and adequately define those terms which are needed
to understand, and implement, the requirements contained in this rule.
    3245-21-25(C) Affected operations--This section lists those
reinforced plastic composites production operations subject to this
rule such as open molding; compression/injection molding; and
centrifugal casting. All of the appropriate affected operations are
listed in this section. Of particular note are SMC manufacturing
operations, a source category for which there are a number of sources
previously covered by 3745-21-07. The main pollutant from reinforced
plastic composites manufacturing operations is styrene, which is both a
VOC and a hazardous air pollutant. Except for SMC machines, the other
reinforced plastic composites manufacturing operations are adequately
controlled by the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Reinforced Plastic Composites Production. (40 CFR part 63
subpart WWWW)
    3245-21-25(D) VOC Control requirements--All affected operations
must meet the work practice standards in Table 1 of this rule. If the
combination of all reinforced plastic composites operations at a
facility emits less than 100 tons of VOC per year, then the affected
operations must meet the emission limits in Table 2 of this rule. If
the combination of all reinforced plastic composites operations at a
facility emits 100 tons or more of VOC per year, then the affected
operations must reduce the total VOC emissions from these operations by
at least 95 percent or, as an alternative, meet the VOC emission limits
in Table 3 of this rule. Also, any SMC machine with uncontrolled VOC
emissions of 25.0 tons or more per rolling 12-month period must be
controlled by a VOC emission control system that reduces the VOC
emissions from the SMC manufacturing machine by at least 95 percent. A
provision of the rule allows for a site-specific alternative
requirement if approved by EPA. These control requirements and
applicability cutoffs are consistent with RACT.
    3745-21-25(E) Emission factor determination--This section provides
acceptable procedures for determining emission factors to determine
compliance with certain VOC emission limits in table 2 and table 3 of
this rule and to calculate VOC emissions. Emission factors approved by
EPA, such as the emission factors in AP-42, may be used in lieu of a
stack test. However, if a stack test is used the stack test results
would supersede any published emission factors. In order to determine
the monomer content of resins and gel coats, information provided by
the material manufacturer, such as manufacturer's formulation data and
material safety data sheets, may be relied upon unless contradicted by
actual measurement results.
    3745-21-25(F) Calculation of facility's VOC emission threshold--
This section establishes the procedures, including use of a calculated
emission factor and conducting performance testing, for calculating the
facility's VOC emissions threshold in tons per year for purposes of
determining which requirements apply under paragraph (D) of this rule.
    3745-21-25(G)-(I)--These paragraphs provide acceptable options for
meeting the VOC emissions limits for open molding and centrifugal
casting operations, continuous lamination/casting operations, and
pultrusion operations.
    3745-21-25(J)-(K)--These paragraphs apply to wet out area(s) and
oven(s) for continuous lamination/casting operations. Paragraph (J)
provides an acceptable method for calculating the annual uncontrolled
and controlled VOC emissions from these operations, and paragraph (K)
provides an acceptable method for determining the capture efficiency of
the enclosure of the wet-out area and the capture efficiency of
ovens(s) from these operations.
    3745-21-25(L)-(N)--These paragraphs provide acceptable procedures
for calculating how much gel coat and resin is applied to the line and
also for calculation of the percent reduction and a VOC emission factor
to demonstrate compliance for continuous lamination/casting operations.
    3745-21-25(O) Demonstration of Continuous compliance--This
paragraph provides acceptable methods for establishing continuing
compliance with each VOC control requirement in paragraph (D) of this
rule that applies to the affected operations.
    3745-21-25(P) Recordkeeping requirements--This paragraph
establishes sufficient recordkeeping requirements to determine a
facility's applicability and compliance status including all data,
assumptions, and calculations used to determine monomer contents and
VOC emission factors. There are also specific recordkeeping
requirements for SMC manufacturing machines in paragraph (P)(2).
    3745-21-25(Q) Reporting requirements--Semiannual compliance status
reports are required for any reinforced plastic composites production
operations subject to this rule. These compliance status reports must
state that there were no deviations from VOC emission limitations,
operating limits, or work practice standards during the reporting
period. If such a deviation does occur, then detailed information is
required on the deviation(s).

