[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 64 (Monday, April 4, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19498-19499]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07031]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER22-1482-000]

Blythe Mesa Solar II, 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
Blythe Mesa Solar II, 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 April 18, 2022.
    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,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 29, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-07031 Filed 4-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 34 (Friday, February 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 9346]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03511]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0653; FRL--9590-01-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Surface Coating of Large Appliances
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), NSPS for Surface Coating of Large
Appliances (EPA ICR Number 0659.15, OMB Control Number 2060-0108), to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through April 30,
2022. Public comments were previously requested, via the Federal
Register, on February 8, 2021 during a 60-day comment period. This
notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller
description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden
and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before March 21,
2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2020-0653, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method)
or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
    Submit written comments and recommendations to OMB for the proposed
information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Muntasir Ali, Sector Policies and
Program Division (D243-05), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
https://www.regulations.gov, or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC
West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC.
The telephone number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For
additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Surface
Coating of Large Appliances were proposed on December 24, 1980;
promulgated on October 27, 1982; and most-recently revised on October
17, 2000. These regulations apply to large appliance coating
facilities. In general, all NSPS standards require initial
notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/
operators of the affected facilities. New facilities include those that
commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction after the date
of proposal. This information is being collected to assure compliance
with 40 CFR part 60, subpart SS.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Facilities that perform surface
coating of large appliance products.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart SS).
    Estimated number of respondents: 16 (total).
    Frequency of response: Quarterly, semiannually.
    Total estimated burden: 1,600 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $192,000 (per year), which includes $2,100 in
annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the estimates: There is an adjustment decrease in the
total estimated burden from the most-recently approved ICR. This
increase is not due to any program changes. The adjustment decrease in
burden from the most-recently approved ICR is due to a decrease in the
number of sources. The number of respondents has been adjusted
downwards from the most-recently approved ICR to reflect a more
accurate estimate of subject sources, based on data collected through
EPA's Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) database and a
review of large appliance coating facilities subject to other federal
regulations. The decrease in the number of respondents also results in
a decrease in the operation and maintenance costs. There are no
estimated new respondents anticipated in the next three years;
therefore, there are no capital costs.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-03511 Filed 2-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 20, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 243)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 79294-79295]
[DOCID:fr20de10-6]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0937; Airspace Docket No. 10-ASO-35]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Henderson, KY

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class E airspace at Henderson, KY. The
Geneva Non-Directional Beacon (NDB) has been decommissioned and new
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) have been developed for
Henderson City-County Airport. This action enhances the safety and
airspace management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the
airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, March 10, 2011. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melinda Giddens, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On October 21, 2010, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to amend Class E airspace 700 feet above
the surface, at Henderson, KY (75 FR 64970) Docket No. FAA-2010-0937.
Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received. Class E airspace designations are published in
paragraph 6005 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 E airspace designations listed in this document
will be published subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface to support new SIAPs developed at Henderson City-County
Airport, Henderson, KY. Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to
the decommissioning of the Geneva NDB and cancellation of the NDB
approach, and for continued safety and management of IFR operations at
the airport.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this 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
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends Class E airspace at Henderson, KY.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9U, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 18, 2010, effective September 15, 2010, is amended
as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ASO KY E5 Henderson, KY [AMENDED]

Henderson City-County Airport, KY
    (Lat. 37[deg]48'28'' N., long. 87[deg]41'09'' W.)
Pocket City VORTAC, Evansville, IN
    (Lat. 37[deg]55'42'' N., long. 87[deg]45'45'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.5-mile radius of the Henderson City-County Airport and
within 1.0 miles each side of the 153[deg] radial from the Pocket
City VORTAC extending from the 6.5-mile radius of the Henderson
City-County Airport to 8.2 miles southeast of the VORTAC.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia on December 10, 2010.
Barry A. Knight,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2010-31765 Filed 12-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 41 (Tuesday, March 3, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11521-11522]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04311]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0078; Notice 2]

AGC Flat Glass North America, Inc., Grant of Petition For
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Grant of petition.

