[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 51 (Thursday, March 18, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14787-14790]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05554]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91307; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2021-011]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend the Exchange's Transaction Credits at Equity 7, Section 118(a)

March 12, 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 March 1, 2021, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's transaction credits
at Equity 7, Section 118(a), as described further below.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/nasdaq/rules, at
the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Exchange's
schedule of credits, at Equity 7, Section 118(a).
    Presently, in Equity 7, Section 118(a), the Exchange offers several
credits that are based, in part, upon members' activities in securities
priced at or more than $1 relative to total ``Consolidated Volume.''
\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Pursuant to Equity 7, Section 114(h), the term
``Consolidated Volume'' shares the meaning of that term set forth in
Equity 7, Section 118(a). Equity 7, Section 118(a) defines
``Consolidated Volume'' to mean the total consolidated volume
reported to all consolidated transaction reporting plans by all
exchanges and trade reporting facilities during a month in equity
securities, excluding executed orders with a size of less than one
round lot. For purposes of calculating Consolidated Volume and the
extent of a member's trading activity the date of the annual
reconstitution of the Russell Investments Indexes is excluded from
both total Consolidated Volume and the member's trading activity.
Unlike Section 118(a), however, Section 114(h) states that, for
purposes of calculating a member's qualifications for Tiers 1 and 2
of the QMM Program credits set forth in Equity 4, Section 114(e),
the Exchange will calculate a member's volume and total Consolidated
Volume twice. First, the Exchange will calculate a member's volume
and total Consolidated Volume inclusive of volume that consists of
executions in securities priced less than $1. Second, the Exchange
will calculate a member's volume and total Consolidated Volume
exclusive of volume that consists of executions in securities priced
less than $1, while also applying distinct qualifying volume
thresholds to each Tier. The Exchange will then assess which of
these two calculations would qualify the member for the most
advantageous credits for the month and then it will apply those
credits to the member.

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend two of the credits it offers to
members in displayed quotes or orders in securities in all three Tapes
(other than Supplemental Orders or Designated Retail Orders) that add
liquidity to the Exchange.
    First, the Exchange proposes to amend a credit it presently offers
of $0.00295 per share executed to a member that, through one or more of
its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs (i) adds shares of liquidity during the
month representing at least 0.50% of Consolidated Volume during the
month; (ii) adds at least 0.35% of Consolidated Volume during the month
in securities in Tape C; and (iii) adds at least 0.15% of Consolidated
Volume during the month in Designated Retail Orders \4\ for securities
in any Tape. The Exchange proposes to increase the threshold percentage
of Consolidated Volume necessary to qualify for this credit from 0.50%
to 0.80%. The Exchange proposes to raise this threshold to incentivize
members to increase the extent of their liquidity adding activity to
continue to qualify for the $0.00295 per share executed credit. If
members increase their liquidity adding activity on the Exchange to
continue to qualify for this credit, then the quality of the market
will improve, to the benefit of all participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Pursuant to Equity 7, Section 118, a ``Designated Retail
Order'' is an agency or riskless principal order that meets the
criteria of FINRA Rule 5320.03 and that originates from a natural
person and is submitted to Nasdaq by a member that designates it
pursuant to this section, provided that no change is made to the
terms of the order with respect to price or side of market and the
order does not originate from a trading algorithm or any other
computerized methodology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the Exchange proposes to amend a credit it presently offers
of $0.0030 per share executed to a member with shares of liquidity
provided in all securities through one or more of its Nasdaq Market
Center MPIDs that represent more than 1.00% of Consolidated Volume
during the month and shares of non-displayed liquidity provided in all
securities through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs that
represent more than 0.25% of Consolidated Volume. The Exchange proposes
to decrease the threshold percentage of Consolidated Volume necessary
to qualify for this credit from 1.00% to 0.95%. The Exchange proposes
to lower this threshold to render it easier for members to qualify for
the $0.0030 per share executed credit. The Exchange believes that more
members may seek to attain this credit to the extent that it is more
accessible to them. If more members increase their liquidity adding
activity on the Exchange to attain this credit, then the quality of the
market will improve, to the benefit of all participants.
    In addition to the above, the Exchange proposes to establish a new
credit for non-displayed orders (other than supplemental orders).
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to provide a new credit for other
non-displayed orders if a member, during the month: (i) Provides 0.30%
or more of Consolidated Volume through non-displayed orders (other than
midpoint orders); and (ii) increases providing liquidity through non-
displayed orders (including midpoint orders) by 10% or more relative to
the member's February 2021 average daily volume provided through non-
displayed orders (including midpoint orders). The amount of this credit
will be $0.00125 per share executed for securities in Tapes A and B and
$0.00075 per share executed for securities in Tape C.
    The Exchange intends for this new credit to reward members that
provide significant volumes of non-displayed liquidity on the Exchange
and to encourage such members to further grow the extent to which they
provide non-displayed liquidity to the Exchange. The Exchange believes
that any ensuing increase in non-displayed liquidity on the Exchange
will improve the quality of the Nasdaq market. In particular, the
Exchange intends to encourage members to increase the extent to which
they provide non-displayed liquidity in securities in Tapes A and B, as
the Exchange believes that an increase in such liquidity is most needed
and likely to be most beneficial to market quality.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposals are consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act,\5\ in general, and further the objectives of
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ in particular, in that they
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other
charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility,
and are not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers. The proposals are also consistent with
Section 11A of the Act relating to the establishment of the national
market system for securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposals Are Reasonable
    The Exchange's proposals are reasonable in several respects. As a
threshold matter, the Exchange is subject to significant competitive
forces in the market for equity securities transaction services that
constrain its pricing determinations in that market. The fact that this
market is competitive has long been recognized by the courts. In
NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit
stated as follows: ``[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow
is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market
system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that
act as their order-routing agents, have a wide range of choices of
where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to
take its market share percentages for granted' because `no exchange
possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of
order flow from broker dealers'. . . .'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation
NMS, while adopting a series of steps to improve the current market
model, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most
important to investors and listed companies.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005), 70
FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Numerous indicia demonstrate the competitive nature of this market.
For example, clear substitutes to the Exchange exist in the market for
equity security transaction services. The Exchange is only one of
several equity venues to which market participants may direct their
order flow. Competing equity exchanges offer similar tiered pricing
structures to that of the Exchange, including schedules of rebates and
fees that apply based upon members achieving certain volume thresholds.
    Within this environment, market participants can freely and often
do shift their order flow among the Exchange

