[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 10, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28915-28917]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10984]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 32107; 812-14552]

Columbia ETF Trust I, et al.; Notice of Application

May 5, 2016.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice of an application for an order under section 6(c) of
the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from
sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d), and 22(e) of the Act and rule 22c-1
under the Act, under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an
exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act, and under
section 12(d)(1)(J) for an exemption from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and
12(d)(1)(B) of the Act. The requested order would permit (a) index-
based series of certain open-end management investment companies
(``Funds'') to issue shares redeemable in large aggregations only
(``Creation Units''); (b) secondary market transactions in Fund shares
to occur at negotiated market prices rather than at net asset value
(``NAV''); (c) certain Funds to pay redemption proceeds, under certain
circumstances, more than seven days after the tender of shares for
redemption; (d) certain affiliated persons of a Fund to deposit
securities into, and receive securities from, the Fund in connection
with the purchase and redemption of Creation Units; (e) certain
registered management investment companies and unit investment trusts
outside of the same group of investment companies as the Funds (``Funds
of Funds'') to acquire shares of the Funds; and (f) certain Funds
(``Feeder Funds'') to create and redeem Creation Units in-kind in a
master-feeder structure.

Applicants:  Columbia Management Investment Advisers, LLC (the
``Initial Adviser''), a Minnesota limited liability company registered
as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940,
Columbia ETF Trust I (the ``Trust''), a Massachusetts business trust
registered under the Act as an open-end management investment company
with multiple series, and Columbia Management Investment Distributors,
Inc. (the ``Distributor''), a Delaware corporation and broker-dealer
registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange
Act'').

DATES: Filing Dates:  The application was filed on September 28, 2015,
and amended on January 19, 2016, April 15, 2016, April 27, 2016, and
May 5, 2016.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing:  An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on May 27, 2016, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing
requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts
bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason
for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be
notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the
Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090; Applicants: Columbia ETF Trust I and
Columbia Management Investment Distributors, Inc., 225 Franklin Street,
Boston, Massachusetts 02110; Columbia Management Investment Advisers,
LLC, 100 Park Avenue, 8th Floor, New York, New York 10017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill Ehrlich, Senior Counsel at (202)
551-6819, or David J. Marcinkus, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or for an
applicant using the

Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling
(202) 551-8090.

Summary of the Application

    1. Applicants request an order that would allow Funds to operate as
index exchange traded funds (``ETFs'').\1\ Fund shares will be
purchased and redeemed at their NAV in Creation Units only. All orders
to purchase Creation Units and all redemption requests will be placed
by or through an ``Authorized Participant'', which will have signed a
participant agreement with the Distributor. Shares will be listed and
traded individually on a national securities exchange, where share
prices will be based on the current bid/offer market. Certain Funds may
operate as Feeder Funds in a master-feeder structure. Any order
granting the requested relief would be subject to the terms and
conditions stated in the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants request that the order apply to the initial funds
and any additional series of the Trust, and any other open-end
management investment company or series thereof, that may be created
in the future (each, included in the term ``Fund''), each of which
will operate as an ETF and will track a specified index comprised of
domestic or foreign equity and/or fixed income securities (each, an
``Underlying Index''). Any Fund will (a) be advised by the Initial
Adviser or an entity controlling, controlled by, or under common
control with the Initial Adviser (each, an ``Adviser'') and (b)
comply with the terms and conditions of the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Each Fund will hold investment positions selected to correspond
generally to the performance of an Underlying Index. In the case of
Self-Indexing Funds, an affiliated person, as defined in section
2(a)(3) of the Act (``Affiliated Person''), or an affiliated person of
an Affiliated Person (``Second-Tier Affiliate''), of the Trust or a
Fund, of the Adviser, of any sub-adviser to or promoter of a Fund, or
of the Distributor will compile, create, sponsor or maintain the
Underlying Index.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Each Self-Indexing Fund will post on its Web site the
identities and quantities of the investment positions that will form
the basis for the Fund's calculation of its NAV at the end of the
day. Applicants believe that requiring Self-Indexing Funds to
maintain full portfolio transparency will help address, together
with other protections, conflicts of interest with respect to such
Funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Shares will be purchased and redeemed in Creation Units and
generally on an in-kind basis. Except where the purchase or redemption
will include cash under the limited circumstances specified in the
application, purchasers will be required to purchase Creation Units by
depositing specified instruments (``Deposit Instruments''), and
shareholders redeeming their shares will receive specified instruments
(``Redemption Instruments''). The Deposit Instruments and the
Redemption Instruments will each correspond pro rata to the positions
in the Fund's portfolio (including cash positions) except as specified
in the application.
    4. Because shares will not be individually redeemable, applicants
request an exemption from section 5(a)(1) and section 2(a)(32) of the
Act that would permit the Funds to register as open-end management
investment companies and issue shares that are redeemable in Creation
Units only.
    5. Applicants also request an exemption from section 22(d) of the
Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act as secondary market trading in shares
will take place at negotiated prices, not at a current offering price
described in a Fund's prospectus, and not at a price based on NAV.
Applicants state that (a) secondary market trading in shares does not
involve a Fund as a party and will not result in dilution of an
investment in shares, and (b) to the extent different prices exist
during a given trading day, or from day to day, such variances occur as
a result of third-party market forces, such as supply and demand.
Therefore, applicants assert that secondary market transactions in
shares will not lead to discrimination or preferential treatment among
purchasers. Finally, applicants represent that share market prices will
be disciplined by arbitrage opportunities, which should prevent shares
from trading at a material discount or premium from NAV.
    6. With respect to Funds that effect creations and redemptions of
Creation Units in kind and that are based on certain Underlying Indexes
that include foreign securities, applicants request relief from the
requirement imposed by section 22(e) in order to allow such Funds to
pay redemption proceeds within fourteen calendar days following the
tender of Creation Units for redemption. Applicants assert that the
requested relief would not be inconsistent with the spirit and intent
of section 22(e) to prevent unreasonable, undisclosed or unforeseen
delays in the actual payment of redemption proceeds.
    7. Applicants request an exemption to permit Funds of Funds to
acquire Fund shares beyond the limits of section 12(d)(1)(A) of the
Act; and the Funds, and any principal underwriter for the Funds, and/or
any broker or dealer registered under the Exchange Act, to sell shares
to Funds of Funds beyond the limits of section 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act.
The application's terms and conditions are designed to, among other
things, help prevent any potential (i) undue influence over a Fund
through control or voting power, or in connection with certain
services, transactions, and underwritings, (ii) excessive layering of
fees, and (iii) overly complex fund structures, which are the concerns
underlying the limits in sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act.
    8. Applicants request an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and
17(a)(2) of the Act to permit persons that are Affiliated Persons, or
Second Tier Affiliates, of the Funds, solely by virtue of certain
ownership interests, to effectuate purchases and redemptions in-kind.
The deposit procedures for in-kind purchases of Creation Units and the
redemption procedures for in-kind redemptions of Creation Units will be
the same for all purchases and redemptions and Deposit Instrument and
Redemption Instruments will be valued in the same manner as those
investment positions currently held by the Funds. Applicants also seek
relief from the prohibitions on affiliated transactions in section
17(a) to permit a Fund to sell its shares to and redeem its shares from
a Fund of Funds, and to engage in the accompanying in-kind transactions
with the Fund of Funds.\3\ The purchase of Creation Units by a Fund of
Funds directly from a Fund will be accomplished in accordance with the
policies of the Fund of Funds and will be based on the NAVs of the
Funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The requested relief would apply to direct sales of shares
in Creation Units by a Fund to a Fund of Funds and redemptions of
those shares. Applicants, moreover, are not seeking relief from
section 17(a) for, and the requested relief will not apply to,
transactions where a Fund could be deemed an Affiliated Person, or a
Second-Tier Affiliate, of a Fund of Funds because an Adviser or an
entity controlling, controlled by or under common control with an
Adviser provides investment advisory services to that Fund of Funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. Applicants also request relief to permit a Feeder Fund to
acquire shares of another registered investment company managed by the
Adviser having substantially the same investment objectives as the
Feeder Fund (``Master Fund'') beyond the limitations in section
12(d)(1)(A) and permit the Master Fund, and any principal underwriter
for the Master Fund, to sell shares of the Master Fund to the Feeder
Fund beyond the limitations in section 12(d)(1)(B).
    10. Section 6(c) of the Act permits the Commission to exempt any
persons or transactions from any provision of the Act if such exemption
is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with
the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the
policy and provisions of the Act. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act
provides that the Commission may exempt any person, security, or