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

SUMMARY: AGC Flat Glass North America, Inc., dba AGC Automotive
Americas Co. (AGC) has determined that certain glazing that it
manufactured as replacement equipment for model year 2003-2008 Toyota
Matrix vehicles, do not fully comply with paragraph S5.1 of Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials. AGC
has filed an appropriate report dated May 23, 2013, pursuant to 49 CFR
part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.

ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Luis
Figueroa, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile
(202) 366-5930.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. AGC's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and
the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, AGC
submitted a petition for an exemption from the notification and remedy
requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    Notice of receipt of AGC's petition was published, with a 30-Day
public comment period, on August 14, 2014 in the Federal Register (79
FR 47722). One comment was received from Toyota Motor Engineering &
Manufacturing North America, Inc. (Toyota). To view the petition,
comment and supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the
online search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2014-0078.''
    II. Replacement Equipment Involved: Affected are approximately
1,435 replacement back windows (backlites) for model year 2003-2008
Toyota Matrix vehicles that AGC manufactured on February 28, 2012. The
subject glazing is labeled ``AGC Automotive, DOT-376 M2H5 AS2, 30B,
Temperlite.''
    In the associated Defect and Noncompliance Report that AGC
submitted to NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, AGC indicated that, as
of May 23, 2014, approximately 941 of the affected 1,435 backlites have
already been removed from the stream of commerce, leaving 494 of the
backlites subject to notification and recall.
    III. Noncompliance: AGC explains that the noncompliance is that the
affected glazing does not fully comply with Paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No.
205 because some portions of the glass located in the wing area of the
affected backlites may not fragment into pieces that are small enough
to meet the standard set forth in Section 5.7 of ANSI Z26.1-1996
(fragment must weigh less than 4.25 g).
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No. 205 incorporates by
reference ANSI Z26.1-1996 and other industry standards. Specifically,
Section S5.7 (Fracture Test) of ANSI Z26.1-1996 requires that no
individual fragment free of cracks and obtained within 3 minutes
subsequent to testing shall weigh more than 4.25 g (0.15 oz.).
    V. Summary of AGC's Analyses: AGC stated its belief that the
noncompliance exhibited by some glass fragments breaking into pieces
that weighing more than 4.25 g does not create a risk to motor vehicle
safety for the following reasons:
    1. AGC testing demonstrates that the noncompliant fragments have no
adverse impact on the characteristics of the glass performing as
tempered glass.
    2. The design of the 2003-2008 Toyota Matrix leaves it unlikely to
cause any safety risks to any vehicle occupant if the ARG backlite
breaks.
    3. AGC's destructive testing confirmed all noncompliant fragments
do not impact the safety of the vehicle or its occupants.
    AGC stated that while it recognizes that its tests were static and
that the actual results in a crash might be somewhat different. For
example, AGC stated its belief that in a rear or partial rear
collision, if the glass breaks, most of that glass will fall and remain
in the general area of the breakage since the remainder of the vehicle
will be propelled forward in the later phases of the crash. This makes
it even less likely that any glass will enter or be propelled forward
enough to reach the passenger compartment of a vehicle. ARG expects
that the subject backlites will react no differently.
    Refer to AGC's petition for more detailed descriptions of the data
and analyses that it provided in support of its reasoning.
    AGC has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the
noncompliance so that all future production of the subject glazing will
fully comply with FMVSS No. 205.
    In summation, AGC believes that the described noncompliance of the
subject glazing is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that
its petition, to exempt AGC from providing recall notification of
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.

