[Federal Register: September 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 183)]
[Notices]
[Page 54400-54401]
[DOCID:fr19se08-53]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8717-4; Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2008-0547]

Draft Problem Formulation for Human Health Risk Assessments of
Pathogens in Land-Applied Biosolids

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Public Comment Period and External Peer-Review
Workshop.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. EPA is announcing the release of a pre-dissemination,
external review draft titled, ``Problem Formulation for Human Health
Risk Assessments of Pathogens in Land-applied Biosolids'' (EPA/600/R-
08/035A), for both public comment and external peer review. The public
comment period will span 45 days. Eastern Research Group (ERG), under
contract with EPA, will convene an independent panel of experts and
organize and conduct an external peer-review workshop to review the
draft document. Both the U.S. EPA and ERG invite the public to register
to attend this workshop. Additional information regarding both
submissions and registration is provided in the remainder of the
document.
    The public comment period and the external peer-review workshop are
separate processes that provide opportunities for all interested
parties to comment on the document. In addition to consideration by
EPA, all public comments submitted in accordance with this notice will
also be forwarded to the external peer-review panel for review prior to
the workshop.
    EPA is releasing this draft document solely for the purpose of pre-
dissemination peer review under applicable information quality
guidelines. This document has not been formally disseminated by EPA. It
does not represent and should not be construed to represent any Agency
policy or determination.

DATES: The 45-day public comment period will begin September 19, 2008
and end November 3, 2008. Technical comments should be provided in
writing and must be received by the U.S. EPA by November 3, 2008.
Comments received after this date will only be considered if time
permits and might not be included for discussion at the external peer-
review workshop. The external peer-review workshop will be held on
November 19, 2008, starting at 8:30 a.m. and adjourning by 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The external peer-review workshop will be held at U.S. EPA's
Andrew W. Briedenbach Environmental Research Center (AWBERC), Rooms
120-126, 26 W. Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268. ERG is
organizing, convening, and conducting the peer-review workshop.
Registration to attend the external review workshop must be completed
prior to November 12, 2008, via one of the following methods:
     Online via the Internet--https://www2.ergweb.com/projects/
conferences/peerreview/register-biosolids.htm
     Telephone--781-674-7374 (registration line).
     Sending an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>subject line
``Biosolid Peer Review.'' When making reservations to attend the
external peer-review workshop, individuals must indicate whether they
plan to provide brief oral comments to the external review panel. Space
is limited, and reservations will be accepted on a first-come, first-
served basis.
    Electronic copies of the external review draft document and the
U.S. EPA Peer-Review Charge can be accessed at that National Center for
Environmental Assessment (NCEA)'s homepage under the ``Recent
Additions'' and the ``Data and Publications'' menus at http://
www.epa.gov/ncea. Copies are not available from ERG.
    Comments may be submitted electronically via http://
www.regulations.gov, by mail, by facsimile, or by hand delivery/
courier. Please follow the detailed instructions as provided in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Questions about the public comment
period can be directed to the OEI Docket Center (telephone--202-566-
1752; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or e-mail_ORD.Docket@epa.gov).
    Questions about the external peer-review workshop can be directed
to ERG, through Kate Schalk (telephone--781-674-7374, or e-mail_
Kate.Schalk@erg.com).
    Questions about the draft document can be directed to Michael
Troyer, NCEA, U.S. EPA, 26 W. Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH
45268, Telephone--513-569-7399; or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Information About the Document

    In January 2004, the U.S. EPA released a final Action Plan for
setting new priorities for the biosolids program, which included the
Agency's response to the National Research Council's 2002 report
entitled, Biosolids Applied to Land: Advancing Standards and Practice.
This current, external review draft document is an important step in
the Agency's response because it aims to improve problem formulation
and strengthen the analysis plans associated with the conduct of
quantitative microbial risk assessments on land-applied biosolids.

II. How To Submit Technical Comments to the Docket at
www.regulations.gov

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD 2008-
0547, by one of the following methods:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax--202-566-1753;
     Mail--Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket
(Mail Code: 2822T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; or
     Hand Delivery--The OEI Docket is located in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The OEI Docket Center Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30

a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding national holidays.
    The OEI Docket Center telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours
of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    If you provide comments by mail or hand delivery, please submit
three copies of the comments. For attachments, provide an index, number
pages consecutively with the comments, and submit an unbound original
and three copies.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-
2008-0547. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the
specified comment period. Comments received after the closing date will
be marked ``late,'' and may only be considered if time permits. It is
EPA's policy to include all comments it receives in the public docket
without change and to make the comments available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless a comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-
mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous
access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: Documents in the docket are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other materials,
such as copyrighted material, are publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the OEI Docket in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center.

    Dated: September 11, 2008.
Rebecca Clark,
Acting Director, National Center for Environmental Assessment.
[FR Doc. E8-21959 Filed 9-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR

INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST RENEWAL:

MOBILE AIR CONDITIONER RETROFITTING PROGRAM

1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

1(a) Title and Number of the Information Collection

This ICR is entitled " Mobile Air Conditioner Retrofitting Program
(Renewal)," EPA ICR Number 1774.05, and OMB Number 2060-0350.

1(b) Short Characterization

The Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program, under Section
612 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), enables the Agency to review available
substitutes for ozone depleting substances (ODSs) and determine their
acceptability.  The Stratospheric Protection Division (SPD) is
responsible for enacting regulations to phase out chemicals that damage
the stratospheric ozone layer; therefore, pose a threat to human health
and the environment.  Depletion of stratospheric ozone can result in
sharp increases in melanoma and non-melanoma cancers due to increased
exposure to ultraviolet-A (UV-A) and ultraviolet-B (UV-B) radiation, and
a higher incidence of cataracts (a leading cause of blindness).  Under
the SNAP program, companies submit applications of substitutes for ODSs.
 After all necessary information is received, SPD has 90 days to review
the data submitted, and determine if the substitute is acceptable,
unacceptable, or if its use must be restricted.  For every submission,
SPD reviews factors such as impact on human health and the environment,
ozone depleting potential, atmospheric lifetime, global warming
potential, and flammability.  Because many substitutes are produced for
multiple uses, SPD must determine what uses are appropriate based on the
factors mentioned. Once SPD makes a decision of acceptability of a
substitute, a Notice is published in the Federal Register listing
acceptable substitutes under SNAP.  If the substitute is found
unacceptable or use restrictions are required, a notice-and-comment
rulemaking is necessary.   A comprehensive list of substitutes, their
uses, and any relevant restrictions is maintained for distribution to
interested parties.