    3745-21-25(R) Compliance dates--This paragraph requires affected
operations for which installation commenced before December 14, 2009
(the effective date of an earlier version of this rule) to comply with
the requirements of this rule by 12 months from December 14, 2009. Any
affected operation for which installation commenced after December 14,
2009, must comply upon initial startup of the affected operation. These
are reasonable compliance dates.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: January 14, 2011.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2011-1771 Filed 1-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 125 (Thursday, June 28, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38474-38475]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15755]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0139; Airspace Docket No. 12-ANM-3]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Livingston, MT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class E airspace at Livingston, Mission
Field Airport, Livingston, MT. Decommissioning of the Livingston
Tactical Air Navigation System (TACAN) has made this action necessary
for the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR)
operations at the airport. Also, the geographic coordinates of the
airport are updated at the request of National Aeronautical Navigation
Services.

DATES: Effective date, 0901 UTC, September 20, 2012. The Director of
the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action
under 1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9
and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On April 3, 2012, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to amend controlled airspace at
Livingston, MT (77 FR 19953). Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6002 of
FAA Order 7400.9V dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in that Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by amending Class E surface airspace at Livingston, Mission
Field Airport, Livingston, MT. Airspace reconfiguration is necessary
due to the decommissioning of the Livingston TACAN. Also, the
geographic coordinates of the airport are updated to coincide with the
FAA's aeronautical database. This action is necessary for the safety
and management of IFR operations.
    The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments
are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this
regulation: (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 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 discusses 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 amends
controlled airspace at Livingston, Mission Field Airport, Livingston,
MT.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 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 14 CFR 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 the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E airspace designated as surface areas.

* * * * *

ANM MT E2 Livingston, MT [Modified]

Livingston, Mission Field, MT
    (Lat. 45[deg]41'58'' N., long. 110[deg]26'53'' W.)

    Within a 4.1-mile radius of Mission Field Airport, and within
2.7 miles each side of the Mission Field Airport 340[deg] bearing
extending from the 4.1-mile radius to 7 miles north of the airport.
This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates
and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Airport/Facility Directory.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on June 18, 2012.
Vered Lovett,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2012-15755 Filed 6-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 35 (Thursday, February 21, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5429-5430]
[FR Doc No: 2019-02888]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Number: PR19-37-000.
    Applicants: Oasis Pipeline, LP.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)+(g): Oasis Pipeline,
LP Statement of Operating Conditions, Effective January 11, 2019 to be
effective 1/11/2019.
    Filed Date: 2/8/19.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>13.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/1/19.
    284.123(g) Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/9/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-656-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Housekeeping Filing February
2019 to be effective 4/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 2/13/19.
    Accession Number: 20190213-5009.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/25/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-657-000.

    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: TCO Negotiated Rate Amds--
VEPCO to be effective 2/13/2019.
    Filed Date: 2/13/19.
    Accession Number: 20190213-5103.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/25/19.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: February 14, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-02888 Filed 2-20-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 17, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50677-50680]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17670]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-95481; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2022-49]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to the NYSE Arca
Equities Proprietary Market Data Fees To Adopt an Enterprise Fee for
Broker-Dealer Subscribers of NYSE ArcaBook

