[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 228 (Monday, November 28, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72961-72964]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30545]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2011-0030]

Flood Hazard Determinations (Including Flood Elevation
Determinations)--Change in Notification and Appeal Procedures

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), via the Federal Insurance
Administrator, must publish flood

elevation determinations for comment in the Federal Register.
Currently, FEMA publishes base flood elevation (BFE) determinations for
Flood Insurance Studies (FISs, also referred to as flood studies) as
proposed and final rules, and Letters of Map Revision (LOMRs) that
include changes to the technical content of a Flood Insurance Rate Map
(FIRM) or FIS as interim and final rules. FEMA now plans to publish
these determinations as notices rather than as rules. This new
procedure will not affect the notice or appeals process for these
determinations. FEMA also plans to publish other types of flood hazard
determinations in the Federal Register with the opportunity for comment
and appeal. These other types of flood hazard determinations include
new and modified Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) and new or modified
regulatory floodways.

DATES: The changes in procedure announced in this notice are effective
December 1, 2011. The new procedure applies to all proposed flood
hazard determinations including proposed flood elevation determinations
published in the Federal Register on or after December 1, 2011.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this notice is available at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID FEMA-2011-0030. You may also view a
hard copy of the docket at the Office of Chief Counsel, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Room 835, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lora Eskandary, Program Specialist,
FEMA, 1800 South Bell Street, Mail Stop 3030, Arlington, VA 20598, at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may also contact the FEMA
Map Information exchange (FMIX) toll free at 1<PHONE_NUMBER> (877-FEMA
MAP) for information.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Change in Procedure for Base Flood Elevation (BFE) Determinations and
Letters of Map Revision (LOMRs)

    The Federal Insurance Administrator must propose flood elevation
determinations by publication of the proposed flood elevation
determination for comment in the Federal Register, as well as via
notification by certified mail to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of
the community, and publication in a prominent local newspaper at least
twice during the ten-day period immediately following the notification
of the CEO. See 44 CFR 67.4(a). The proposed determination is
appealable pursuant to 44 CFR 67.8. The Federal Insurance Administrator
must provide final notice of the flood elevation determination as
follows: ``The Federal Insurance Administrator's notice of the final
flood elevation determination for a community shall be in written form
and published in the Federal Register, and copies shall be sent to the
CEO, all individual appellants and the State Coordinating Agency.'' See
44 CFR 67.11. A ``flood elevation determination'' is ``a determination
by the Federal Insurance Administrator of the water surface elevations
of the base flood, that is, the flood level that has a one percent or
greater chance of occurrence in any given year.'' See 44 CFR 59.1.
These elevations are used to determine floodplain management
ordinances, set flood insurance rates, and to determine whether
mandatory purchase of flood insurance is required in order to obtain a
federally-backed mortgage on a home.
    Currently FEMA publishes base flood elevation (BFE) determinations
for Flood Insurance Studies pursuant to 44 CFR 67.4 and 67.11 as
proposed and final rules. However, there is no legal requirement to
publish them as rules, and FEMA now plans to publish them as notices,
which are administratively less burdensome. The background and legal
authority for this change in procedure is explained below.
    Sections 67.4 and 67.11 of Title 44 of the Code of Regulations
(CFR) were initially promulgated in 1974, pursuant to section 110 of
the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, Public Law 93-234, which
amended the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. Section 110 states
``In establishing projected flood elevations * * * [the agency] shall
first propose such determinations by publication for comment in the
Federal Register, by direct notification to the chief executive officer
of the community, and by publication in a prominent local newspaper.''
See 42 U.S.C. 4104. The rule implementing section 110 was promulgated
by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), as HUD was
the agency responsible for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
before the NFIP was transferred to FEMA in 1979. The original rules
appeared in HUD's regulations at 24 CFR 1917.4 and 1917.11. The
preambles to the proposed and final rules which added sections 1917.4
and 1971.11 to Title 24 CFR did not indicate whether the proposed and
final flood elevation determinations would be published as notices or
rules. The preamble to the proposed rule simply stated ``[t]he proposed
new Part 1917 would establish an administrative procedure for reviewing
appeals of flood elevation determinations made in the National Flood
Insurance Program.'' See 39 FR 12031 (Apr. 2, 1974). No further
explanation was given.
    Sections 1917.4 and 1971.11 were finalized as proposed on July 24,
1974. The preamble to the final rule noted that one commenter had
requested that the notification by newspaper could be more effective by
increasing the number of days of publication. HUD did not alter the
proposed regulatory text, however, because the publication standard had
been set by the Flood Disaster Protection Act and could not be altered
by regulation. Other commenters requested that communities who entered
the flood insurance program prior to the passage of the Flood Disaster
Protection Act of 1973 be allowed to appeal past flood elevation
determinations. Again HUD declined to alter the proposed regulatory
text because the Act did not apply retroactively. Further, HUD noted
``an attempt to include such regular flood insurance program
communities in this [sic] new appeals procedures could curtail the
right of judicial review available to them under the National Flood
Insurance Act of 1968 and Title 5 of the United States Code.'' See 39
FR 26904 (July 24, 1974). There were no other comments addressing part
1917, and the preamble did not mention whether the flood elevation
determinations would be published as notices or as rules in the Federal
Register.
    The text of sections 1917.4 and 1917.11 has not changed since they
were finalized in 1974.\1\ In 1979 these sections were transferred to
44 CFR 67.4 and 67.11, respectively, when the NFIP was transferred to
FEMA. In 1981, an editorial note was added at the end of 44 CFR 67.11,
stating ``Note: For the list of communities issued under this section,
and not carried in the CFR, see the List of CFR Sections Affected and
appearing in the Finding Aids section of