SPD requires technicians retrofitting motor vehicle air conditioners
(MVACs) containing ODS such as CFC-12 to use an approved SNAP substitute
and to provide basic information on a label to be affixed to a visible
section of the MVAC.  The label must include the name of the substitute
refrigerant, when and by whom the retrofit was performed, environmental
and safety information about the substitute refrigerant, and other
information.  This information is needed so that subsequent technicians
working on the MVAC system will be able to service the system properly,
decreasing the likelihood of significant refrigerant emissions,
cross-contamination and potential failure of air conditioning systems
and refrigerant recovery/recycling equipment. EPA requires that when
retrofitting CFC-12 MVAC systems with an approved SNAP refrigerant, the
technician must first extract the CFC-12, and must install new fittings
unique to that refrigerant.

EPA estimates that 6,500 technicians will be responsible for providing
this information over the next 3 years, at a total cost (labor plus
materials) of $205,000.

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

2(a) Need and Authority for the Collection

The SNAP program reviews potential alternatives to ozone-depleting
refrigerants used in various sectors, including MVACs.  When
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), and specifically CFC-12, were phased out SPD
faced the challenge of identifying acceptable alternative refrigerants
that allowed consumers choice to retrofit CFC-12 MVAC systems to use
alternatives.  EPA notes that in the U.S., prior to the 1993 model year,
MVACs used CFC-12 and that after 1995, original equipment manufacturers
(OEMs) produced MVACs with HFC-134a.  EPA estimates that there are
currently approximately 3.3 million automobiles, originally designed to
use CFC-12 in their MVACs, operating in the U.S.  Of these, EPA
estimates 7,000 (about 0.2%) or less will be retrofitted to use
alternative refrigerants accepted for retrofitting between April 1, 2010
and March 31, 2013 (the term of this ICR).  The remaining MVAC systems
will either (1) continue to operate without service, (2) continue to
operate with minor service including repairs and refilling with
available supplies of CFC-12, (3) will be recycled or disposed of along
with the entire motor vehicle, (4) will cease to function but will not
be retrofitted, or (5) have already been retrofitted to an acceptable
alternative refrigerant and will not be retrofitted again.

The purpose of this Information Collection Request (ICR) is to estimate
the burden associated with the 40 CFR part, 82 subpart G requirements
that service technicians label MVAC systems with information about new
refrigerants when they retrofit a system.  It is necessary to assess the
time it will take for the service technician to fill out and place the
label on the retrofitted air conditioner.  This label will acknowledge
that the retrofitting has been completed, and that the MVAC no longer
uses CFC-12.  In addition, the label provides essential information to
technicians about the specific refrigerant used in the air conditioning
system.

Section 612 of the CAA requires EPA to promulgate rules making it
unlawful to replace any ODS  with any substitute that the Administrator
determines may present adverse effects to human health or the
environment where the Administrator has identified an alternative that
(1) reduces the overall risk to human health and the environment, and
(2) is currently or potentially available.  EPA is concerned that the
existence of several substitutes in this end-use may increase the
likelihood of significant refrigerant cross-contamination and potential
failure of air conditioning systems and recovery/recycling equipment.
In addition, continuing the smooth transition to substitutes strongly
depends on the continued purity of the recovered, recycled and/or
reclaimed CFC-12 supply.

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The purpose of the label is to alert service technicians and motor
vehicle owners that the MVAC has been retrofitted to use an acceptable
non-CFC refrigerant.  The label will provide essential information to
technicians about the specific refrigerant used in the air conditioning
system.  Technicians need this information to avoid service practices
that might result in refrigerant cross-contamination and system failure.

3. NON DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

3(a) Non duplication

The required label is put on CFC-12 air conditioners that are being
retrofitted with an acceptable substitute.  The label will be the only
required mechanism to indicate the use of a substitute, and therefore
will not be duplicative.

3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

A Federal Register Notice (75 FR 7584) making this supporting statement
available for public comment was submitted and published.  No public
comments were received.

3(c) Consultations

EPA consulted with the following individuals in preparing this ICR
renewal:

Ward Atkinson, Chairman of the Interior Climate Control Committee of
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE),<PHONE_NUMBER>, regarding the
number of air conditioners likely to be retrofitted and the cost burden.

Paul DeGuiseppi, Mobile Air Conditioning Society Worldwide, (215)
631-7020, regarding the percent of air conditioners likely to be
retrofitted.

Jim Thomas, Refrigerant Services Inc.,<PHONE_NUMBER>, regarding the cost
of labels.

Doug Pettigrew, ICOR International,<PHONE_NUMBER>, regarding the cost of
labels.

3(d) Effects Of Less Frequent Collection

This ICR asks for information to be collected just once per MVAC
retrofit.

3(e) General Guidelines

This ICR follows all of OMB’s general guidelines for information
collections.

3(f) Confidentiality

This ICR does not ask for any information that would be considered
confidential.

3(g) Sensitive Questions

This ICR does not ask any questions concerning sexuality, religious
beliefs, or other matters usually considered private.

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

4(a) Respondents and SIC Codes

The following is a list of Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
codes and associated industries that may retrofit a MVAC and therefore
may be affected by information collection requirements covered under
this ICR.  Also listed is the corresponding North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) codes available from
http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/naics.html.