August 11, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on August 1, 2022, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes changes to the NYSE Arca Equities Proprietary
Market Data Fees (``Fee Schedule'') to adopt an Enterprise Fee for
Broker-Dealer subscribers of NYSE ArcaBook. The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes changes to the Fee Schedule to adopt an
Enterprise Fee for Broker-Dealer subscribers of NYSE ArcaBook. The
Exchange proposes to make the fee change operative on August 1, 2022.
    The Exchange currently offers a Professional User Fee Cap for
broker-dealers that are subscribers of NYSE ArcaBook at $75,000 per
month.\4\ To illustrate the application of the Professional User Fee
Cap, a broker-dealer with 2,500 internal professional users who
receives NYSE ArcaBook would pay $110,000 per month in professional
user fees (500 users at $60 per month plus 2,000 users at $40 per
month).\5\ This broker-dealer's fees, however, are currently capped at
$75,000 per month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82100 (November 16,
2017), 82 FR 55660 (November 22, 2017) (SR-NYSEARCA-2017-130)
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Changes to the NYSE Arca Equities Proprietary Market Data Fees). The
Professional User Fee Cap applies to internal users of a broker-
dealer subscriber.
    \5\ The Professional User Fees for broker-dealer subscribers of
NYSE ArcaBook is $60 per month for 1-500 users and $40 per month for
501 or more users. See Fee Schedule, available here: https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/data/NYSE_Arca_Equities_Proprietary_Data_Fee_Schedule.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also currently offers a Non-Professional User Fee Cap
for broker-dealers that are subscribers of NYSE ArcaBook at $40,000 per
month.\6\ To illustrate the application of the Non-Professional User
Fee Cap, a broker-dealer with 10,000 non-professional users who
receives NYSE ArcaBook would pay $45,000 per month in non-professional
user fees (1,500 users at $10 per month plus 1,500 users at $6 per
month plus 7,000 users at $3 per month).\7\ This broker-dealer's fees,
however, are also currently capped at $40,000 per month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72560 (July 8,
2014), 79 FR 40801 (July 14, 2014) (SR-NYSEARCA-2014-72) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending
the Fees for NYSE ArcaBook).
    \7\ The Non-Professional User Fees for broker-dealer subscribers
of NYSE ArcaBook is $10 per month for 1-1,500 users, $6 per month
for 1,501-3,000 users and $3 per month for 3,001 or more users. See
Fee Schedule, available here: https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/data/NYSE_Arca_Equities_Proprietary_Data_Fee_Schedule.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subscribers whose fees are capped are required to count and report
to the Exchange the total number of professional users and non-
professional users that are permissioned to receive the data feed.

