[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 173 (Friday, September 6, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54835-54841]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21781]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0173; FRL-9900-62-Region 4]

Air Quality Implementation Plan; Alabama; Attainment Plan for the
Troy Area 2008 Lead Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a state implementation plan (SIP)
revision, submitted by the State of Alabama through the Alabama
Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), to EPA on November 9,
2012, for the purpose of providing for attainment of the 2008 Lead
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in the Troy 2008 Lead
nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as the ``Troy Area'' or
``Area''). The Troy Area is comprised of a portion of Pike County in
Alabama surrounding the Sanders Lead Company (hereafter referred to as
``Sanders Lead''). EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's November 9,
2012 SIP submittal regarding the attainment plan based on Alabama's
attainment demonstration for the Troy Area. The attainment plan
includes the base year emissions inventory requirements, an analysis of
the reasonably available control technology (RACT) and reasonably
available control measures (RACM) requirements, reasonable further
progress (RFP) plan, modeling demonstration of lead attainment and
contingency measures for the Troy Area. This action is being taken in
accordance with Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA's guidance related
to lead attainment planning.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 7, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R04-OAR-2013-0173 by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0173, Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief,
Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2013-0173. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zuri Farngalo of the Regulatory
Development Section, in the Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr.
Farngalo may be reached by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or via electronic
mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What action Is EPA proposing to take?
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed action?
III. What is included in Alabama's attainment plan submittal for the
Troy area?
IV. What Is EPA's analysis of Alabama's submittal for the Troy area?
    1. Pollutants Addressed
    2. Emissions Inventory Requirements
    3. Modeling
    4. RACM/RACT
    5. RFP Plan
    6. Contingency Measures
    7. Attainment Date
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA proposing to take?

    EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's SIP submittal for the Troy
Area, as submitted through ADEM to EPA on November 9, 2012, for the
purpose of demonstrating attainment of the 2008 Lead NAAQS. Alabama's
lead attainment plan for the Troy Area includes a base year emissions
inventory, a modeling demonstration of lead attainment, an analysis of
RACM/RACT, a RFP plan, and contingency measures.
    EPA has preliminarily determined that Alabama's attainment plan for
the 2008 Lead NAAQS for the Troy Area meets the applicable requirements
of the CAA and the ``SIP Toolkit--Attainment Demonstrations and Air
Quality Modeling,'' hereafter referred to as the ``SIP Toolkit,'' dated
April 12, 2012, located at http://www.epa.gov/air/lead/kitmodel.html.
Thus, EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's attainment plan for the
Troy Area. EPA's analysis for this proposed action is discussed in
Section IV of this proposed rulemaking.

II. What is the background for EPA's proposed action?

    On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964), EPA revised the Lead NAAQS,
lowering the level from 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) to
0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ calculated over a three-month rolling average. EPA
established the NAAQS based on significant evidence and numerous health
studies demonstrating that serious health effects are associated with
exposures to lead emissions.
    Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is required
by the CAA to designate areas throughout the United States as attaining
or not attaining the NAAQS; this designation process is described in
section 107(d)(1) of the CAA. On November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71033), EPA
promulgated initial air quality designations for the 2008 Lead NAAQS,
which became effective on December 31, 2010, based on air quality
monitoring data for calendar years 2007-2009, where there was
sufficient data to support a nonattainment designation. Designations
for all remaining areas were completed on November 22, 2011 (76 FR
72097), which became effective on December 31, 2011, based on air
quality monitoring data for calendar years 2008-2010.
    Effective December 31, 2010, the Troy Area was designated as
nonattainment for the 2008 Lead NAAQS. This designation triggered a
requirement for Alabama to submit a SIP revision with a plan for how
the Area would attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS, as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than December 31, 2015. ADEM submitted its SIP
submittal for the Troy Area on November 9, 2012, which included the
base year emissions inventory and the

attainment demonstration. EPA's analysis of the submitted attainment
demonstration includes a review of the pollutant addressed, emissions
inventory requirements, modeling, RACT and RACM requirements, RFP plan,
and contingency measures for the Troy Area.

III. What is included in Alabama's attainment plan submittal for the
Troy area?

    In accordance with section 172(c) of the CAA and the SIP Toolkit,
the Alabama attainment plan for the Troy Area includes: (1) An
emissions inventory for the plan's base year (2010); and (2) an
attainment demonstration. The attainment demonstration includes:
technical analyses that locate, identify, and quantify sources of
emissions contributing to violations of the 2008 Lead NAAQS; analyses
of future-year emissions reductions and air quality improvements
expected to result from national and local programs; adopted emission
reduction measures with schedules for implementation; and contingency
measures required under section 172(c)(9) of the CAA. See 73 FR 67035.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of Alabama's attainment plan submittal for
the Troy area?