transaction, or any class or classes of persons, securities, or
transactions, from any provision of section 12(d)(1) if the exemption
is consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors.
Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to grant an order
permitting a transaction otherwise prohibited by section 17(a) if it
finds that (a) the terms of the proposed transaction are fair and
reasonable and do not involve overreaching on the part of any person
concerned; (b) the proposed transaction is consistent with the policies
of each registered investment company involved; and (c) the proposed
transaction is consistent with the general purposes of the Act.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-10984 Filed 5-9-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 87 (Monday, May 6, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26248-26249]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10608]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0283]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; York River, between Yorktown and
Gloucester Point, VA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the draw of the US 17/George P. Coleman
Memorial Swing Bridge across the York River, at mile 7.0, between
Gloucester Point and Yorktown, VA. The deviation is necessary to
facilitate electrical work on the George P. Coleman Memorial Swing
Bridge. This deviation allows the drawbridge to remain in the closed to
navigation position during the deviation period.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. on July 8, 2013 to 5
p.m. on July 12, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2013-0283] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Jim Rousseau, Bridge
Administration Branch Fifth District, Coast Guard; telephone 757-398-
6557, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing the docket, call Barbara Hairston, Program Manager, Docket
Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Virginia Department of Transportation,
who owns and operates this swing bridge, has requested a temporary
deviation from the current operating regulations set out in 33 CFR
117.1025, to facilitate electrical work on the structure.
    Under the regular operating schedule, the Coleman Memorial Bridge,
at mile 7.0, between Gloucester Point and Yorktown, VA opens on signal
except from 5 a.m. to 8 a.m. and 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays the bridge shall remain closed to
navigation. The Coleman Memorial Bridge has vertical clearances in the
closed position of 60 feet above mean high water.
    Under this temporary deviation, the drawbridge will be closed to
navigation from 7 a.m. on Monday July 8, 2013 to 5 p.m. on Friday April
12, 2013. Emergency openings cannot be provided. There are no alternate
routes for vessels transiting this section of the York River.
    The York River is used by a variety of vessels including military,
tugs, and recreational vessels. The Coast Guard has carefully
coordinated the restrictions with military, commercial, and
recreational waterway users. The Coast Guard will inform users of the
waterway through our Local and Broadcast Notice to Mariners of the
closure periods for the bridge so that vessels can arrange their
transits to minimize any impacts caused by the temporary deviation.
Mariners able to pass under the bridge in the closed position may do so
at any time. Mariners are advised to proceed with caution.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: April 23, 2013.
Waverly W. Gregory, Jr.,
Bridge Program Manager, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2013-10608 Filed 5-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Drug Interchangeability (Prescribability and Switchability) – Do We Have a Right Tool for the Assessment?


[Federal Register: June 8, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 109)]
[Notices]
[Page 32484-32485]
[DOCID:fr08jn10-109]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0259]

Array-Based Cytogenetic Tests: Questions on Performance
Evaluation, Result Reporting and Interpretation; Public Meeting;
Request for Comments

