[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 246 (Wednesday, December 26, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66200-66209]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27746]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2018-0572; FRL-9988-22-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Redesignation of the Cleveland Area to
Attainment of the 2012 Annual Standard for Fine Particulate Matter

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On July 24, 2018, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(Ohio) submitted a request for the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to redesignate the Cleveland area to attainment of the 2012
annual national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or standards) for
fine particulate matter (PM2.5) under the Clean Air Act
(CAA). EPA is proposing to grant Ohio's request. EPA is proposing to
determine that the Cleveland area has attained the 2012 annual
PM2.5 standard, based on the most recent three years of
certified air quality data. EPA is proposing to approve a revision to
the Ohio state implementation plan (SIP) that the Cleveland area meets
the requirements for redesignation under the CAA and for the state's
maintenance plan for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS through
2030. Ohio's maintenance plan submission includes motor vehicle
emission budgets (MVEBs) for the mobile source contribution of
PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides (NOX) to the Cleveland
area for transportation conformity purposes; EPA is proposing to
approve the MVEBs for 2022 and 2030 into the Ohio SIP. EPA is taking
these actions in accordance with the CAA and EPA's implementation
regulations regarding the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 25, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2018-0572 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the ``For Further Information Contact'' section. For the
full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Leslie, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What actions are EPA taking?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the state's request?
    1. Attainment Determination (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i))
    2. Section 110 and Part D Requirements, and Approval SIP under
Section 110(k) (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v))
    3. Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
    4. Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
    5. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEBs) for PM2.5
and NOX, and Safety Margin for the Cleveland Area
V. What are the effects of EPA's actions?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What actions are EPA taking?

    EPA is taking several actions related to the redesignation of the
Cleveland area to attainment of the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA is proposing that the Cleveland moderate nonattainment area is
attaining the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to
approve Ohio's 2012 annual PM2.5 maintenance plan for the
Cleveland area as a revision to the Ohio SIP.
    EPA is proposing to find that Ohio meets the requirements for
redesignation of the Cleveland area to attainment of the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is
thus proposing to grant Ohio's request to change the designation of the
Cleveland area from nonattainment to attainment of the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA's analysis of these actions are discussed
in Section IV of today's rulemaking.

II. What is the background for these actions?

    On December 14, 2012, EPA promulgated a revised primary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS to provide increased protection of public health
from fine particle pollution (78 FR 3086; January 15, 2013). In that
action, EPA strengthened the primary annual PM2.5 standard
from 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) to 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\,
which is attained when the 3-year average of the annual arithmetic
means does not exceed 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\. On December 18, 2014, the EPA
Administrator signed a final action promulgating initial designations
for the 2012 primary PM2.5 NAAQS based on 2011-2013 air
quality monitoring data for the majority of the United States. The
Cleveland nonattainment area is in northeastern Ohio and includes
Cuyahoga and Lorain counties. Ohio's main PM2.5 components
are primary particles (organic particles, crustal material, and
elemental carbon) and NOX, which were included in the
attainment demonstration analysis. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
sulfur dioxide (SO2) and ammonia (NH3) were
determined to be insignificant for attainment and New Source Review
(NSR) purposes (83 FR 45193), based on a concentration-based
contribution analysis and a sensitivity-based analysis conducted in
accordance with the

August 26, 2016 Implementation Rule (81 FR 58010).

III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?

    The CAA sets forth criteria for redesignating a nonattainment area
to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for
redesignation provided that: (1) The Administrator determines that the
area has attained the applicable NAAQS based on current air quality
data; (2) the Administrator has fully approved an applicable SIP for
the area under section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) the Administrator
determines that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and
enforceable emission reductions resulting from implementation of the
applicable SIP, Federal air pollution control regulations, or other
permanent and enforceable emission reductions; (4) the Administrator
has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area meeting the
requirements of section 175A of the CAA; and (5) the state containing
the area has met all requirements applicable to the area for purposes
of redesignation under section 110 and part D of the CAA.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of the state's request?

