October 9 - 12, 2007 FIFRA scientific advisory panel

The potential for atrazine to affect amphibian gonadal development

Charge to the Panel

  TC \l2 "Charge to the Panel

	The Agency has reviewed relevant studies in the scientific literature
published since 2003, as well as studies submitted by the registrant in
response to a DCI, to evaluate the potential for atrazine alone to
elicit effects on amphibian gonadal development and differentiation.
The strengths and limitations of the individual studies were assessed,
and the extent of concordance for the entire body of information derived
from these laboratory and field studies was considered to assess the
plausibility that atrazine can cause developmental effects in amphibian
gonads, and if so, the nature and strength of associated dose-response
relationships.  This analysis, while primarily focused on gonadal
development and differentiation, included data on other developmental
effects, including: time to metamorphosis, growth, sex ratios, and
gonadal abnormalities.

	The Agency is seeking comments and recommendations from the SAP on a
number of questions surrounding the current body of evidence regarding
the potential effects of atrazine on gonadal development in amphibians
and the relevancy of these potential effects to an ecological risk
assessment of atrazine.  The Agency is also seeking input from the SAP
on its conclusion that, based on the results of the most recent studies
in response to the DCI, atrazine exposure does not affect amphibian
gonadal development and that no further testing is required to address
this hypothesis.

Questions  TC \l3 "Questions

	In reviewing the available laboratory and field studies, the Agency
used a number of criteria to evaluate individual investigations.
Criteria such as experimental design, test protocols, and quality
assurance information were used to evaluate the reliability of a
study’s ability to adequately assess a hypothesis that atrazine
elicits developmental effects in amphibians, and if so, the nature and
strength of associated dose-response relationships.

(a)  	Please provide comments and recommendations regarding the EPA’s
approach and criteria used to evaluate the studies.

	(b) 	Given the evaluation criteria employed by the Agency, please
comment on EPA’s overall application of these criteria to the
currently available studies.

Questions Concerning the Open Literature Studies

2)	The Agency has concluded that the information contained in the open
literature published since the 2003 SAP does not provide any additional
information that could be used to refute or confirm the hypothesis that
exposure to atrazine alone causes adverse developmental effects in
amphibian gonads.

(a)  	Please comment on the comprehensiveness of the Agency’s
literature reviews relative to the potential effects of atrazine alone
on amphibian gonadal development.

(b) 	Please comment on the Agency’s evaluation of the open literature
studies and the Agency’s conclusion that the data derived from
laboratory studies, both individually and collectively, are not
sufficient to refute or confirm the hypothesis that atrazine exposure
causes developmental effects in amphibian gonads.

(c) 	The Agency concluded that the field studies are not adequate for
assessing the hypothesis at hand.  Please comment on the Agency’s
conclusion.  If the SAP concludes one or more of the field studies do
provide the means to assess the hypothesis that atrazine exposure
results in effects on amphibian gonadal development, please suggest
interpretive and statistical methods that should be employed to evaluate
the data.

Questions Concerning the DCI Study

3)	Please comment on the Agency’s evaluation of the final study
design. For example, the Agency concluded that the minor changes in the
experimental design [i.e., omitting atrazine degradate (DACT, DEA and
DIA) analysis and not conducting differential cell counts for ovarian
and testicular histology] did not compromise the means to assess the
hypothesis that atrazine exposure can affect amphibian gonadal
development.  If the SAP concludes that the alterations in the study
design preclude or significantly compromise the ability to assess the
hypothesis, please discuss to the extent possible, how the specific
design modifications could impact the means to assess the hypothesis.
Please provide comments on other aspects of the Agency’s evaluation as
well.

4)	The Agency has described the exposure profiles for studies conducted
in response to the DCI and has stated that mean-measured concentrations
in the studies were lower than target nominal concentrations.  However,
the Agency concluded that the frequent analytical measurements provide a
sufficiently comprehensive understanding of the exposure profile over
the course of the studies.  Please comment on the Agency’s conclusion
that the atrazine exposure concentration profile is reasonably
characterized and sufficient for documenting the potential effects of
atrazine over a broad range of exposure concentrations.  In addition,
provide comments on whether the actual concentrations were consistent
and sufficiently stable to establish the means to analyze exposure
concentration-response relationships.

5)  	The Agency described atrazine contamination of negative controls in
one out of the two studies and concluded that since the experimental
design had twice the number of controls relative to other treatments,
the data from these atrazine-contaminated controls could be removed from
the analyses without invalidating the statistical interpretation of the
results.

	(a)	Please comment on the Agency’s decision to omit half of the
controls from the WLI study in the statistical analyses and on the
conclusion that the study is still scientific valid.  If the SAP has an
alternative approach to treating these control data in the statistical
analyses, please provide specific recommendations.

6)	The original White Paper (USEPA 2003) identified measurement
endpoints that included the possible enumeration of specific
histological structures such as the number of oogonia in ovaries and the
number of spermatids in testes.  Such a detailed analysis was not
conducted in the studies that are in response to the DCI.  Rather, a
qualitative assessment of the incidence of ovarian and testicular
gonadocytes was conducted. The Agency has concluded that the lack of
these data does not limit the means to assess the hypothesis that
atrazine exposure affects amphibian gonadal development.

	(a)	Please comment on the whether the lack of these histological data
limits the utility of the available information to fail to support the
hypothesis that atrazine exposure affects amphibian gonadal development.

	(b) 	If the SAP concludes these data are necessary to adequately assess
the hypothesis, please provide options to processing and analyzing these
data in an efficient and robust manner.