this volume.'' A similar note was added to section 67.4 in 1989,
stating ``Note: For references to FR pages showing lists of flood
elevation determinations, see the List of CFR Sections Affected
appearing in the Finding Aids section of this volume.'' The notes have
since been revised to direct the reader to the Finding Aids section
``of the printed volume and on GPO Access.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The text reads as follows:
    Sec.  67.4 Proposed flood elevation determination.
    The Federal Insurance Administrator shall propose flood
elevation determinations in the following manner:
    (a) Publication of the proposed flood elevation determination
for comment in the Federal Register;
    (b) Notification by certified mail, return receipt requested, of
the proposed flood elevation determination to the CEO; and
    (c) Publication of the proposed flood elevation determination in
a prominent local newspaper at least twice during the ten day period
immediately following the notification of the CEO.
    Sec.  67.11 Notice of final determination.
    The Federal Insurance Administrator's notice of the final flood
elevation determination for a community shall be in written form and
published in the Federal Register, and copies shall be sent to the
CEO, all individual appellants and the State Coordinating Agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the applicable regulations were promulgated in 1974, base
flood elevation determinations listed in feet or meters for specific
localities have been published in the Federal Register as proposed and
final rules. Neither the statute nor the regulations indicate that
these elevations must be published as rules, however. Both the statute
(42 U.S.C. 4104) and the regulations (44 CFR 67.4, 67.11) state only
that the agency must publish a ``notice.'' Section 67.3 also refers to
a notice, not a rule. It states that the official docket must include
``[a] copy of the notice of the proposed flood elevation determination
published in the Federal Register.'' See 44 CFR 67.3(d).
    Nowhere is it mentioned that the flood elevation determinations
were to be published as rules. The extensive Congressional hearings
from October 1973 regarding the proposed legislation focus on notice of
the elevation determinations, and do not mention anything about issuing
them as regulations. See Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973
hearings, Ninety-third Congress, first session, on S. 1495 and H.R.
8449, October 31, 1973. A major issue at the hearings focused on the
desire for communities to have notice of the flood elevation
determinations and an opportunity to contest them--to be part of the
administrative process, to ensure that communities have the opportunity
to present their own evidence of flood elevations that may contradict
the Federal government's findings. There was a concern that if the
Federal government acted independently, without input from the impacted
communities, there would be a violation of due process because the
government would be forcing residents to buy flood insurance without
any access to the decision process. These concerns were remedied by the
final legislation, which allowed for notice and appeal, allowing for
communities to present scientific and technical data regarding the
proposed flood elevations. But whether the proposed flood elevations
needed to be issued as regulations was never mentioned in the extensive
hearings.
    The evidence indicates that publication in the Federal Register,
which is just one means of the required notice (the other two being
letter to the CEO and publication in the local newspaper), was being
used to ensure all stakeholders had notice, since publication of a
document in the Federal Register is considered constructive notice to
anyone subject to or affected by the document so published. See 44
U.S.C. 1507. Viewing this issue in context of the hearings, and within
the context of the statute (42 U.S.C. 4104) and the regulatory text of
section 67.4 (both of which list 3 types of notice), the main reason
for publication in the Federal Register was clearly for notification
purposes only. Further, the flood elevation determinations are very
specific to a certain locality; regulations usually apply more broadly.
    FEMA concludes that the statute does not require that the
determinations must take the form of a regulation; rather, the
requirement of publication in the Federal Register is for notice
purposes only. The statute and regulations give FEMA the authority to
issue flood elevation determinations that are legally binding on the
affected communities, as long as there is notice and comment afforded
to those communities. It is not necessary to include specific flood
elevations for affected flooding sources in feet/meters in the Code of
Federal Regulations. The flood elevations themselves do not need to be
codified as regulations for them to have legal effect. Absent a legal
requirement to publish flood elevations as rules, FEMA now plans to
publish proposed and final flood elevation determinations as notices
rather than as rules, which is administratively less burdensome.
    The information provided in the BFE notices will be less detailed
than the information FEMA currently provides in the BFE rules. FEMA
will no longer list in the Federal Register specific location
descriptions (e.g., Sawmill Creek approximately 400 feet upstream of
Laurel Fort Meade Road) or specific flood elevations of the base flood
(e.g., + 613 feet) for each flooding source. Instead, the Federal
Register notice will indicate which geographical areas are affected
(county, town, etc.) and provide both a physical address and an
internet address where the specific flood elevations (as depicted in a
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and/or a Flood Insurance Study (FIS)
report) can be viewed for that geographical location.
    This new procedure will not apply to any proposed BFE rules that
are outstanding as of the effective date of this notice (December 1,
2011). FEMA will close those proposed rules out with final rules, as
required by the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553.
    This new procedure will also apply to certain Letters of Map
Revision (LOMRs). A LOMR is a type of determination that FEMA issues
under the authority of 44 CFR part 65. It may include changes to the
technical content (e.g., additions or modifications to BFEs) or changes
to the administrative content (e.g., corrections to typographical
errors) of a published FIRM or FIS report. The flood elevation
determinations associated with LOMRs that affect the technical content
of the FIRM or FIS report are published in the Federal Register
pursuant to 44 CFR part 67. As explained above, the notice required by
part 67 does not require that the notice take the form of a rule.
Notice of changes in flood elevation determinations may be published as
notices rather than rules. Therefore, as with BFE determinations for
Flood Insurance Studies, FEMA will issue flood elevation determinations
associated with LOMRs as notices rather than rules as of December 1,
2011.

Change in Procedure for Other Types of Flood Elevation Determinations
(Special Flood Hazard Areas and Regulatory Floodways)

    In addition to BFE determinations, FEMA also issues other types of
flood hazard determinations including new and modified Special Flood
Hazard Areas (SFHAs) and new and modified regulatory floodways. SFHAs
are areas subject to inundation by the base flood and include the
following flood insurance risk zone designations: A, AO, AH, A1-30, AE,
A99, AR, AR/A1-30, AR/AE, AR/AO, AR/AH, AR/A, VO, V1-30, VE, and V. The
various flood insurance risk zones represent different levels of risk
and the type of flood hazard (e.g., coastal, riverine, ponding areas,
etc.). The regulatory floodway is the channel of a river or other
watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order
to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water-
surface elevation more than a designated height.
    Under current practice, new or modified SFHAs or regulatory
floodways not specifically related to changes in BFE determinations are
not appealable under 44 CFR 67.8. For that reason, FEMA has not
published notification of new and modified SFHAs and regulatory
floodways in the Federal Register pursuant to 44 CFR 67.4 and 67.11.
    As of the effective date of this notice (December 1, 2011), FEMA
will publish notification of new or modified SFHAs

or regulatory floodways in the Federal Register pursuant to 44 CFR 67.4
and 67.11, and will allow appeals of those notices pursuant to 44 CFR
67.8. As with the BFE notices, the Federal Register notices for new or
modified SFHAs or regulatory floodways will indicate which geographical
areas are affected (county, town, etc.) and provide both a physical
address and an internet address where the specific flood hazards (as
shown in a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and/or a Flood Insurance
Study report) can be viewed for that geographical location.
    As with appeals of BFE determinations, appeals of SFHA and
regulatory floodway determinations must include supporting scientific
and technical data certified by a registered professional engineer or
licensed land surveyor pursuant to 44 CFR 67.6.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4104; 44 CFR parts 65 and 67.