and competing venues in response to changes in their respective pricing
schedules. Within the foregoing context, the proposals represent
reasonable attempts by the Exchange to increase its liquidity and
market share relative to its competitors.
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to modify the
qualification criteria for two of its transaction credits, at Equity 7,
Section 118(a) because they will each encourage the addition of
liquidity to the Exchange, first by making it easier for additional
members to qualify for the $0.0030 credit, and second by challenging
members that currently qualify for the $0.00295 per share executed
credit to add additional liquidity to the Exchange to continue to
qualify for it. If more members seek to qualify for a credit by adding
liquidity to the Exchange, and if members increase their extent of
their liquidity adding activity on the Exchange to continue to qualify
for a credit, then the quality of the market will improve, and the
Exchange will become more attractive to existing and prospective
participants.
    The Exchange also believes that its proposal is reasonable to
establish a new add non-displayed credit with a growth component tied
to the addition of non-displayed liquidity. The proposal will encourage
members to increase the extent to which they provide non-displayed
liquidity to the Exchange, and it will reward members that do so in
significant volumes. The Exchange believes that any ensuing increase in
non-displayed liquidity on the Exchange--and in particular, non-
displayed liquidity in securities in Tapes A and B--will improve the
quality of the Nasdaq market, and it will cause the Exchange to become
more attractive to existing and prospective participants. The Exchange
notes that it selected February 2021 as the baseline for the growth
requirements because it is the month immediately preceding the
establishment of the new tier.
    The Exchange notes that those market participants that are
dissatisfied with the proposals are free to shift their order flow to
competing venues that offer more generous pricing or less stringent
qualifying criteria.
The Proposals Are Equitable Allocations of Credits
    The Exchange believes its proposals will allocate its charges and
credits fairly among its market participants.
    The Exchange believes that is an equitable allocation to increase
the eligibility requirements for the $0.00295 per share executed
credit, and to lower the eligibility requirements for the $0.0030 per
share executed credit, because both proposals will encourage members to
add additional liquidity to the Exchange. To the extent that the
Exchange succeeds in increasing liquidity on the Exchange, then the
Exchange will experience improvements in its market quality, which
again stands to benefit all market participants.
    Additionally, the Exchange believes that it is equitable to
establish a new add credit tier that is tied to the growth of non-
displayed liquidity. The addition of this new proposed credit tier will
encourage members to increase the extent to which they add non-
displayed liquidity to the Exchange, and it will reward members that do
so in significant volumes. The Exchange believes that any increase in
non-displayed liquidity on the Exchange that follows from the
introduction of this new credit--and in particular, non-displayed
liquidity in securities in Tapes A and B--will improve the quality of
the Nasdaq market, and it will cause the Exchange to become more
attractive to existing and prospective participants.
    Any participant that is dissatisfied with the proposals is free to
shift their order flow to competing venues that provide more generous
pricing or less stringent qualifying criteria.
The Proposals Are Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that its proposals ae not unfairly
discriminatory. As an initial matter, the Exchange believes that
nothing about its volume-based tiered pricing model is inherently
unfair; instead, it is a rational pricing model that is well-
established and ubiquitous in today's economy among firms in various
industries--from co-branded credit cards to grocery stores to cellular
telephone data plans--that use it to reward the loyalty of their best
customers that provide high levels of business activity and incent
other customers to increase the extent of their business activity. It
is also a pricing model that the Exchange and its competitors have long
employed with the assent of the Commission. It is fair because it
incentivizes customer activity that increases liquidity, enhances price
discovery, and improves the overall quality of the equity markets.
    The Exchange believes that its proposals to amend the qualifying
Consolidated Volume criteria for two of its transaction credits are not
unfairly discriminatory because these credits are available to all
members. Moreover, these proposals stand to improve the overall market
quality of the Exchange, to the benefit of all market participants, by
incentivizing members to increase the extent of their liquidity adding
activity on the Exchange.
    Likewise, the Exchange believes that its new proposed add credit
with a growth component is not unfairly discriminatory because it is
aimed at encouraging the growth of non-displayed liquidity on the
Exchange, which if successful, stands to improve the quality of the
Nasdaq market, to the benefit of all market participants. The Exchange
notes that its proposal to offer higher credits to members with orders
in non-displayed securities in Tapes A and B than to those in Tape C is
fair because the Exchange observes that its market has a greater need
for, and its market quality would benefit most from, growth in non-
displayed liquidity in securities in Tapes A and B. The Exchange has
limited resources with which to apply to incentives, and it must
allocate those limited resources in a manner that prioritizes areas of
greatest need and potential effect.
    Any participant that is dissatisfied with the proposals is free to
shift their order flow to competing venues that provide more generous
pricing or less stringent qualifying criteria.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Intramarket Competition
    The Exchange does not believe that its proposal will place any
category of Exchange participant at a competitive disadvantage.
    As noted above, the proposed changes to the qualifying criteria for
two of its transaction credits are intended to have market-improving
effects, to the benefit of all members. Any member may elect to achieve
the levels of liquidity required in order to qualify for the credits or
fees.
    Likewise, the proposed addition of a rebate tied to a member's
activity in non-displayed liquidity will encourage growth in that
activity, to the benefit of overall market quality. Any member may
elect to engage in the levels of non-displayed liquidity adding
activity that are required to qualify for this new credit.
    The Exchange notes that its members are free to trade on other
venues to the extent they believe that the proposed amended
qualification criteria for these fees and credits are not attractive.
As one can observe by looking at any market share chart, price
competition