NHTSA Decision

    NHTSA Analysis: FMVSS No. 205 specifies labeling and performance
requirements for automotive glazing. As related to the subject
noncompliance, FMVSS No. 205 incorporates ANSI Z26.1 (1996) and other
industry standards by reference (S.5.1). Paragraph 4.1 of ANSI Z26.1
(1996)

specifies the grouping of tests applicable to each item of glazing. The
groupings are also summarized in Table I. Fracture, Test No. 7 (par.
5.7), is part of a grouping of tests specified for item of glazing 2
(AS-2). The purpose of the fracture test is to ensure that resulting
fragments are light enough to minimize risk of injury after a glazing
fracture. Six production glazing items must be tested (paragraph
3.2.1(3) of ANSI Z26.1 (1996)) and upon fracture no individual piece is
to weigh more than 4.25 g (paragraph 5.7.4 of ANSI Z26.1 (1996)).
    In the subject petition AGC states that it was alerted to a
possible noncompliance by a customer concerning replacement backlites
that it manufactured for 2003-2008 Toyota Matrix vehicles. In response,
AGC conducted fracture testing in accordance with paragraph 5.7 of ANSI
Z26.1 (1996) and other testing. The fracture testing produced fragments
weighting over the maximum allowed 4.25 g.
    AGC stated its belief that the backlites ``broke like tempered
safety glass and exhibited all the characteristics of safety glazing
material required in ANSI Z26.1.'' The fact that there were fragments
that weigh over the required 4.25 g and some fragments weighing over 10
g contradicts AGC's statement. A variation in the size of the
fragmented material points to tempering that is not completely
consistent with the intent of Test No. 7, ``verify that the fragments
produced by fracture of safety glazing materials are such as to
minimize risk of injury.'' As stated in ANSI Z26.1 this minimization of
risk is afforded by fragments weighing 4.25 g or less.
    AGC also explains that the failures are constrained to the winged
side edges of the backlites and that 90% of the glass meets the 4.25 g
requirement. In addition, AGC claims that since ``virtually all'' of
the black ceramic painted portion of the winged side edges is covered
by the door frame and on the exterior of the car this portion of the
backlite curves out towards the sides of the vehicle, and that the
chances of passengers being injured by broken glass during a crash are
small.
    NHTSA also reviewed Toyota's comment that it submitted to the
docket in response to the publication of the notice of petition. In
summary, Toyota states that it does not believe that the noncompliance
poses an unreasonable risk to safety due to the small number of
vehicles with the noncompliant glazing installed and because 90% of
each backlite complies with the fracture test requirements.
    The agency does not agree with Toyota's reasoning. The purpose of
FMVSS No. 205 is to ``reduce injuries'' without regard to the number of
vehicles involved. However, AGC has shown that the noncompliance is
limited to the winged black ceramic area of the backlite. In the
vehicle's interior this area sits on top of the frame and is not
exposed to passengers, and in the outside it faces away from the
vehicle. Therefore, NHTSA concludes that in this specific case, due to
the location of the noncompliant winged section of the backlite in
conjunction with the shape of the subject vehicle, there is a low
probability that fragments would be propelled to the inside of the
vehicle in the event of a glazing fracture.
    NHTSA Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has
decided that AGC has met its burden of persuasion that the subject
FMVSS No. 205 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, AGC's petition is hereby granted and AGC is exempted from
the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for, that
noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision
only applies to the subject noncompliant glazing that AGC no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed.
However, the granting of this petition does not relieve vehicle
distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant glazing under their control after AGC
notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-04311 Filed 3-2-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 224 (Tuesday, November 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71368-71372]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25358]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96334; File No. SR-PEARL-2022-48]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule
2614(f), Self-Trade Protection Modifiers