Sandra K. Knight,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-30545 Filed 11-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 178 (Thursday, September 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56647-56648]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19924]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD21-15-000]

Joint Federal-State Task Force on Electric Transmission; Notice
Announcing Meeting and Inviting Agenda Topics

    On June 17, 2021, the Commission established a Joint Federal-State
Task Force on Electric Transmission (Task Force) to formally explore
transmission-related topics outlined in the Commission's order.\1\ The
Commission stated that the Task Force will convene for multiple formal
meetings annually, which will be open to the public for listening and
observing and on the record.\2\ The next public meeting of the Task
Force will be held on November 15, 2022, at the New Orleans Marriott in
New Orleans, LA, from approximately 8:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. Central
Time. Commissioners may attend and participate in this meeting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Joint Fed.-State Task Force on Elec. Transmission, 175 FERC
] 61,224 (2021) (Establishing Order).
    \2\ Id. P 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The meeting will be open to the public for listening and observing
and on the record. There is no fee for attendance and registration is
not required. The public may attend in person or via Webcast.\3\ This
conference will be transcribed. Transcripts will be available for a fee
from Ace Reporting,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A link to the Webcast will be available on the day of the
event at https://www.ferc.gov/TFSOET.
_____________________________________-

    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please
send an email to [email protected] or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.
    As explained in the Establishing Order, the Commission will issue
agendas for each meeting of the Task Force, after consulting with all
Task Force members and considering suggestions from state
commissions.\4\ The Establishing Order set forth a broad array of
transmission-related topics that the Task Force has the authority to
examine with a focus on topics related to planning and paying for
transmission, including transmission to facilitate generator
interconnection, that provides benefits from a federal and state
perspective.\5\ All interested persons, including all state
commissioners, are hereby invited to file comments in this docket
suggesting agenda items relating to this topic by October 7, 2022. The
Task Force members will consider the suggested agenda items in
developing the agenda for the November 15, 2022 public meeting. The
agenda will be issued in the above-captioned docket no later than
November 1, 2022, for the meeting to be held on November 15, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Establishing Order, 175 FERC ] 61,224 at PP 4, 7.
    \5\ Id. P 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments may be filed electronically via the internet.\6\
Instructions are available on the Commission's website, https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/overview. For assistance, please contact FERC
Online Support at

[email protected] or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic
filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, submissions
sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Office of the Secretary, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via any other carrier must be
addressed to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of the
Secretary, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) (2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    More information about the Task Force, including frequently asked
questions, is available here: https://www.ferc.gov/TFSOET. For more
information about this meeting, please contact: Gretchen Kershaw, 202-
502-8213, [email protected]; or Jennifer Murphy,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected]. For information related to logistics, please contact
Benjamin Williams,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected]; or Rob
Thormeyer,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

    Dated: September 8, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-19924 Filed 9-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 11, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 134)]
[Notices]
[Page 39972]
[DOCID:fr11jy08-54]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

Approaches to Reduce Risk of Transfusion-Transmitted Babesiosis
in the United States; Public Workshop

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of public workshop.

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

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public
workshop entitled ``Approaches to Reduce the Risk of Transfusion-
Transmitted Babesiosis in the United States.'' The purpose of the
public workshop is to discuss the risk and possible approaches to
minimize the incidence of transfusion-transmitted babesiosis in the
United States. We are convening this workshop at the present time
because FDA has observed a recent increase in the number of reports of
transfusion-transmitted babesiosis, thus warranting additional
discussion to address this blood safety issue. The public workshop will
feature presentations and roundtable discussions led by experts from
academic institutions, government, and industry.
    Date and Time: The public workshop will be held on September 12,
2008, from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
    Location: The public workshop will be held at the Lister Hill
Center Auditorium, Bldg. 38A, National Institutes of Health, 8800
Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20894.
    Contact Person: Rhonda Dawson, Center for Biologics Evaluation and
Research (HFM-302), Food and Drug Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike,
suite 200N, Rockville, MD 20852-1448,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Registration: Mail, fax or e-mail your registration information
(including name, title, firm name, address, telephone and fax numbers)
to the contact person by August 25, 2008. There is no registration fee
for the public workshop. Early registration is recommended because
seating is limited to 175 attendees. Registration on the day of the
public workshop will be provided on a space available basis beginning
at 7:30 a.m.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Rhonda Dawson (see Contact Person) at least 7 days in advance.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Babesiosis is a malaria-like illness caused
by infection of erythrocytes with protozoan parasites belonging to the
genus Babesia. Transfusion-transmitted babesiosis is caused by
transfusion of blood or blood components collected from donors infected
with Babesia parasites. During the last 40 years, more than 60 cases of
transfusion-transmitted babesiosis have been recognized in the United
States. In fiscal years 2006 and 2007, FDA received a total of five
reports of fatal transfusion-transmitted babesiosis (primary or
contributory cause of death) in the United States.
    The public workshop will facilitate a scientific discussion on
approaches to reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted babesiosis in
the United States. Topics to be discussed include: (1) Biology,
pathogenesis, transmission and epidemiology of babesiosis; (2) risk of
Babesia infections through transfusion of blood and blood components;
(3) laboratory testing to detect Babesia infections; and, (4) possible
approaches, including donor testing and donor deferral, to reduce the
risk of transfusion-transmitted babesiosis while maintaining blood
availability and safety.
    Please note that on January 15, 2008, the FDA Division of Dockets
Management Web site transitioned to the Federal Dockets Management
System (FDMS). FDMS is a Government-wide, electronic docket management
system. Electronic comments or submissions will be accepted by FDA only
through FDMS at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Transcripts: Transcripts of the public workshop may be requested in
writing from the Freedom of Information Office (HFI-35), Food and Drug
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, rm. 6-30, Rockville, MD 20857,
approximately 15 working days after the public workshop at a cost of 10
cents per page. A transcript of the public workshop will be available
on the Internet at http://www.fda.gov/cber/minutes/workshop-min.htm.

    Dated: July 2, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E8-15799 Filed 7-10-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 57 (Thursday, March 24, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15779-15780]
[FR Doc No: 2016-06690]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee--Open Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee
open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C. App. 2), notice is hereby given of a
meeting of the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee
(COMSTAC). The meeting will take place on Wednesday, April 27, 2016,
from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., and Thursday, April 28, 2016 from 8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the National Transportation Safety Board
Conference Center, 429 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Washington, DC 20594. This
will be the 63rd meeting of the COMSTAC.
    The proposed schedule for the COMSTAC working group meetings on
April 27 is below:

--International Space Policy (8:00 a.m.-10:00 a.m.)
--Business/Legal (10:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m.)
--Standards (1:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m.)
--Operations (3:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m.)

    The full Committee will meet on April 28, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. The proposed agenda for that meeting features speakers relevant to
the commercial space transportation industry; and reports and
recommendations from the working groups.
    Interested members of the public may submit relevant written
statements for the COMSTAC members to consider under the advisory
process. Statements may concern the issues and agenda items mentioned
above and/or additional issues that may be relevant for the U.S.
commercial space transportation industry. Interested parties wishing to
submit written statements should contact Michael Beavin, COMSTAC
Executive Director, (the Contact Person listed below) and Designated
Federal Officer in writing

(mail or email) by April 18, 2016, so that the information can be made
available to COMSTAC members for their review and consideration before
the April 27-28, 2016 meeting. Written statements should be supplied in
the following formats: One hard copy with original signature and/or one
electronic copy via email.
    An agenda will be posted on the FAA Web site at www.faa.gov/go/ast.
For specific information concerning the times and locations of the
COMSTAC working group meetings, contact the Contact Person listed
below.
    Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as
sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should
inform the Contact Persons listed below in advance of the meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Beavin, telephone (202) 267-
9051; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>FAA Office of Commercial Space
Transportation, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Room 331, Washington, DC
20591.
    Complete information regarding COMSTAC is available on the FAA Web
site at: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/advisory_committee/.