between exchanges is fierce, with liquidity and market share moving
freely between exchanges in reaction to fee and credit changes. The
Exchange notes that its pricing tier structure is consistent with
broker-dealer fee practices as well as the other industries, as
described above.
Intermarket Competition
    In terms of inter-market competition, the Exchange notes that it
operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants
can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities available at
other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange
must continually adjust its credits and fees to remain competitive with
other exchanges and with alternative trading systems that have been
exempted from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to
exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own credits and
fees in response, and because market participants may readily adjust
their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to
which credit or fee changes in this market may impose any burden on
competition is extremely limited.
    The proposed amended credits are reflective of this competition
because, even as one of the largest U.S. equities exchanges by volume,
the Exchange has less than 20% market share, which in most markets
could hardly be categorized as having enough market power to burden
competition. Moreover, as noted above, price competition between
exchanges is fierce, with liquidity and market share moving freely
between exchanges in reaction to fee and credit changes. This is in
addition to free flow of order flow to and among off-exchange venues
which comprises upwards of 50% of industry volume.
    The Exchange's proposals are pro-competitive in that the Exchange
intends for them to increase liquidity on the Exchange, thereby
rendering the Exchange a more attractive and vibrant venue to market
participants.
    In sum, if the changes proposed herein are unattractive to market
participants, it is likely that the Exchange will lose market share as
a result. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed
changes will impair the ability of members or competing order execution
venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2021-011 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2021-011. 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-NASDAQ-2021-011 and should be submitted
on or before April 8, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-05554 Filed 3-17-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 13, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 70)]
[Notices]
[Page 18826-18827]
[DOCID:fr13ap10-41]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2615-037]

FPL Energy Maine Hydro LLC, Madison Paper Industries, and Merimil
Limited Partnership; Notice of Application Tendered for Filing With the
Commission and Establishing Procedural Schedule for Licensing and
Deadline for Submission of Final Amendments

April 6, 2010.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: 2615-037.
    c. Date Filed: March 31, 2010.
    d. Applicant: FPL Energy Maine Hydro LLC, Madison Paper Industries,
and Merimil Limited Partnership.
    e. Name of Project: Brassua Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The existing project is located on the Moose River in
Somerset County, Maine. The project does not affect federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Frank H. Dunlap, FPL Energy Maine Hydro,
LLC,
    26 Katherine Drive, Hallowell, Maine 04347; Telephone (207) 629-
1817.
    i. FERC Contact: John Costello,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. This application is not ready for environmental analysis at this
time.
    k. The Project Description: The existing Brassua Project includes:
(1) A 1,789-foot-long dam consisting of: (a) An earth dike 410 feet
long with 100 feet of concrete core wall; (b) a concrete-faced earth
dike 342.5 feet long; (c) a concrete Ambursen dam 284 feet long with a
height of 52 feet above the stream bed; (d) a 18.5-foot fishway
(inactive); and (e) a 734-foot earth dike with a concrete core wall;
(2) a 9,700-acre reservoir (known as Brassua Lake) with a normal pool
elevation 1,074.0 feet (U.S.G.S. datum) and maximum drawdown of 31
feet, extending 7.75 miles upstream; (3) a reinforced-concrete intake
structure; (4) a 110-foot-long, 13-foot square penstock; (5) a 32-foot-
high, 32-foot-wide and 60-foot-long powerhouse; (6) a 4.18-MW
generating unit; (7) a 40-foot-wide, 15-foot-deep and 60-foot-long
tailrace; (8) a substation; (9) a 0.5-mile-long, 34.5-kV (kilovolt)
transmission line; and (10) appurtenant facilities. The earth sections
of the dam are topped with