7)	The Agency has described a number of measurement endpoints (e.g.,
translucent gonads, unpigmented ovaries, pigmented testes) based on
histology results that were reported in the studies. The Agency,
however, based on its understanding of relevant scientific literature,
could not conclude that these measurement endpoints are biologically
relevant indicators of effects on growth or reproductive success (i.e.,
the Agency did not interpret these responses as adverse effects per se)
nor was the Agency aware of any information that established these
responses as precursors to the apical endpoints of primary interest
(i..e., time to and size at metamorphosis, sex ratio, and the presence
of mixed and/or intersex animals).

	(a)	Please comment on the biological relevancy of these endpoints and
the extent to which they may reflect reliable measures of developmental
abnormalities.

8)	The Agency’s analysis of potential developmental effects in studies
responsive to the DCI has focused on histological data as opposed to
gross morphological data.  The histological data from these studies are
based on the analyses of a single certified pathologist.  While this
approach eliminates the potential variability associated with having
multiple pathologists analyze the histological slides, it may introduce
an avidity bias.

	(a)	Please comment on whether a single pathologist is sufficient for
interpreting the histology data.  If the SAP believes that a single
pathologist is not sufficient, please comment on the potential value of
convening a pathology review board to evaluate the findings of the DCI
study.

	(b)	Please also comment on the potential value of having a pathology
review board evaluate materials (e.g., digital images of gross
morphology and microscope slides containing histological sections) from
studies published in the open literature.  These data could be submitted
voluntarily by the authors and could include slides to evaluate
similarities or differences in identifying or describing histological
features and/or describing and quantifying histological responses.

9)	After an evaluation of the laboratory-based studies submitted in
response to the DCI, the Agency has concluded that these studies do not
provide sufficient evidence to support the hypothesis that atrazine
causes adverse gonadal developmental effects in amphibians.

	(a)	In light of the responses to Questions 3 – 8, please comment on
whether the results from the study in response to the DCI are
sufficiently robust to address the hypothesis that atrazine exposure
causes gonadal abnormalities in X. laevis.   If the SAP concludes these
results are not sufficiently robust, what recommendations can the SAP
provide to efficiently and reasonably address remaining uncertainties?
For example, if the SAP does not believe the DCI study is sufficiently
robust to assess the hypothesis, does the SAP believe either the two
experiments or a specific component of the two experiments should be
reanalyzed or repeated?  Please provide the rationale for recommending
any additional analyses and/or experiments.

	(b)	Please comment and provide recommendations on alternate statistical
analyses, if any, to evaluate the data derived from the study.  If
alternative approaches are suggested, please comment, to the extent
possible, on the rationale for these approaches and how they represent
improvements in the existing statistical interpretations.

Concluding Questions

ntrations up to 100 μg/L does not cause adverse effects on amphibian
gonadal development.

11)   	The Agency is not aware of data that establish a mechanistic
basis for how atrazine could affect amphibian gonadal development.
Please identify and comment on any studies that demonstrate the
mechanistic steps by which amphibian gonadal development could be
affected by atrazine, and thereby contradict the Agency’s overall
conclusions based on the studies evaluated for this SAP review.  If the
SAP is aware of any relevant study(ies), please comment on the data from
this study(ies) and how the data indicate and quantify a mechanistic
pathway from atrazine’s molecular site of action to histological and
apical endpoints associated with adverse effects on amphibian gonadal
development.  Please also comment on any dose-response relationships
associated with the steps in the reported toxicity pathway.

12)	In its 2003 White Paper the Agency proposed a research approach
using focused, empirical laboratory studies based on initial
investigations with X. laevis, potentially followed by selective,
confirmatory laboratory studies with frog species native to North
America.  However, the 2003 SAP did not identify any important
differences between amphibian species to conclude that any affected
developmental and/or mechanistic processes observed in X. laevis would
not be applicable to indigenous ranid species.

	(a)  	Please comment on the Agency’s recommendation that data derived
from X. laevis in the studies evaluated for this review are sufficient
to conclude that additional testing with indigenous species is not
warranted.

Based on the available data provided by the DCI studies, the Agency has
concluded that atrazine does not adversely affect amphibian gonadal
development.  The Agency has further concluded that no additional
studies are required to address the hypothesis that atrazine adversely
affects amphibian gonadal development.

Please comment on the Agency’s recommendation that the current body of
data is sufficient to refute the hypothesis that atrazine by itself can
adversely affect amphibian gonadal development and that no additional
data are required to address this hypothesis.


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 211 (Wednesday, November 2, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66195-66197]
[FR Doc No: 2022-23787]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2021-D-0669]

S1B(R1) Addendum to S1B Testing for Carcinogenicity of
Pharmaceuticals; International Council for Harmonisation; Guidance for
Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a final guidance for industry entitled ``S1B(R1)
Addendum to S1B Testing for Carcinogenicity of Pharmaceuticals.'' The
guidance was prepared under the auspices of the International Council
for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for
Human Use (ICH), formerly the International Conference on
Harmonisation. The final guidance expands the testing scheme for
assessing human carcinogenic risk of pharmaceuticals by introducing an
additional approach that is not described in the original S1B
Guideline. The final guidance is intended to offer an integrative
approach that provides specific weight of evidence criteria that inform
whether a 2-year rat study is

likely to add value in completing a human carcinogenicity risk
assessment. The Addendum also adds a plasma exposure ratio-based
approach for setting the high dose in the rasH2-Tg mouse model, while
all other aspects of the recommendations for high-dose selection in ICH
guidance for industry ``S1C(R2) Dose Selection for Carcinogenicity
Studies of Pharmaceuticals'' still apply.