SIC code:        Type of Industry and NAICS code:

551		New and used car dealers (NAICS code 441110)

554		Gas service stations (NAICS codes 447110 and 447190)

7532		Top and body repair shops (NAICS code 811121)

7538		General automotive repair shops (NAICS code 811111)

7539		Automotive repair shops not elsewhere classified, including air
conditioning and radiator specialty shops (NAICS code 811198)

4(b) Information Requested

The Agency will not standardize the label, but rather allow the industry
to devise a format that accommodates information about the refrigerants
on the market.  Unique fittings are necessary for different refrigerants
in order to avoid cross contamination, as is the use of different
colored labels for each refrigerant.  EPA works with refrigerant
developers to eliminate the risk of duplication.  The person conducting
the retrofit must apply to the MVAC in the engine compartment a label
that contains the following information:

The name and address of the technician and the company performing the
retrofit.

The date of the retrofit.

The trade name, charge amount, and, when applicable, the numerical
designation of the refrigerant as determined under the latest version of
Standard 34 of the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and
Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), Inc..

The type, manufacturer, and amount of lubricant used.

If the refrigerant is or contains an ozone-depleting substance, the
phrase "ozone depleter".

If the refrigerant displays flammability limits as measured according to
latest version of Standard E681 of the American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) International, the statement "This refrigerant is
FLAMMABLE.  Take appropriate precautions."

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED – AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

The Agency has not developed a format for the label and does not collect
and compile the information provided on the label.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden

EPA has not developed a standard label, but rather the manufacturers
have the opportunity to produce unique labels to accompany their
refrigerant.  Much of the information required on the labels can be
printed with the labels, thereby lessening the burden on the individual
service shops, many of which are small businesses.  These labels may
also contain information about the specific fittings the service
technician should use, with the subject refrigerant, to minimize the
potential for cross-contamination due to several alternative refrigerant
products on the market.  EPA works closely with industry in carrying out
these labeling requirements.  Proper labeling results in considerable
savings to industry and the public, since it greatly reduces the chance
of refrigerant contamination.  There are now 16 alternative refrigerants
on the market listed under the SNAP program as acceptable replacements
for CFC-12 for MVAC. However, only 13 of these alternative refrigerants
are acceptable for retrofitting MVACs.  Considerable costs would accrue
if refrigerants were contaminated (mixed), including the costs to repair
systems which failed as a result and the costs to recover, separate,
reclaim and/or dispose of contaminated refrigerant.

To estimate the total number of retrofits to occur by July 31, 2010, the
date this ICR will expire, the Agency analyzed publicly available data
from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation
Statistics, regarding vehicle sales per year.  EPA assumed that the
penetration of air conditioning in these vehicles rose linearly from 70%
in 1970 to 98% in 1998 and remained at 98% thereafter.  EPA assumed that
100% of the MVACs were designed for CFC-12 for years 1970 through 1991,
67% for 1992, 33% for 1993, and 0% thereafter.  EPA assumed the lifetime
of service of an air conditioner follows a Poisson distribution with an
average lifetime of 12 years.  Using this method, EPA estimates that
there are currently approximately 3 million MVACs, originally designed
to use CFC-12, operating in the U.S.  Of these, EPA estimates 7000, or
about 0.2%, will be retrofitted to use alternative refrigerants between
May 1, 2010 and April 31, 2013 (the term after this ICR).  The remaining
MVACs either (1) will continue to operate without service, (2) will
continue to operate with minor service including refilling with
available supplies of CFC-12, (3) will be disposed or recycled along
with the entire motor vehicle, (4) will cease to function but will not
be retrofitted due to economic reasons, or (5) have already been
retrofitted to an alternative refrigerant and will not be retrofitted
again.

EPA estimates the time to complete and apply the required label at 5
minutes per MVAC.

6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs

EPA estimates the cost per label to be $0.10.

EPA estimates the time to complete and apply the label at 5 minutes per
MVAC.  Based on recent consultation with the industry, EPA uses an
estimate of $70 per hour loaded labor rate (includes: wages paid to the
technician; benefits including paid leave, health insurance, retirement
savings and legally required benefits; and overhead, including office
space, furniture, equipment and computers, supplies and other business
expenses).  Thus the loaded labor cost per response is approximately
$5.83.

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden And Cost

The data required on the label is not submitted to the EPA; therefore,
the Agency burden and cost is zero.

6(d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

The U.S. Department of Labor statistics indicate there are 650,000
automotive service technicians and mechanics (SOC Code Number 49-3023)
in the U.S.  EPA estimates that 6,500 of them, or approximately 1% of
the total, will be responsible for retrofitting the estimated 55,000
MVAC systems over the three-year term of this ICR.

EPA estimates the time to complete and apply the label at 5 minutes per
MVAC, making the total burden 4,500 hours (1,500 hours per year).  At an
estimated average labor rate of $70 per hour, the overall cost
associated with the burden hours is $315,000 ($105,000 per year).  The
cost for designing, typesetting, printing and distributing 55,000 labels
is estimated at $0.10 per label to be $5,500 ($1,833.33 per year).
Adding the labor and capital costs together yields a total cost burden
of $320,500 ($106,833.33 per year).

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours And Cost Tables

As indicated in 6(c), there is no burden or cost to the Agency;
therefore, the bottom-line burden hours and costs are equivalent to the
respondent burden hours and costs:

burden hours:			1,500 hours per year

burden costs:	direct:		$1,833 per year

		labor:		$105,000 per year

6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

Based on the decline of CFC-12 MVACs in service today EPA estimates a
continued reduction in the number of CFC-12 MVACs retrofits that will
occur during the next three years. After 1994, new cars in the US were
no longer sold with CFC-12 MVACs.  Thus, the number of operating cars
with CFC-12 cars MVACs has decreased since the last ICR renewal. With
fewer cars with CFC-12 MVACs, there will be fewer retrofits with
substitute refrigerants and subject to this ICR.

6(g) Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and record keeping burden for this
collection of information is estimated to average 5 minutes per
response.  Burden means 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.  This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply
with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of
the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques,
EPA has established a public docket for this ICR.  Submit your comments,
referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0911 to (1) EPA online using
www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, the Air and Radiation Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460,  under Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0911.  The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566-1744,
and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is
(202) 566-1742.    Also, you can send comments to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725
17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA.
Please include the EPA Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0911 and OMB
control number 2060-0350 in any correspondence.