A. Attainment Demonstration

    Consistent with CAA requirements (see, e.g., section 172), and 40
CFR 51.117, an attainment demonstration for a lead nonattainment area
must include a showing that the area will attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS as
expeditiously as practicable. The demonstration must also meet the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.112 and Part 51, Appendix W, and include
inventory data, modeling results, and emissions reduction analyses on
which the state has based its projected attainment. In the case of the
Troy Area, EPA is proposing that the attainment plan submitted by
Alabama is sufficient, and EPA is proposing to approve individual
components of the plan.
1. Pollutants Addressed
    Alabama's lead attainment plan evaluates lead emissions in the Troy
Area within Pike County. There are no significant precursors to
consider for the lead attainment plan.
2. Emissions Inventory Requirements
    States are required under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA to develop
comprehensive, accurate and current emissions inventories of all
sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in the area. These
inventories provide a detailed accounting of all emissions and emission
sources by precursor or pollutant. In the November 12, 2008 Lead
Standard (PDF) (99pp, 665k) rulemaking, EPA finalized the guidance
related to the emissions inventories requirements. The current
regulations are located at 40 CFR 51.117(e), and include, but are not
limited to, the following requirements:
     States must develop and periodically update a
comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all
source affecting ambient lead concentrations;
     The SIP inventory must be approved by EPA as a SIP element
and is subject to public hearing requirements; and
     The point source inventory upon which the summary of the
baseline for lead emissions inventory is based must contain allsources
that emit 0.5 or more tons of lead per year.
    For the base-year inventory of actual emissions, EPA recommends
using either 2010 or 2011 as the base year for the contingency measure
calculations, but does provide flexibility for using other inventory
years if states can show another year is more appropriate.\1\ For lead
SIPs, the CAA requires that all sources of lead emissions in the
nonattainment area must be submitted with the base-year inventory. In
today's action, EPA is proposing to approve the base year emissions
inventory portion of the SIP revision submitted by Alabama on November
9, 2012, as required by section 172(c)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See EPA document titled ``Addendum to the 2008 Lead NAAQS
Implementation Questions and Answers'' dated August 10, 2012,
included in EPA's SIP Toolkit located at http://www.epa.gov/air/lead/kitmodel.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State of Alabama followed EPA's recommendation by using the
year of designation (2010) as the base year in the November 9, 2012
Lead SIP. Actual emissions from all sources of lead were reviewed and
compiled, as applicable and available, for the base year emissions
inventory requirement. All applicable sources of lead emissions
contained in the Troy nonattainment area were estimated and included in
the inventory.
    The only source of lead emissions above 0.5 tons per year within
the Troy Area is Sanders Lead, a secondary lead smelting and refining
facility which processes scrap metal and lead bearing by-products into
refined lead alloys. Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.117(e), the facility is the
only point source evaluated as part of this emissions inventory
requirement and is therefore, the only source that is required to be
evaluated as part of this attainment demonstration. In addition to
complying with the 2008 Lead NAAQS, the facility is also subject to the
revised Secondary Lead MACT (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart X). The facility's
emissions were calculated using data collected from stack tests with
the application of AP-42 emissions factors for each source, and quality
assured by ADEM. ADEM used the EPA 2008 National Emissions Inventory
(NEI)\2\ to obtain estimates of the stationary area and nonroad and
onroad mobile emissions for the Troy Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Area sources are only required to be submitted for the NEI
every three years, in accordance with the Air Emissions Reporting
Rule and the most recent release is in the 2008 NEI version 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Stationary area source emissions, shown below in Table 1, were
obtained from the Emissions Inventory System maintained by EPA which
has the most current information. The nonroad emissions are negligible
and therefore assumed to be zero for the purpose of this SIP, and are
consistent with the nonroad 2008 model. The emissions data for the
nonroad category which includes aircraft (airports), rail and
commercial marine vessels was obtained from the 2008 NEI version 2.
Onroad lead emissions are negligible and therefore assumed to be zero,
consistent with MOVES 2010b model and the 2008 NEI. A more detailed
discussion of the emissions inventory development can be found in
Alabama's November 9, 2012 submittal.
    Table 1 below shows the level of emissions calculated in pounds per
year (lbs/year) in the Area for the 2010 base year, and by emissions
source categories, as provided in Alabama's November 9, 2012 attainment
plan.