DATES: The announcement of the guidance is published in the Federal
Register on November 2, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit either electronic or written comments on
Agency guidances at any time as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2021-D-0669 for ``S1B(R1) Addendum to S1B Testing for
Carcinogenicity of Pharmaceuticals.'' Received comments will be placed
in the docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential
Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at
the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of this guidance to the
Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research,
Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale
Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002; or the Office of
Communication, Outreach and Development, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send
one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing
your requests. The guidance may also be obtained by mail by calling
CBER at 1-800-835-4709 or<PHONE_NUMBER>. See the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for electronic access to the guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Regarding the guidance: Timothy McGovern, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 6426, Silver Spring, MD 6426, 240-402-
0477 [email protected]; or Stephen Ripley, Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903
New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,
240-402-7911, [email protected].
    Regarding the ICH: Jill Adleberg, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
51, Rm. 6364, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a final guidance for industry
entitled ``S1B(R1) Addendum to S1B Testing for Carcinogenicity of
Pharmaceuticals.'' The guidance was prepared under the auspices of ICH.
ICH has the mission of achieving greater regulatory harmonization
worldwide to ensure that safe, effective, high-quality medicines are
developed, registered, and maintained in the most resource-efficient
manner.
    By harmonizing the regulatory requirements in regions around the
world, ICH guidelines have substantially reduced duplicative clinical
studies, prevented unnecessary animal studies, standardized the
reporting of important safety information, standardized marketing
application submissions, and made many other improvements in the
quality of global drug development and manufacturing and the products
available to patients.
    The six Founding Members of the ICH are the FDA; the Pharmaceutical
Research and Manufacturers of America; the European Commission; the
European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries Associations; the
Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare;

and the Japanese Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association. The Standing
Members of the ICH Association include Health Canada and Swissmedic.
Additionally, the Membership of ICH has expanded to include other
regulatory authorities and industry associations from around the world
(https://www.ich.org/).
    ICH works by involving technical experts from both regulators and
industry parties in detailed technical harmonization work and the
application of a science-based approach to harmonization through a
consensus-driven process that results in the development of ICH
guidelines. The regulators around the world are committed to
consistently adopting these consensus-based guidelines, realizing the
benefits for patients and for industry.
    As a Founding Regulatory Member of ICH, FDA plays a major role in
the development of each of the ICH guidelines, which FDA then adopts
and issues as guidance for industry. FDA's guidance documents do not
establish legally enforceable responsibilities. Instead, they describe
the Agency's current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as
recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements
are cited.
    In the Federal Register of October 5, 2021 (86 FR 54982), FDA
published a notice announcing the availability of a draft guidance
entitled ``S1B(R1) Addendum to S1B Testing for Carcinogenicity of
Pharmaceuticals.'' The notice gave interested persons an opportunity to
submit comments by December 6, 2021.
    After consideration of the comments received and revisions to the
guideline, a final draft of the guideline was submitted to the ICH
Assembly and endorsed by the regulatory agencies on August 4, 2022.
    The final guidance provides guidance on expanding the testing
scheme for assessing human carcinogenic risk of pharmaceuticals by
introducing an additional approach that is not described in the
original S1B Guideline and also adds a plasma exposure ratio-based
approach for setting the high dose in the rasH2-Tg mouse model. This
guidance finalizes the draft guidance issued on October 5, 2021.
    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the
current thinking of FDA. It does not establish any rights for any
person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an
alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable
statutes and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does
refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not
required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of
information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA. The collections
of information in 21 CFR part 312 have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0014; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 314
have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0001.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the guidance at
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information/guidances-drugs, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents, https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information-biologics/biologics-guidances, or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: October 27, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-23787 Filed 11-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


This readme contains a summary of the files contained on this disk. These files were developed as part of estimating the costs and emission reductions of attaining a revised ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) nationwide. These files contain illustrative analyses that consider a limited number of emission control scenarios that States, Tribes and Regional Planning Organizations might implement to achieve the revised ozone NAAQS. According to the Clean Air Act, EPA must use health-based criteria in setting the NAAQS and cannot consider estimates of compliance cost. EPA is producing this RIA both to provide the public a sense of the benefits and costs of meeting a new ozone NAAQS and to meet the requirements of Executive Order 12866.  These files are strictly illustrative of possible control and cost scenarios, and are not guidance or directives on how to achieve a revised ozone standard.

The materials on this disk are divided into 2 files. All files are in Micrsoft Excel format.  Titles and contents are described below.
Note: 	All files on this disk relate solely to Non-EGU point and Area sources.
	Geographic Areas for these analyses are provided seperately in file named Geographic Areas.xls
	Control Measures data obtained from AirControlNET version 4.1.  Supplemental control measures are included in the RIA in the Appedix to Chapter 3.

070 Entire US Control Strategy Incremental Analysis.xls   This file contains the control strategy and cost analysis for the 0.070 ppm alternate standard incrementally to the baseline.

084 Entire US Control Strategy.xls  This file contains the control strategy for the baseline analysis.


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 127 (Monday, July 6, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 31939]
[FR Doc No: E9-15732]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12607-004]

Massena Electric Department; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