  PAGE   2

  PAGE   4

  PAGE   4

  PAGE   5

  PAGE   5


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 84 (Wednesday, May 1, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 18528]
[FR Doc No: 2019-08834]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice Of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Number: PR19-45-001.
    Applicants: EnLink LIG, LLC.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)+(g): Amendment of
Petition for Rate Approval and SOC to be effective 4/23/2019.
    Filed Date: 4/23/19.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>64.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/14/19.
    284.123(g) Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/24/19.

    Docket Number: PR19-57-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Gas Company.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)+(g): Offshore
Delivery Service Rate Revision--April 2019 to be effective 4/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 4/24/19.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>03.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/15/19.
    284.123(g) Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/24/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-1147-000.
    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing NAESB 3.1 Compliance Filing to be
effective 8/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 4/24/19.
    Accession Number: 20190424-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-1148-000.
    Applicants: Discovery Gas Transmission LLC.
    Description: Imbalance Cash-out Report for 2018 Activity for
Discovery Gas Transmission LLC under RP19-1148.
    Filed Date: 4/24/19.
    Accession Number: 20190424-5068.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/19.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified date(s). 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: April 25, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-08834 Filed 4-30-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 139 (Monday, July 21, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42312-42313]
[FR Doc No: 2014-17047]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Staff Attendance at Southwest Power Pool Regional
Entity Trustee, Regional State Committee, Members' and Board of
Directors Meetings

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) hereby gives
notice that members of its staff may attend the meetings of the
Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP) Regional Entity Trustee (RE), Regional
State Committee (RSC), SPP Members Committee and Board of Directors, as
noted below. Their attendance is part of the Commission's ongoing
outreach efforts.
    All meetings will be held at the Embassy Suites Omaha-Downtown, 555
South 10th Street, Omaha, NE. The hotel's phone number is (402) 346-
9000.

SPP RE
    July 28, 2014 (8:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.)
SPP RSC

    July 28, 2014 (1:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m.)
SPP Members/Board of Directors
    July 29, 2014 (8:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m.)

    The discussions may address matters at issue in the following
proceedings:

Docket No. EL05-19, Southwestern Public Service Company
Docket No. ER05-168, Southwestern Public Service Company
Docket No. ER06-274, Southwestern Public Service Company
Docket No. ER06-451, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER09-35, Tallgrass Transmission, LLC
Docket No. ER09-36, Prairie Wind Transmission, LLC
Docket No. ER09-548, ITC Great Plains, LLC
Docket No. EL11-34, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER11-1844, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER11-4105, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. EL12-28, Xcel Energy Services Inc., et al.
Docket No. EL12-59, Golden Spread Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Docket No. EL12-60, Southwest Power Pool, Inc., et al.
Docket No. ER12-480, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-959, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-1071, Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-1179, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-1586, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-2366, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER13-366, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER13-367, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER13-1173, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER13-1748, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER13-1864, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER13-1872, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER13-2031, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. EL14-21, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. EL14-30, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. EL14-49, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. EL14-57, City of Hastings, NE and City of Grand Island, NE
v. Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-781, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-866, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-1174, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-1406, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-1407, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-1653, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-1713, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-2009, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-2022, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-2059, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-2062, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-2065, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-2081, Southwest Power Pool, Inc
Docket No. ER14-2107, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-2162, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-2184, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-2217, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-2219, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-2303, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-2363, Southwestern Public Service Company

These meetings are open to the public.
    For more information, contact Patrick Clarey, Office of Energy
Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at (317) 249-
5937 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: July 11, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-17047 Filed 7-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 38 (Tuesday, February 26, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6144-6145]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03291]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-CERCLA Docket No. V-W-19-C-003; FRL-9989-94-Region 5]

Proposed CERCLA Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on
Consent; City of Kalamazoo, Michigan, and City of Kalamazoo Brownfields
Redevelopment Authority; Allied Paper Portage Creek/Kalamazoo River
Superfund Site, Operable Unit 1, Panelyte Property, Kalamazoo Michigan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed Settlement Agreement and request for public
comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hereby gives notice
of a proposed Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent
(Settlement) pertaining to a 22-acre parcel of land (the Panelyte
Property) located in Kalamazoo, Michigan. The Panelyte Property is
located adjacent to, and is partially contaminated by waste from,
Operable Unit 1 (OU1) of the Allied Paper/Portage Creek/Kalamazoo River
Superfund Site. EPA invites public comment on the Settlement for thirty
(30) days following publication of this notice. The Settlement requires
the City of Kalamazoo and the City of Kalamazoo Brownfield
Redevelopment Authority to conduct certain short-term and long-term
response actions at the Panelyte Property and at OU1. These response
actions include: Cooperation with periodic reviews; compliance with and
performance of activities related to institutional controls; assistance
with community relations activities; property clearance activities;
oversight of traffic management issues; and to cooperate with OU1
remedy component placement on the Panelyte Property and the performance
of inspections of such remedy components.

DATES: Comments must be post marked or received on or before March 28,
2019.

ADDRESSES: The proposed Settlement and related site documents can be
viewed at the Superfund Records Center, (SRC-7J), United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 W Jackson Blvd., Chicago,
IL 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Electronic copies online will be found at
www.epa.gov/superfund/allied-paper-kalamazoo.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Further information or a copy of the
Settlement may be obtained from Diane Russell, Community Involvement
Coordinator, U.S. EPA Region 5 Superfund Division Community Information
Office, 1300 Bluff St., Suite 140, Flint, MI 48504. Telephone: 989-395-
3493. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background Information