    Issued in Washington, DC, March 18, 2016.
George C. Nield,
Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2016-06690 Filed 3-23-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 27, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30200-30202]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12662]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0329, FRL-9928-32-Region 10]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Washington:
Interstate Transport Requirements for the 2008 Lead and 2010 Nitrogen
Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a submittal by the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology)
demonstrating that the State Implementation Plan (SIP) meets certain
interstate transport requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) promulgated for lead
(Pb) on October 15, 2008, and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) on
January 22, 2010. Specifically, Ecology conducted an emissions
inventory analysis and reviewed monitoring data to show that sources
within Washington do not significantly contribute to nonattainment, or
interfere with maintenance, of the Pb and NO2 NAAQS in any
other state.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 26, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2015-0329, by any of the following methods:
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Mail: Jeff Hunt, EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste and
Toxics (AWT-150), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Region 10 Mailroom, 9th floor, 1200
Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. Attention: Jeff Hunt,
Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT-150. Such deliveries are only
accepted during normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-
2015-0329. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the
disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means the EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov your email 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the
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.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available
docket materials are available either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Seattle, WA 98101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Hunt at:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the above EPA, Region 10 address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.
Information is organized as follows:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Analysis of the State's Submittal
    A. 2008 Pb NAAQS
    B. 2010 NO2 NAAQS
III. Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On October 15, 2008 (73 FR 66964) and January 22, 2010 (75 FR
6474), the EPA revised the Pb and NO2 NAAQS, respectively.
Within three years after promulgation of a new or revised standard,
states must submit SIPs meeting the requirements of CAA sections
110(a)(1) and (2), often referred to as ``infrastructure''
requirements. On May 11, 2015, Ecology submitted a SIP revision
including an emissions inventory and monitoring data analysis to
demonstrate that sources within Washington do not significantly
contribute to nonattainment, or interfere with maintenance, of the Pb
and NO2 NAAQS in any other state to address the CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements for those pollutants.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Washington's May 11, 2015 submittal also included an
interstate transport analysis for the ozone standard promulgated by
the EPA in 2008. The EPA is not acting on the ozone interstate
transport analysis at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Analysis of the State's Submittal

    CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires state SIPs to contain
adequate provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions
activity within a state from contributing significantly to
nonattainment, or interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in any
other state.

A. 2008 Pb NAAQS

    State submittal: Washington's submittal cites the EPA's guidance to
address Pb infrastructure SIP elements under CAA sections 110(a)(1) and
(2).\2\

The EPA's Pb infrastructure guidance states, ``[t]he physical
properties of Pb prevent Pb emissions from experiencing the same travel
or formation phenomena as PM2.5 or ozone. More specifically,
there is a sharp decrease in Pb concentrations, at least in the coarse
fraction, as the distance from a Pb source increases. Accordingly,
while it may be possible for a source in a state to emit Pb in a
location and in quantities that may contribute significantly to
nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other state,
EPA anticipates that this would be a rare situation, e.g., where large
sources are in close proximity to state boundaries.'' The Pb
infrastructure guidance also notes, ``EPA's experience with initial
lead designations suggests that sources that emit less than 0.5 tpy
[tons per year] or that are located more than 2 miles from a state
border generally appear unlikely to contribute significantly to
nonattainment in another state.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards. 1.) ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan (SIP) Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for
the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality Standards.''
Memorandum to EPA Air Division Directors, Regions I-X, October 14,
2011, and 2.) ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan
(SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2).'' Memorandum to EPA Air Division Directors, Regions I-X,
September 13, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to evaluate possible emissions impacts in neighboring
states, Ecology reviewed the 2011 National Emissions Inventory (NEI)
for facilities located in all Washington counties within 2 miles of the
state border reporting lead emissions. As shown in table A1 of
Washington's submittal, all of these facilities had Pb emissions of
0.16 tpy or less. Based on this information, Ecology determined that
these sources are unlikely to contribute significantly to
nonattainment, or interfere with maintenance, in another state.
    Similarly, Ecology reviewed the 2011 National Emissions Inventory
(NEI) for all facilities in the State reporting Pb emissions above 0.5
tpy. These facilities were Auburn Municipal Airport (0.61 tpy), Saint-
Gobain Containers, Inc. (0.54 tpy), and Harvey Field Airport (0.54
tpy). All three of these sources with Pb emissions above 0.5 tpy are
located over 100 miles from the neighboring Idaho and Oregon borders.
Because of the considerable distance to state borders, Ecology also
determined that these sources are unlikely to contribute significantly
to nonattainment, or interfere with maintenance, in another state.
    EPA analysis: In addition to reviewing Ecology's analysis, the EPA
also reviewed current monitoring data for the Pb NAAQS.\3\ To identify
nonattainment receptors for the purpose of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), the EPA reviewed the most recent monitoring data
available (2011-2013) and found that the closest monitor violating the
Pb NAAQS was San Mateo, California, located approximately 600 miles
from the Washington border. For the purpose of evaluating
``interference with maintenance'' for CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),
the EPA identified maintenance receptors as any monitor that violated
the Pb NAAQS in either of the prior two monitoring cycles (2009-2011
and 2010-2012), but attained in the most recent monitoring cycle (2011-
2013). The EPA reviewed the 2009-2011, 2010-2012, and 2011-2013 Pb
monitoring data and found no areas that would be considered a
maintenance receptor. The EPA believes it is reasonable to conclude
that emissions from Washington sources do not significantly contribute
to nonattainment, or interfere with maintenance of the 2008 Pb NAAQS in
any other state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. 2010 NO2 NAAQS