November 16, 2022.
    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice
is hereby given that on November 7, 2022, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX
Pearl'' or the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposed rule change expand the
availability of the Exchange's existing Self-Trade Protection (``STP'')
modifiers to more Equity Members \3\ on the Exchange's equity trading
platform (referred to herein as ``MIAX Pearl Equities'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Equity Member'' is a Member authorized by the
Exchange to transact business on MIAX Pearl Equities. See Exchange
Rule 1901.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl at MIAX
Pearl's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 2614(f) to expand the
availability of the Exchange's existing STP modifiers to more Equity
Members on MIAX Pearl Equities.\4\ Specifically, the Exchange proposes
to allow Equity Members to apply STP to orders submitted by an
Affiliate \5\ that is also an Equity Member (an Equity Member
Affiliate), if they choose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange notes that provisions of Exchange Rule 2614
that are not subject to this proposed rule change were amended in
separate filings, but those amendments have not yet been
implemented. See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 95679
(September 6, 2022), 87 FR 55866 (September 12, 2022) (SR-PEARL-
2022-34); and 96205 (November 1, 2022) (SR-PEARL-2022-43).
    \5\ The term ``affiliate'' of or person ``affiliated with''
another person means a person who, directly, or indirectly,
controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with, such
other person. See Exchange Rule 100. The term ``person'' refers to a
natural person, corporation, partnership (general or limited),
limited liability company, association, joint stock company, trust,
trustee of a trust fund, or any organized group of persons whether
incorporated or not and a government or agency or political
subdivision thereof. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange offers optional anti-internalization functionality to
Users \6\ in the form of STP modifiers that enable a User to prevent
two of its orders from executing against each other. Currently, Users
can set the STP modifier to apply at the market participant identifier
(``MPID''), Exchange Member identifier, or trading group identifier
(any such existing identifier, a ``Unique Identifier'').\7\ The STP
modifier on the order with the most recent time stamp controls the
interaction between two orders marked with STP modifiers. STP
functionality assists market participants in reducing trading costs
from unwanted executions potentially resulting from the interaction of
executable buy and sell trading interest from the same firm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The term ``User'' means any Member or Sponsored Participant
who is authorized to obtain access to the System pursuant to
Exchange Rule 2602. See Exchange Rule 1901.
    \7\ See Exchange Rule 2614(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change would permit Equity Members to direct that
orders entered into the System not execute against orders entered
across MPIDs that are Equity Member Affiliates. The Exchange believes
that this enhancement will provide helpful flexibility for Equity
Members that wish to prevent trading against all orders entered by
market participants that are affiliated with each other, instead of
just orders that are entered under the same Unique Identifier (as
currently defined).
    The Exchange offers the following four (4) STP modifiers to Equity
Members: Cancel Newest, Cancel Oldest, Decrement and Cancel, and Cancel
Both. An order marked with the Cancel Newest modifier will not execute
against a contra-side order marked with any STP modifier originating
from the same Unique Identifier (as currently defined) and the order
with the most recent time stamp marked with the Cancel Newest modifier
will be cancelled. The contra-side order with the older timestamp
marked with an STP modifier will remain on the MIAX Pearl Equities
Book.\8\ An order marked with the Cancel Oldest modifier will not
execute against a contra-side order marked with any STP modifier
originating from the same Unique Identifier and the order with the
older time stamp marked with the STP modifier will be cancelled. The
contra-side order with the most recent timestamp marked with the STP
modifier will remain on the MIAX Pearl Equities Book. An order marked
with the Decrement and Cancel modifier will not execute against contra-
side interest marked with any STP modifier originating from the same
Unique Identifier. If both orders are equivalent in size, both orders
will be cancelled. If both orders are not equivalent in size, the
equivalent size will be cancelled and the larger order will be
decremented by the size of the smaller order, with the balance
remaining on the MIAX Pearl Equities Book. Finally, an order marked
with the Cancel Both modifier will not execute against contra-side
interest marked with any STP modifier originating from the same Unique
Identifier and the entire size of both orders will be cancelled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Exchange Rule 1901 defines the term ``MIAX Pearl Equities
Book'' as ``the electronic book of orders in equity securities
maintained by the System.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange understands that some Equity Members would like to
apply STP to orders submitted by their Affiliates who are also Equity
Members. For example, if Equity Member A is under common control with
Equity Member B, the two Equity Members would like the option of
applying STP to orders submitted by the two Equity Member Affiliates.
Therefore, the Exchange proposes to expand the availability of the
anti-internalization functionality it offers by allowing STP groups to
be set at the Equity Member Affiliate level in addition to the current
options of settings at the MPID, Exchange Member identifier, or trading
group identifier level. This proposal is designed to offer STP
functionality to Equity Member Affiliates that have divided their
business activities between separate corporate entities without
disadvantaging them when compared to Equity Members that operate those
business activities within a single corporate entity. This proposal
would expand the levels at which STP groups can be set by an Equity
Member, but nothing in this proposal would change the manner in which
two orders in the same STP group interact.
    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 2614(f)
to include ``Equity Member Affiliate'' as one of the possible levels
for STP groupings (in addition to the current options of MPID, Exchange
Member identifier, and trading group identifier). The Exchange also
proposes to amend Exchange Rule 2614(f) to specify that for purposes of
the rule, the term ``Equity Member Affiliate'' shall mean an Equity
Member that is affiliated with another Equity Member pursuant to
Exchange Rule 100.\9\ If Equity Members choose to have STP applied
across Equity Member Affiliates, the anti-internalization