June 25, 2009.
    On February 3, 2009, Massena Electric Department filed an
application for a subsequent preliminary permit pursuant to section
4(f) of the Federal Power Act, to study the feasibility of the Massena
Grasse Hydroelectric Project No. 12607-004, to be located in the Town
of Massena, on the Grasse River, in St. Lawrence County, New York.
    The proposed Massena Grasse Project would consist of: (1) A new 22-
foot-high, 245-foot-long concrete gravity dam and a 300-acre
impoundment with a normal water surface elevation of 178 feet mean sea
level; (2) a new powerhouse containing one generating unit having an
installed capacity of 2.5 megawatts; (3) a new 23-kilovolt, 0.25-mile-
long transmission line; and (4) appurtenant facilities. The project
would have an estimated annual generation of 9,600 megawatt-hours that
would be used by the Town of Massena Electric Department.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Andrew McMahon, P.E., Superintendent; the
Town of Massena Electric Department; 71 East Hatfield Street; Massena,
New York; 13662<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, and e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    FERC Contact: Patrick Murphy,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``eFiling'' link. If unable to be filed electronically,
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and eight
copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. For
more information on how to submit these types of filings please go to
the Commission's Web site located at http://www.ferc.gov/filing-comments.asp.
    More information about this project can be viewed or printed on the
``eLibrary'' link of the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-12607) in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-
free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-15732 Filed 7-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 50917]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21933]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP18-369-002.
    Applicants: Sea Robin Pipeline Company, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing Quality Compliance to be effective
8/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20181002-5033.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-27-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: STEP Project Non-Conforming
Interim Agreements to be effective 10/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20181002-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-29-000.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Volume No. 2--Neg Rate Agmt--
NextEra Energy Marketing, LLC SP338828 to be effective 10/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20181002-5042.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-31-000.
    Applicants: Dauphin Island Gathering Partners.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Filing 10-2-
2018 to be effective 11/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20181002-5088.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-32-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Energy Transmission, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: DETI--October 2, 2018
Nonconforming Service Agreements to be effective 11/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20181002-5110.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-33-000.
    Applicants: Caledonia Energy Partners, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Updates to Caledonia Energy
Partners, LLC FERC Gas Tariff to be effective 11/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20181002-5113.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-34-000.
    Applicants: Freebird Gas Storage, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Updates to Freebird Gas
Storage, LLC FERC Gas Tariff to be effective 11/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20181002-5114.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-35-000.
    Applicants: Cimarron River Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rates 2018-10-03 to
be effective 10/3/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20181002-5158.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-36-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Energy Questar Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Statement of Negotiated Rates
Version 8.0.0--Highpoint Operating Corp. to be effective 10/2/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20181002-5173.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

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

    Dated: October 3, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-21933 Filed 10-9-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 77 (Friday, April 23, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21635-21637]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08508]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 77 / Friday, April 23, 2021 / Rules
and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0587; Product Identifier 2020-NM-086-AD; Amendment
39-21506; AD 2021-08-12]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500
series airplanes. This AD was prompted by crack indications found in
the lower aft wing skin bolt holes where the flap tracks attach to the
track support fitting. This AD requires repetitive inspections for
cracking of the left and right wing, lower aft wing skin aft edge, at
certain flap track locations, and applicable on-condition actions. The
FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective May 28, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 28, 2021.

ADDRESSES: For Boeing service information identified in this final
rule, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual &
Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach,
CA 90740-5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    For Aviation Partners Boeing service information identified in this
final rule, contact Aviation Partners Boeing, 2811 South 102nd St.,
Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98168; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: http://www.aviationpartnersboeing.com.
    You may view this service information at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0587.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0587; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, any
comments received, and other information. The address for Docket
Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Ha, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company
Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on July 28, 2020 (85 FR 45355).
The NPRM was prompted by crack indications found in the lower aft wing
skin bolt holes where the flap tracks attach to the track support
fitting.
    The FAA issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM)
to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The
Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series
airplanes. The SNPRM published in the Federal Register on January 21,
2021 (86 FR 6276). The SNPRM was prompted by a determination that the
compliance time should be reduced for airplanes on which Aviation
Partners Boeing (APB) blended winglets have been installed using
supplemental type certificate (STC) ST01219SE. The SNPRM proposed to
require repetitive inspections for cracking of the left and right wing,
lower aft wing skin aft edge, at certain flap track locations, and
applicable on-condition actions. The FAA is issuing this AD to address
undetected cracking in the lower wing skin, which could result in the
inability of the structure to carry limit load, and adversely affect
the structural integrity of the airplane.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received no comments on the SNPRM or on the determination
of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
requires adopting this AD as proposed. Except for minor editorial
changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the SNPRM. None of the
changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-57A1349 RB,
dated April 14, 2020, and Aviation Partners Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin AP737C-57-003, dated July 28, 2020. The service information
describes procedures for repetitive high frequency eddy current
inspections for cracking of the left and right wing, lower aft wing
skin aft edge, at flap track numbers 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8 attachment
location and applicable on-condition actions. On-condition actions
include repairing any cracking found. These documents are distinct
since they apply to different airplane models in different
configurations.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 141 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                     Labor cost          Parts cost     Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HFEC inspections...............  7 work-hours x $85 per               $0  $595 per            $83,895 per
                                  hour = $595 per                          inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
                                  inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable providing
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

2021-08-12 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-21506; Docket No. FAA-
2020-0587; Product Identifier 2020-NM-086-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective May 28, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -
200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by crack indications found in the lower aft
wing skin bolt holes where the flap tracks attach to the track
support fitting. The FAA is issuing this AD to address undetected
cracking in the lower wing skin, which could result in the inability
of the structure to carry limit load, and adversely affect the
structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Required Actions

    (1) For all airplanes except those identified in paragraph
(g)(2) of this AD, except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD,
at the applicable times specified in the ``Compliance'' paragraph in
Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-57A1349 RB, dated April 14,
2020, do all applicable actions identified in, and in accordance
with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements
Bulletin 737-57A1349 RB, dated April 14, 2020.
    (2) For airplanes on which Aviation Partners Boeing blended
winglets are installed using supplemental type certificate (STC)
ST01219SE: Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, at the
applicable time in the ``Compliance'' paragraph in Aviation Partners
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin AP737C-57-003, dated July 28, 2020, do
all applicable actions identified in, and in accordance with, the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin
737-57A1349 RB, dated April 14, 2020.
    Note 1 to paragraph (g): Guidance for accomplishing the actions
required by this AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-57A1349, dated April 14, 2020, which is referred to in Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-57A1349 RB, dated April 14, 2020.