    In accordance with Section 122(i) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended
(``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given of a proposed
Settlement pertaining to the Panelyte Property, a 22-acre parcel of
land located in Kalamazoo, Michigan. The Panelyte Property is located
adjacent to, and is partially contaminated by hazardous substances
from, Operable Unit 1 (OU1) of the Allied Paper Portage Creek/Kalamazoo
River Superfund Site. The Settlement is with the following settling
parties: The City of Kalamazoo, Michigan and the City of Kalamazoo
Brownfield Redevelopment Authority. The Settlement requires the
settling parties to perform certain work and to comply with property
requirements. The settling parties will cooperate with EPA in
potentially placing components of the EPA-selected remedy for OU1 on
the Panelyte Property. The settling parties will cooperate with EPA's
periodic reviews of the OU1 remedy, including the compilation,
reporting, and the review and analysis of data, reports, and other
information in their possession. The settling parties will also place
and comply with any necessary institutional controls on properties they
presently control, will assist EPA in obtaining institutional controls
on other properties, and will assist EPA with future review and
maintenance of the institutional controls. The settling parties will
assist EPA in performing community relation activities related to the
Panelyte Property and OU1, will assist in performing property clearing
activities (trees, brush, undergrowth) at the Panelyte Property related
to OU1 remedy components, and will perform inspections of OU1 remedy
components placed on the Panelyte Property. The settling parties shall
prepare and oversee implementation of the traffic management plan
related to construction activities under the OU1 remedy.
    The Settlement includes a covenant by the United States not to sue
the settling parties, pursuant to Sections 106 and Section 107(a) of
CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 106 and 107(a).

II. Opportunity To Comment

A. General Information

    For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this
notice, the Agency will receive written comments relating to the
Settlement. The Agency will consider all comments received and may
modify or withdraw its consent to the Settlement if comments received
disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the Settlement is
inappropriate, improper, or inadequate.

B. Where do I send my comments or view responses?

    Your comments should be mailed to Diane Russell, Community
Involvement Coordinator, U.S. EPA Region 5 Superfund Division Community
Information Office, 1300 Bluff St., Suite 140, Flint, MI 48504.
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Be sure to label
the comments with the Docket Number at the top of this notice and/or
the property name. The Agency's response to any comments received will
be available for public inspection at the Superfund Records Center.

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

    1. Submitting Confidential Business Information (CBI). Do not
submit ANY information you think or know is CBI to EPA through an
agency website or via email. Clearly mark on your written comments all
the information that you claim to be CBI. If you mail EPA your comments
on a disk or CD-ROM (CD), mark the outside of the CD as CBI and then
identify electronically within the CD the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one

complete version of your comments that includes all the information
claimed as CBI, you must submit for inclusion in the public docket a
second copy of your comments that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI. Information marked as CBI will not be disclosed except
in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the subject of your comments by the docket number
and the site name in the title of this notice or the Federal Register
publication date and page number.
     Follow directions--the agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree with the terms of the
Settlement; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your
requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the identified
comment period deadline.

    Dated: February 7, 2019.
Thomas R. Short,
Acting Director, Superfund Division.
[FR Doc. 2019-03291 Filed 2-25-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 23, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23798-23799]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10939]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2017-1195; Airspace Docket No. 17-AEA-24]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class D Airspace and Class E Airspace; Erie, PA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class D airspace, Class E surface area
airspace and Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D
surface area, by updating the name to Erie International Airport/Tom
Ridge Field, Erie, PA. This action also amends Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface in Erie, PA, by
updating the name to St. Vincent Health Center Heliport. This action
also updates the geographic coordinates of the airport and heliport,
and replaces the outdated term ``Airport/Facility Directory'' with the
term ``Chart Supplement'' in the legal descriptions of associated Class
D and E airspace to match the FAA's aeronautical database. The Class E
surface airspace is further clarified showing removal of the
extensions, and the Class E extension airspace is further clarified
showing removal of the part-time Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) language.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, July 19, 2018. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1
Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11B at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701
Columbia Ave, College Park, GA 30337; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends Class D and Class E airspace in the Erie, PA area, to
support IFR operations under standard instrument approach procedures at
Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field, and St. Vincent Health
Center Heliport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the
Federal Register (83 FR 8210, February 26, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-
2017-1195 to amend Class D airspace and Class E surface airspace, Class
E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area, and
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the
surface at Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field and St. Vincent
Health Center Heliport, Erie, PA.
    Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    The FAA further clarifies the rule by adding that the Class E
surface airspace extensions are removed from the legal description, and
the part-time Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) language is removed from the
Class E extension airspace legal description. There is no practical
change to the airspace as proposed by the FAA, only that we are
revising it because it did not accurately describe what we proposed.
    Except as described above, this rule is the same as published in
the NPRM.
    Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraph
5000, 6002, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11B dated
August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, which is incorporated
by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class D and E airspace
designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in
the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15,
2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 amends Class D airspace, and Class E surface area airspace, and
Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area,
by updating the airport name to Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge
Field (formerly Erie International Airport). The geographic coordinates
of the airport, in all airspace classes are adjusted to coincide with
the FAA's aeronautical database.
    Also, this action removes the airspace extensions from the Class E
surface airspace legal description of the airport as it duplicates the
Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area
(which is now continuous). This action also removes the part-time NOTAM
language from the Class E airspace designated as an extension
(inadvertently omitted in the NPRM).
    Additionally, this action makes an editorial change to the airspace
legal description replacing ``Airport/Facility Directory'' with ``Chart
Supplement'' in the associated airspace.
    This action also amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface by updating the airport name to Erie
International Airport/Tom Ridge Field (formerly Erie International Tom
Ridge Field Airport), and the heliport name to St. Vincent Health
Center Heliport (formerly Life Star Base Heliport), Erie, PA, to be in

concert with the FAA's aeronautical database.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified
that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 3, 2017, effective September 15, 2017, is amended
as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

AEA PA D Erie, PA [Amended]

Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field, PA
    (Lat. 42[deg]04''59'' N, long. 80[deg]10'26'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
3,200 feet MSL within a 4.2-mile radius of Erie International
Airport/Tom Ridge Field. This Class D airspace area is effective
during the specific days and times established in advance by a
Notice to Airmen. The effective days and times will thereafter be
continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6002 Class E Surface Area Airspace.

* * * * *

AEA PA E2 Erie, PA [Amended]

Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field, PA
    (Lat. 42[deg]04'59'' N, long. 80[deg]10'26'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 4.2-
mile radius of Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field. This
Class E airspace area is effective during the specific days and
times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective
days and times will thereafter be continuously published in the
Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a
Class D Surface Area.