    EPA is proposing to redesignate the Cleveland area to attainment of
the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and to approve Ohio's
maintenance plan. The basis for EPA's action are as follows:
1. Attainment Determination (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i))
    To redesignate an area from nonattainment to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). For PM2.5, an area is
attaining the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS if it meets the
standard, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.13 and appendix N
of part 50, based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of
quality-assured air quality monitoring data. To attain the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS, the 3-year average of the annual arithmetic
mean concentration, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50,
appendix N, must be less than or equal to 12.0 [micro]g/m\3\ at all
relevant monitoring sites in the subject area over a 3-year period. The
relevant data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance with
40 CFR part 58 and recorded in the EPA Air Quality System (AQS)
database. The monitors generally should have remained at the same
location for the duration of the monitoring period required for
demonstrating attainment.
    EPA reviewed the certified, quality assured/quality controlled
PM2.5 monitoring data from the Cleveland area for the 2012
annual PM2.5 NAAQS from 2015-2017 and determined that the
design value for the area is less than the standard of 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\
for that period. The PM2.5 design values for monitors with
complete data are summarized in Table 1:

                          Table 1--Monitoring Data for the Cleveland Area for 2015-2017
                                    [2012 annual PM2.5 standard ([mu]g/m\3\)]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Year                           Average
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Site                    County            2015            2016            2017          2015-2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
39-035-0034...................  Cuyahoga........             9.2             7.8             7.8             8.2
39-035-0038...................  ................            11.8            10.0             9.9            10.6
39-035-0045...................  ................            11.0             9.4             9.7            10.1
39-035-0060...................  ................          * 11.7             9.6             9.7            10.0
39-035-0065...................  ................            13.3            10.7            11.2            11.7
39-035-0073...................  ................            (**)            (**)             7.3
39-035-1002...................  ................             9.1             7.8             8.1             8.3
39-093-3002...................  Lorain..........             8.2             7.0             7.6             7.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Data completeness requirements met by substituting data from a secondary monitor resulting in a valid design
  value.
** New monitor started April 1, 2017.

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Cleveland area is attaining
the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This proposed determination is
based upon complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient air
monitoring data for the 2015-2017 monitoring period that show the area
has monitored attainment of 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
    Pursuant to section 179(c) of the CAA, EPA is also proposing to
determine that, based on air quality monitoring data for 2015-2017, the
Cleveland area is attaining the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA
assessed whether the Cleveland area has attained the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS, based on the most recent three years of
complete, certified and quality-assured data, and whether the Cleveland
area attained the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date of December 31, 2021, based on monitored data from
2015-2017. Under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 50.7, the annual primary
and secondary PM2.5 standards are met when the annual
arithmetic mean concentration, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR
part 50, appendix N, is less than or equal to 12.0 mg/m\3\ at all
relevant monitoring sites in the area.
    EPA has reviewed the ambient air quality monitoring data in the
Cleveland area, consistent with the requirements contained at 40 CFR
part 50. EPA's review focused on data recorded in the EPA AQS database,
for the Cleveland area for PM2.5 nonattainment area from
2015 to 2017. EPA also considered preliminary data for 2018, which have
not been certified, but which are consistent with the area's continued
attainment.
    All monitors in the Cleveland area recorded complete data in
accordance with criteria set forth by EPA in 40 CFR part 50, appendix
N, where a complete year of air quality data comprises four calendar
quarters, with each quarter containing data from at least 75 percent
(%) capture of the scheduled sampling days. Available data are
sufficient for comparison to the NAAQS if three consecutive complete
years of data exist.
2. Section 110 and Part D Requirements, and Approval SIP Under Section
110(k) (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v))
    EPA has determined that Ohio has met all currently applicable SIP
requirements for purposes of redesignation for the Cleveland area under
section 110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements), and Part D planning
requirements. Ohio's 2016 emissions inventory was approved as meeting
the