(h) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-57A1349 RB,
dated April 14, 2020, uses the phrase ``the original issue date of
Requirements Bulletin 737-57A1349 RB,'' this AD requires using ``the
effective date of this AD.''
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-57A1349 RB,
dated April 14, 2020, specifies contacting Boeing for repair
instructions: This AD requires doing the repair and applicable on-
condition actions before further flight using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this
AD.
    (3) For airplanes identified as Group 1 in Boeing Alert
Requirements Bulletin 737-57A1349 RB, dated April 14, 2020: Within
120 days after the effective date of this AD, do actions to correct
the unsafe condition using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this AD.
    (4) Where Aviation Partners Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
AP737C-57-003, dated July 28, 2020, uses the phrase ``the original
issue date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires using ``the
effective date of this AD.''
    (5) Where Aviation Partners Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
AP737C-57-003, dated July 28, 2020, specifies contacting Boeing for
repair instructions: This AD requires doing the repair and
applicable on-condition actions before further flight using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(i) of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority
to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your
request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards
District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of

the person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los
Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the
repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Wayne Ha,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch,
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-
5238; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (k)(3) and (5) of this AD.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-57A1349 RB, dated
April 14, 2020.
    (ii) Aviation Partners Boeing Alert Service Bulletin AP737C-57-
003, dated July 28, 2020.
    (3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740-5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) For Aviation Partners Boeing service information identified
in this AD, contact Aviation Partners Boeing, 2811 South 102nd St.,
Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98168; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 206-767-
0535; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: http://www.aviationpartnersboeing.com.
    (5) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (6) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on April 5, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-08508 Filed 4-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 124 (Thursday, June 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38777-38779]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15345]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69817; File No. SR-Phlx-2013-66]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 3100 To Adopt a Modification in the Process for Initiating Trading
of a Security That Is the Subject of a Trading Halt or Pause on NASDAQ
OMX PSX

June 21, 2013.
    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 June 14, 2013, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or the ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``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 Rule 3100 to adopt a modification in
the process for initiating trading of a security that is the subject of
a trading halt or pause on NASDAQ OMX PSX (``PSX''). The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/nasdaqomxphlx/phlx/, 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
    In 2012, The NASDAQ Stock Market (``NASDAQ'') modified its process
for commencing trading of a security that is the subject of an initial
public offering (an ``IPO'') on NASDAQ by allowing market participants
to enter orders to be held in an undisplayed state until the
commencement of the Display-Only Period that occurs prior to the
IPO.\3\ NASDAQ recently proposed a similar change with regard to
entering orders prior to the end of other trading halts or pauses on
NASDAQ.\4\ The Exchange is proposing to make a similar change with
regard to entering orders prior to the end of trading halts or pauses
on PSX. Rule 3100(a) describes the circumstances under which the
Exchange has the authority to initiate a trading halt. As detailed in
Rule 3100(a), the specific bases for a halt include the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66652 (March 23, 2012),
77 FR 13129 (March 29, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-038).
    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69563 (May 13, 2013), 78
FR 29187 (May 17, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2013-073).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     A halt to permit the dissemination of material news with
respect to a security listed on another national securities exchange
(Rule 3100(a)(1)(A));
     a halt due to an order imbalance or influx (Rule
3100(a)(1)(B));
     a halt with respect to an index warrant when deemed
appropriate in the interests of a fair and orderly market and to
protect investors (Rule 3100(a)(2));
     a halt in a Derivative Securities Product (as defined in
Rule 3100(b)(4)(A)) for which a net asset value (``NAV'') or a
Disclosed Portfolio is disseminated if the Exchange becomes aware that
the NAV or Disclosed Portfolio is not being disseminated to all market
participants at the same time (Rule 3100(a)(3));
     a trading pause with respect to stocks that are not
subject to the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan \5\ and for which the primary
listing market has issued an individual stock trading pause (Rule
3100(a)(4)); and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Plan to Address Extraordinary Market Volatility Submitted to
the Commission Pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS under the Act,
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31, 2012), 77 FR
33498 (June 6, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     a trading halt in a Derivative Security Product traded
pursuant to unlisted trading privileges for which a ``Required Value,''
such as an intraday indicative value or disclosed portfolio, is not
being disseminated, under the conditions described in Rule 3100(b).
    Under the current process, quotes and orders in a halted security
may not be entered until the resumption of trading. However, the
Exchange believes that the quality of its process for commencing
trading in the halted security would be enhanced by allowing market
participants to enter orders to be held but not displayed until the
resumption of trading. Specifically, the Exchange believes that this
change will provide for a greater number of orders being entered prior
to commencement of trading, resulting in a higher level of order
interaction at the resumption of trading.
    Orders entered in this manner will be held in a suspended state
until the resumption of trading, at which time they will be entered
into the system. Market participants may cancel orders entered in this
manner in the same way they would cancel any other order. Orders
entered prior to the resumption of trading will be rejected unless they
are designated for holding. Specifically, the orders will be entered
into the continuous market once trading resumes.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Orders entered and held during the halt period will be
entered into the continuous market in the order in which they were
received. However, such orders will be entered contemporaneously
with any orders received through order entry ports after the halt is
terminated. Thus, the relative priority of orders received during
the halt and orders received through order entry ports after the
halt is terminated will be a function of the duration of system
processing associated with each particular order. As a result,
orders received during the halt will not automatically have priority
over orders received at the conclusion of the halt.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\7\ in general, and with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ in particular, in that the proposal is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Specifically,
the Exchange believes that the change to allow entry of quotes and
orders for holding during a trading halt will provide for a greater
number of orders being entered prior to commencement of trading,
resulting in a higher level of order interaction in the re-opening
process. Thus, the Exchange believes that the change will remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
Specifically, the Exchange believes that this change will provide for a
greater number of orders being entered prior to commencement of
trading, resulting in a higher level of order interaction. The Exchange
believes that this change will promote competition by enhancing the
attractiveness of PSX as a trading venue through higher order fill
rates and more complete price discovery. Moreover, because the change
will not affect the availability or price of goods or services offered
by PSX or others, it will not impose any burden on competition.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \9\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

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

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (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.