33.5-inch-high wave barriers (Jersey barriers).
    The Brassua Project is operated as a seasonal storage facility
where water releases are determined by downstream demands for
hydroelectric generation in the Kennebec River and for flood control.
Reservoir fluctuations follow an annual cycle under which reservoir
levels are reduced during the fall and winter to provide additional
flows downstream as well as to make storage volume available for spring
snow melt and runoff. After the spring refill, flow is released for the
Brassua reservoir to provide summer minimum instream flows as well as
water for industrial and municipal uses. Specific project operation
requirements are discussed below.
    The current license allows the licensees to operate the Brassua
Project in peaking mode from July 1st through August 31st and from
November 6th through the start of spring freshnet (normally mid-May) of
each year. The licensees are required to cease peaking operation and
resume normal operation in which flows through the project are
maintained constant on a daily basis from spring freshet through June
30th and from September 1st through November 5th of each year.
    The current license requires the licensees to release the following
minimum flows and maintain the following target water levels to protect
fish and aquatic habitat and to benefit the reproductive efforts of the
landlocked salmon population in the Moose River. All Minimum flow
releases are maintained through the turbine or deep gates and
discharged in the lower Moose River below the dam.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or
may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    n. Procedural Schedule:
    The application will be processed according to the following Hydro
Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule may be made as
appropriate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Milestone                           Target Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of Acceptance/Notice of      May 30, 2010.
 Ready for Environmental Analysis
 (when FERC approved studies are
 complete).
Filing of recommendations,          July 29, 2010.
 preliminary terms and conditions,
 and fishway prescriptions.
Commission issues EA..............  January 10, 2011.
Comments on EA....................   February 9, 2011.
Modified terms and conditions.....   April 10, 2011.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    o. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-8354 Filed 4-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US

03/10/2008 10:37 AM

To

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> cc

"Lee, Amanda I."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Margaret Morrison/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Neal Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: Lydia

No problem.  We're here and will wait to hear from you.

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 03/10/2008 10:33 AM

To

Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

"Lee, Amanda I."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Margaret Morrison/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Neal Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: Lydia

Lydia, my apologies at cancelling our 10am, another conversation has

demanded my attention.

I'll call Margaret as soon as I am available to resume our conversation,

and thank you for your patience,

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 9:26 AM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc: Lee, Amanda I<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: Re: Lydia

Yes, we can meet this AM as soon as we're done with the 10 AM call on

the rule, though I need to check with Neal on his availability.

             "King, Heidi R."

             <Heidi_R._King@o

             mb.eop.gov>                                             To

                                      Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,

             03/10/2008 09:23         Neal Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,

             AM                       Margaret

                                      Morrison/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

                                                                     cc

                                      "Lee, Amanda I."

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

                                                                Subject

                                      Lydia

Good morning Lydia,

We continue to prioritize our review the Ozone NAAQS materials.  We

would like to have a conversation asap on the Benefits; would it be

possible to meet today, given the timeline?

In an effort to identify issues we'd like to cover while hopefully not

restricting further conversation, we've assembled the following list:

- Conversion to max 8 hour average for mortality studies

- PM scaling factor

- Visibility calculations

- 2006 dollars vs 2000 dollars

- UV write up

- Section 7.5.1

Thank you, as Margo and I mentioned last week, our calendars are for the

most part available to this project and we're happy to be as flexible as

possible.

heidi

(202) 395-4551


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 93 (Friday, May 13, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29246-29248]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10172]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0307]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Lake Erie, Cleveland, OH

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a temporary safety
zone for certain waters of Lake Erie. This action is necessary to
provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters near
Cleveland, OH, during the Tri CLE Rock and Roll Run, held on August 20,
2022. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from
being in the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port
Buffalo or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this
proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before June 13, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2022-0307 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email LT Jared Stevens, Waterways
Management Division, MSU Cleveland, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 216-
937-0124, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On January 5, 2022, the Phastar Corporation notified the Coast
Guard that it will be holding a triathlon on August 20, 2022. The
triathlon is to take place in the North Coast Harbor into the East
Basin Channel Cleveland, OH. The Captain of the Port Buffalo (COTP) has
determined that a safety zone that will cover all navigable waters and
tributaries of Lake Erie within the North Coast Harbor into the East
Basin Channel in Cleveland, OH, is needed to protect participants
during the swimming portion of the triathlon.
    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of
participants and the navigable waters within the course of the swimming
portion of the triathlon before, during, and after the scheduled marine
event. The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in
46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP is proposing to establish a safety zone from 7 a.m. to 10
a.m. on August 20, 2022. The safety zone would cover all navigable
waters and tributaries of Lake Erie within the North Coast Harbor and
immediately adjacent waters in Cleveland, OH. The boundaries of the
safety zone are centered on 41[deg]30'17.99'' N Longitude
81[deg]41'28.19'' W Latitude. The duration of the zone is intended to
ensure the safety of participants in these navigable waters before,
during, and after the swim portion of the Tri CLE Rock Roll Run
triathalon. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety
zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end
of this document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
has not been reviewed by the

Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on size, location,
and duration of the proposed rule. This safety zone would restrict
navigation through the swimming area for three hours on one day.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule
would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment
(see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to
what degree this rulemaking would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the proposed rule
would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves the
establishment of a safety zone lasting 3 hours that would prohibit
entry in, out or through North Coast Harbor on August 20, 2022.
Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review
under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual
023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket.
For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To do
so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2022-0307 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment
option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate
instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only
post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that
we receive.
    Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we

post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions
to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is
proposing to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0307 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0307   Safety Zone; North Coast Harbor, Lake Erie,
Cleveland, OH.