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice of public meeting; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
following public meeting: Array-Based Cytogenetic Tests: Questions on
Performance Evaluation, Result Reporting and Interpretation. The
purpose of the public meeting is to seek input on challenges related to
performance evaluation, determination of clinical significance, result
reporting, and interpretation for array-based cytogenetic tests.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on June 30, 2010, from 1:30
p.m. to 5 p.m.
    Location: The meeting will be held at Hyatt Regency Bethesda, 7400
Wisconsin Ave., 1 Bethesda Metro Center, Bethesda, MD.
    Contact: Susan Monahan, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, rm. 4321, Silver Spring, MD 20903, 301-796-
5661, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Zivana Tezak, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, rm. 5668, Silver
Spring, MD 20903,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Registration and Requests for Oral Presentations: Send registration
information (including name, title, firm name, address, telephone, and
fax number), and written material and requests to make oral
presentations, to the contact person by June 21, 2010. Registration is
free and will be on a first-come, first-served basis. Early
registration is recommended because seating is limited. FDA may limit
the number of participants from each organization based on space
limitations. Registrants will receive confirmation once they have been
accepted. Onsite registration on the day of the public meeting will be
provided on a space-available basis beginning at 7 a.m.
    If you wish to make an oral presentation during the open comment
session at the meeting, you must indicate this at the time of
registration. FDA has included general discussion topics and specific
questions for comment in section III of this document, Topics for
Input. You should also identify which discussion topic you wish to
address in your presentation. FDA will do its best to accommodate
requests to speak. Individuals and organizations with common interests
are urged to consolidate or coordinate their presentations, and to
request time for a joint presentation. FDA will determine the amount of
time allotted to each presenter and the approximate time that each oral
presentation is scheduled to begin.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Susan Monahan or Zivana Tezak (see Contact) at least 7 days in
advance.
    Comments: FDA is holding this public meeting to obtain input on a
number of questions regarding review and interpretation issues for
array-based cytogenetic testing.
    Regardless of attendance at the meeting, interested persons may
submit either electronic or written comments on any discussion topic(s)
to the open docket. The deadline for submitting comments to the docket
is July 30, 2010. Submit electronic comments to http://
www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. It is only necessary to send one set of
comments. Identify comments with the docket number found in brackets in
the heading of this document. In addition, when responding to specific
questions as outlined in section III of this document, please identify
the question you are addressing. Received comments may be seen in the
Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Many human genetic disorders are a result of the gain or loss of
human genetic material, which may manifest as congenital anomalies,
dysmorphic features, developmental disabilities, etc. Traditionally,
chromosomes were analyzed using a method called karyotyping. In
addition, molecular methods such as fluorescence in situ hybridization
(FISH) provide the information about chromosome abnormalities at
specific loci. The recent

development of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) array methodologies, such as
microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and single-
nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays allow a high-resolution evaluation
of DNA copy number alterations associated with chromosome
abnormalities. Array-based cytogenetic testing is currently being
implemented in the clinical setting as a method for detecting
pathological genomic copy number changes.
    FDA regulation and review of in vitro diagnostic devices has
traditionally been a single marker-based, indication-specific process
that ensures safety and effectiveness of the product. However, the
results obtained from array-based cytogenetic tests are not necessarily
predefined and may not be associated with known clinical syndromes.
Evaluating complex devices such as array-based cytogenetic tests
challenges the traditional method of FDA review.

II. Meeting Overview

    During the meeting, FDA staff will present a brief background and
overview of in vitro diagnostic (IVD) regulation. Specific questions
related to review challenges for array-based cytogenetic tests are
listed in section III of this document, Topics for Input. After the
open comment session, the meeting will close with a round-table
discussion between FDA staff and selected participants representing a
range of constituencies. The participants in the round-table discussion
will engage in a dialogue on discussion topics (see section III of this
document), and provide closing thoughts. The participants will not be
asked to develop consensus opinions during the discussion, but rather
to provide their individual perspectives. Others in attendance at the
meeting will have an opportunity to listen to the round-table
discussion.
    In advance of the meeting, additional information, including a
meeting agenda, will be made available on the Internet. This
information will be placed on file in the public docket (docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document), which is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. This information will also be available
at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/
default.htm (select the appropriate meeting from the list).

III. Topics for Input

    FDA seeks input on the following issues:
    1. Clinical significance
    a. The resolution of array-based cytogenetic tests and the presence
of copy number variations (CNVs) in the apparently healthy population
poses challenges for result interpretation. What criteria should be
used to determine the clinical significance of CNVs (e.g., when
categorized as benign, pathogenic, or of unknown significance)?
    b. Should there be different requirements implemented for
interpreting the clinical significance of deletions vs. duplications
vs. translocations?
    2. Result reporting and interpretation
    a. Should result output be limited to results associated with known
syndromes that can be adequately validated clinically and analytically?
    b. What criteria (e.g., minimum overlap, size, etc.) should be used
to conclude findings are indicative of known syndrome?
    c. Should the performing, ordering and/or result interpretation of
these tests be limited to certain professionals (e.g., clinical
cytogeneticists)?
    d. How does FDA ensure that the results are interpreted correctly?
    3. Additional and confirmatory testing
    a. Should any array-based cytogenetic testing of an affected
individual include testing of parents where possible?
    b. Should a second followup test (e.g., FISH) be required for
result confirmation prior to reporting array-based cytogenetic results?
    4. Incidental findings
    Laboratories are obliged to report clinically significant findings
unrelated to the test order, when identified. How can the reporting of
results for diseases or conditions outside of the indications for use
be restricted?
    5. Clinical evaluation for approval of array-based cytogenetic
devices
    a. Would validation of a group of CNVs associated with well-known
syndromes be acceptable as a representation of all types of detectable
CNVs?
    b. If yes, then which syndromes should be included and how many
CNVs would be a representative number?
    c. What should be used as the reference genome?
    d. What studies should be performed to understand clinical
specificity?
    6. Use of database(s) in result reporting
    a. How can the accuracy of information used in the determination of
results be assured?
    i. Who should develop and maintain a curated database of known/
probable CNV changes and benign findings in the population?
    ii. FDA regulations require that all aspects of a test involved in
result output are under design controls in accordance with the Quality
System regulations. When implementing the database for result
reporting, how can it be assured that the database is adequately
maintained and meets appropriate quality standards?
    Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is
available, it will be accessible at http://www.regulations.gov. It may
be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and
Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD. A
transcript will also be available in either hardcopy or on CD-ROM,
after submission of a Freedom of Information request. Written requests
are to be sent to Division of Freedom of Information (HFI-35), Office
of Management Programs, Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers
Lane, rm. 6-30, Rockville, MD 20857.

    Dated: June 3, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-13768 Filed 6-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 43 (Thursday, March 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12055-12056]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05199]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Sunshine Act Meetings; Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of
Directors

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

ACTION: Notice of Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors
Meeting.

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

TIME AND DATE: The meeting will be held on April 9, 2015, from 12:00
Noon to 3:00 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time.

PLACE: This meeting will be open to the public via conference call. Any
interested person may call 1-877-422-1931, passcode<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
listen and participate in this meeting.