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-Phlx-2013-66 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2013-66. 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 Web site (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 Web site 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 such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2013-66 and should be
submitted on or before July 18, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority. \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-15345 Filed 6-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 15, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 13804]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05124]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. OR17-8-000]

Medallion Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Petition for
Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on February 28, 2017, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2)
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207(a)(2) (2016), Medallion Pipeline
Company, LLC (Medallion), filed a petition for a declaratory order
seeking approval of overall tariff structure and terms of service for
expansion of Medallion crude oil pipeline system, as more fully
explained in the petition.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Petitioner.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on March 28, 2017.

    Dated: March 7, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-05124 Filed 3-14-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 225 (Friday, November 26, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67409-67412]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25526]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2020-0400; FRL-9274-01-R4]

Air Plan Approval; Georgia; Atlanta Area Emissions Inventory
Requirements for the 2015 8-Hour Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
State of Georgia through the Georgia Environmental Protection Division
(GA EPD) on July 2, 2020, to address the base year emissions inventory
requirements for the 2015 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for the Atlanta, Georgia 2015 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area (hereinafter referred to as the ``Atlanta Area'').
These requirements apply to all ozone nonattainment areas. This action
is being proposed pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 27, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2020-0400 at www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to
its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tiereny Bell, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is
(404) 562-9088. Ms. Bell can also be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On October 1, 2015, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour primary and
secondary ozone NAAQS, strengthening both from 0.075 parts per million
(ppm) to 0.070 ppm (the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS). See 80 FR 65292. The
2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS is set at 0.070 ppm based on an annual fourth-
highest daily maximum 8-hour average concentration averaged over three
years. Under EPA's regulations at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
part 50, the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS is attained when the 3-year
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.070
ppm. See 40 CFR 50.19. Ambient air quality monitoring data for the 3-
year period must meet a data completeness requirement. See 40 CFR part
50, Appendix U. The ambient air quality monitoring data completeness
requirement is met when the average percentage of days with valid
ambient monitoring data is greater than 90 percent and no single year
has less than 75 percent data completeness as determined using Appendix
U.
    Upon promulgation of a new or revised ozone NAAQS, the CAA requires
EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that is violating the NAAQS
based on the three most recent years of ambient air quality data. On
April 30, 2018, EPA designated a seven-county area in and around
metropolitan Atlanta as a marginal ozone nonattainment area for the
2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\1\ The Atlanta Area was designated
nonattainment for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS on April 30, 2018
(effective August 3, 2018) using 2014-2016 ambient air quality data.
See 83 FR 25776. On December 6, 2018, EPA finalized a rule titled
``Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Ozone: Nonattainment Area State Implementation Plan Requirements'' (SIP
Requirements Rule) that establishes the requirements that state,
tribal, and local air quality management agencies must meet as they
develop implementation plans for areas where air quality exceeds the
2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\2\ See 83 FR 62998; 40 CFR part 51, subpart
CC. This rule establishes nonattainment area attainment deadlines based
on Table 1 of section 181(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), including an
attainment deadline of August 3, 2021, three years after the August 3,
2018 effective date, for areas classified as marginal for the 2015 8-
hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The nonattainment area for the 2015 8-hour ozone standard
consists of the following counties: Bartow, Clayton, Cobb, Dekalb,
Fulton, Gwinnett, and Henry.
    \2\ The SIP Requirements Rule addresses a range of nonattainment
area SIP requirements for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS, including
requirements pertaining to attainment demonstrations, reasonable
further progress (RFP), reasonably available control technology,
reasonably available control measures, major nonattainment new
source review, emission inventories, and the timing of SIP
submissions and compliance with emission control measures in the
SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the nonattainment designation, Georgia was required to
develop a SIP revision addressing certain CAA requirements for the
Atlanta Area. Among other things, Georgia was required to submit a SIP
revision addressing the emissions inventory requirements in CAA section
182(a)(1).
    Ground level ozone is not emitted directly into the air but is
created by chemical reactions between oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the presence
of sunlight. Emissions from industrial facilities and electric
utilities, motor vehicle exhaust, gasoline vapors, and chemical
solvents are some of the major sources of NOX and VOC.
Section 182(a)(1) of the CAA requires states with areas designated
nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS to submit a SIP revision providing a
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions from
all sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in such area.
NOX and VOCs are the relevant pollutants because they are
the precursors--i.e., the pollutants that contribute to the formation--
of ozone.