    (a) Location. All navigable waters of North Coast Harbor into the
East Basin Channel.
    (b) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 7 a.m.
through 10 a.m. on August 20, 2022.
    (c) Definitions. ``Official Patrol Vessel'' means a Coast Guard
Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or
other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and
local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Sector
Buffalo (COTP) in the enforcement of the regulations in this section.
``Participant'' means all persons and vessels attending the event.
    (d) Regulations. (1) The Coast Guard may patrol the event area
under the direction of a designated Coast Guard Patrol Commander. The
Patrol Commander may be contacted on Channel 16 VHF-FM (156.8 MHz) by
the call sign ``PATCOM.''
    (2) All persons and vessels not registered with the sponsor as
participants or official patrol vessels are considered spectators. The
``official patrol vessels'' consist of any Coast Guard, state or local
law enforcement and sponsor provided vessels designated or assigned by
the Captain of the Port Sector Buffalo, to patrol the event.
    (3) Spectator vessels desiring to transit the regulated area may do
so only with prior approval of the Patrol Commander and when so
directed by that officer and will be operated at a no wake speed in a
manner which will not endanger participants in the event or any other
craft.
    (4) No spectator shall anchor, block, loiter, or impede the through
transit of official patrol vessels in the area specified in paragraph
(a) of this section during the effective dates and times specified in
paragraph (b) of this section, unless cleared for entry by or through
an official patrol vessel.
    (5) The Patrol Commander may forbid and control the movement of all
vessels in the regulated area specified in paragraph (a) of this
section. When hailed or signaled by an official patrol vessel, a vessel
shall come to an immediate stop and comply with the directions given.
Failure to do so may result in expulsion from the area, citation for
failure to comply, or both.
    (6) Any spectator vessel may anchor outside the regulated areas
specified in this section, but may not anchor in, block, or loiter in a
navigable channel.
    (7) The Patrol Commander may terminate the event or the operation
of any vessel at any time it is deemed necessary for the protection of
life or property.
    (8) The Patrol Commander will terminate enforcement of the special
regulations at the conclusion of the event.

    Dated: May 2, 2022.
L.M. Littlejohn,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2022-10172 Filed 5-12-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41314-41315]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17517]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy,
Washington, DC 20549-0213.

Extension:
Rule 10b-17; SEC File No. 270-427; OMB Control No. 3235-0476.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval for Rule 10b-17 (17 CFR 240.10b-17)--
Untimely Announcements of Record Dates.
    Rule 10b-17 requires any issuer of a class of securities publicly
traded by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate
commerce or of the mails or of any facility of any national securities
exchange to give notice of the following specific distributions
relating to such class of securities: (1) A dividend or other
distribution in cash or in kind other than interest payments on debt
securities; (2) a stock split or reverse stock split; or (3) a rights
or other subscription offering.
    There are approximately 10,137 respondents per year. These
respondents make approximately 22,093 responses per year. Each response
takes approximately 10 minutes to complete. Thus, the total compliance
burden per year is 3,682 burden hours. The total internal labor cost
for the respondents, associated with producing and filing the reports,
is approximately $238,188.58.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a
collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a
valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: Thomas Bayer, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-

Simon, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312 or send an e-
mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: July 7, 2011.
Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-17517 Filed 7-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 230 (Friday, December 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68659-68661]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26279]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP22-17-000]

Rio Grande LNG, LLC; Notice of Application for Limited Amendment
and Establishing Intervention Deadline

    Take notice that on November 17, 2021, Rio Grande LNG, LLC (RGLNG),
1000 Louisiana Street, 39th Floor, Houston, TX 77002, filed an
application under section 3(a) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) requesting
to amend its November 22, 2019 Authorization Order \1\ to incorporate
carbon capture and sequestration systems into the approved site and
design of the RGLNG Terminal.\2\ RGLNG states that