STATUS: Open to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board
of Directors (the Board) will continue its work in developing and
implementing the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement and to
that end, may

consider matters properly before the Board.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Avelino Gutierrez, Chair, Unified
Carrier Registration Board of Directors at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 2, 2015.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-05199 Filed 3-3-15; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 9 (Friday, January 12, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1550-1552]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00415]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Parts 250 and 385

[Docket No. RM18-4-000; Order No. 839]

Civil Monetary Penalty Inflation Adjustments

AGENCY:  Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY:  The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
issuing a final rule to amend its regulations governing the maximum
civil monetary penalties assessable for violations of statutes, rules,
and orders within the Commission's jurisdiction. The Federal Civil
Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended most recently by
the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act
of 2015, requires the Commission to issue this final rule.

DATES:  This final rule is effective January 12, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Todd Hettenbach, Attorney, Office of
Enforcement, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER> [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Order No. 839

Final Rule

    1. In this final rule, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) is complying with its statutory obligation to amend the
civil monetary penalties provided by law for matters within the
agency's jurisdiction.

Background

    2. The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act
Improvements Act of 2015 (2015 Adjustment Act),\1\ which further
amended the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990
(1990 Adjustment Act),\2\ required the head of each federal agency to
issue a rule by July 2016 adjusting for inflation each ``civil monetary
penalty'' provided by law within the agency's jurisdiction and to make
further inflation adjustments on an annual basis every January 15
thereafter.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Sec. 701, Public Law 114-74, 129 Stat. 584, 599.
    \2\ Public Law 101-410, 104 Stat. 890 (codified as amended at 28
U.S.C. 2461 note).
    \3\ 28 U.S.C. 2461 note, at (4). The Commission made its January
2017 adjustment on January 9, 2017, in Docket No. RM17-9-000. See
Civil Monetary Penalty Inflation Adjustments, Order No. 834, 82 FR
8137 (Jan. 24, 2017), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,390 (2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

    3. The 2015 Adjustment Act defines a civil monetary penalty as any
penalty, fine, or other sanction that: (A)(i) Is for a specific
monetary amount as provided by federal law; or (ii) has a maximum
amount provided for by federal law; (B) is assessed or enforced by an
agency pursuant to federal law; and (C) is assessed or enforced
pursuant to an administrative proceeding or a civil action in the
federal courts.\4\ This

definition applies to the maximum civil penalties that may be imposed
under the Federal Power Act (FPA),\5\ the Natural Gas Act (NGA),\6\ the
Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA),\7\ and the Interstate Commerce
Act (ICA).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Id. (3).
    \5\ 16 U.S.C. 791a et seq.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 717 et seq.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.
    \8\ 49 App. U.S.C. 1 et seq. (1988).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. Under the 2015 Adjustment Act, the first step for such
adjustment of a civil monetary penalty for inflation requires
determining the percentage by which the U.S. Department of Labor's
Consumer Price Index for all-urban consumers (CPI-U) for October of the
preceding year exceeds the CPI-U for October of the year before
that.\9\ The CPI-U for October 2017 exceeded the CPI-U for October 2016
by 2.041 percent.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 28 U.S.C. 2461 note, at (5)(b)(1).
    \10\ See, e.g., Memorandum from Mick Mulvaney, Office of
Management and Budget, Implementation of the Penalty Inflation
Adjustments for 2018, Pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties
Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, 1 (Dec. 15,
2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. The second step requires multiplying the CPI-U percentage
increase by the applicable existing maximum civil monetary penalty.\11\
This step results in a base penalty increase amount.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id. (5)(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. The third step requires rounding the base penalty increase
amount to the nearest dollar and adding that amount to the base penalty
to calculate the new adjusted maximum civil monetary penalty.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Under the 2015 Adjustment Act, an agency is directed to use the
maximum civil monetary penalty applicable at the time of assessment of
a civil penalty, regardless of the date on which the violation
occurred.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id. (6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. The adjustments that the Commission is required to make pursuant
to the 2015 Adjustment Act are reflected in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Existing maximum    New adjusted maximum
           Source                civil monetary        civil monetary
                                     penalty               penalty
------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 U.S.C. 825o-1(b), Sec.     $1,213,503 per        $1,238,271 per
 316A of the Federal Power     violation, per day.   violation, per day.
 Act.
16 U.S.C. 823b(c),..........  $21,916 per           $22,363 per
Sec. 31(c) of the Federal      violation, per day.   violation, per day.
 Power Act.
16 U.S.C. 825n(a),..........  $2,795 per violation  $2,852 per
Sec. 315(a) of the Federal                           violation.
 Power Act.
15 U.S.C. 717t-1,...........  $1,213,503 per        $1,238,271 per
Sec. 22 of the Natural Gas     violation, per day.   violation, per day.
 Act.
15 U.S.C. 3414(b)(6)(A)(i),   $1,213,503 per        $1,238,271 per
 Sec. 504(b)(6)(A)(i) of the   violation, per day.   violation, per day.
 Natural Gas Policy Act of
 1978.
49 App. U.S.C. 6(10) (1988),  $1,270 per offense    $1,296 per offense
 Sec. 6(10) of the             and $64 per day       and $65 per day
 Interstate Commerce Act.      after the first day.  after the first
                                                     day.
49 App. U.S.C. 16(8) (1988),  $12,705 per           $12,964 per
 Sec. 16(8) of the             violation, per day.   violation, per day.
 Interstate Commerce Act.
49 App. U.S.C. 19a(k)         $1,270 per offense,   $1,296 per offense,
 (1988), Sec. 19a(k) of the    per day.              per day.
 Interstate Commerce Act.
49 App. U.S.C. 20(7)(a)       $1,270 per offense,   $1,296 per offense,
 (1988), Sec. 20(7)(a) of      per day.              per day.
 the Interstate Commerce Act.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Administrative Findings

    9. Congress directed that agencies issue final rules to adjust
their maximum civil monetary penalties notwithstanding the requirements
of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).\14\ Because the Commission
is required by law to undertake these inflation adjustments
notwithstanding the notice and comment requirements that otherwise
would apply pursuant to the APA, and because the Commission lacks
discretion with respect to the method and amount of the adjustments,
prior notice and comment would be impractical, unnecessary, and
contrary to the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id. (3)(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Regulatory Flexibility Statement

    10. The Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, requires agencies
to certify that rules promulgated under their authority will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
businesses.\15\ The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act
apply only to rules promulgated following notice and comment.\16\ The
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act do not apply to this
rulemaking because the Commission is issuing this final rule without
notice and comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
    \16\ 5 U.S.C. 603, 604.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Paperwork Reduction Act

    11. This rule does not require the collection of information. The
Commission is therefore not required to submit this rule for review to
the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Document Availability

    12. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and
in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours
(8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A,
Washington DC 20426.
    13. From the Commission's Home Page on the internet, this
information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is
available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type
the docket number (excluding the last three digits) in the docket
number field.
    14. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
website during normal business hours from the Commission's Online
Support at<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
[email protected], or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification

    15. For the same reasons the Commission has determined that public
notice and comment are unnecessary, impractical, and contrary to the
public interest, the Commission finds good cause to adopt an effective
date that is less than 30 days after the date of publication in the
Federal Register pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act,\18\ and
therefore, the regulation is effective upon publication in the Federal
Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    16. The Commission has determined, with the concurrence of the
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of
the Office of Management and Budget, that this rule is not a ``major
rule'' as defined in section 351 of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This Final Rule is being submitted to
the Senate, House, and Government Accountability Office.