    State submittal: Ecology's submittal noted there is no EPA guidance
suggesting how to approach a technical analysis for NO2
interstate transport. Based on a review of other state submittals,
Ecology examined ambient air quality data for NO2 monitors
in states bordering Washington (Idaho, Oregon), and identified monitors
within a 50 kilometer radius of the border, the standard distance for
modeling analysis (see 79 FR 25066, May 2, 2014, for the EPA's
NO2 interstate transport analysis for New York). Using this
methodology, Ecology identified one monitor meeting the criteria. This
monitor is located in Multnomah County, Oregon with design values in
2009-2011 = 36 parts per billion (ppb), 2010-2012 = 34 ppb, and 2011-
2013 = 34 ppb, all well below the 2010 NO2 1-hour NAAQS of
100 ppb. The next closest NO2 monitor is located in Ada
County, Idaho, outside the 50 kilometer radius of the Washington
border, with 98th percentile highest daily maximum 1-hour averages of
44 ppb in 2012 and 39 ppb in 2013.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Because the Ada County monitor was recently established it
does not yet have three years of complete data to calculate a design
value for comparison to the NAAQS, however the annual values to date
are well below the 100 ppb 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS. For
more information on this monitor please see http://www.deq.idaho.gov/media/1118299/annual-ambient-aq-monitoring-network-plan-1114.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ecology also supplemented the monitoring data with an emissions
inventory analysis showing on-road mobile sources comprising 57% of
total emissions, with the next two largest source categories being non-
road mobile sources = 11% and point sources = 9% of emissions in
Washington State in 2011. Finally, Ecology used the Motor Vehicle
Emission Simulator (MOVES2014) to demonstrate that the model predicts
dramatic reductions in on-road and non-road mobile source
NO2 emissions from 2000 through 2020 in Washington.
    EPA analysis: In addition to reviewing Ecology's analysis, the EPA
also reviewed monitoring data for all NO2 monitors in the
United States.\5\ During the monitoring periods of 2009-2011, 2010-
2012, and 2011-2013, the EPA found no monitors violating the 2010
NO2 NAAQS. Similar to the methodology described above for
determining Pb maintenance receptors, the EPA identified NO2
maintenance receptors as any monitor that violated the NO2
NAAQS in either of the prior two monitoring cycles (2009-2011 and 2010-
2012), but attained in the most recent monitoring cycle (2011-2013).
Using this methodology, the EPA found no receptors meeting the criteria
as a maintenance receptor. Based on this monitoring data, the EPA
believes it is reasonable to conclude that emissions from Washington
sources do not significantly contribute to nonattainment, or interfere
with maintenance of the NO2 NAAQS in any other state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proposed Action

    The EPA has reviewed the May 11, 2015 submittal from Ecology
demonstrating that sources in Washington do not significantly
contribute to nonattainment, or interfere with maintenance, of the Pb
and NO2 NAAQS in other states. The EPA is proposing to find
that the Washington SIP meets the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
interstate transport requirements for the 2008 Pb and 2010
NO2 NAAQS.

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, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves the state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by the state law. For that reason, this proposed 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 the requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because this action does not involve technical standards; and
     does not provide the 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, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land in Washington except as specifically noted below and
is also not approved to apply in any other area where the EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those
areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor
will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law. Washington's SIP is approved to apply on non-trust
land within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation,
also known as the 1873 Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe of Indians
Settlement Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided
state and local agencies in Washington authority over activities on
non-trust lands within the 1873 Survey Area. Consistent with EPA
policy, the EPA provided a consultation opportunity to the Puyallup
Tribe in a letter dated September 3, 2013. The EPA did not receive a
request for consultation.

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, and Volatile organic
compounds.

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

    Dated: May 18, 2015.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2015-12662 Filed 5-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 41 (Monday, March 2, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12281-12282]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04219]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC20-9-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-549D); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission
or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the currently approved
information collection, FERC-549D (Quarterly Transportation and Storage
Report for Intrastate Natural Gas and Hinshaw Pipelines).

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due May 1, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. IC20-9-
000) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Website: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of
the Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-549D, Quarterly Transportation and Storage Report for
Intrastate Natural Gas and Hinshaw Pipelines.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0253.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-549D information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting
requirements.
    Abstract: The reporting requirements under FERC-549D are required
to carry out the Commission's policies in accordance with the general
authority in Sections 1(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) \1\ and
Sections 311 of the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA).\2\ This
collection promotes transparency by collecting and making available
intrastate and Hinshaw pipeline transactional information. The
Commission collects the data upon a standardized form with all
requirements outlined in 18 CFR 284.126.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 717-817-w.
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 3301-3432.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FERC-549D collects the following information:
     Full legal name and identification number of the shipper
receiving service, including whether the pipeline and the shipper are
affiliated;
     Type of service performed;
     The rate charged under each contract;
     The primary receipt and delivery points for each contract;
     The quantity of natural gas the shipper is entitled to
transport, store, or deliver for each transaction;
     The duration of the contract, specifying the beginning and
(for firm contracts only) ending month and year of current agreement;
     Total volumes transported, stored, injected or withdrawn
for the shipper; and
     Annual revenues received for each shipper, excluding
revenues from storage services.
    Filers submit the Form-549D on a quarterly basis.
    Type of Respondents: Intrastate natural gas under NGPA Section 311
authority and Hinshaw pipelines.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \3\ The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden and cost for the information collection as
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Commission defines burden as the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain,
retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency. For further explanation of what is included in the
information collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal
Regulations 1320.3.

                         FERC-549D--Quarterly Transportation and Storage Report for Intrastate Natural Gas and Hinshaw Pipelines
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Average  annual
                               Average  annual      number of      Average  annual    Average  burden hours  Total annual  burden hours      Cost per
                                   number of     responses per    total  number of       & cost ($)  per      &  total annual cost  ($)  respondent  ($)
                                 respondents       respondent         responses             response                  (rounded)
                                          (1)              (2)     (1) * (2) = (3)   (4)...................  (3) * (4) = (5)...........       (5) / (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PDF filings..................             120                4                 480   12.5 hrs.; $1,133.....  6,000 hrs.; $543,840......          $4,532
                              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total....................  ...............  ...............                480   ......................  6,000 hrs.; $543,840......
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: February 25, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-04219 Filed 2-28-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 188)]
[Notices]
[Page 55827]
[DOCID:fr26se08-40]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13254-000]

City of Aspen; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted
for Filing and Soliciting Comment and Motions To Intervene

September 19, 2008.
    On July 10, 2008, the City of Aspen filed an application, pursuant
to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act, proposing to study the
feasibility of the Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project, to be located on
Castle Creek in Pitkin County, Colorado.
    The proposed Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project consists of: (1)
The City of Aspen's ``Thomas Reservoir'', a small impoundment
constructed in 1964 as a part of Aspen's Water Treatment Facilities,
(2) a single underground penstock that would replace two (out of
service) underground penstocks (3) a proposed powerhouse with a single
vertical shaft Pelton turbine coupled to a synchronous generator having
a total installed capacity of 1.05 megawatts, (4) a new tailrace from
the powerhouse that will deliver flows to Castle Creek just above the
existing bridge, and (5) appurtenant facilities. The project would have
an annual generation of 7.7 million kilowatt-hours that would be
delivered to the City system.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Phil Overyender, Director of Public Works,
City of Aspen, 130 South Galena St., Aspen, CO 81611; phone: (970) 920-
5111.
    FERC Contact: Alyssa Dorval,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene: 60 days from
the issuance of this notice. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of
intent, and competing applications may be filed electronically via the
Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the
Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing'' link. If unable to be
filed electronically, documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an
original and eight copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. For more information on how to submit these types
of filings please go to the Commission's Web site located at http://
www.ferc.gov/filing-comments.asp. More information about this project
can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of Commission's Web
site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket
number (P-13254) in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-22622 Filed 9-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 248 (Thursday, December 28, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61563-61565]
[FR Doc No: 2017-28084]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC18-38-000.
    Applicants: Colton Power L.P., Fountain Valley Power, L.L.C.,
Harbor Cogeneration Company, LLC, KES Kingsburg, L.P., SWG Arapahoe,
LLC, SWG Colorado, LLC, Valencia Power, LLC, Goal Line L.P.
    Description: Application for Authorization for Disposition of
Jurisdictional Facilities and Request for Expedited Action of Colton
Power L.P., et al.
    Filed Date: 12/20/17.
    Accession Number: 20171220-5240.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/18.