* * * * *

AEA PA E4 Erie, PA [Amended]

Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field, PA
    (Lat. 42[deg]04'59'' N, long. 80[deg]10'26'' W)
Erie VORTAC
    (Lat. 42[deg]01'03'' N, long. 80[deg]17'34'' W)
Erie Localizer RWY 6
    (Lat. 42[deg]05'30'' N, long. 80[deg]09'22'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface extending
northeast of the Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field 4.2-mile
radius from within 4 miles northwest of the Erie VORTAC 054[deg]
radial to 3.5 miles southeast of the Erie ILS localizer northeast
course then extending southwest from a point located along the Erie
localizer northeast course 9.2 miles northeast of lat.
42[deg]07'30'' N, long. 80[deg]05'36''W, to the 4.2-mile radius of
the airport.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AEA PA E5 Erie, PA [Amended]

Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field, PA
    (Lat. 42[deg]04'59'' N, long. 80[deg]10'26'' W)
St. Vincent Health Center Heliport, PA
    (Lat. 42[deg]06'43'' N, long. 80[deg]04'51'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.7-mile radius of Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge
Field, and within 4.4 miles each side of the 054[deg] bearing from
the airport extending from the 6.7-mile radius to 14 miles northeast
of the airport and within a 6-mile radius of St. Vincent Health
Center Heliport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on May 16, 2018.
Ryan W. Almasy,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2018-10939 Filed 5-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 225 (Friday, November 26, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67509-67511]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25759]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-93633; File No. SR-EMERALD-2021-41]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX Emerald, LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Its Fee Schedule

November 19, 2021.
    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 November 8, 2021, MIAX Emerald, LLC (``MIAX Emerald'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II 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 is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX Emerald Fee
Schedule (the ``Fee Schedule'').
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/emerald, at MIAX's
principal office, 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
    The Exchange proposes to (i) amend the Fee Schedule to amend the
exchange groupings of options exchanges within the routing fee table in
Section 1(b) of the Fee Schedule, Fees for Customer Orders Routed to
another Options Exchange; and (ii) make a minor, non-substantive edit
to correct a typographical error. The Exchange initially filed this
proposal on October 27, 2021 (SR-EMERALD-2021-35) and withdrew such
filing on November 8, 2021. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee
change effective November 8, 2021.
    Currently, the Exchange assesses routing fees based upon (i) the
origin type of the order, (ii) whether or not it is an order for
standard option classes in the Penny Interval Program \3\ (``Penny
classes'') or an order for standard option classes which are not in the
Penny Interval Program (``Non-Penny classes'') (or other explicitly
identified classes), and (iii) to which away market it is being routed.
This assessment practice is identical to the routing fees assessment
practice currently utilized by the Exchange's affiliates, Miami
International Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX'') and MIAX PEARL, LLC
(``MIAX Pearl''). This is also similar to the methodology utilized by
the Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe BZX Options''), a competing options
exchange, in assessing routing fees. Cboe BZX Options has exchange
groupings in its fee schedule, similar to those of the Exchange,
whereby several exchanges are grouped into the same category, dependent
upon the order's origin type and whether it is a Penny or Non-Penny
class.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88993 (June 2,
2020), 85 FR 35145 (June 8, 2020) (SR-EMERALD-2020-05) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Exchange Rule 510, Minimum Price Variations and Minimum
Trading Increments, To Conform the Rule to Section 3.1 of the Plan
for the Purpose of Developing and Implementing Procedures Designed
To Facilitate the Listing and Trading of Standardized Options).
    \4\ See Cboe U.S. Options Fee Schedules, BZX Options, effective
August 2, 2021, ``Fee Codes and Associated Fees,'' at https://www.cboe.com/us/options/membership/fee_schedule/bzx/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of conducting a periodic review of the current
transaction fees and rebates charged by away markets, the Exchange has
determined to amend the exchange groupings of options exchanges within
the routing fee table to better reflect the associated costs of routing
customer orders to those options exchanges for execution.\5\ In
particular, the Exchange proposes to amend the exchange groupings in
the first row of the table identified as, ``Routed, Priority Customer,
Penny Program,'' to relocate Nasdaq BX Options from the first row of
the table to the second, also identified as, ``Routed, Priority
Customer, Penny Program.'' The impact of this proposed change will be
that the routing fee for Priority Customer orders in the Penny Program
that are routed to Nasdaq BX Options will increase from $0.15 to $0.65.
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to adjust the routing fee
for certain orders routed to Nasdaq BX Options to reflect the
associated costs for that routed execution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Nasdaq BX established a Customer Taker fee of $0.46 in Penny
Classes and $0.65 in Non-Penny Classes. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 91473 (April 5, 2021), 86 FR 18562 (April 9, 2021) (SR-
BX-2021-009). Nasdaq BX recently increased the Customer Taker fee in
Non-Penny Classes from $0.65 to $0.79. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 93121 (September 24, 2021), 86 FR 54259 (September 30,
2021) (SR-BX-2021-040).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the Exchange proposes to amend the exchange groupings in the
third row of the table, identified as ``Routed, Priority Customer, Non-
Penny Program,'' to relocate Nasdaq BX Options from the third row of
the table to the fourth, also identified as, ``Routed, Priority
Customer, Non-Penny Program.'' The impact of this proposed change will
be that the routing fee for Priority Customer orders in the Non-Penny
Program that are routed to Nasdaq BX Options will increase from $0.15
to $1.00. The purpose of the proposed rule change is to adjust the
routing fee for certain orders routed to Nasdaq BX Options to reflect
the associated costs for that routed execution.
    Next, the Exchange proposes to amend the exchange groupings in the
sixth row of the table identified as, ``Routed, Public Customer that is
not a Priority Customer, Non-Penny Program,'' to relocate Nasdaq ISE
from