List of Subjects

18 CFR Part 250

    Natural gas, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

18 CFR Part 385

    Administrative practice and procedure, Electric power, Penalties,
Pipelines, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    By the Commission.

    Issued: January 8, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends parts 250
and 385, chapter I, title 18, Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 250--FORMS

0
1. The authority citation for part 250 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717-717w, 3301-3432; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352;
28 U.S.C. 2461 note.

0
2. Amend Sec.  250.16 by revising paragraph (e)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  250.16  Format of compliance plan transportation services and
affiliate transactions.

* * * * *
    (e) * * * (1) Any person who transports gas for others pursuant to
subparts B or G of part 284 of this chapter and who knowingly violates
the requirements of Sec. Sec.  358.4 and 358.5, Sec.  250.16, or Sec.
284.13 of this chapter will be subject, pursuant to sections 311(c),
501, and 504(b)(6) of the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978, to a civil
penalty, which the Commission may assess, of not more than $1,238,271
for any one violation.
* * * * *

PART 385--RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

0
3. The authority citation for part 385 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  5 U.S.C. 551-557; 15 U.S.C. 717-717w, 3301-3432; 16
U.S.C. 791a-825v, 2601-2645; 28 U.S.C. 2461; 31 U.S.C 3701, 9701; 42
U.S.C. 7101-7352, 16441, 16451-16463; 49 U.S.C. 60502; 49 App.
U.S.C. 1-85 (1988); 28 U.S.C. 2461 note (1990); 28 U.S.C. 2461 note
(2015).

0
4. Revise Sec.  385.1504(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  385.1504  Maximum civil penalty (Rule 1504).

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the
Commission may assess a civil penalty of up to $22,363 for each day
that the violation continues.
* * * * *

0
5. Revise Sec.  385.1602 to read as follows:

Sec.  385.1602  Civil penalties, as adjusted (Rule 1602).

    The current inflation-adjusted civil monetary penalties provided by
law within the jurisdiction of the Commission are:
    (a) 15 U.S.C. 3414(b)(6)(A)(i), Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978:
$1,238,271.
    (b) 16 U.S.C. 823b(c), Federal Power Act: $22,363 per day.
    (c) 16 U.S.C. 825n(a), Federal Power Act: $2,852.
    (d) 16 U.S.C. 825o-1(b), Federal Power Act: $1,238,271 per day.
    (e) 15 U.S.C. 717t-1, Natural Gas Act: $1,238,271 per day.
    (f) 49 App. U.S.C. 6(10) (1988), Interstate Commerce Act: $1,296
per offense and $65 per day after the first day.
    (g) 49 App. U.S.C. 16(8) (1988), Interstate Commerce Act: $12,964
per day.
    (h) 49 App. U.S.C. 19a(k) (1988), Interstate Commerce Act: $1,296
per day.
    (i) 49 App. U.S.C. 20(7)(a) (1988), Interstate Commerce Act: $1,296
per day.

[FR Doc. 2018-00415 Filed 1-11-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 12, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 238)]
[Notices]
[Page 74523-74524]
[DOCID:fr12de06-89]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0139; FRL-8254-3]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) and Sewage Sludge Management State Program
Requirements, EPA ICR Number 0168.09, OMB Control Number 2040-0057

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. This ICR is scheduled to expire on December 31,
2006. Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or
sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending
at OMB. This ICR describes the nature of the information collection and
its estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before January 11,
2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OW-2006-0139, to (1) EPA online using FDMS (our preferred method), by
e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Water Docket, Mail Code 4101T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB at: Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynn Stabenfeldt, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On March 7, 2006 (71 FR 11407-11411), EPA sought comments on
this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments on the
draft ICR.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0139, which is available for public viewing at the
Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. 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<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Water Docket
is<PHONE_NUMBER>. An electronic version of the public docket is
available through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at http://www.regulations.gov/.
 Use FDMS to submit or view public comments,

access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to
access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically. Once in the system key in the docket ID number
identified above.
    Any comments related to this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice. EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available
for public viewing in FDMS as EPA receives them and without change,
unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA
identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide
a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is
placed in FDMS. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted
material, will be available in the public docket. Although identified
as an item in the official docket, information claimed as CBI, or whose
disclosure is otherwise restricted by statute, is not included in the
official public docket, and will not be available for public viewing in
FDMS.
    Title: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and
Sewage Sludge Management State Program Requirements.
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR No. 0168.09. OMB Control No. 2040-0057.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on December 31, 2006.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: Under the NPDES program, States, Federally Recognized
Indian Tribes, and U.S. Territories, hereafter referred to as States,
may acquire the authority to issue permits. These governments have the
option of acquiring authority to issue general permits (permits that
cover a category or categories of similar discharges). States with
existing NPDES programs must submit requests for program modifications
to add Federal facilities, or general permit authority. In addition, as
Federal statutes and regulations are modified, States must submit
program modifications to ensure that their program continues to meet
Federal requirements. States have the option of obtaining a sludge
management program. This program may be a component of a State NPDES
Program, or it may be administered as a separate program. To obtain a
NPDES or sludge program, a State must submit an application that
includes a program description, an Attorney General's Statement, draft
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the EPA Region, and copies of the
State's statutes and regulations. Once a State obtains authority for an
NPDES or sludge program, it becomes responsible for implementing the
program in that jurisdiction. The State must retain records on the
permittees and perform inspections. In addition, when a State obtains
NPDES or sludge authority, EPA must oversee the program. Thus, States
must submit permit information and compliance reports to the EPA. When
EPA issues a permit in an unauthorized State, that State must certify
that the permit requirements comply with State water laws. According to
the Clean Water Act (CWA) (section 510), States may adopt discharge
requirements that are equal to or more stringent than requirements in
the CWA or Federal regulations. There are three categories of reporting
requirements that are covered by this ICR. The first category, ``State
Program Requests,'' includes the activities States must complete to
request a new NPDES or sludge program, or to modify an existing
program. The second category, ``State Program Implementation,''
includes the activities that approved States must complete to implement
an existing