    Docket Numbers: EC18-39-000.
    Applicants: Access Industries, Inc., Calpine Corporation.
    Description: Application for Authorization under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act and Request for Expedited Consideration, et al. of
Calpine Corporation, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5195.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG18-22-000.
    Applicants: Hardin Wind Energy LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Hardin Wind Energy LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5153.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: EG18-23-000.
    Applicants: Hardin Wind Energy Holdings LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Hardin Wind Energy Holdings LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5154.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: EG18-24-000.
    Applicants: Beech Ridge Energy II Holdings LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Beech Ridge Energy II Holdings LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5155.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1276-007; ER10-1292-006; ER10-1287-006; ER10-
1303-006; ER10-1319-008; ER10-1353-008.
    Applicants: Consumers Energy Company, CMS Energy Resource
Management Company, Grayling Generation Station Limited Partnership,
Genesee Power Station Limited Partnership, CMS Generation Michigan
Power, LLC, Dearborn Industrial Generation, L.L.C.
    Description: Updated Market Power Analysis for the Central Region
of Consumer Energy Company, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/19/17.
    Accession Number: 20171219-5246.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/20/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-348-006; ER15-1378-002.
    Applicants: Mercuria Energy America, Inc., Mercuria Commodities
Canada Corporation.
    Description: Updated Triennial Market Analysis for the Southeast
Region of the Mercuria Sellers.
    Filed Date: 12/20/17.
    Accession Number: 20171220-5250.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/20/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-323-004.
    Applicants: Ohio Valley Electric Corporation.
    Description: Updated Market Power Analysis in the MISO Balancing
Area Authority of Ohio Valley Electric Corporation.
    Filed Date: 12/20/17.
    Accession Number: 20171220-5232.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/20/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-487-000.
    Applicants: Tampa Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Section 205 Requirements
Depreciation Rates--Various Accounts to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 12/20/17.
    Accession Number: 20171220-5210.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-488-000.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018 SDGE RS Annual Update
to Transmission Owner Tariff to be effective 1/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/20/17.
    Accession Number: 20171220-5211.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-489-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Request for Waiver and Shortened Answer Date of PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Filed Date: 12/20/17.
    Accession Number: 20171220-5242.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/3/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-490-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Indiana, LLC.
    Description: Market-Based Triennial Review Filing: Central
Triennial Duke Companies to be effective 2/19/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5055.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-491-000.
    Applicants: Hardin Wind Energy LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market-Based
Rate Authorization to be effective 2/20/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5091.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-491-001.
    Applicants: Hardin Wind Energy LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Market-Based Rate
Application to be effective 2/20/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5165.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-492-000.
    Applicants: Hardin Wind Energy Holdings LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market-Based
Rate Authorization to be effective 2/20/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5095.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-492-001.
    Applicants: Hardin Wind Energy Holdings LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Market-Based Rate
Application to be effective 2/20/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5166.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-493-000.
    Applicants: Virginia Electric and Power Company, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: VEPCO Submits Revisions to
OATT to Add Dominion M-2 to be effective 1/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5099.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-494-000.
    Applicants: Beech Ridge Energy II Holdings LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market-Based
Rate Authorization to be effective 2/20/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5114.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-494-001.
    Applicants: Beech Ridge Energy II Holdings LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Market-Based Rate
Application to be effective 2/20/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5167.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-495-000.

    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: SPS Notice of Succession RS-
136 TCEC to GSEC to be effective 1/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5140.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-496-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original Service Agreement
No. 4856, Queue No. AA2-121/AB2-104 to be effective 11/21/2017.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5158.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-498-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original Service Agreement
No. 4872, Queue No. AA2-132 to be effective 11/21/2017.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5237.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-499-000.
    Applicants: Southwestern Electric Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: SWEPCO-HOPE PSA RS#125 A&R
Windcatcher to be effective 1/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5243.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-500-000.
    Applicants: Southwestern Electric Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: SWEPCO-Bentonville PSA
RS#126 A&R Windcatcher to be effective 1/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5250.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following public
utility holding company filings:

    Docket Numbers: PH18-1-000.
    Applicants: [Eacute]nergir Inc.
    Description: Energir Inc. submits FERC 65-B Waiver Notification.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5198.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: PH18-2-000.
    Applicants: Valener Inc.
    Description: Valener Inc. submits FERC 65-B Waiver Notification.
    Filed Date: 12/21/17.
    Accession Number: 20171221-5199.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/18.

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

    Dated: December 21, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-28084 Filed 12-27-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 5 (Friday, January 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1117-1118]
[FR Doc No: X10-950108]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0191; Notice 1]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming
2005 and 2006 Mercedes Benz S-Class Passenger Cars Manufactured Before
September 1, 2006, Are Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for decision that nonconforming
2005 and 2006 Mercedes Benz S-Class passenger cars manufactured before
September 1, 2006, are eligible for importation.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces receipt by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that
2005 and 2006 Mercedes Benz S-Class passenger cars manufactured before
September 1, 2006, that were not originally manufactured to comply with
all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) are
eligible for importation into the United States because they are
substantially similar to vehicles that were originally manufactured for
importation into and sale in the United States and that were certified
by their manufacturer as complying with the safety standards (the U.S.-
certified version of the 2005 and 2006 Mercedes Benz S-Class passenger
cars manufactured before September 1, 2006,) and they are capable of
being readily altered to conform to the standards.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is February 8,
2010.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket and notice numbers above
and be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Comments must be written in the English language, and
be no greater than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to
the length of necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are
submitted in hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are
provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that your comments were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
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 DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    How to Read Comments submitted to the Docket: You may read the
comments received by Docket Management at the address and times given
above. You may also view the documents from the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov.
    Follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets. The
docket ID number and title of this notice are shown at the heading of
this document notice. Please note that even after the comment closing
date, we will continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it
becomes available. Further, some people may submit late comments.
Accordingly, we recommend that you periodically search the Docket for
new material.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, NHTSA<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a motor vehicle that was not
originally manufactured to conform to all applicable FMVSS shall be
refused admission into the United States unless NHTSA has decided that
the motor vehicle is substantially similar to a motor vehicle
originally manufactured for importation into and sale in the United
States, certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of the same model year as
the model of the motor vehicle to be compared, and is capable of being
readily altered to conform to all applicable FMVSS.
    Petitions for eligibility decisions may be submitted by either
manufacturers or importers who have registered with NHTSA pursuant to
49 CFR Part 592. As specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA publishes notice
in the Federal Register of each petition that it receives, and affords
interested persons an opportunity to comment on the petition. At the
close of the comment period, NHTSA decides, on the basis of the
petition and any comments that it has received, whether the vehicle is
eligible for importation. The agency then publishes this decision in
the Federal Register.
    J.K. Technologies, LLC (``JK''), of Baltimore, Maryland (Registered
Importer 90-006) has petitioned NHTSA to decide whether nonconforming
2005 and 2006 Mercedes Benz S-Class passenger cars manufactured before
September 1, 2006 are eligible for importation into the United States.
The vehicles which JK believes are substantially similar are 2005 and
2006 Mercedes Benz S-Class passenger cars manufactured before September
1, 2006 that were manufactured for sale in the United States and
certified by their manufacturer as conforming to all applicable FMVSS.
    The petitioner states that it compared non-U.S. certified 2005 and
2006 Mercedes Benz S-Class passenger cars manufactured before September
1, 2006 to their U.S.-certified counterparts, and found the vehicles to
be substantially similar with respect to compliance with most FMVSS.
    JK submitted information with its petition intended to demonstrate
that non-U.S. certified 2005 and 2006 Mercedes Benz S-Class passenger
cars manufactured before September 1, 2006, as originally manufactured,
conform to many FMVSS in the same manner as their U.S. certified
counterparts, or are capable of being readily altered to conform to
those standards.
    Specifically, the petitioner claims that non-U.S. certified 2005
and 2006