functionality would prevent orders from such Equity Member Affiliates
from trading against one another.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Assume Equity Member A and Equity Member B satisfy the definition
of Equity Member Affiliate and instructed the Exchange to prohibit
their orders that contain STP modifiers from executing against one
another. Under this proposal, if Equity Member A submits an order to
buy 100 shares of security ABC for $10.00 with an Equity Member-
supplied STP modifier, and Equity Member B, an Equity Member Affiliate
of Equity Member A, submits an order to sell 100 shares of security ABC
for $10.00 also with an Equity Member-supplied STP modifier, the two
otherwise executable orders will not execute, but will instead interact
based upon the Equity Member-supplied STP modifier on the newer order.
    An Equity Member must inform the Exchange's Membership Department
which other Equity Member(s) it is affiliated with and meet the
definition of Equity Member Affiliate for purposes of using STP. Equity
Members will be responsible for having proper internal documentation in
their books and records substantiating that two or more Equity Members
using STP are Equity Member Affiliates of one another. The Exchange
notes that it already utilizes this grouping of Equity Member
Affiliates in its fee schedule so as not to penalize two affiliated
members when calculating rebate tiers.\10\ The Exchange also notes that
other equity exchanges recently amended their rules to allow affiliate
grouping for their own anti-internalization functionality.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See the definition of ADAV in the Exchange's fee schedule
available at https://www.miaxoptions.com/sites/default/files/fee_schedule-files/MIAX_Pearl_Equities_Fee_Schedule_09012022.pdf
(dated September 1, 2022).
    \11\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 96187
(October 31, 2022), 87 FR 6674 (November 4, 2022) (SR-IEX-2022-08)
(filed for immediate effectiveness on October 24, 2022); 96156
(October 25, 2022), 87 FR 65633 (October 31, 2022) (SR-BX-2022-020)
(filed for immediate effectiveness on October 21, 2022); and 96154
(October 25, 2022), 87 FR 65631 (October 31, 2022) (SR-Phlx-2022-43)
(filed for immediate effectiveness on October 21, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposed rule change is designed to provide additional
flexibility to Equity Members in how they implement self-trade
prevention provided by the Exchange, and thereby better manage their
order flow and prevent undesirable executions or the potential for
``wash sales'' that may occur as a result of the speed of trading in
today's marketplace. Based on informal discussions with Equity Members,
the Exchange believes that the proposed amendments will be useful to
Equity Members in implementing their own compliance controls.
Furthermore, the additional STP functionality may assist Members in
complying with certain rules and regulations of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act (``ERISA'') that preclude and/or limit managing
broker-dealers of such accounts from trading as principal with orders
generated for those accounts.
    The Exchange notes that, as with the current anti-internalization
functionality offered by the Exchange, use of the proposed new Equity
Member Affiliate STP grouping will not alleviate, or otherwise exempt,
Equity Members from their best execution obligations. As such, Equity
Members and their Affiliates using STP will continue to be obligated to
take appropriate steps to ensure customer orders which were prevented
from execution due to anti-internalization ultimately receive the same
price, or a better price, than they would have received had execution
of the orders not been inhibited by anti-internalization. Further, as
with current rule provisions, Market Makers and other Users may not use
STP functionality to evade the firm quote obligation, as specified in
Exchange Rule 2606(b), and the STP functionality must be used in a
manner consistent with just and equitable principles of trade.\12\ For
these reasons, the Exchange believes the proposed new Equity Member
Affiliate level of STP grouping offers Equity Members enhanced order
processing functionality that may prevent potentially undesirable
executions without negatively impacting broker-dealer best execution
obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Exchange Rule 2100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation
    Due to the technological changes associated with this proposed
change, the Exchange will issue a trading alert publicly announcing the
implementation date of this proposed rule change to provide Equity
Members with adequate time to prepare for the associated technological
changes. The Exchange anticipates that the implementation date will be
in the fourth quarter of 2022.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\13\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5),\14\ in particular, because it 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 proposed rule change is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest because allowing Equity
Member Affiliates to be part of the same STP group will provide Equity
Members with additional flexibility with respect to how they implement
self-trade protections provided by the Exchange that may better support
their trading strategies and compliance controls. Equity Members that
prefer the current anti-internalization groupings offered by the
Exchange can continue to use them without any modification (i.e., if
two Equity Member Affiliates do not wish to have orders from the two
Equity Members be in the same STP group, the Equity Members will not
have to make any changes to the manner in which they submit orders to
the Exchange).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted in the Purpose section, the Exchange believes that
providing Equity Members with more flexibility and control over the
interactions of their orders will better prevent undesirable executions
or the potential for ``wash sales'' that may occur as a result of the
speed of trading in today's marketplace. The Equity Member Affiliate
level STP grouping may better assist Equity Members in complying with
certain ERISA rules and regulations that preclude and/or limit managing
broker-dealers of such accounts from trading as principal with orders
generated for those accounts.
    Additionally, as discussed in the Purpose section, allowing Equity
Members to apply STP to trades submitted by their Affiliates that are
also Equity Members is intended to avoid disparate treatment of firms
that have divided their various business activities between separate
corporate entities as compared to firms that operate those business
activities within a single corporate entity. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes that this proposed rule change is fair and equitable, and not
unreasonably discriminatory.
    Further, the Exchange believes that providing expanded STP grouping
options may streamline certain regulatory functions by reducing false
positive results that may occur on wash trading surveillance reports
when two orders in the same STP group are