section 172(c)(3) comprehensive emissions inventory requirement on
September 6, 2018 (83 FR 45193). Ohio's reasonably available control
technology (RACT)/reasonable available control measure (RACM) analysis
was submitted as part of the October 14, 2016 attainment demonstration.
In its RACT/RACM analysis, Ohio found that existing measures for
PM2.5, and NOX for area sources, mobile sources
and stationary sources constitute RACT/RACM, and Ohio found that no new
additional measures or controls are economically or technically
feasible. Ohio's attainment demonstration also included a demonstration
that the PM2.5 precursors VOC, SO2 and
NH3 are insignificant for the purpose of attainment planning
(including RACT/RACM). Ohio's RACT/RACM analysis was approved on
September 6, 2018 (83 FR 45193).
    The reasonable further progress (RFP) as required under section
172(c)(2) is defined as progress that must be made toward attainment.
This requirement is not relevant for purposes of redesignation because
the Cleveland area has monitored attainment of the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. (``General Preamble for the Interpretation of
Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990''; (57 FR 13498, 13564, April 16,
1992)).
    Thus, we are determining that the Ohio submittal meets all SIP
requirements currently applicable for purposes of redesignation under
part D of title I of the CAA, in accordance with sections
107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and 107(d)(3)(E)(v).
    In making these determinations, we have ascertained which SIP
requirements are applicable for the purposes of the redesignation, and
concluded that the Ohio SIP includes measures meeting those
requirements and that they are fully approved under section 110(k) of
the CAA.
a. Ohio Has Met All Applicable Requirements for Purposes of
Redesignation of the Cleveland Area Under Section 110 and Part D of the
CAA
i. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
    Section 110(a) of title I of the CAA contains the general
requirements for a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the
implementation plan submitted by a state must have been adopted by the
state after reasonable public notice and hearing, and, among other
things, must include enforceable emission limitations and other control
measures, means or techniques necessary to meet the requirements of the
CAA; provide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices,
methods, systems, and procedures necessary to monitor ambient air
quality; provide for implementation of a source permit program to
regulate the modification and construction of any stationary source
within the areas covered by the plan; include provisions for the
implementation of part C, Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
and part D, New Source Review (NSR) permit programs; include criteria
for stationary source emission control measures, monitoring, and
reporting; include provisions for air quality modeling; and provide for
public and local agency participation in planning and emission control
rule development. Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs
contain measures to prevent sources in a state from significantly
contributing to air quality problems in another state.
    EPA interprets the ``applicable'' requirements for an area's
redesignation to be those requirements linked with that area's
nonattainment designation. Therefore, we believe that the section 110
elements described above that are not connected with nonattainment plan
submissions and not linked with an area's attainment status, such as
the ``infrastructure SIP'' elements of section 110(a)(2), are not
applicable requirements for purposes of the redesignation. A state
remains subject to these requirements after an area is redesignated to
attainment, and thus EPA does not interpret such requirements to be
relevant applicable requirements to evaluate in a redesignation. For
example, the requirement to submit state plans addressing interstate
transport obligations under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) continue to
apply to a state regardless of the designation of any particular area
in the state, and thus are not applicable requirements to be evaluated
in the redesignation context.
    EPA has applied this interpretation consistently in many
redesignations for decades. See e.g., 81 FR 44210 (July 7, 2016) (final
redesignation for the Sullivan County, Tennessee area); 79 FR 43655
(July 28, 2014) (final redesignation for Bellefontaine, Ohio lead
nonattainment area); 61 FR 53174-53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR
24826 (May 7, 1997) (proposed and final redesignation for Reading,
Pennsylvania ozone nonattainment area); 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996)
(final redesignation for Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio ozone
nonattainment area); and 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (final
redesignation of Tampa, Florida ozone nonattainment area). See also 65
FR 37879, 37890 (June 19, 2000) (discussing this issue in final
redesignation of Cincinnati, Ohio 1-hour ozone nonattainment area); and
66 FR 50399 (October 19, 2001) (final redesignation of Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania 1-hour ozone nonattainment area).
    We have reviewed the Ohio SIP and determined that it meets the
general SIP requirements under section 110 of the CAA to the extent
they are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA has previously
approved provisions of Ohio's SIP addressing section 110 requirements,
at 40 CFR 52.1870.
    On December 4, 2015, Ohio made a submittal which addressed the
``infrastructure SIP'' elements of the 2012 annual PM2.5
NAAQS required under CAA section 110(a)(2). EPA approved the 2012
annual PM2.5 infrastructure SIPs on February 2, 2018 (83 FR
4845), however, as noted above, the requirements of section 110(a)(2)
are statewide requirements that are not linked to the PM2.5
nonattainment status of the Cleveland area. Therefore, these SIP
elements are not applicable requirements for purposes of review of the
state's 2012 annual PM2.5 redesignation request.
ii. Part D Requirements
    EPA has determined that with the approval of the base year
emissions inventory and RACM provisions as discussed in rulemaking
dated September 6, 2018, the Ohio SIP has met the requirements
applicable for purposes of redesignation under part D of the CAA for
the Cleveland 2012 annual PM2.5 nonattainment area. Subpart
1 of part D sets forth the general nonattainment requirements
applicable to all nonattainment areas.
(1) Section 172 Requirements
    Section 172(c) sets out general nonattainment plan requirements. A
thorough discussion of these requirements can be found in the General
Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992)
(``General Preamble''). EPA's longstanding interpretation of the
nonattainment planning requirements of section 172 is that once an area
is attaining the NAAQS, those requirements are not ``applicable'' for
purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and therefore need not be
approved into the SIP before EPA can redesignate the area. In the
General Preamble, EPA set forth its interpretation of applicable
requirements for purposes of evaluating redesignation requests when an
area is attaining a standard. See 57 FR 13564. EPA noted that the
requirements for reasonable further progress and other