Mercedes Benz S-Class passenger cars manufactured before September 1,
2006 are identical to their U.S. certified counterparts with respect to
compliance with Standard Nos. 102 Transmission Shift Lever Sequence,
Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect, 103 Windshield
Defrosting and Defogging Systems, 104 Windshield Wiping and Washing
Systems, 106 Brake Hoses, 109 New Pneumatic Tires, 113 Hood Latch
System, 116 Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids, 124 Accelerator Control
Systems, 135 Passenger Car Brake Systems, 201 Occupant Protection in
Interior Impact, 202 Head Restraints, 204 Steering Control Rearward
Displacement, 205 Glazing Materials, 206 Door Locks and Door Retention
Components, 207 Seating Systems, 210 Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages, 212
Windshield Mounting, 214 Side Impact Protection, 216 Roof Crush
Resistance, 219 Windshield Zone Intrusion, 301 Fuel System Integrity,
and 302 Flammability of Interior Materials.
    The petitioner also contends that the vehicles are capable of being
readily altered to meet the following standards, in the manner
indicated:
    Standard No. 101 Controls and Displays: (a) replacement of the
instrument cluster with a U.S.-model component; (b) installation or
activation of the U.S.-version control and display software and (c)
installation of a U.S.-model cruise control lever.
    Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated
Equipment: installation of the following U.S.-model components on
vehicles that are not already so equipped: (a) Front sidemarker lamps;
(b) headlamps; (c) tail lamps with integral rear side marker lamps.
    Standard No. 110 Tire Selection and Rims: Installation of a tire
information placard.
    Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirrors: Installation of a U.S.-model
passenger side rearview mirror, or inscription of the required warning
statement on the face of that mirror.
    Standard No. 114 Theft Protection: Installation of a supplemental
key warning buzzer, or installation or activation of U.S.-version
software to meet the requirements of this standard.
    Standard No. 118 Power-Operated Window, Partition, and Roof Panel
Systems: Installation or activation of U.S.-version software in the
vehicle's computer system to meet the requirements of this standard on
vehicles that do not already have this software installed or activated.
    Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash Protection: Inspection of all
vehicles and replacement of any non U.S.-model seat belts, and (b)
installation or activation of U.S.-version software to ensure that the
seat belt warning system meets the requirements of this standard.
    The petitioner states that with the exemption of the seat belts the
occupant crash protection system used in these vehicles is identical to
that found in the U.S.-certified model.
    Standard No. 209 Seat Belt Assemblies: Inspection of all vehicles
and installation of U.S.-model seat belts on vehicles that are not
already so equipped.
    Standard No. 225 Child Restraint Anchorage Systems: Inspection of
all vehicles and installation of U.S.-model child restraint anchorage
system components on vehicles not already so equipped.
    Standard No. 401 Interior Trunk Release: Inspection of all vehicles
and installation of U.S.-model components on vehicles not already so
equipped.
    The petitioner additionally states that a vehicle identification
plate must be affixed to the vehicles near the left windshield post to
meet the requirements of 49 CFR Part 565.
    All comments received before the close of business on the closing
date indicated above will be considered, and will be available for
examination in the docket at the above addresses both before and after
that date. To the extent possible, comments filed after the closing
date will also be considered. Notice of final action on the petition
will be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated below.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A) and (b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8;
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: January 4, 2010.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2010-56 Filed 1-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 18, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49141-49142]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20150]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86944; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2019-072]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Extend the Pilot Related to the Market-Wide Circuit Breaker in Rule
4121

September 12, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on September 5, 2019, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. 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 extend the pilot related to the market-
wide circuit breaker in Rule 4121.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.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 Exchange 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 Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    Rule 4121 provides a methodology for determining when to halt
trading in all stocks due to extraordinary market volatility (i.e.,
market-wide circuit breakers). The market-wide circuit breaker
(``MWCB'') mechanism under Rule 4121 was approved by the Commission to
operate on a pilot basis,\3\ the term of which was to coincide with the
pilot period for the Plan to Address Extraordinary Market Volatility
Pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS (the ``LULD Plan''),\4\
including any extensions to the pilot period for the LULD Plan.\5\ The
Commission recently approved an amendment to the LULD Plan for it to
operate on a permanent, rather than pilot, basis.\6\ In light of the
proposal to make the LULD Plan permanent, the Exchange amended Rule
4121 to untie the pilot's effectiveness from that of the LULD Plan and
to extend the pilot's effectiveness to the close of business on October
18, 2019.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67090 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33531 (June 6, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-131).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012). The LULD Plan provides a
mechanism to address extraordinary market volatility in individual
securities.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 67090 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33531 (June 6, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-131) (Approval
Order); and 68786 (January 31, 2013), 78 FR 8666 (February 6, 2013)
(SR-NASDAQ-2013-021) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness
of Proposed Rule Change to Delay the Operative Date of a Rule Change
to Nasdaq Rule 4121).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85623 (April 11,
2019), 84 FR 16086 (April 17, 2019).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85578 (April 9,
2019), 84 FR 15271 (April 15, 2019) (SR-NASDAQ-2019-027).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to amend Rule 4121 to extend the pilot to
the close of business on October 18, 2020. This filing does not propose
any substantive or additional changes to Rule 4121. The Exchange will
use the extension period to develop with the other SROs rules and
procedures that would allow for the periodic testing of the performance
of the MWCB mechanism, with industry member participation in such
testing. The extension will also permit the exchanges to consider
enhancements to the MWCB processes such as modifications to the Level 3
process.
    The market-wide circuit breaker under Rule 4121 provides an
important, automatic mechanism that is invoked to promote stability and
investor confidence during a period of significant stress when
securities markets experience extreme broad-based declines. All U.S.
equity exchanges and FINRA adopted uniform rules on a pilot basis
relating to market-wide circuit breakers in 2012 (``MWCB Rules''),
which are designed to slow the effects of extreme price movement
through coordinated trading halts across securities markets when severe
price declines reach levels that may exhaust market liquidity.\8\
Market-wide circuit breakers provide for trading halts in all equities
and options markets during a severe market decline as measured by a
single-day decline in the S&P 500 Index.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67090 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33531 (June 6, 2012) (SR-BATS-2011-038; SR-BYX-2011-
025; SR-BX-2011-068; SR-CBOE-2011-087; SR-C2-2011-024; SR-CHX-2011-
30; SR-EDGA-2011-31; SR-EDGX-2011-30; SR-FINRA-2011-054; SR-ISE-
2011-61; SR-NASDAQ-2011-131; SR-NSX-2011-11; SR-NYSE-2011-48; SR-
NYSEAmex-2011-73; SR-NYSEArca-2011-68; SR-Phlx-2011-129) (``MWCB
Approval Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Rule 4121, a market-wide trading halt will be triggered
if the S&P 500 Index declines in price by specified percentages from
the prior day's closing price of that index. Currently, the triggers
are set at three circuit breaker thresholds: 7% (Level 1), 13% (Level
2), and 20% (Level 3). A market decline that triggers a Level 1 or
Level 2 halt after 9:30 a.m. ET and before 3:25 p.m. ET would halt
market-wide trading for 15 minutes, while a similar market decline at
or after 3:25 p.m. ET would not halt market-wide trading. A market
decline that triggers a Level 3 halt, at any time during the trading
day, would halt market-wide trading until the primary listing market
opens the next trading day.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\9\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest. The market-wide circuit breaker mechanism under Rule 4121 is
an important, automatic mechanism that is invoked to promote stability
and investor confidence during a period of significant stress when
securities markets experience extreme broad-based