construction and operation of the carbon capture and sequestration
systems will enable it to capture and sequester at least 90% of the
carbon dioxide (CO2) produced at the RGLNG Terminal. Once captured,
RGLNG would transport the CO2, via pipeline, to an underground geologic
formation permitted by the Environmental Protection Agency and relevant
Texas State agencies under its underground injection control Class VI
permitting program for geologic sequestration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Rio Grande LNG, LLC, 169 FERC ] 61,131 (2019), order on
reh'g, 170 FERC ] 61,046 (2020).
    \2\ The RGLNG terminal site (approximately 1,000 acres) is
located on the north embankment of the Brownsville Ship Channel in
Cameron County, Texas and, once constructed, will consist primarily
of five natural gas liquefaction trains, four full-containment LNG
storage tanks, two LNG carrier loading berths, one 1,500-foot-
diameter turning basin, LNG truck loading and unloading facilities,
two Natural Gas Liquids (NGL) truck loading bays, and other support
structures such as administrative buildings, a central control
building, and communication systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding the proposed project should be directed to
Ivan Van der Walt, Chief Operating Officer, Rio Grande LNG, LLC, 1000
Louisiana Street, 39th Floor, Houston, TX 77002,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
decade.com">[email protected]decade.com; or
    David L. Wochner, K&L Gates LLP, 1601 K Street, NW, Washington, DC,
20006,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].
    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure,\3\ within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will
either: Complete its environmental review and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or environmental
assessment (EA) for this proposal. The filing of an EA in the
Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify
federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all
necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal
authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission
staff's FEIS or EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 18 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 157.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project: You can file comments on the project, and you can file a
motion to intervene in the proceeding. There is no fee or cost for
filing comments or intervening. The deadline for filing a motion to
intervene is 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 20, 2021.

Comments

    Any person wishing to comment on the project may do so. Comments
may include statements of support or objections to the project as a
whole or specific aspects of the project. The more specific your
comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your comments
are timely and properly recorded, please submit your comments on or
before December 20, 2021.
    There are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the
Commission. In all instances, please reference the Project docket
number CP22-17-000 in your submission.
    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's website at www.ferc.gov
under the link to Documents and Filings. Using eComment is an easy
method for interested persons to submit brief, text-only comments on a
project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide
comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you
are making; first select ``General'' and then select ``Comment on a
Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address below . Your written comments must reference the
Project docket number (CP22-17-000).
    To mail via USPS, use the following address:

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    To mail via any other courier, use the following address:

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments (options 1
and 2 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected]
    Persons who comment on the environmental review of this project
will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, and will
receive notification when the environmental documents (EA or EIS) are
issued for this project and will be notified of meetings associated
with the Commission's environmental review process.
    The Commission considers all comments received about the project in
determining the appropriate action to be taken. However, the filing of
a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the
proceeding. To become a party, you must intervene in the proceeding.
For instructions on how to intervene, see below.

Interventions

    Any person, which includes individuals, organizations, businesses,
municipalities, and other entities,\4\ has the option to file a motion
to intervene in this proceeding. Only intervenors have the right to
request rehearing of Commission orders issued in this proceeding and to
subsequently challenge the Commission's orders in the U.S. Circuit
Courts of Appeal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 18 CFR 385.102(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To intervene, you must submit a motion to intervene to the
Commission in accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure \5\ and the regulations under the NGA \6\ by the
intervention deadline for the project, which is December 20, 2021. As
described further in Rule 214, your motion to intervene must state, to
the extent known, your position regarding the proceeding, as well as
the your interest in the proceeding. [For an individual, this could
include your status as a landowner, ratepayer, resident of an impacted
community, or recreationist. You do not need to have

property directly impacted by the project in order to intervene.] For
more information about motions to intervene, refer to the FERC website
at https://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 18 CFR 385.214.
    \6\ 18 CFR 157.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are two ways to submit your motion to intervene. In both
instances, please reference the Project docket number CP22-17-000 in
your submission.
    (1) You may file your motion to intervene by using the Commission's
eFiling feature, which is located on the Commission's website
(www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. New eFiling
users must first create an account by clicking on ``eRegister.'' You
will be asked to select the type of filing you are making; first select
``General'' and then select ``Intervention.'' The eFiling feature
includes a document-less intervention option; for more information,
visit https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/document-less-intervention.pdf.; or
    (2) You can file a paper copy of your motion to intervene, along
with three copies, by mailing the documents to the address below. Your
motion to intervene must reference the Project docket number CP22-17-
000.
    To mail via USPS, use the following address:

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    To mail via any other courier, use the following address:

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    The Commission encourages electronic filing of motions to intervene
(option 1 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected]
    Motions to intervene must be served on the applicant either by mail
or email at: 1000 Louisiana Street, 39th Floor, Houston, TX 77002 or at
decade.com">[email protected]decade.com. Any subsequent submissions by an
intervenor must be served on the applicant and all other parties to the
proceeding. Contact information for parties can be downloaded from the
service list at the eService link on FERC Online. Service can be via
email with a link to the document.
    All timely, unopposed \7\ motions to intervene are automatically
granted by operation of Rule 214(c)(1).\8\ Motions to intervene that
are filed after the intervention deadline are untimely and may be
denied. Any late-filed motion to intervene must show good cause for
being late and must explain why the time limitation should be waived
and provide justification by reference to factors set forth in Rule
214(d) of the Commission's Rules and Regulations.\9\ A person obtaining
party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the
Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies (paper or
electronic) of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other
parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The applicant has 15 days from the submittal of a motion to
intervene to file a written objection to the intervention.
    \8\ 18 CFR 385.214(c)(1).
    \9\ 18 CFR 385.214(b)(3) and (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tracking the Proceeding

    Throughout the proceeding, additional information about the project
will be available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at
(866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website at www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link as described above. The eLibrary link also provides
access to the texts of all formal documents issued by the Commission,
such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. For more information and to register, go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Intervention Deadline: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 20, 2021.