    As part of the Exchange's efforts to ease administrative burdens on
its customers and expand enterprise coverage to external professional
users to whom customers may redistribute NYSE ArcaBook data, the
Exchange proposes to adopt an Enterprise Fee for broker-dealers that
are subscribers of NYSE ArcaBook of $115,000 per month. The proposed
fee is the sum of the Professional User Fee Cap of $75,000 per month
and the Non-Professional User Fee Cap of $40,000 per month. To
illustrate the application of the proposed Enterprise Fee, a broker-
dealer with 2,500 internal professional users and 10,000 non-
professional users, would currently be capped at $115,000 per month
($75,000 per month under the Professional User Fee Cap plus $40,000 per
month under the Non-Professional User Fee Cap).
Applicability of Proposed Rule Change
    The purpose of the proposal is to offer customers an additional
subscription method without imposing any new or higher fees, and to
lower the administrative burden on broker-dealer subscribers by not
requiring the broker-dealer to count and report to the Exchange the
number of professional users and non-professional users separately and
expand enterprise coverage to external professional users to which a
broker-dealer subscriber redistributes NYSE ArcaBook data feed under
the broker-dealer's subscription. The Exchange believes eliminating the
distinction between professional users and non-professional users in a
brokerage relationship will lessen current distinctions among broker-
dealers. As proposed, all broker-dealers that choose to utilize the
enterprise license will be treated the same in that each broker-dealer
that chooses an enterprise license would pay the same amount of the fee
without having to count and report the number of professional users and
non-professional users separately. With the proposed fee change, the
broker-dealer in the above example could choose an enterprise license
and would continue to pay the same amount as it does today and would be
able to provide NYSE ArcaBook to internal and external professional and
non-professional users at no additional cost. The proposed change will
not increase any fee or charge to current subscribers.
    As noted above, no current subscriber will be subject to higher
fees by the proposed fee change. To the extent a current subscriber
pays the capped fees of $75,000 per month for professional users and
$40,000 per month for non-professional users, the subscriber can simply
choose to amend its subscription to an enterprise license and continue
to pay $115,000 per month, the same amount the subscriber pays
currently, with the added benefit of not counting the number of
professional users and non-professional users.
    The proposed Enterprise Fee for NYSE ArcaBook will result in a fee
reduction for broker-dealer subscribers with sufficiently large numbers
of professional and non-professional users, as described in the example
above. Broker-dealers that purchase NYSE ArcaBook typically have
thousands of users. If a broker-dealer subscriber has a smaller number
of professional and/or non-professional users of NYSE ArcaBook, then it
may continue to use the per user fee structure and the fees it pays
will not change. By providing an enterprise license for broker-dealers
with a large number of professional and non-professional users, the
Exchange believes that more broker-dealers may choose to offer NYSE
ArcaBook, thereby expanding the distribution of this market data for
the benefit of investors. The Exchange also believes that offering an
enterprise license expands the range of options for offering NYSE
ArcaBook and would allow broker-dealers greater choice in selecting the
most appropriate level of data and fees for the professional and non-
professional users they are servicing. The Exchange also notes that the
concept of adopting an enterprise license fee is not novel.\8\ In
addition, the Exchange currently has an enterprise license applicable
to subscribers to NYSE Arca BBO and NYSE Arca Trades market data
feeds.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See e.g., Section 123(c) Enterprise License Fees for Nasdaq
Depth-of-Book Data at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/nasdaq/rules/Nasdaq%20Equity%207.
    \9\ See NYSE Arca Equities Proprietary Market Data Fees at
https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/data/NYSE_Arca_Equities_Proprietary_Data_Fee_Schedule.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\10\ in general, and
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ in particular, in that it
provides an equitable allocation of reasonable fees among users and
recipients of the data and is not designed to permit unfair
discrimination among customers, issuers, and brokers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In adopting Regulation NMS, the Commission granted self-regulatory
organizations (``SROs'') and broker-dealers increased authority and
flexibility to offer new and unique market data to the public. The
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services
in the securities markets. Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the
Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in determining
prices and SRO revenues, and also recognized that current regulation of
the market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting market
competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors
and listed companies.'' \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37495, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (Final Rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to market data, the decision of the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in NetCoalition
v. SEC upheld the Commission's reliance on the existence of competitive
market mechanisms to evaluate the reasonableness and fairness of fees
for proprietary market data:

    In fact, the legislative history indicates that the Congress
intended that the market system ``evolve through the interplay of
competitive forces as unnecessary regulatory restrictions are
removed'' and that the SEC wield its regulatory power ``in those
situations where competition may not be sufficient,'' such as in the
creation of a ``consolidated transactional reporting system.'' \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 535 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting H.R. Rep. No. 94-229 at 92 (1975), as reprinted in 1975
U.S.C.C.A.N. 323).

    The court agreed with the Commission's conclusion that ``Congress
intended that `competitive forces should dictate the services and
practices that constitute the U.S. national market system for trading
equity securities.' '' \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id. at 535.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    More recently, the Commission confirmed that it applies a ``market-
based'' test in its assessment of market data fees, and that under that
test:

the Commission considers whether the exchange was subject to
significant competitive forces in setting the terms of its proposal
for [market data], including the level of any fees. If an exchange
meets this burden, the Commission will find that its fee rule is
consistent with the Act unless there is a substantial countervailing
basis to find that the terms of the rule violate the Act or the
rules thereunder.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-90217 (October
16, 2020), 85 FR 67392 (October 22, 2020) (SR-NYSENAT-2020-05)
(Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change to Establish Fees for the
NYSE National Integrated Feed) (internal quotation marks omitted),
quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74781 (December 9, 2008) (NYSE ArcaBook Approval
Order).