II. State's Submittal

    On July 2, 2020, Georgia submitted a SIP revision addressing the
emissions inventory requirements related to the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS
for the Atlanta Area.\3\ EPA is proposing to approve this SIP revision
as meeting the inventory requirements of section 182(a)(1) of the CAA
and meeting EPA's

SIP Requirements Rule. More information on EPA's analysis of Georgia's
SIP revision and how this SIP revision addresses these requirements is
provided below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In the July 2, 2020, SIP revision, GA EPD submitted a
certification that existing SIP-approved Georgia rules satisfy the
permit program requirements found in section 172(c)(5) and section
173 of the CAA. GA EPD also provided a written commitment to take
action to meet the emissions statement requirement located in
section 182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA. EPA will take action on these SIP
revisions in separate rulemakings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Analysis of State's Submittal

    As discussed above, section 182(a)(1) of the CAA requires areas to
submit a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual
emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in
each ozone nonattainment area. The section 182(a)(1) base year
inventory is defined in the SIP Requirements Rule as ``a comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from sources of VOC and
NOX emitted within the boundaries of the nonattainment area
as required by CAA section 182(a)(1).'' See 40 CFR 51.1300(p). The
inventory year must be selected consistent with the baseline year for
the RFP plan as required by 40 CFR 51.1310(b),\4\ and the inventory
must include actual ozone season day emissions as defined in 40 CFR
51.1300(q) \5\ and contain data elements consistent with the detail
required by 40 CFR part 51, subpart A. See 40 CFR 51.1315(a), (c), (e).
In addition, the point source emissions included in the inventory must
be reported according to the point source emissions thresholds of the
Air Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR) in 40 CFR part 51, subpart
A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 40 CFR 51.1310(b) states that ``at the time of designation
for the ozone NAAQS the baseline emissions inventory shall be the
emissions inventory for the most recent calendar year for which a
complete triennial inventory is required to be submitted to EPA
under the provisions of subpart A of this part. States may use an
alternative baseline emissions inventory provided that the year
selected corresponds with the year of the effective date of
designation as nonattainment for that NAAQS. All states associated
with a multi-state nonattainment area must consult and agree on
using the alternative baseline year. The emissions values included
in the inventory required by this section shall be actual ozone
season day emissions.'' For additional information, please see the
guidance document titled ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for
Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations,'' EPA-454/
B-17- 003, July 2017, available at: https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/air-emissions-inventory-guidance-implementation-ozone-and-particulate.
    \5\ ``Ozone season day emissions'' is defined as ``an average
day's emissions for a typical ozone season work weekday. The state
shall select, subject to EPA approval, the particular month(s) in
the ozone season and the day(s) in the work week to be represented,
considering the conditions assumed in the development of RFP plans
and/or emissions budgets for transportation conformity.'' See 40 CFR
51.1300(q).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Georgia selected 2014 as the base year for the emissions inventory,
which is the year corresponding with the first triennial inventory
under 40 CFR part 51, subpart A. This base year is one of the three
years of ambient data used to designate the Atlanta Area as a
nonattainment area and therefore represents emissions associated with
nonattainment conditions. The emissions inventory is based on data
developed and submitted by GA EPD to EPA's 2014 Emission Inventory
(NEI), and it contains data elements consistent with the requirements
of 40 CFR part 51, subpart A.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Data downloaded from the EPA Emissions Inventory System
(EIS) from the 2014 NEI was subjected to quality assurance
procedures described under quality assurance details under 2014 NEI
Version 1 located at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2014-national-emissions-inventory-nei-data. The quality assurance
and quality control procedures and measures associated with this
data are outlined in the State's Emission Inventory Quality
Assurance Project Plan. The 2017 GA EI QAPP can be found at https://epd.georgia.gov/document/document/appendix-e-georgia-quality-assurance-project-plan-document/download.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Georgia's emissions inventory for the Atlanta Area provides 2014
typical average summer day emissions for NOX and VOCs for
the following general source categories: Point sources, MAR (marine
vessels, aircraft and rail) sources, nonpoint sources, on-road mobile
sources, non-road mobile sources, fire events, and biogenic sources.
The summer day emissions were calculated as the average of emissions
during weekdays in July 2014. A detailed discussion of the inventory
development is located on pages 1 through 6 of the documents in the
July 2, 2020 submission entitled ``Atlanta Nonattainment Area Emissions
Inventory for the 2015 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS'' (Inventory Document) in the
State's July 2, 2020 submittal. The table below provides a summary of
the emissions inventory.

                                                    Table 1--2014 Emissions for the Atlanta Area \7\
                                                                  [Tons per summer day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Point          Marine vessels,        Nonpoint             On-road            Non-road
                                                     -------------------- aircraft, and rail -----------------------------------------------------------
                       County                                            --------------------
                                                         NOX       VOC       NOX       VOC       NOX       VOC       NOX       VOC       NOX       VOC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bartow..............................................     17.01      1.07      0.84      0.06      0.14      3.61     11.03      3.51      1.30      1.29
Clayton.............................................      0.28      0.59     13.27      1.85      0.15      6.69      8.39      3.63      2.45      1.26
Cobb................................................      2.05      1.35      2.73      0.73      0.59     18.14     26.23     11.87      7.24      9.30
Dekalb..............................................      0.33      3.43      0.75      0.08      0.53     18.41     25.84     10.46      6.27      8.06
Fulton..............................................      1.17      0.69      2.49      0.16      1.23     25.76     42.83     19.54     10.74      9.04
Gwinnett............................................      0.00      0.21      0.64      0.05      0.58     21.77     24.18     11.54     10.58     11.04
Henry...............................................      4.37      1.18      0.82      0.04      0.13      4.66      4.35      2.40      2.38      1.46
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...........................................     25.21      8.52     21.54      2.97      3.35     99.04    142.85     62.95     40.96     41.45
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The emissions reported for the Atlanta Area reflect the emissions
within the seven counties comprising the nonattainment area. The
inventory contains point source emissions data for the facilities
located within the Area. More detail on the emissions for individual
source categories is provided below and in Appendix A of Georgia's July
2, 2020 submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For the purpose of Table 1--2014 Emissions for the Atlanta
Area, EPA rounded to the nearest hundredth of a ton per summer day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Point sources are large, stationary, identifiable sources of
emissions that release pollutants into the atmosphere. The Electric
Generating Units (EGU) point source emissions inventory was developed
from facility-specific emissions data. NOX emissions were
calculated using continuous emissions monitoring system data which
included hourly measurements. For VOC emissions, GA EPD used facility-
specific emissions data reported to the 2014 NEI from sources that are
required to submit inventory data according to the AERR. The non-EGU
point source emissions inventory for the Atlanta Area was