executed, notwithstanding that the transaction may not constitute a
wash trade.
    Finally, as discussed in the Purpose section, the Exchange notes
other equity exchanges recently amended their rules to allow affiliate
grouping for their own anti-internalization functionality.\15\
Consequently, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule
change raises any new or novel issues not already considered by the
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 12 [sic].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. To the contrary, the
proposal is designed to enhance the Exchange's competitiveness by
providing additional flexibility over the level at which orders are
grouped, thereby incentivizing Equity Members to send orders to the
Exchange and increase the liquidity available on the Exchange.
Additionally, the proposed rule change is designed to assist Equity
Members with compliance with the securities laws that prohibit wash
trading as well as ERISA requirements. The Exchange also notes that the
proposed new STP grouping option, like the Exchange's current anti-
internalization functionality, is completely optional and Equity
Members can determine on an order-by-order, MPID, Exchange Member
identifier, trading group identifier, or Equity Member Affiliate
identifier basis whether to apply anti-internalization protections to
orders submitted to the Exchange. The proposed rule change would also
improve the Exchange's ability to compete with other exchanges that
recently amended their rules to allow affiliate grouping for their own
anti-internalization functionality.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Moreover, there
is no barrier to other national securities exchanges adopting similar
anti-internalization grouping at the Equity Member Affiliate level.
    The Exchange also does not believe that the proposed rule change
will impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary
or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. All Equity
Members will continue to be eligible to use the Exchange's anti-
internalization functionality. While not every Equity Member engages in
a business that might involve risks of self-matching against an
Affiliate's orders, for the Equity Members that do face that risk, the
proposed additional anti-internalization grouping is designed to help
such Equity Members with their compliance with the securities laws and
ERISA. Further, implementation of anti-internalization functionality
impacts only an Equity Member's orders (and the orders of the Equity
Member Affiliates), and not the orders of other, unaffiliated Equity
Members. As discussed in the Purpose and Statutory Basis sections,
allowing Equity Members to apply STP to trades submitted by their
Affiliates that are also Equity Members is intended to avoid disparate
treatment of firms that have divided their various business activities
between separate corporate entities as compared to firms that operate
those business activities within a single corporate entity.