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

    More specifically, the proposed rule change will expand competition
by providing customers an additional subscription method (without
imposing any new or higher fees) that would reduce the administrative
burden of counting and reporting to the Exchange the number of
professional and non-professional users. With this proposed rule
change, customers will have the ability to choose which subscription
options suits its needs best. For the broker-dealers who have a large
user base of professional and non-Professional users, the ability to
subscribe to an enterprise license would eliminate their administrative
burden of counting and reporting users, as well as eliminate the burden
to validate the non-professional user status to ensure accurate non-
professional user count, and would cap their Arcabook device fees at
the enterprise rate. If a current broker-dealer subscriber has a
smaller number of professional and/or non-professional users of NYSE
ArcaBook, then it may continue to use the per user fee structure and
the fees it pays will not change or increase. As proposed, all broker-
dealers that choose to utilize the proposed enterprise license would
pay the same amount of the fee without having to count and report to
the number of professional users and non-professional users separately
and will not need to validate non-professional user status.
    The Exchange notes that NYSE ArcaBook is entirely optional. The
Exchange is not required to make NYSE ArcaBook available or to offer
any specific pricing alternatives to any customers, nor is any firm
required to purchase NYSE ArcaBook. Unlike some other data products
(e.g., the consolidated quotation and last-sale information feeds) that
firms are required to purchase in order to fulfil regulatory
obligations,\16\ a customer's decision whether to purchase any of the
Exchange's proprietary market data feeds is entirely discretionary.
Most firms that choose to subscribe to proprietary market data products
from the Exchange and its affiliates do so for the primary goals of
using them to increase their revenues, reduce their expenses, and in
some instances compete directly with the Exchange (including for order
flow); those firms are able to determine for themselves whether NYSE
ArcaBook or any other similar products are attractively priced or not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The Exchange notes that broker-dealers are not required to
purchase proprietary market data to comply with their best execution
obligations. See In the Matter of the Application of Securities
Industry and Financial Markets Association for Review of Actions
Taken by Self-Regulatory Organizations, Release Nos. 34- 72182; AP-
3-15350; AP-3-15351 (May 16, 2014). Similarly, there is no
requirement in Regulation NMS or any other rule that proprietary
data be utilized for order routing decisions, and some broker-
dealers and ATSs have chosen not to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Firms that do not wish to purchase NYSE ArcaBook have a variety of
alternative market data products from which to choose. For example, the
Nasdaq Stock Market (``Nasdaq'') provides an enterprise license for the
dissemination of Nasdaq TotalView, which competes with NYSE ArcaBook.
More specifically, Nasdaq provides broker-dealer subscribers an
enterprise license that permits internal and external distribution to
both professional and non-professional users for a monthly fee of
$500,000.\17\ Alternatively, if NYSE ArcaBook does not provide
sufficient value to firms as offered based on the uses those firms have
or planned to make of it, such firms may simply choose to conduct their
business operations in ways that do not use NYSE ArcaBook or use them
at different levels or in different configurations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Nasdaq TotalView, Enterprise License Option, available
at http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=DPUSData.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In setting the proposed fees, the Exchange considered the
competitiveness of the market for proprietary data and all of the
implications of that competition. The Exchange believes that it has
considered all relevant factors and has not considered irrelevant
factors in order to establish reasonable fees. The existence of
numerous alternatives to the Exchange's offering, including proprietary
data from other sources, ensures that the Exchange cannot set
unreasonable fees when subscribers can elect these alternatives or
choose not to purchase a specific proprietary data product if the
attendant fees are not justified by the returns that any particular
data recipient would achieve through the purchase.