    Dated: November 29, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-26279 Filed 12-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 21, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 204)]
[Notices]
[Page 62576]
[DOCID:fr21oc08-114]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release Nos. 33-8977; 34-58788; IC-28438; IA-2798]

Resubmission of Comment Letters

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Resubmission of comments.

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

SUMMARY: A small number of public comments submitted by commenters in
connection with certain proposed Commission rules, proposed rule
changes by self-regulatory organizations, and other matters were not
received by the Commission through the Federal eRulemaking Portal and
through the Commission's Web site due to software issues. A list of
those matters and the number of comment letters not received is
attached as Appendix A. The Commission is providing an opportunity for
commenters whose comments were not received to resubmit their comments
with respect to the matters identified in Appendix A.

DATES: Resubmit comments on or before October 29, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet submission form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml);
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
the file number for the specific matter being commented upon on the
subject line; or
     Use the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://
www.regulations.gov). Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Paper Comments

     Send paper statements in triplicate to Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to the file number for the specific matter
being commented upon. This file number should be included on the
subject line if e-mail is used. To help us process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission
will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml). Comments also are available for
public inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference
Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business
days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. All comments received will
be posted without change; we do not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Florence E. Harmon, Acting Secretary,
at<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of the Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A small number of public comments submitted
by commenters in connection with the matters identified in Appendix A
were not received by the Commission through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal and through the Commission's Web site due to software issues.
The Commission has been informed by the agency responsible for the
Federal eRulemaking Portal and the staff responsible for maintaining
the Commission's Web site that these issues have been resolved. The
Commission is providing an opportunity for commenters to resubmit those
comments.\1\ Because the identities of the commenters whose submissions
were affected by these software issues are not retrievable, the
Commission requests that if you commented on any of the matters listed
in Appendix A you review the Commission's Web site posting for the
particular matter to determine whether your comment letter has been
posted. If it has not been posted and you wish to resubmit your comment
letter, you may do so via any of the methods described above. If your
comment letter has been posted, there is no need to resubmit it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Commission recently reopened the comment period for one
of the matters listed in Appendix A, Indexed Annuities and Certain
Other Insurance Contracts, Securities Act Release No. 8933 (June 25,
2008) (73 FR 37752 (July 1, 2008)). Any commenters whose comments on
this matter were not received can resubmit comments until the end of
the reopened comment period. See Indexed Annuities and Certain Other
Insurance Contracts, Securities Act Release No. 8976 (Oct. 10,
2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission will consider all comment letters that are
resubmitted. Although the Commission has taken action on some of these
matters, the Commission will evaluate whether further action is
necessary or appropriate in response to comments received.

    Dated: October 15, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.

APPENDIX A

List of Matters and Number of Comment Letters Not Received

     References to Ratings of Nationally Recognized Statistical
Rating Organizations (File No. S7-19-08) [3 comments].
     Security Ratings (File No. S7-18-08) [2 comments].
     References to Ratings of Nationally Recognized Statistical
Rating Organizations (File No. S7-17-08) [2 comments].
     Exemption of Certain Foreign Brokers or Dealers (File No.
S7-16-08) [3 comments].
     Modernization of the Oil and Gas Reporting Requirements
(File No. S7-15-08) [6 comments].
     Indexed Annuities and Certain Other Insurance Contracts
(File No. S7-14-08) [37 comments].
     Interactive Data to Improve Financial Reporting (File No.
S7-11-08) [1 comment].
     Amendment to Regulation SHO (File No. S7-19-07) [18
comments].
     Naked Short-Selling Anti-Fraud Rule (File No. S7-08-08) [4
comments].
     Revisions to the Cross-Border Tender Offer, Exchange
Offer, and Business Combination Rules and Beneficial Ownership
Reporting Rules for Certain Foreign Institutions (File No. S7-10-08) [1
comment].
     Commission Guidance Regarding the Duties and
Responsibilities of Investment Company Board of Directors with respect
to Investment Adviser Portfolio Trading Practices (File No. S7-22-08)
[1 comment].
     Roundtable on Fair Value Accounting Standards (File No. 4-
560) [1 comment].
     Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Amending its Schedule of Fees and Charges for Exchange
Services in order to Revise Certain Transaction Fees (File No. SR-
NYSEARCA-2008-75) [1 comment].
     Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change of Amended
Proposed Rule Change Amending FAST and DRS Limited Participant
Requirements for Transfer Agents (File No. SR-DTC-2006-16) [1 comment].

[FR Doc. E8-24975 Filed 10-20-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 132 (Thursday, July 10, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39362-39363]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16018]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0080]

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Rear Impact Guards, Rear
Impact Protection

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Grant of petition for rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: By initiating rulemaking to consider enhancing related safety
standards, this notice grants the part of the petition for rulemaking
submitted by Ms. Marianne Karth and the Truck Safety Coalition
(Petitioners) requesting that the agency improve the safety of rear
impact (underride) guards on trailers and single unit trucks. Based on
the petition, available information, and the agency's analysis in
progress, NHTSA has decided that the Petitioners' request related to
rear impact guards merits further consideration. Therefore, the agency
grants the Petitioners' request to initiate rulemaking on rear impact
guards. NHTSA is planning on issuing two separate notices--an advanced
notice of proposed rulemaking pertaining to rear impact guards and
other safety strategies for single unit trucks, and a notice of
proposed rulemaking focusing on rear impact guards on trailers and
semitrailers. NHTSA is still evaluating the Petitioners' request to
improve side guards and front override guards and will issue a separate
decision on those aspects of the petition at a later date.