                        Table 1--2010 and Projected 2015 Lead Emissions for the Troy Area
                                                [Pounds per year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Year                            Onroad          Nonroad          Area            Point
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010............................................               0          205.94            0.56           7,162
2015............................................               0          205.94            0.56             946
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Reduction.............................               0               0               0           6,216
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA evaluated Alabama's 2010 base year emissions inventory for the
Troy Area, and made the preliminary determination that this inventory
was developed consistent with EPA's guidance for emissions inventory.
Therefore, pursuant to section 172(c)(3), EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama's 2010 base year emissions inventory for the Troy Area. The
projected emissions for 2015 represent an 87 percent reduction from the
base year lead emissions, and, as discussed in the modeling section
below, provide sufficient emissions reductions for the Troy Area to
attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
3. Modeling
    The lead attainment demonstration must include air quality
dispersion modeling developed in accordance with EPA's Modeling
Guidance.\3\ The Alabama modeling analysis was prepared using EPA's
preferred dispersion modeling system, the American Meteorological
Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD)
consisting of the AERMOD (version 12060) model and two data input
preprocessors AERMET (version 11059) and AERMAP (version 11103). The
non-regulatory AERMINUTE (version 11325) meteorological preprocessor
and AERSURFACE (version 08009) were also used to develop inputs to
AERMET. The Building Profile Input Program for Plume Rise Model
Enhancements was also used in the downwash-modeling and incorporated
good engineering practice, and technical procedures. More detailed
information on the AERMOD Modeling system and other modeling tools and
documents can be found on the EPA Technology Transfer Network Support
Center for Regulatory Atmospheric Modeling (SCRAM) (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/) and in Alabama's November 9, 2012 SIP submittal in the
docket for this proposed action (EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0173) on the
www.regulations.gov Web site. A brief description of the modeling used
to support Alabama's attainment demonstration follows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix W (EPA's Guideline on Air Quality
Models) (November 2005) located at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/appw_05.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. Modeling Approach
    The following is an overview of the Sanders Lead modeling approach
used in Alabama's November 9, 2012 SIP submittal. This approach was
developed by the URS Corporation, on behalf of Sanders Lead, and
revised based on comments received from ADEM and EPA. The basic
procedures are outlined as follows:
     Start with the most recent 2010 emissions estimates for
point, area, volume and mobile sources at Sanders Lead;
     Develop model inputs using the AERMOD modeling system
including the:
    [cir] AERMOD pre-processors AERMET and AERMINUTE to process five
years' (i.e., 2006-2010) 1-minute meteorological data from the National
Weather Service (NWS) Montgomery, Alabama, surface level site
(identified as KMGM) (the closest weather station to Sanders Lead),
based on ADEM's land use classifications, in combination with upper-air
meteorological data from the Birmingham, Alabama, NWS upper-air
sounding site (KBMX);
    [cir] AERMOD pre-processor AERMAP to generate terrain inputs for
the receptors, based on a digital elevation mapping database from the
National Elevation Dataset developed by the U.S. Geological Survey;
    [cir] AERMOD pre-processor AERSURFACE to generate direction
specific land use based surface characteristics for the modeling;
    [cir] Define a Cartesian receptor grid across the nonattainment
boundary (approximately 0.8 miles around the Sanders Lead facility),
with 100 meter spacing in ambient air to ensure maximum concentrations
are captured; and
    [cir] Develop all other input options commensurate with the
Regulatory Modeling Guidance.
     Perform current and post control dispersion modeling using
the EPA approved AERMOD modeling system;
     Process AERMOD output through EPA's LEADPOST post
processor (version 12114) deriving the maximum 3 month average rolling
design value across the 5 year meteorological data period; and
     Document the results in a report suitable for inclusion as
an appendix for the Troy Area Lead SIP.
b. Modeling Results
    The Lead NAAQS compliance results of the attainment modeling are
summarized in Table 2 below. Table 2 presents the results from the two
sets of AERMOD modeling runs that were performed. The two modeling runs
were the result of using two different five-year (2006-2010)
meteorological datasets based on AERSURFACE-developed surface
characteristics representative of the NWS site in Montgomery, Alabama
(NWS MET Data). The first and second rows of Table 2 present the
surface characteristics representative of the Sanders Lead facility
site (Facility MET Data). This procedure was used since on-site
meteorological data was not available. Modeling with the two sets of
data was also used since on-site meteorological data are not available
at the Sanders Lead facility.
    A background ambient air quality concentration is required to be
added to the modeled concentrations for the purpose of developing a
lead design value, such that attainment of the control strategy is
demonstrated. The background concentration for the SIP was based on
speciated air quality data from the Montgomery, Alabama airport monitor
(site number 01-101-1002) from the last two months of 2005 and the
years 2006-2010. The data is recorded and collected once every 6th day.
Monthly averages of the data from this period were obtained and used to
develop the 3-month rolling averaged concentrations. The highest of the
3-month averaged concentrations (i.e., 0.009 [micro]g/m\3\) was used in
the modeled compliance test (see column 3 of Table 2).
    As can be seen in Table 2, the maximum 3-month rolling average
across all five years of meteorological data (2006-2010) is less than
or equal to the 2008 Lead NAAQS of 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ for both sets of
AERMOD modeling runs.

Output from the LEADPOST processor which details all of the
concentrations can be found in Appendix G of Alabama's November 9, 2012
SIP submittal.