developed from non-EGU facility-specific data reported to the 2014 NEI
from sources that are required to submit inventory data according to
the AERR. The point source emissions data meets the point source
emissions requirements of 40 CFR part 51, subpart A. A detailed account
of the non-EGU point sources can be found on pages 4 through 6 of the
emissions inventory document in Georgia's submittal.
    MAR sources are marine, aircraft, and rail sources of emissions
separated from the point and nonpoint source categories. Emissions for
these sources were obtained from the 2014 NEI. A detailed account of
the MAR sources can be found on pages 2 and 5-6 of the emissions
inventory document in Georgia's submittal.
    Nonpoint sources are small stationary sources of emissions which,
due to their large number, collectively have significant emissions
(e.g., dry cleaners, service stations). Emissions for these sources
were obtained from the 2014 NEI. A detailed account of the nonpoint
sources can be found on page 2 of the emissions inventory document in
Georgia's submittal.
    On-road mobile sources include vehicles used on roads for
transportation of passengers or freight. Georgia developed its on-road
emissions inventory using EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator
(MOVES) model for each ozone nonattainment county.\8\ County level on-
road modeling was conducted using county-specific vehicle population
and other local data. A detailed account of the on-road sources can be
found in Appendix A and page 2 through 3 of the emissions inventory
document in Georgia's submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Georgia used MOVES version 2014a because this was the latest
version available at the time that the State submitted its SIP
revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Non-road mobile sources include vehicles, engines, and equipment
used for construction, agriculture, recreation and other purposes that
do not use the roadways (e.g., lawn mowers, construction equipment,
railroad locomotives and aircraft). Georgia obtained emissions for the
non-road mobile sources from the 2014 NEI. Those emissions were
estimated using EPA's National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) with
updated NMIM County Database (NCD) files from GA EPD. A detailed
account of non-road mobile sources can be found in Appendix D of the
July 2, 2020, submittal.
    Georgia also included 2014 actual emissions from fire events and
biogenic sources in its emission inventory. Wildland fires are
unplanned, unwanted wild land fires including unauthorized human-caused
fires, escaped prescribed fire projects, or other inadvertent fire
situations where the objective is to put the fire out. Prescribed fires
are any fires ignited by management actions to meet specific objectives
related to the reduction of the biomass potentially available for
wildfires. Fire event emissions were developed by GA EPD using fire
records collected from the Georgia Forestry Commission (GFC). When fire
activities were not included in the GFC database, military bases and
federal agencies (USFS and FWS) records were used. In addition, GA EPD
collected detailed burning records for the Okefenokee area which showed
burned area per day. A detailed account of fire event sources can be
found in Appendix A and on page 4 of the emissions inventory document
in the July 2, 2020, submittal.
    Biogenic emission sources are emissions that come from natural
sources. GA EPD obtained biogenic emissions for 2014 from the 2014 NEI
and used the summary of county-specific daily biogenic emissions.\9\ A
detailed account of biogenic sources can be found in Appendix A and on
page 4 of the emissions inventory document in the Georgia submittal.
The table below provides a summary of the 2014 fire event \10\ and
biogenic emissions for the Atlanta Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The biogenic emissions were calculated from the Biogenic
Emission Inventory System (BEIS) version 3.61 model in the Sparse
Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions model (SMOKE). These emissions were
obtained from NEI2014. The data was downloaded from the U.S. EPA's
Air Emissions Inventories website: https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2014-national-emissions-inventory-nei-data.
More detailed information can be found in the SMOKE manual (https://www.cmascenter.org/smoke/).
    \10\ There were minimal emissions from fire events in 2014 such
that, with rounding, there were 0.00 tons of NOX and VOC
emitted per summer day. For the purpose of Table 2, EPA rounded to
the nearest hundredth of a ton per summer day.

                      Table 2--2014--Fire Event and Biogenic Emissions for the Atlanta Area
                                              [Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Fire events                Biogenic
                           County                            ---------------------------------------------------
                                                                  NOX          VOC          NOX          VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bartow......................................................         0.00         0.00         0.43        67.00
Clayton.....................................................         0.00         0.00         0.14        26.68
Cobb........................................................         0.00         0.00         0.22        46.82
Dekalb......................................................         0.00         0.00         0.16        45.75
Fulton......................................................         0.00         0.00         0.27        64.04
Gwinnett....................................................         0.00         0.00         0.33        52.45
Henry.......................................................         0.00         0.00         0.30        42.98
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
    Total...................................................         0.00         0.00         1.85       345.72
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has preliminarily determined that Georgia's emissions inventory
meets the requirements under CAA section 182(a)(1) and the SIP
Requirements Rule for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

IV. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision submitted by Georgia
on July 2, 2020, addressing the base year emissions inventory
requirements for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Atlanta Area. EPA
proposes to find that the State's submission meets the requirements of
sections 110 and 182 of the CAA.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided they meet the criteria of the

CAA. This proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: November 17, 2021.
John Blevins,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2021-25526 Filed 11-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77825-77826]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27624]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER23-618-000]

Sandy Ridge Wind 2, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Sandy Ridge Wind 2, LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is January 3, 2023.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    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://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. 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>.

    Dated: December 14, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-27624 Filed 12-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P