measures designed to provide for an area's attainment do not apply in
evaluating redesignation requests because those nonattainment planning
requirements ``have no meaning'' for an area that has already attained
the standard. Id. This interpretation was also set forth in the
Calcagni Memorandum.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ September 4, 1992 Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director,
Air Quality Management Division (EPA), entitled, ``Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's long-standing interpretation regarding the applicability of
section 172(c)'s attainment planning requirements for an area that is
attaining a NAAQS applies in this redesignation of the Cleveland 2012
annual PM2.5 nonattainment area as well, except for the
applicability of the requirement to implement all RACM under section
172(c)(1). On July 14, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the
Sixth Circuit (6th Circuit) ruled that, to meet the requirement of
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii), states are required to submit plans
addressing RACM/RACT under section 172(c)(1) and EPA is required to
approve those plans prior to redesignating the area, regardless of
whether the area is attaining the standard. Sierra Club v. EPA, 793
F.3d 656 (6th Cir. 2015). Because Ohio is within the jurisdiction of
the 6th Circuit, EPA is acting in accordance with the Sierra Club
decision in this redesignation action.\2\ However, in this case, this
issue is moot because EPA has already concluded that Ohio has met RACT/
RACM requirements for PM2.5 in action published September 6,
2018 (83 FR 45193).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Although the approach being implemented here is inconsistent
with the Agency's longstanding national policy, such deviation is
required in order to act in accordance with a Circuit Court
decision. Consistent with 40 CFR 56.5(b), the Region does not need
to seek concurrence from EPA Headquarters for such deviation in
these circumstances. See also 81 FR 51102 (August 3, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for all nonattainment areas to
provide for the implementation of all RACM as expeditiously as
practicable and to provide for attainment of the primary NAAQS. Under
this requirement, a state must consider all available control measures,
including reductions that are available from adopting RACT on existing
sources, for a nonattainment area and adopt and implement such measures
as are reasonably available in the area as components of the area's
attainment demonstration. As discussed above, EPA approved Ohio's RACM
submission on September 6, 2018 (83 FR 45193). Therefore, Ohio has met
its requirements under CAA section 172(c)(1) and section
107(d)(3)(E)(v).
    As noted above, the remaining section 172(c) ``attainment
planning'' requirements are not applicable for purposes of evaluating
the state's redesignation request. Specifically, the RFP requirement
under section 172(c)(2), which is defined as progress that must be made
toward attainment, the requirement to submit section 172(c)(9)
contingency measures, which are measures to be taken if the area fails
to make reasonable further progress to attainment, and section
172(c)(6)'s requirement that the SIP contain control measures necessary
to provide for attainment of the standard, are not applicable
requirements that Ohio must meet here because the Cleveland area has
monitored attainment of the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
    Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions. Ohio
submitted a 2011 base year emissions inventory as part of their
PM2.5 attainment Demonstration on October 14, 2016, and
requested that the 2011 inventories be used as the most accurate and
current inventory. Ohio's 2011 emissions inventory was approved as
meeting the section 172(c)(3) comprehensive emissions inventory
requirement on September 6, 2018 (83 FR 45193). Section 172(c)(4)
requires the identification and quantification of allowable emissions
for major new and modified stationary sources in an area, and section
172(c)(5) and 189(a)(1)(A) requires source permits for the construction
and operation of new and modified major stationary sources anywhere in
the nonattainment area. EPA approved Ohio's current NSR program for
PM2.5 on June 25, 2015 (80 FR 36477). In addition, the
state's maintenance plan does not rely on nonattainment NSR, therefore
having a fully approved NSR program is not an applicable requirement;
nonetheless, we have approved the state's program.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A detailed rationale for this view is described in a
memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D New Source
Review Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted above, we find that the Ohio
SIP meets the section 110(a)(2) applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation.
(2) Section 176 Conformity Requirements
    Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that federally-supported or funded activities,
including highway and transit projects, conform to the air quality
planning goals in the applicable SIPs. The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and projects
developed, funded or approved under title 23 of the U.S. Code and the
Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity) as well as to all other
federally-supported or funded projects (general conformity). See 73 FR
66964, 67043 n.120. EPA approved Ohio's transportation conformity SIP
on March 2, 2015 (80 FR 11133) and the general conformity SIP on May
26, 2015 (80 FR 29968).
b. Ohio Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of the
CAA
    EPA has fully approved the Ohio SIP for the Cleveland area under
section 110(k) of the CAA for all requirements applicable for purposes
of redesignation, in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). EPA may
rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request. See
Calcagni Memorandum at 3); Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v.
Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-990 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
426 (6th Cir. 2001). EPA also relies on measures approved in
conjunction with a redesignation action. See, e.g., 68 FR 25413 (May
12, 2003) (approving I/M program for St. Louis) and 68 FR 25426 (May
12, 2003) (approving redesignation relying in part on I/M program
approval). As discussed in the prior section, Ohio has adopted and
submitted (and EPA has fully approved) a number of required SIP
provisions addressing the 2012 annual PM2.5 standards.
    EPA has approved Ohio's 2011 emissions inventories for the
Cleveland area as meeting the requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the
CAA, and approved RACM provisions meeting the requirement of 172(c)(1).
No Cleveland area SIP provisions are currently disapproved,
conditionally approved, or partially approved. Therefore, the
Administrator has fully approved the applicable requirements for the
Cleveland area under section 110(k) in accordance with section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
3. Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
    EPA finds that Ohio has demonstrated that the observed air quality
improvement in the Cleveland area is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions from Federal measures. In making this demonstration, Ohio
has calculated the change in emissions