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. As noted above, the proposed
rule change will expand competition by providing customers with an
additional subscription method that would reduce the administrative
burden and cap the fees. Customers that choose to purchase the proposed
enterprise license will benefit from the ability to grow their use base
without paying additional incremental fees, reduced administrative
burden by eliminating the need to validate non-professional user
status, and eliminating the need to count and report the number of
professional and/or non-professional users. Customers that choose not
to purchase the proposed enterprise license can continue to use the
current fee structure and the fees it pays will not change.
    Intramarket Competition. The Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change does not put any market participant at a relative
disadvantage compared to other market participants. As noted above, the
proposed fee schedule would apply to all subscribers of NYSE ArcaBook,
and customers may not only choose whether to subscribe to the feed at
all but may tailor their subscription to include only the products and
uses that they deem suitable for their business needs. The Exchange
also believes that the proposed rule change neither favors nor
penalizes one or more categories of market participants in a manner
that would impose an undue market on competition.
    Intermarket Competition. The Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change does not impose a burden on competition on other exchanges
that is not necessary or appropriate; indeed, the Exchange believes the
proposed rule change would have the effect of increasing competition.
In setting fees at issue here, the Exchange is constrained by the fact
that, if its pricing is unattractive to customers, customers will have
its pick of an increasing number of alternative venues to use instead
of the Exchange. Given this competition, no one exchange's market data
fees can impose an unnecessary burden on competition, and the
Exchange's proposed fees do not do so here.

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \18\ of the Act and

subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 \19\ thereunder, because it
establishes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \20\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2022-49 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2022-49. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (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 website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 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. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2022-49 and should be submitted
on or before September 7, 2022.
    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-17670 Filed 8-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


July 16, 2010

MEMORANDUM

TO: 			Air Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0133

SUBJECT:	Supplemental Materials for Canola Oil Biodiesel

This memorandum accompanies information related to the Environmental
Protection Agency’s (EPA) analysis of lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions for canola oil biodiesel.  To facilitate public review, below
is a brief description of additional data, reports, and references for
canola oil biodiesel.

1.  Memo to EPA from U.S. Canola Association & Canola Biodiesel
Stakeholders

This document contains background and general information on canola and
canola biodiesel production.

2.  Canola LCA Data report

This report prepared for the Canola Council of Canada, by (S&T)2
Consultants Inc., documents the practices of growing canola, crushing it
to extract the oil, and then processing the oil to produce biodiesel.
Data is provided for both Canadian and US canola.

3.  U.S. Canola Baseline

This spreadsheet has United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S.
canola production projections through 2019-20.

4.  Land Trends in Canada

This spreadsheet shows how agricultural acreage has evolved over time in
Canada.

5.  Tillage Practices in Western Canada

This spreadsheet shows the evolution of tillage practices in western
Canada including extrapolated out to 2021.

6.  North Dakota Fertilizer Survey

This spreadsheet shows results of a nitrogen fertilizer survey from
North Dakota and has the nitrogen applied per area. This was from a 2009
ND survey.

7.  NBB Energy Use Survey

This document describes the results of an energy use survey conducted by
the National Biodiesel Board (NBB) of biodiesel production energy use.
The report also has the feedstock requirements.

8.  Canola Crushing Data

This spreadsheet has the oil yield data from Statistics Canada for
canola crushing in Canada.  It has almost 40 years of monthly yield
data.  Data from the Statistics Canada website.
http://cansim2.statcan.gc.ca/cgi-win/cnsmcgi.pgm?regtkt=&C2Sub=&ARRAYID=
10005&C2DB=PRD&VEC=&LANG=E&SrchVer=2&ChunkSize=50&SDDSLOC=&ROOTDIR=CII/&
RESULTTEMPLATE=CII/CII_PICK&ARRAY_PICK=1&SDDSID=&SDDSDESC=

9.  U.S. Soybean Use by Livestock

This document shows the use of soymeal in livestock rations for 2009.