                                   Table 2--Post-Control Modeling Results \4\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sanders lead facility        Max 3-mth        Background         Total                         Year maximum
           impacts            rolling average   concentration    concentration        NAAQS          occurred
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post-Construction ([NWS] MET  0.144 [mu]g/     0.009 [mu]g/     0.15 [mu]g/m\3\  0.15 [mu]g/m\3\            2010
 Data).                        m\3\.            m\3\.
Post-Construction (Facility   0.139 [mu]g/     0.009 [mu]g/     0.15 [mu]g/m\3\  0.15 [mu]g/m\3\            2010
 MET Data).                    m\3\.            m\3\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The pre-control analysis resulted in a predicted impact of 5.30
[mu]g/m\3\ (NWS MET data) and 3.64 [mu]g/m\3\ (Facility MET data). The
post-control analysis resulted in a predicted impact of 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\
(NWS MET data) and 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ (Facility MET data). This data
indicates significant reductions in air quality impact with the future
implementation of the post-construction control plan for the Sanders
Lead facility. This data also supports that the controls represent RACM
and RACT for the SIP. The control strategy for the facility as
reflected in its Air Permit No. 210-0005 includes enclosure of the
furnace building and installation of canopy hoods over each blast
furnace and compliance with the Secondary Lead MACT (40 CFR Part 63,
Subpart X). More details on the pre- and post-construction operations
at the facility are included in the Alabama SIP. Therefore, on this
basis, ADEM asserted that the proposed controls are RACM/RACT and
should be sufficient to attain 2008 Lead NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Final results listed in Table 2 are rounded according to 40
CFR part 50, Appendix R; specifically subsection 4(a) which
addresses comparison with the Lead NAAQS, as well as 5(a), (b), and
(c) which addresses rounding conventions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has reviewed the modeling that Alabama submitted to support the
attainment demonstration for the Troy Area and has preliminarily
determined that this modeling is consistent with CAA requirements,
Appendix W and EPA guidance for lead attainment demonstration modeling.
4. RACM/RACT
a. Requirements for RACM/RACT
    CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that each attainment plan provides
for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable and attainment of the NAAQS. EPA
interprets RACM, including RACT, under section 172, as measures that a
state determines to be both reasonably available and contribute to
attainment as expeditiously as practicable in the nonattainment area. A
comprehensive discussion of the RACM/RACT requirement for lead
attainment plans and EPA's guidance can be found in the SIP Toolkit.
b. Alabama's Analysis of Pollutants and Sources for the Troy Area
    Alabama's analysis is found in Chapter 6 of the November 9, 2012
SIP submittal. The State determined that controls for lead emissions at
Sanders Lead are appropriate in the Troy Area for purposes of attaining
the 2008 Lead NAAQS. EPA preliminarily agrees that Alabama's
determination is supported by its analysis.
c. Alabama's Evaluation of RACM/RACT Control Measures for the Troy Area
    On November 9, 2012, Air Permit No. 210-0005 was issued to Sanders
Lead for additional proposed control measures to reduce lead emissions.
The Title V permit reflecting RACT controls is included in Appendix F
of the November 9, 2012 SIP submittal. In accordance with the schedule
in the Title V permit, Sanders Lead was required to implement the
controls on or before July 1, 2013. ADEM represented to EPA that
Sanders Lead has completed implementation of the RACT controls listed
in the permit and summarized in Table 3 below:

                  Table 3--Summary of RACT Controls \5\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Description of measure                    Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Control and Enclose Furnace    Sanders Lead is proposing to install
 Operations.                    canopy hoods over each blast furnace
                                with supply air to reduce worker lead
                                exposures. Additionally, the furnace
                                building will be enclosed. A new 318,000
                                cubic feet per minute (CFM) baghouse
                                followed by high-efficiency particulate
                                air (HEPA) filters will be installed to
                                control emissions captured by the new
                                hoods and building enclosure (including
                                the kettle basement ventilation).
Control and Enclose Refining   Sanders Lead is proposing to enclose the
 Operations.                    refining building, including the
                                elimination of sidewall fans. Area
                                ventilation will be provided by the new
                                318,000 CFM baghouse discussed above.
Combustion gases and Refining  Sanders Lead is proposing to control the
 Kettle Hoods.                  combustion gases and kettle hoods with a
                                new 60,000 actual cubic feet per minute
                                (ACFM) baghouse (with HEPAs).
Relocate Industrial Battery    Sanders Lead is proposing to relocate the
 Decasing and Enclose Raw       industrial battery decasing operations
 Material Handling Operations.  to the inside of the existing raw
                                material storage building. A new 60,000
                                ACFM collector with HEPA filters will be
                                installed to control industrial battery
                                decasing and raw material storage area.
Battery Breaker/Shredder       Sanders Lead is proposing to enclose the
 Operations.                    Shredder Building and install a new
                                12,000 ACFM wet scrubber to control acid
                                emissions from specific point locations
                                within the Shredder Building. The
                                exhaust from this scrubber along with
                                building exhaust will be exhausted
                                through a new 60,000 ACFM bag collector
                                (with HEPAs).
Enclose Baghouse Hoppers and   Sanders Lead is proposing to enclose the
 Transport of Dust.             base of baghouses 1 and 5, including the access doors and
                                removable panels on the units.
                                Ventilation will be provided by ducting
                                to existing baghouses.