DATES: The Petitioners' request to initiate rulemaking on rear impact
guards on trailers and single unit trucks is granted on July 10, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For non-legal issues: Mr. Robert Mazurowski, Office of
Crashworthiness Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 (202-
366-1012). Mr. Mazurowski's fax number is:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For legal issues: Mr. Ryan Hagen, Office of the Chief Counsel,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., Washington, DC 20590<PHONE_NUMBER>). Mr. Hagen's fax number is:
(202) 366-3820.

Background and Summary of Petition

    On September 12, 2013, Ms. Karth and members of the Truck Safety
Coalition (Petitioners) met with the Secretary of Transportation to
discuss their petition for rulemaking on truck safety issues. The
Petitioners requested a standard requiring improved underride guards be
issued, and that the Department of Transportation begin studies and
rulemakings for side guards and front override guards.
    In additional correspondence from the Petitioners to the Department
of Transportation following the meeting, the Petitioners stated that if
the Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) for rear underride
guards were amended to be equivalent to Canadian motor vehicle safety
standards, injuries and fatalities could be avoided. Moreover, the
Petitioners stated that all trucks and trailers should be required to
be equipped with energy absorbing rear impact guards mounted 16 inches
from the ground with vertical supports mounted 18 inches from the side
edges.
    On May 5, 2014, the Petitioners presented the Secretary of
Transportation with more than 11,000 identical petitions from members
of the public, again requesting the initiation of a rulemaking on rear
impact guards. In particular, the Petitioners requested that the
Department adopt a requirement for improved rear impact guards and that
the Department begin the process of improving side guards and front
override guards.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In their petition, the Petitioners also requested that the
Department raise the minimum insurance liability limits that truck
drivers are required to carry and take certain actions to improve
enforcement of hours of service limits and reduce truck driver
fatigue, both of which are actions under the jurisdiction of the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), not NHTSA.
Consequently, these two requests are not addressed in this notice,
which is not intended to either grant or deny the petitioners
request on these two actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Documents exchanged between the Petitioners and NHTSA in regard to
this petition can be found at http://www.regulations.gov by entering
docket number NHTSA-2014-0063.

 Agency Analysis and Decision

    The aspects of the petition that fall within NHTSA's authority
relate to U.S. rear impact guards, side guards, and front override
guards.\2\ NHTSA is

granting the Petitioners' request with respect to rear impact guards
and will initiate rulemakings on this issue. NHTSA is still evaluating
the Petitioners' request to improve side guards and front override
guards and will issue a separate decision on those aspects of the
petitions at a later date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ We note that the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and
the National Transportation Safety Board requested some of the same
amendments to rear impact guards as the Petitioners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The standards for rear impact protection that NHTSA will consider
in its rulemaking are FMVSS No. 223, Rear Impact Guards, and FMVSS No.
224, Rear Impact Protection.\3\ FMVSS No. 223 specifies equipment
requirements for rear impact guards for trailers and semitrailers.
FMVSS No. 224 specifies requirements for the installation of rear
impact guards for trailers and semitrailers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 49 CFR 571.223; 571.224.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The major difference between the Canadian motor vehicle safety
standard for rear impact protection (No. 223) on trailers and the
relevant FMVSSs is that Canadian underride guards are required to meet
higher strength and energy absorption requirements than U.S. underride
guards.
    As part of its analysis of the petition, NHTSA reviewed recent
research it conducted on rear impact protection and rear underride
occurrences. Specifically, NHTSA considered a 2013 University of
Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI) report, a 2012 UMTRI
report, a 2011 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety report on rear
impact protection, and a 2002 Transport Canada report. The data and
analysis in these reports indicate that amending the FMVSSs pertaining
to rear impact protection could potentially improve the safety of light
duty vehicles underriding trailers in rear end crashes.
    As part of its rulemaking effort, NHTSA will take into account
currently available data and seek additional information from the
public, including Canadian officials. The agency plans to pursue
rulemaking through two separate notices on distinct applications of
rear impact protection. The first notice would be an advanced notice of
proposed rulemaking pertaining to rear impact guards for single unit
trucks and other safety strategies not currently applicable to single
unit trucks. The second notice would be a notice of proposed rulemaking
focusing on rear impact guards for trailers and semitrailers.
    The agency notes that its granting of the petition submitted by Ms.
Karth and the Truck Safety Coalition does not prejudge the outcome of
the rulemaking or necessarily mean that a final rule will be issued.
The determination of whether to issue a rule will be made after study
of the requested action and the various alternatives in the course of
the rulemaking proceeding, in accordance with statutory criteria.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30162, 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95, 49 CFR Part 552.

David M. Hines,
Acting Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2014-16018 Filed 7-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P