program, such as certification of EPA-issued permits by non-NPDES
States. The third category, ``State Program Oversight,'' includes
activities required of NPDES States so that EPA may satisfy its
statutory requirements for state program oversight. The information
collected by EPA is used to evaluate the adequacy of a State's NPDES or
sludge program and to provide EPA with the information necessary to
fulfill its statutory oversight functions over State program
performance and individual permit actions. EPA will use this
information to evaluate State requests for full or partial program
approval and program modifications. In order to evaluate the adequacy
of a State's proposed program, appropriate information must be provided
to ensure that proper procedures, regulations, and statutes are in
place and consistent with the CWA requirements.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15, and are
identified on the form and/or instrument, if applicable.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 52
hours 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 which have subsequently changed; 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.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: States, Territories, and American
Indian Tribal Entities.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 618.
    Frequency of Response: Semi-annually, quarterly, on occasion, every
5 years, on-going.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 1,013,802 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $37,470,111, which includes $0 for
capital or O&M.
    Changes in the Estimates: The estimated increase in burden is
46,836 hours compared to the total estimated burden hours currently
identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR Burdens. This change is
primarily the result of (1) EPA's continuous effort to improve the
quality of data in its PCS database. This change may reflect more
accurate data rather than a significant change in the number of permits
actually administered. The total number of permits in PCS has
decreased, but the number of major facilities has increased. (2)
Changes and adjustments in the number and types of permits administered
by the states and EPA under the NPDES program. Non-NPDES authorized
states continue to apply for NPDES program and sludge program
authorization, impacting recordkeeping and reporting, resulting in a
shift of burden from Federal to State governments. (3) The shift toward
the use of general permits to cover certain categories of dischargers,
reducing the number of standard permits.

    Dated: December 4, 2006.
Richard T. Westlund,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E6-21115 Filed 12-11-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


	EPA ICR No. 2195.03                                      OMB Control
No. 2070-0169

Attachment F

Display Related to OMB Control #2070-0169

Listings of Related Regulations in 40 CFR 9.1

As of May 10, 1993, the OMB approval numbers for EPA regulations in
Chapter I of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) appear in
a listing in 40 CFR 9.1 (58 FR 27472).  This listing fulfills the
display requirements in section 3507(f) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) for EPA regulations.  The listing at 40 CFR 9.1 displays this OMB
Control number for the following regulations:

Program Title

Protections for Test Subjects in Human Research

40 CFR Citation
                  OMB Control No.

26.1125………………………………………………………
………………..2070-0169

26.1303………………………………………………………
………………..2070-0169


INDEX TO DOCKET EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0904

Partial Approval and Disapproval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Arizona; Regional Haze and Visibility Impacts of Transport, Ozone and Fine Particulates, Proposed Rule

Index No.	Category / Document Title 	Document Date	regs.gov Document ID

EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0904-XXXX

A. 	EPA Guidance Documents, Policies and Rulemakings

	Proposed Rule - Visibility Protection for Federal Class I Areas, 45 FR 34762	1980-05-22	-0002

	Final Rule - Visibility Protection for Federal Class I Areas, 45 FR 80084	1980-12-02	-0002

	Proposed Rule - Regional Haze Regulations, 62 FR 41138	1997-07-31  -0002

	IWAQM Phase 2 Summary Report And Recommendations For Modeling Long Range Transport Impacts	1998-12	-0002

	Visibility Monitoring Guidance, EPA-454/R-99-003	1999-06	-0002

	Final Rule - Regional Haze Regulations, 64 FR 35714	1999-07-01 	-0002

	Proposed Guidelines for BART Determinations Under the Regional Haze Regulations, 66 FR 38108	2001-06-20	-0002

	2002 Base Year Emission Inventory SIP Planning	2002-11-18 	-0002

	Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions under the Regional Haze Rule	2003-09	-0002

	Guidance for Tracking Progress under the Regional Haze Rule	2003-09 -0002

	Proposed Rule, Regional Haze Regulations and Guidelines for BART Determinations, 69 FR 25184	2004-05-04	-0002

	BART Guidelines Error Correction Memo	2005-06-24	-0002

	Final Rule - Regional Haze Regulations and Guidelines for BART Determinations, 70 FR 39104	2005-07-06	-0002

	Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter NAAQS and Regional Haze Regulations	2005-11 	-0002

	Memorandum from Joseph W. Paisie regarding Regional Haze Regulations and Guidelines for BART	2006-07-19 	-0002

	Guidance for SIP Submissions to Meet Current Outstanding Obligations Under Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS (Memorandum from William T. Harnett) 	2006-08-15 	-0002

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Additional Regional Haze Questions (Guidance) 2006-09-27	-0002

	Final Rule - Revision to Regional Haze Regulations, 71 FR 60612 2006-10-13 	-0002

	Guidance for Setting Reasonable Progress Goals Under the Regional Haze Program	2007-06-01	-0002

	Finding of Failure To Submit SIPs Required by the 1999 Regional Haze Rule, 74 FR 2392	2009-01-15 	-0002

	Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS (Memorandum from William T. Harnett) 2009-09-25 	-0002

	Proposed Rule - Approval, Disapproval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Arizona; Regional Haze State and Federal Implementation Plans [“Phase 1”], 77 FR 42834 	2012-07-20	-0002

	Final Rule - Approval, Disapproval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Arizona; Regional Haze State and Federal Implementation Plans [“Phase 1”], 77 FR 72512	2012-12-05	-0002

	Options to Limit the Potential to Emit (PTE) of a Stationary Source Under Section 112 and Title V of the

Clean Air Act (Act) – Memorandum from John Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards	1995-01-25	-0030

	Clarification of Methodology for Calculating Potential to Emit (PTE) for Batch Chemical Production Operations ) – Memorandum from John Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards	1996-08-29 -0031