the exchange groupings in the sixth row of the table to the seventh row
of the table, also identified as ``Routed, Public Customer that is not
a Priority Customer, Non-Penny Program.'' The impact of this proposed
change will be that the Exchange routing fee for Public Customer orders
in the Non-Penny Program that are routed to Nasdaq ISE will increase
from $1.00 to $1.15. The purpose of the proposed rule change is to
adjust the routing fee for certain orders routed to Nasdaq ISE to
reflect the associated costs for that routed execution.
    Additionally, the Exchange proposes to amend the exchange groupings
in the seventh row of the table, identified as ``Routed, Public
Customer that is not a Priority Customer, Non-Penny Program,'' to
relocate Nasdaq BX Options and MIAX Pearl to the eighth row of the
table, also identified as, ``Routed, Public Customer that is not a
Priority Customer, Non-Penny Program.'' The impact of this proposed
change will be that the routing fee for Public Customer orders that are
not Priority Customer orders in the Non-Penny Program that are routed
to Nasdaq BX Options or MIAX Pearl will increase from $1.15 to $1.25.
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to adjust the routing fee
for certain orders routed to Nasdaq BX Options or MIAX Pearl to reflect
the associated costs for that routed execution. The Exchange notes that
no options exchanges were removed from the routing fee table entirely,
with the only change being the change in categorization.
    Accordingly, with the proposed change, the routing fee table will
be as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Description                              Fees
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Routed, Priority Customer, Penny Program, to: NYSE                 $0.15
 American, BOX, Cboe, Cboe EDGX Options, MIAX, Nasdaq MRX,
 Nasdaq PHLX (except SPY)..................................
Routed, Priority Customer, Penny Program, to: NYSE Arca             0.65
 Options, Cboe BZX Options, Cboe C2, Nasdaq GEMX, Nasdaq
 ISE, NOM, Nasdaq PHLX (SPY only), MIAX Pearl, Nasdaq BX
 Options...................................................
Routed, Priority Customer, Non-Penny Program, to: NYSE              0.15
 American, BOX, Cboe, Cboe EDGX Options, MIAX, Nasdaq ISE,
 Nasdaq MRX, Nasdaq PHLX...................................
Routed, Priority Customer, Non-Penny Program, to: NYSE Arca         1.00
 Options, Cboe BZX Options, Cboe C2, MIAX Pearl, Nasdaq
 GEMX, NOM, Nasdaq BX Options..............................
Routed, Public Customer that is not a Priority Customer,            0.65
 Penny Program, to: NYSE American, NYSE Arca Options, Cboe
 BZX Options, BOX, Cboe, Cboe C2, Cboe EDGX Options, Nasdaq
 GEMX, Nasdaq ISE, Nasdaq MRX, MIAX, MIAX Pearl, NOM,
 Nasdaq PHLX, Nasdaq BX Options............................
Routed, Public Customer that is not a Priority Customer,            1.00
 Non-Penny Program, to: MIAX, NYSE American, Cboe, Nasdaq
 PHLX, Cboe EDGX Options...................................
Routed, Public Customer that is not a Priority Customer,            1.15
 Non-Penny Program, to: Cboe C2, BOX, NOM, Nasdaq ISE......
Routed, Public Customer that is not a Priority Customer,            1.25
 Non-Penny Program, to: Cboe BZX Options, NYSE Arca
 Options, Nasdaq GEMX, Nasdaq MRX, Nasdaq BX Options, MIAX
 Pearl.....................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining to amend its routing fees the Exchange took into
account transaction fees and rebates assessed by the away markets to
which the Exchange routes orders, as well as the Exchange's clearing
costs, administrative, regulatory, and technical costs associated with
routing orders to an away market. The Exchange uses unaffiliated
routing brokers to route orders to the away markets; the costs
associated with the use of these services are included in the routing
fees specified in the Fee Schedule. This routing fees structure is not
only similar to the Exchange's affiliates, MIAX and MIAX Pearl, but is
also comparable to the structure in place on at least one other
competing options exchange, such as Cboe BZX Options.\6\ The Exchange's
routing fee structure approximates the Exchange's costs associated with
routing orders to away markets. The per-contract transaction fee amount
associated with each grouping closely approximates the Exchange's all-
in cost (plus an additional, non-material amount) \7\ to execute that
corresponding contract at that corresponding exchange. The Exchange
notes that in determining whether to adjust certain groupings of
options exchanges in the routing fee table, the Exchange considered the
transaction fees and rebates assessed by away markets, and determined
to amend the grouping of exchanges that assess transaction fees for
routed orders within a similar range. This same logic and structure
applies to all of the groupings in the routing fee table. By utilizing
the same structure that is utilized by the Exchange's affiliates, MIAX
and MIAX Pearl, the Exchange's Members \8\ will be assessed routing
fees in a similar manner. The Exchange believes that this structure
will minimize any confusion as to the method of assessing routing fees
between the three exchanges. The Exchange notes that its affiliates,
MIAX and MIAX Pearl, will file to make the same proposed routing fee
changes contained herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See supra note 4. The Cboe BZX Options fee schedule has
exchange groupings, whereby several exchanges are grouped into the
same category, dependent on the order's Origin type and whether it
is a Penny or Non-Penny class. For example, Cboe BZX Options fee
code RR covers routed customer orders in Non-Penny classes to NYSE
Arca, Cboe C2, Nasdaq ISE, Nasdaq Gemini, MIAX Emerald, MIAX Pearl,
or NOM, with a single fee of $1.25 per contract.
    \7\ This amount is to cover de minimis differences/changes to
away market fees (i.e., minor increases or decreases) that would not
necessitate a fee filing by the Exchange to re-categorize the away
exchange into a different grouping. Routing fees are not intended to
be a profit center for the Exchange and the Exchange's target
regarding routing fees and expenses is to be as close as possible to
net neutral.
    \8\ The term ``Member'' means an individual or organization
approved to exercise the trading rights associated with a Trading
Permit. Members are deemed ``members'' under the Exchange Act. See
the Definitions section of the Fee Schedule and Exchange Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange proposes to make a minor non-substantive
change to the title of the table in section 1(b) of the Fee Schedule,
to capitalize the ``a'' in the word ``another'' such that the title of
the table will be ``Fees for Customer Orders Routed to Another Options
Exchange.'' This proposed change harmonizes the title of the table to
that of the Exchange's affiliate, MIAX Pearl.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \9\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \10\ in particular, in
that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its
facilities. The Exchange also believes the proposal furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \11\ 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 and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination
between customers, issuers, brokers and dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed change to the exchange groupings
of options exchanges within the routing fee table furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act and is reasonable, equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory because the proposed change will
continue to apply in the same manner to all Members that are subject to
routing fees. The Exchange believes the proposed change to the routing
fee table exchange groupings furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act and is designed to promote just and equitable principles of
trade and is not unfairly discriminatory because the proposed change
seeks to recoup costs that are incurred by the Exchange when routing
customer orders to away markets on behalf of Members and does so in the
same manner to all Members that are subject to routing fees. The costs
to the Exchange to route orders to away markets for execution primarily
includes transaction fees and rebates assessed by the away markets to
which the Exchange routes orders, in addition to the Exchange's
clearing costs, administrative, regulatory and technical costs. The
Exchange believes that the proposed re-categorization of certain
exchange groupings would enable the Exchange to recover the costs it
incurs to route orders to Nasdaq BX Options, Nasdaq ISE, and MIAX
Pearl. The per-contract transaction fee amount associated with each
grouping approximates the Exchange's all-in cost (plus an additional,
non-material amount) to execute the corresponding contract at the
corresponding exchange.
    The Exchange believes the proposed change to correct a
typographical error in the title of the table in section 1(b) of the
Fee Schedule, promotes just and equitable principles of trade and
removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system because the proposed change
promotes clarity and consistency within the Fee Schedules of MIAX
Emerald and its affiliate Exchange, MIAX Pearl. The Exchange believes
this change will provide greater clarity to Members and the public
regarding the Exchange's Fee Schedule and it is in the public interest
for the Fee Schedule to be accurate and consistent so as to eliminate
the potential for confusion.