declines. Extending the market-wide circuit breaker pilot for an
additional year would ensure the continued, uninterrupted operation of
a consistent mechanism to halt trading across the U.S. markets while
the Exchange, with the other SROs, consider and develop rules and
procedures that would allow for the periodic testing of the performance
of the MWCB mechanism, which would include industry member
participation in such testing. The extension will also permit the
exchanges to consider enhancements to the MWCB processes such as
modifications to the Level 3 process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change promotes
just and equitable principles of trade in that it promotes transparency
and uniformity across markets concerning when and how to halt trading
in all stocks as a result of extraordinary market volatility. Based on
the foregoing, the Exchange believes the benefits to market
participants from the MWCB under Rule 4121 should continue on a pilot
basis because the MWCB will promote fair and orderly markets, and
protect investors and the public interest.

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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the proposal would
ensure the continued, uninterrupted operation of a consistent mechanism
to halt trading across the U.S. markets while the Exchange, in
conjunction with the other SROs, consider and develop rules and
procedures that would allow for the periodic testing of the performance
of the MWCB mechanism. Furthermore, as noted above, the extension will
permit the exchanges to consider enhancements to the MWCB processes
such as modifications to the Level 3 process.
    Further, the Exchange understands that FINRA and other national
securities exchanges will file proposals to extend their rules
regarding the market-wide circuit breaker pilot. Thus, the proposed
rule change will help to ensure consistency across market centers
without implicating any competitive issues.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

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

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

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the 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 to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2019-072 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-NASDAQ-2019-072. 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 public.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2019-072 and
should be submitted on or before October 9, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-20150 Filed 9-17-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 31, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 62)]
[Notices]
[Page 16953]
[DOCID:fr31mr08-134]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket Nos. FMCSA-01-10578, FMCSA-05-21711, FMCSA-05-22194, 05-22727]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Renewals; Vision

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA previously announced its decision to renew the
exemptions from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations for 12 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to
exempt individuals from the vision requirement if the exemptions
granted will not compromise safety. The Agency has reviewed the
comments submitted in response to the previous announcement and
concluded that granting these exemptions will provide a level of safety
that will be equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety
maintained without the exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle
(CMV) drivers.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room 8301, Washington, DC
20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Document Management
System (DMS) at http://dmses.dot.gov.

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for a 2-year period if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that
would be achieved absent such exemption.'' The statute also allows the
Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The comment
period ended on February 28, 2008.

Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received one comment in this proceeding. The comment was
considered and discussed below.
    Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) expressed
opposition to FMCSA's policy to grant exemptions from the FMCSR,
including the driver qualification standards. Specifically, Advocates:
(1) Objects to the manner in which FMCSA presents driver information to
the public and makes safety determinations; (2) objects to the Agency's
reliance on conclusions drawn from the vision waiver program; (3)
claims the Agency has misinterpreted statutory language on the granting
of exemptions (49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315); and finally (4) suggests
that a 1999 Supreme Court decision affects the legal validity of vision
exemptions.
    The issues raised by Advocates were addressed at length in 64 FR
51568 (September 23, 1999), 64 FR 66962 (November 30, 1999), 64 FR
69586 (December 13, 1999), 65 FR 159 (January 3, 2000), 65 FR 57230
(September 21, 2000), and 66 FR 13825 (March 7, 2001). We will not
address these points again here, but refer interested parties to those
earlier discussions.

Conclusion

    The Agency has not received any adverse evidence on any of these
drivers that indicates that safety is being compromised. Based upon its
evaluation of the 12 renewal applications, FMCSA renews the Federal
vision exemptions for Francis M. Anzulewicz, Donald J. Bierwirth, Jr.,
Arthur L. Bousema, Matthew Daggs, Donald R. Date, Jr., John E. Kimmet,
Jr., Jason L. Light, Robert Mollicone, Kenneth R. Murphy, Jr., Paul D.
Schnautz, Robert A. Sherry, and John R. Synder.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each renewal
exemption will be valid for 2 years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if: (1) The person fails to comply with
the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has
resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was
granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent
with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.

    Issued on: March 21, 2008.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
 [FR Doc. E8-6489 Filed 3-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


Record for the Final Metal Product and Machinery Rule Child Lead Benefits, Weighted Estimates ( Proposed/ NODA Option) Category Type Reduced Cases Annual Benefits ( 2001$) Neo Natal Mortality Sport 1.1395 $ 7,406,485.65 Neo Natal Mortality Sub 0.4633 $ 3,011,295.40 Avoided IQ Loss Sport 796.2802 $ 7,500,163.33 Avoided IQ Loss Sub 282.1024 $ 2,657,122.28 Reduced IQ < 70 Sport 2.7764 $ 161,062.44 Reduced IQ < 70 Sub 0.9471 $ 54,944.28 Reduced Pb > 20 Sport 0.0000 $ 0.00 Reduced Pb > 20 Sub 0.0000 $ 0.00 Total $ 20,791,073.37 February 14, 2003 Page 1 of 1 exlchld. xls  Child Lead