	In re Monroe Electric Generating (Petition No. 6-99-2)	1999-06-11	-0032

State Plans, Rules, Support Documents, and Correspondence

	Revision to the Arizona SIP Under CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) – Regional Transport

-0003

	Arizona SIP Revision under CAA Section 110(a)(1) and (2); 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, and 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS	2009-10-14	-0003

	Arizona Regional Haze SIP Under Section 308 of the Federal Regional Haze Rule (with appendices)	2011-01	-0003

	Letter from John Shaw, ASARCO to Nancy C. Wrona, ADEQ 	2007-10-01	-0003

	Letter from Cosimo DeMasi, TEP, to Nancy Wrona, ADEQ 	2007-01-02	-0003

	Regional Haze SIP for the State of Arizona [submitted by Arizona Department of Environmental Quality under section 309 of the Regional Haze Rule]	2003-12-23	-0003

	Revision SIP for Regional Haze [submitted by Arizona Department of Environmental Quality under section 309 of the Regional Haze Rule]  2003-12-31	-0003

	Letter from Stephen A. Owens, ADEQ, to Wayne Nastri, EPA 	2008-12-24 -0003

	Letter dated May 25, 2011, from Arizona Governor Janice K. Brewer to Jared Blumenfeld, Designation Recommendations for the 2010 Primary Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS	2011-05-25	-0003

	Letter from Jeffrey G. Yockey to Eric Massey, ADEQ 	2007-07-03	-0003

	Revision to the Regional Haze SIP for the State of Arizona with Technical Support Document, ADEQ	2013-05-03

	B.12.	Attachments to the Regional Haze SIP revision	2013-05-03

	EPA Communications

	Email from Sue Kidd, APS, to Colleen McKaughan, EPA (October 10, 2012, 9:17 AM) and attachments, including May 23, 1962, “Operating Notes For May 1962.”	2012-10-10	-0004

	Letter from Jared Blumenfeld, EPA, to Diane Enos, President, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community (February 28, 2013)	2013-02-28	-0020

	Conference call with EPA and Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), January 31, 2013	2013-01-31	-0046

	Ten letters from Jared Blumenfeld to members of Arizona congressional delegation (February 14, 2013)	2013-02-14	-0021

C.5.	Correspondence with Tom Moore, Western Governors Association  Jan-Feb 2013	-0033

C.6.	Bryan Paris (ADEQ) emails to Kate Hoag and Greg Nudd (2 files) 2013-03-04	-0034

C.7.	Emails (3) between Ryan Templeton (ADEQ) and Kate Hoag	2013-04-03 -0036

C.8.	Kate Hoag call log	2013-05-07	-0037

C.9.	Correspondence with Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community and Phoenix Cement (7 files, C.09.a. through C.09.g.)	2013	-0038 through -0044

C.10.	Memo on ADEQ-EPA meetings	2013-05-15	-0047

C.11.	Email from Colleen McKaughan (EPA) to Jay Grady, California Portland Cement Company, and two attachments (3 files total)	2012-11-09

	C.12.	Email from Colleen McKaughan (EPA) to Verle Martz, Salt River Materials Group, and two attachments (3 files total)	2012-11-06

	C.13.	Email from Colleen McKaughan (EPA) to Erik Bakken and Jeff Yockey, Tucson Electric Power (TEP), and two attachments (3 files total) 2012-11-06

	C.14	Letter from Colleen McKaughan, EPA to Eric Massey, ADEQ	2010-12-02

	Case Law and Court Filings

	NPCA v. Jackson, Complaint (D.D.C. Case 1:11-cv-01548)	2011-08-29  -0005

	NPCA v. Jackson, Consent Decree (D.D.C. Case 1:11-cv-01548) Dkt # 21 2012-03-30	-0005

	NPCA v. Jackson, D.D.C. Memorandum Opinion and Order (D.D.C. Case 1:11-cv-01548) Dkt # 35	2012-05-25	-0005

	NPCA v. Jackson, Docket (D.D.C. Case 1:11-cv-01548) 	2012	-0005

	Center for Energy and Economic Development v. EPA, 398 F.3d 653 (D.C. Circuit 2005)

-0005

	Arizona’s PSD rule (AAC R18-2-304, formerly R9-3-304)

-0005

	Executive Orders and Statutes

	Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735) 1993-10-04	-0006

	Executive Order 13132: Federalism (64 FR 43255)	1999-08-10	-0006

	Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249)	2000-11-09	-0006

	Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885)	1997-04-23	-0006

	Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355) 2001-05-22	-0006

	Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629) 1994-02-16	-0006

	Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)	2011	-0006

	Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)	2011	-0006

	Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 501 et seq.)	2011	-0006

	National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (15 USC 3701 et seq.) 2011	-0006

	Power Plant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978

-0006

Additional Documents Considered for Proposed Rulemaking

	“Natural Haze Levels II: Application of the New IMPROVE Algorithm to Natural Species Concentrations Estimates; Final Report by the Natural Haze Levels II Committee to the RPO Monitoring/Data Analysis Workgroup”, presentation at WRAP Attribution of Haze Workgroup Meeting, July 26-27, 2006, Denver, CO	2006-07-26	-0007

	Revised IMPROVE algorithm for Estimating Light Extinction from Particle Speciation Data, IMPROVE, January 2006.

-0007

	“CALMET/CALPUFF Protocol for BART Exemption Screening Analysis for Class I Areas in the Western United States.”

-0007

	“WRAP 2002 Arizona Point Source Emissions”

-0007

	Federal Land Managers’ Air Quality Related Values Work Group (FLAG) Phase I Report—Revised (2010), U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service, October 2010. http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Pubs/pdf/flag/FLAG_2010.pdf

 (“FLAG_2010”)	2010-10	-0007

	Federal Reserve of Philadelphia, Leading Index for Arizona 1980-2015  2012	-0007

	“Summary of WRAP RMC BART Modeling for Arizona” Draft No. 5, May 7, 2005.