Improve Process Material       In order to eliminate leaded outdoor
 Transport to Eliminate         traffic, Sanders Lead is proposing to
 Leaded Outdoor Traffic.        install building connection tunnel for
                                the transport of material from shredder
                                to the raw material storage building.
Relocate and Contain Leaded    Sanders Lead is proposing to install
 Vehicle Maintenance.           transfer points at the refining,
                                smelting and raw material storage
                                vehicle exits to maintain ``leaded''
                                vehicles inside the building. Sanders
                                Lead is proposing to relocate leaded
                                vehicle maintenance to a newly enclosed
                                constructed area.
Improved Watering............  Sanders Lead is proposing to develop an
                                updated watering plan based on the new
                                vehicle patterns and facility layout.
                                The watering plan will include an
                                improved floor wetting system inside and
                                outside the building, as well as
                                purchasing new wet sweepers for the
                                outside buildings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

d. Proposed Action on RACM/RACT Demonstration and Control Strategy
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Table found in the Title V permit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's determination that the
proposed controls for lead emissions at Sanders Lead constitute RACM/
RACT for that source in the Troy Area based on our analysis described
above. Further, as summarized above, EPA proposes that no further
controls would be required at Sanders Lead and that the proposed
controls are sufficient for RACM/RACT purposes for the Troy Area, at
this time.
    Since the Troy Area is projected to attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS by
the 2015 attainment date, and at this time, no additional measures
could be adopted to attain one year sooner, EPA proposes to approve
Alabama's November 9, 2012 SIP submission as meeting the RACM/RACT
requirements of the SIP Toolkit and that the level of control in the
State's submission constitutes RACM/RACT for purposes of the 2008 Lead
NAAQS. By approving these control measures as RACM/RACT for Sanders
Lead for purposes of Alabama's attainment planning, these control
measures will become permanent and enforceable SIP measures to meet the
requirements of the CAA and 2008 Lead NAAQS.
5. RFP Plan
    Section 172(c)(2) of the CAA requires that an attainment plan
includes a demonstration that shows reasonable further progress for
meeting air quality standards will be achieved through generally linear
incremental improvement in air quality. As stated in the final Lead
Rule (73 FR 67039), EPA concluded that it was appropriate that RFP
requirements be satisfied by the strict adherence to an ambitious
compliance schedule, which is expected to periodically yield
significant emission reductions. The control measures for attainment of
the 2008 Lead NAAQS included in Chapter 6 of the State's submittal have
been modeled to achieve attainment of the 2008 Lead NAAQS. The
stipulations require these control measures and resulting emissions
reductions to be achieved as expeditiously as practicable. As a result
of an ambitious compliance schedule, yielding a significant reduction
in lead emissions from the Sanders Lead facility and resulting in
modeled attainment of the NAAQS, EPA has preliminarily determined that
ADEM's lead attainment plan for the 2008 Lead NAAQS fulfills the RFP
requirements for the Troy Area. EPA, therefore, proposes to approve the
State's attainment plan with respect to the RFP requirements.
6. Contingency Measures
    In accordance with section 172(c)(9) of the CAA, contingency
measures are required as additional measures to be implemented in the
event that an area fails to meet the RFP requirements or fails to
attain a standard by its attainment date. These measures must be fully
adopted rules or control measures that can be implemented quickly and
without additional EPA or state action if the area fails to meet RFP
requirements or fails to meet its attainment date and should contain
trigger mechanisms and an implementation schedule. In addition, they
should be measures not already included in the SIP control strategy for
attaining the standard and should provide for emission reductions
equivalent to one year of RFP.
    Based on all the improvements that are planned for Sanders Lead,
ADEM believes that the 2008 Lead NAAQS can be achieved on a consistent
basis. However, if an exceedance of the NAAQS occurs during any three
month period after July 2013 (the deadline for full implementation of
the control strategy), within 180 days, Sanders Lead will submit an
investigative study identifying the source(s) of excessive emissions
contributing to the exceedance and will develop and prepare a strategy
to eliminate the likelihood of another exceedance. This strategy will
contain a plan identifying which stack or stacks will be raised and to
what extent. Within 18 months of the NAAQS violation(s), these measures
will be fully implemented. Potential controls which may provide some
additional reductions include:
    (1) Adding a second gate on the south end of the property in order
to direct significant traffic flow to an area further away from the
maximum lead impact areas;
    (2) planting vegetation in specific areas to help control dust flow
patterns and scavenge fugitive lead emissions;
    (3) re-evaluating material handling procedures, patterns, etc., to
determine if improvements can be made;
    (4) re-evaluating housekeeping procedures, including dust sweeping
and collection equipment; and
    (5) implementing other improvements that may become evident based
on potential source(s) of lead emissions identified during
investigation.
    EPA proposes that the contingency measures submitted by Alabama
meet the section 172(c)(9) requirements for the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
7. Attainment Date
    Alabama provided a demonstration attainment of the 2008 Lead NAAQS
for the Troy Area by no later than five years after the Area was
designated nonattainment. The modeling indicates that the Troy Area
will attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS by December 31, 2015, and therefore,
EPA is proposing to approve the State's attainment date.

V. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's lead attainment plan for the
Troy Area. EPA has preliminarily determined that the SIP meets the
applicable requirements of the CAA. Specifically, EPA is proposing to
approve Alabama's November 9, 2012 SIP submission, which includes the
attainment demonstration, base year emissions inventory, RACM/RACT

analysis, contingency measures and RFP plan. The requirement for a RFP
plan is satisfied because Alabama demonstrated that the Area will
attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS by the proposed attainment date of December
31, 2015.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submittal that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 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 that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves 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 Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, October 7, 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).
    In addition, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

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

    Dated: August 22, 2013.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2013-21781 Filed 9-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: August 11, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 154)]
[Notices]
[Page 48738-48739]
[DOCID:fr11au10-104]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Notice of Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and
Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B
(Formerly Subpart Q) During the Week Ending July 28, 2010

    The following Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience
and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under subpart
B (formerly subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural

Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et seq.).
    The due date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motions to
Modify Scope are set forth below for each application. Following the
Answer period DOT may process the application by expedited procedures.
Such procedures may consist of the adoption of a show-cause order, a
tentative order, or in appropriate cases a final order without further
proceedings.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2010-0190.
    Date Filed: July 28, 2010.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify
Scope: August 18, 2010.
    Description: Application of Aviation Services, Ltd. (d/b/a Freedom
Air (Guam)) (``Freedom Air'') requesting a certificate of public
convenience and necessity authorizing Freedom Air to engage in
interstate scheduled air transportation of persons, property and mail.

Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2010-19761 Filed 8-10-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 4, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62503-62505]
[FR Doc No: 2018-26250]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 383 and 384

[Docket No. FMCSA-2001-11117]
RIN 2126-AA70

Limitations on the Issuance of Commercial Driver's Licenses With
a Hazardous Materials Endorsement

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

ACTION: Interim rules; re-opening of the comment period.

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

SUMMARY: In May 2003 and April 2005, FMCSA published interim final
rules (IFR) regarding the limitations on the issuance of commercial
driver's licenses with a hazardous materials endorsement. The comment
period for the May 2003 IFR closed on July 7, 2003; there was no
comment period for the April 2005 IFR. The Agency received over 50
comments on the 2003

IFR. FMCSA now plans to adopt the provisions of the IFRs that have not
previously been made final. To ensure that interested parties have an
opportunity to provide comments, the Agency has re-opened the comment
period for 15 days.

DATES: The comment periods for the interim final rules published May 5,
2003, at 68 FR 23844, and April 29, 2005, at 70 FR 22268, are reopened.
Comments must be received on or before December 19, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Docket Number FMCSA-
2001-11117 using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for instructions on submitting
comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Selden Fritschner, CDL Division,
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001; by email at [email protected], or by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone
(202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
IFR (FMCSA-2001-11117), indicate the specific section of the document
to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion
or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online or
by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means.
FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an
email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so
that FMCSA can contact you if there are questions regarding your
submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
put the docket number, FMCSA-2001-11117, in the keyword box, and click
``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on the ``Comment Now!''
button and type your comment into the text box on the following screen.
Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual or on
behalf of a third party and then submit.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period and may change this IFR based on your comments. FMCSA
may issue a final rule at any time after the close of the comment
period.

B. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket number, FMCSA-2001-11117, in the
keyword box, and click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket
Folder'' button and choose the document to review. If you do not have
access to the internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the
Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

C. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.transportation.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On May 5, 2003, FMCSA published an IFR titled ``Limitations on the
Issuance of Commercial Driver's Licenses with a Hazardous Materials
Endorsement'' (68 FR 23844). It revised its regulations to require
State licensing agencies to issue or renew a hazardous materials
endorsement for a CDL only if the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) has determined that the applicant does not pose a
security risk warranting denial of such endorsement. To determine
applicability, a CDL renewal, transfer, or upgrade was also considered
a new issuance and fell within the scope of these requirements if it
involved a hazardous materials endorsement. The IFR implemented FMCSA's
part of the requirements of section 1012 of the USA PATRIOT Act, which
limited the issuance of hazardous materials licenses. Because FMCSA
shares with TSA the responsibility for implementing section 1012, TSA
concurrently published an IFR containing regulations governing the
security risk determination process in 49 CFR parts 1570 and 1572 (May
5, 2003, 68 FR 23852). No public meeting was requested and none was
held. The IFR became effective upon publication on May 5, 2003.
    On April 29, 2005, FMCSA published an IFR titled ``Limitations on
the Issuance of Commercial Driver's Licenses with a Hazardous Materials
Endorsement'' (70 FR 22268). That rule was issued as an IFR because it
related to the 2003 IFR. In the preamble, FMCSA wrote that the 2005 IFR
would be subsumed into the 2003 IFR when that rulemaking was finalized.
FMCSA's 2003 IFR provided a specific date on which States became
subject to the new requirement. The 2005 IFR amended the FMCSRs to
cross-reference the TSA's compliance date as the date when FMCSA's
companion requirements also became applicable (70 FR 22268). Consistent
with the TSA regulations, FMCSA also reduced the amount of advance
notice that States must provide to drivers that a security threat
assessment will be performed when they renew a hazardous materials
endorsement.
    FMCSA solicited comments to the 2003 IFR. The Agency received over
50 comments. No comment period was included with the 2005 IFR.
    On October 5, 2018, Congress enacted the FAA Reauthorization Act of
2018 (Pub. L. 115-254). Under Sec. 1977, a CMV driver who wants to
obtain a hazardous materials endorsement on a commercial driver's
license is an ``applicable individual who is subject to credentialing
or background investigation''. Section 1978 exempted individuals who
hold a valid transportation security card (TSC, or TWIC as implemented
by TSA) issued under section 70105 of Title 46. FMCSA intends to
incorporate this exemption when finalizing the IFRs, subject to TSA

requirements on the issuance of the HME.