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 after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \17\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) \18\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \18\ 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, 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.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \19\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\20\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposed
rule change may become operative upon filing. The Exchange states that
waiver of the operative delay would be consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest because it would enable the
Exchange to implement the proposed rule change as soon as possible,
which would allow Equity Member Affiliates to be part of the same STP
group during the operative delay period and provide Equity Members with
additional flexibility in the near term with respect to how they
implement self-trade protections that may better support their trading
strategies and compliance controls. The Exchange also states that
waiver of the operative delay would allow the Exchange to avoid
disparate treatment during the operative delay period of firms that
have divided their various business activities between separate
corporate entities as compared to firms that operate those business
activities within a single corporate entity. Further, other equity
exchanges recently amended their rules to allow affiliate grouping for
their anti-internalization functionalities. For these reasons, and
because the proposed rule change does not raise any novel regulatory
issues, the Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and
designates the proposal operative upon filing.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \21\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day 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 summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-PEARL-2022-48 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PEARL-2022-48. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-PEARL-2022-48 and should be submitted on
or before December 13, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-25358 Filed 11-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 6, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 558]
[FR Doc No: 2020-29282]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4575-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2020-0001]

Oklahoma; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Oklahoma (FEMA-4575-DR), dated December 21,
2020, and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued December 21, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated December 21, 2020, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Oklahoma resulting from a severe winter storm during the period
of October 26 to October 29, 2020, is of sufficient severity and
magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.
5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such
a major disaster exists in the State of Oklahoma.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State.
Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75
percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Traci L. Brasher, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major
disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Oklahoma have been designated
as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Caddo, Canadian, Cleveland, Dewey, Grady, Kingfisher, Kiowa,
Logan, Noble, Oklahoma, Payne, Pottawatomie, and Roger Mills
Counties for Public Assistance.
    All areas within the State of Oklahoma are eligible for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Pete Gaynor,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2020-29282 Filed 1-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 134 (Thursday, July 12, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 41146-41147]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17030]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0286; FRL-9698-6]

Delegation of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Source Categories; Gila River Indian Community

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 112(l) of the Clean Air Act as amended in
1990, EPA is proposing to grant delegation of specific national
emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) to the Gila
River Indian Community Department of Environmental Quality in Arizona.

DATES: Any comments on this proposal must arrive by August 13, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2012-0286, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (AIR-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments 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 Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. 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.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105. While
all documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly
available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rynda Kay, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4118<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document concerns the delegation of
unchanged NESHAP to the Gila River Indian Community Department of
Environmental Quality (GRIC) in Arizona. In the Rules section of this
Federal Register, EPA is granting GRIC the authority to implement and
enforce specified NESHAP. The direct final rule also explains the
procedure for future delegation of NESHAP to GRIC. EPA is taking direct
final action without prior proposal because the Agency believes this
action is not controversial. If we receive adverse comments, however,
we will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule and
address the comments in a subsequent action based on this proposed
rule. Please note that if we receive adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
    We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone
interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not
receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further
information, please see the direct final action.

    Dated: June 22, 2012.
Elizabeth Adams,
Acting Director, Air Division, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-17030 Filed 7-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P