-0007

	TEP Sundt Unit I4 BART Eligibility Memo (November 21, 2012)   2012-11-21	-0007

	Catalyst Paper press release http://catalystpaper.com/media/news/community/catalyst-permanently-close -snowflake-recycle-paper-mill 	2012-07-30	-0007

	"Springerville FGD costs.xls"

-0007

	“Technical Support Document for Technical Products Prepared by the Western Regional Air Partnership in Support of Western Regional Haze Plans”, Final, February 2011 (WRAP TSD).	2011-02	-0007

F.12.	ERG Technical Memorandum, “WRAP PRP18b Emissions Inventory – Revised Point and Area Source Projections”	2009-10-16	-0007

F.13.	EPA Analysis of IMPROVE Monitoring Data From 2000-2010  - including data files	2012-12-06	-0007

F.14.	Arizona BART Eligibility TSD	2005-04-04	-0007

F.15.	“WRAP Point and Area Source Emissions Projection for the 2018 Base Case Inventory”, Version 1	2006-01-25	-0007

F.16.	Modeling files for Hayden smelter (7 files, not in electronic docket but available from EPA Region 9. See “F-16 NPR_ph2_modeling_files.txt” in electronic docket for list of available files.)	2013-05	-0045

F.17.	EPA Summary and Assessment of ADEQ Visibility Analysis	2013-05-09 -0048

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Technical Support Document

	Index to Docket EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0904 (for original proposal)

-0008

	Proposed Rule: Partial Approvals and Disapprovals of Air Quality Implementation Plans: Arizona; Regional Haze and Visibility Impacts of Transport, Ozone and Fine Particulates	2012-12-21	-0001

	Notice; extension of comment period	2013-02-04	-0009

	Index to Docket EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0904	2013-05-17	-0049

	Revised Index to Docket EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0904	2013-05-22

	G.6.	Revised Index (for NFRM) to Docket EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0904 (this document)	2013-07-17

	Public Comments Received on Proposed Rule and Public Hearing Transcripts

H.1	Comment from Doyle Shamley, Apache County Coordinator	2013-02-03 -0011

H.2	Comment from Arizona Public Service Co (APS), Susan Kidd	2013-02-04 -0010

H.3	Comment from Doug Von Gausig, Mayor, Town of Clarkdale	2013-01-23 -0012

H.4	Comment from Lhoist North America	2013-03-05	-0013

H.5	Comment from Phoenix Cement Company (3 files)	2013-03-06	-0022

H.6	Comment from Arizona Mining Association (2 files)	2013-03-06	-0023

H.7	Comment from National Park Service (2 files)	2013-03-06	-0024

H.8	Comment from Earthjustice On behalf of National Parks Conservation Association; Sierra Club; Physicians for Social Responsibility, Arizona Chapter; and San Juan Citizens Alliance (8 files)	2013-03-06	-0017

H.9	Comment from ASARCO (4 files)	2013-03-06	-0025

H.10	Comment from Arizona Department of Environmental Quality	2013-03-06 -0019

H.11	Comment from CalPortland (2 files)	2013-03-06	-0026

H.12	Comment from Tucson Electric Power (TEP)	2013-03-06	-0014

H.13	Comment from Freeport-McMoran (1 file in original and revised versions)	2013-03-06	-0015 (original) and -0016 (revised)

H.14	Comment from Salt River Project (SRP)	2013-03-06	-0018

H.15	Comment from A.G. “Chip” Davis, Supervisor, District 3, Yavapai County, Arizona	2013-01-28	-0027

H.16	Comment from Competitive Enterprise Institute – LATE	2013-03-07 -0028

H.17	Comment from NPCA et al (via Earthjustice)	2013-06-17

	H.18	Comments from Freeport-McMoran	2013-06-19

	H.19	Comments from AZ Dept of Env Quality	2013-06-19

	H.20	Comments from Tucson Electric Power	2013-06-19

	H.21	Comments from CalPortland	2013-06-19

	H.22	Comments from Phoenix Cement Company	2013-06-19

Additional Documents Considered for Final Rulemaking

I.1	Improving sulfuric acid plant performance	2011-06-10

	I.2	VK Series sulphuric acid catalysts

I.3	MECS Catalyst Products and Technical Services Update	2009

	I.4	Meeting_future_SO2_emissions_with_VK_701_LEAP5	2011-04

	I.5	J Acid Plant Capacity Increase_Malevu	2009

	I.6	Background Information for NSPS Subpart P	1974-10

	I.7	Review of NSPS Subpart P (two files: (1) Chapters 1-9 and (2) Appendices)	1984-03

	I.8	What is the scope of the term smelting furnace	1994-11-30

	I.9	Interpretation of the Definition of Fugitive Emissions in Part 70 71	1999-02-10

	I.10	Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final Clean Air Visibility Rule or the Guidelines for Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Determinations Under the Regional Haze Regulations, EPA-452/R-05-004 2005-06

	I.11	Asarco Hayden Title V Permit – Arizona Air Quality Permit No. 1000042	2001-10-09

	I.12	Springerville FGD costs (updated) – Revised version of docket item F-10, "Springerville FGD costs.xls"	2013-07-02

	I.13	Cholla 1 SO2 costs	2013-07-02

	I.14	Summary of Comments and Responses on the May 22, 1980 Proposed Regulations for Visibility Protection for Federal Class I Areas – 2 files	1980

	I.15	Calculating Potential to Emit (PTE) for Emergency Generators 1995-09-06

	I.16	Calculating Potential to Emit (PTE) and Other Guidance for Grain Handling Facilities	1995-11-14

	I.17	History of Arizona SIP Submittals Under the Regional Haze Rule 2013-07-13

	I.18	Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Hawaii; Regional Haze Federal Implementation Plan (Final Rule) 2012-10-09

	I.19	Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Hawaii; Regional Haze Federal Implementation Plan (Proposed Rule) 2012-05-29

	I.20	California Regional Haze Plan	2009-01-22

	I.21	ADEQ Title V Permit 53592 and Technical Review, for Miami Smelter – 2 files	2012-11-11

	I.22	Letter from John Groothuizen, Site Manager at the Catalyst Paper Snowflake plant to Eric Massey, ADEQ	2012-12-21

	I.23	ADEQ Title V Permit 53399 and Technical Review, for Cholla Power Plant – 2 files	2012-05-31

	I.24	Technical Support Document for the Proposed Action on the Federal Implementation Plan for the Regional

Haze Program in the State of Hawaii,” Air Division, U.S. EPA Region 9, sections II.A.3 and II.B.3.	2012-05-14

	Notice of Final Rulemaking and Response to Comments

 This item was inadvertently omitted from the docket and index posted on May 20, 2013. It was added on May 22, 2013.