Comments Requested

    Considering the passage of time since the publication of the IFRs,
and because some items may not have been touched on during the initial
notice and comment, FMCSA is re-opening the comment period. At the end
of the comment period, FMCSA will consider all issues under its
authority and may change the IFR based on the comments. FMCSA may issue
a final rule at any time after the close of the comment period.

    Issued on: November 23, 2018.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-26250 Filed 12-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: February 15, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 31)]
[Notices]
[Page 7487-7488]
[DOCID:fr15fe07-117]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55260; File No. SR-BSE-2007-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Extend the Time Period for the Position Limits Pilot Program

February 8, 2007.
    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 January 31, 2007, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by BSE. The
Exchange has filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon filing with the
Commission. 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    BSE proposes to amend Chapter III, Section 7 (Position Limits) of
the Rules of the Boston Options Exchange (``BOX''), an options trading
facility of BSE, to extend its current pilot program to increase the
standard position and exercise limits for equity option contracts and
options on the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock (``QQQQ'') (``Pilot
Program''). The text of the proposed rule change is available at BSE,
the Commission's Public Reference Room, and http://www.bostonstock.com.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Pilot Program provides for an increase to the standard position
and exercise limits for equity option contracts and for options on
QQQQs for a six-month period.\5\ Specifically, the Pilot Program
increased the applicable position and exercise limits for equity
options and options on the QQQQ to the following levels:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Pilot Program, which began on March 3, 2005, was
extended on August 15, 2005, February 22, 2006, and August 30, 2006.
See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51317 (March 3, 2005), 70
FR 12254 (March 11, 2005) (SR-BSE-2005-10) (``Pilot Program
Notice''); 52264 (August 15, 2005), 70 FR 48992 (August 22, 2005)
(SR-BSE-2005-37); 53347 (February 22, 2006), 71 FR 10573 (March 1,
2006) (SR-BSE-2006-07); and 54388 (August 30, 2006), 71 FR 52833
(September 7, 2006) (SR-BSE-2006-32).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Current equity option contract        Pilot program equity option
             limit \6\                          contract limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
13,500 contracts.                    25,000 contracts.
22,500 contracts.                    50,000 contracts.
31,500 contracts.                    75,000 contracts.
60,000 contracts.                    200,000 contracts.
75,000 contracts.                    250,000 contracts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current QQQQ option contract limit   Pilot program QQQQ option contract
                                      limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
300,000 contracts.                   900,000 contracts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Except when the Pilot Program is in effect.

    The Exchange believes that extending the Pilot Program for six
months is warranted due to positive feedback from members and for the
reasons cited in the original rule filing that proposed the adoption of
the Pilot Program.\7\ In addition, BOX has not encountered any problems
or difficulties relating to the Pilot Program since its inception. For
these reasons, the BSE requests that the Commission extend the Pilot
Program for an additional six months, through and including September
1, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Pilot Program Notice, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the objective of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 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
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing rule change does not: (1) Significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (2) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (3) become operative for 30
days from the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally may
not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.\12\
However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \13\ permits the Commission to designate
a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes
that waiving the 30-day operative delay is

consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest
because it will allow the Pilot Program to continue uninterrupted.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to
the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of 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. BSE has satisfied the five-day pre-filing
requirement.
    \13\ Id.
    \14\ For purposes only of waiving the operative delay, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File No. SR-BSE-2007-04 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-BSE-2007-04. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of BSE. 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 available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-
BSE-2007-04 and should be submitted on or before March 8, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-2608 Filed 2-14-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 4, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 66)]
[Notices]
[Page 18603]
[DOCID:fr04ap08-130]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Seventy-Sixth Meeting, RTCA Special Committee 159: Global
Positioning System (GPS)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 159 meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of RTCA Special Committee 159: Global Positioning System (GPS).

DATES: The meeting will be held April 14-18, 2008 from 9 a.m. to 4:30
p.m. (unless stated otherwise).

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1828 L Street, NW.,
Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW.,
Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (202)
833-9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub.L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is
hereby given for a Special Committee 159 meeting. The plenary agenda
will include:

April 14

     All Day, Working Group 2C, Inertial (GPS/Inertial),
Macintosh-NBAA Room & Hilton ATA Room.

April 15

     All Day, Working Group 4, Precision Landing Guidance (GPS/
LAAS), MacIntosh-NBAA Room & Hilton ATA Room.

April 16

     All Day, Working Group 2, Wide Area Augmentation System
(GPS/WAAS), ARINC Room.
     All Day, Working Group 4, Precision Landing Guidance
(GPSILAAS), MacIntosh-NBAA Room & Hilton ATA Room.