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. The Exchange believes its
proposed re-categorization of certain exchange groupings is intended to
enable the Exchange to recover the costs it incurs to route orders to
away markets, particularly Nasdaq BX Options and Nasdaq ISE. The
Exchange does not believe that this proposal imposes any unnecessary
burden on competition because it seeks to recoup costs incurred by the
Exchange when routing orders to away markets on behalf of Members and
at least one other options exchange has a similar routing fees
structure.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \13\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \14\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \15\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-EMERALD-2021-41 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-EMERALD-2021-41. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-EMERALD-2021-41 and should be submitted
on or before December 17, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-25759 Filed 11-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 85 (Tuesday, May 3, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26227-26228]
[FR Doc No: 2022-09435]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2012-0014]

Lead in Construction Standard; Extension of the Office of
Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information Collection
(Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning the proposal to
extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the
information collection requirements specified in the Lead in
Construction Standard.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
July 5, 2022.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Documents in the docket are
listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; however, some
information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to
read or download through the website. All submissions, including
copyrighted material, are available for inspection through the OSHA
Docket Office. Contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY
(877) 889-5627) for assistance in locating docket submissions.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and OSHA
docket number (OSHA-2012-0014) for the Information Collection Request
(ICR). OSHA will place all comments, including any personal
information, in the public docket, which may be made available online.
Therefore, OSHA cautions interested parties about submitting personal
information such as social security numbers and birthdates. For further
information on submitting comments, see the ``Public Participation''
heading in the section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Seleda Perryman or Theda Kenney,
Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of the continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, the collection instruments are clearly understood, and
OSHA's estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et
seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing
information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational
injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also
requires that OSHA obtain such information with minimum burden upon
employers, especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce
to the maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of effort in
obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).
    The following sections describe who uses the information collected
under each requirement, as well as how they use it. The purpose of
these

requirements is to reduce employees' risk of death or serious injury by
ensuring that employment has been tested and is in safe operating
condition.
    The purpose of the Lead in Construction Standard and its collection
of information (paperwork) requirements is to reduce occupational lead
exposure in the construction industry. Lead exposure can result in both
acute and chronic effects and can be fatal in severe cases of lead
toxicity. The major collection of information requirements of the
Standard are: Conducting worker exposure assessments; notifying workers
of their lead exposures; establishing, implementing and reviewing a
written compliance program annually; labeling containers of
contaminated protective clothing and equipment; providing medical
surveillance to workers; providing examining physicians with specific
information; ensuring that workers receive a copy of their medical
surveillance results; posting warning signs; establishing and
maintaining exposure monitoring, medical surveillance, medical removal
and objective data records; and providing workers with access to these
records. The records are used by employees, physicians, employers and
OSHA to determine the effectiveness of the employer's compliance
efforts.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the agency's functions to
protect workers, including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection, and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend the approval of the information
collection requirements contained in the Lead in Construction Standard.
There is no change in the burden from the last clearance request.
    OSHA will summarize the comments submitted in response to this
notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB to extend
the approval of the information collection requirements.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Lead in Construction Standard.
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0189.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.
    Number of Respondents: 885,922.
    Number of Responses: 8,284,552
    Frequency of Responses: On occasion.
    Average Time per Response: Varies.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1,243,648.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $67,002,757.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on this Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); if comments, including
attachments, are not longer than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA
Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> or (3) by hard copy.
    Please note: While OSHA's Docket Office is continuing to accept and
process submissions by regular mail due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the
Docket Office is closed to the public and not able to receive
submissions to the docket by hand, express mail, messenger, and courier
service. All comments, attachments, and other material must identify
the agency name and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No.
OSHA-2012-0014). You may supplement electronic submissions by uploading
document files electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials
in reference to an electronic or a facsimile submission, you must
submit them to the OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice
titled (ADDRESSES). The additional materials must clearly identify your
electronic comments by your name, date, and the docket number so that
the agency can attach them to your comments.
    Due to security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments.
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
dates of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this
website. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on
using the http://www.regulations.gov website to submit comments and
access the docket is available at the website's ``User Tips'' link.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>)
for information about materials not available from the website, and for
assistance in using the internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    James S. Frederick, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020
(85 FR 58393).

    Signed at Washington, DC.
James S. Frederick,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2022-09435 Filed 5-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P