April 17

     All Day, Working Group 4, Precision Landing Guidance (GPS/
LAAS), MacIntosh-NBAA Room & Hilton ATA Room Morning (9-12 p.m.)
(tentative), WG-6, Interference (GPS Interference), Colson Board Room.

April 18

Plenary Session

     Chairman's Introductory Remarks.
     Approval of Summary of the Seventy-Fifth Meeting held
January 25, 2008, 2007, RTCA Paper No. 071-081SC159-962.
     Review Working Group (WG) Progress and Identify Issues for
Resolution.
    [cir] GPS/3rd Civil Frequency (WG-1).
    [cir] GPSIWASS (WG-2).
    [cir] GPS/GLONASS (WG-2A).
    [cir] GPS/Inertial (WG-2C).
    [cir] GPS/Precision Landing Guidance and (WG-4).
    [cir] GPS/Airport Surface Surveillance (WG-5).
    [cir] GPS/Interference (WG-6).
    [cir] GPS/Antennas (WG-7).
    [cir] GPS/GRAS (WG-8).
     Ad Hoc Group--Report--Proposed Activity--GPS L1 Only MOPS.
     Review of EEJROCAE Activities.
     Assignment/Review of Future Work.
     Other Business.
     Date and Place of Next Meeting.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 26, 2008.
Francisco Estrada C.,
RTCA Advisory Committee.
 [FR Doc. E8-6928 Filed 4-3-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 21, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36014-36017]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15407]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No Docket No. FAA-2011-0527; Airspace Docket No. 11-AWA-2]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class C Airspace; Palm Beach International
Airport, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to modify the Palm Beach International
Airport Class C airspace area by raising the floor of Class C airspace
above Palm Beach County Park Airport (LNA) from 1,200 feet MSL to 1,600
feet MSL. The FAA is proposing this action to enhance safety and enable
more efficient operations at LNA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 22, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2011-
0527 and Airspace Docket No. 11-AWA-2, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace, Regulations
and ATC Procedures Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2011-0527 and Airspace Docket No. 11-AWA-2) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Nos. FAA-2011-0527 and Airspace Docket No. 11-AWA-2.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified closing date
for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date
for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/recently_published/
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation
Administration, Room 210, 1701 Columbia Ave., College Park, GA 30337.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to modify the Palm Beach International
Airport Class C airspace area by raising the floor of Class C airspace
to 1,600 feet MSL within an area overlying, and to the south of, the
Palm Beach County Park Airport (see attached chart). Currently, the
floor of Class C airspace in the vicinity of LNA is at 1,200 feet MSL.
Raising the Class C floor as proposed would enhance safety by providing
additional clearance between rotorcraft and fixed-wing aircraft
entering the traffic pattern at LNA. This would allow fixed-wing
aircraft entering the traffic pattern to safely overfly the existing
helicopter patterns and also would allow LNA helicopter training
activities to take place at higher altitudes. The boundaries would be
depicted as subareas A, B, and C for clarity.
    In addition, a minor correction is made to the geographic
coordinates of LNA to reflect the current information in the FAA's
aeronautical database.
    Class C airspace areas are published in paragraph 4,000 of FAA
Order 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010 and effective September 15, 2010,
which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class C airspace
area modification proposed in this document would be published
subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule'' under Department of Transportation (DOT)
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it modifies terminal airspace as required to preserve the safe and
efficient flow of air traffic.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9U, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15,
2010, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 4000--Subpart C--Class C Airspace

* * * * *

ASO FL C Palm Beach International Airport, FL [Amended]

Palm Beach International Airport, FL
    (Lat. 26[deg]40'59'' N., long. 80[deg]05'44'' W.)
Palm Beach County Park Airport
    (Lat. 26[deg]35'35'' N., long. 80[deg]05'06'' W.)

Boundaries

    Area A. That airspace extending upward from the surface to and
including 4,000 feet MSL within a 5-mile radius of Palm Beach
International Airport, excluding that airspace within a 2-mile
radius of the Palm Beach County Park Airport.
    Area B. That airspace extending upward from 1,600 feet MSL to
and including 4,000 feet MSL within an area bounded on the north by
a line direct from the intersection of the Florida Turnpike (Highway
91) and Lantana Road to the intersection of a 5-mile radius of the
Palm Beach International Airport and a 2-mile radius west of the
Palm Beach County Park Airport and a 2-mile radius north of the Palm
Beach County Park Airport, on the east by a line direct from the
intersection of a 5-mile radius of the Palm Beach International
Airport and a 2-mile radius east of the Palm Beach County Park
Airport to the intersection of a 10-mile radius of the Palm Beach
International Airport and US 1, on the south by a 10-mile radius of
the Palm Beach International Airport, and on the west by the Florida
Turnpike.
    Area C. That airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet MSL to
and including 4,000 feet MSL within a 10-mile radius of the Palm
Beach International Airport, excluding area B.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 13, 2011.
Gary A. Norek,
Acting Manager, Airspace, Regulations and ATC Procedures Group.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP21JN11.025

[FR Doc. 2011-15407 Filed 6-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C