between 2011, one of the years the Cleveland area was monitoring
nonattainment, and 2016, one of the years the Cleveland area monitored
attainment. The reduction in emissions and the corresponding
improvement in air quality over this period can be attributed to a
number of regulatory control measures that the Cleveland and
contributing areas have implemented in recent years.
a. Permanent and Enforceable Controls Implemented
    The following is a discussion of permanent and enforceable measures
that have been implemented in the area:
i. Federal Emission Control Measures
    Reductions in directly emitted fine particles and fine particle
precursor emissions have occurred statewide and in upwind areas because
of Federal emission control measures, with additional emission
reductions expected to occur in the future. Federal emission control
measures include the following.
    Tier 2 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur
Standards. These emission control requirements result in lower
NOX and SO2 emissions from new cars and light
duty trucks, including sport utility vehicles. The Federal rules were
phased in between 2004 and 2009. EPA has estimated that, by the end of
the phase-in period, new vehicles will emit less NOX with
the following percentage decreases: Passenger cars (light duty
vehicles)--77%; light duty trucks, minivans and sports utility
vehicles--86%; and, larger sports utility vehicles, vans and heavier
trucks--69% to 95%. EPA expects fleet-wide average emissions to decline
by similar percentages as new vehicles replace older vehicles. The Tier
2 standards also reduced the sulfur content of gasoline to 30 parts per
million (ppm) beginning in January 2006, reducing both directly emitted
sulfates and the precursor SO2. Most gasoline sold in Ohio
prior to January 2006 had a sulfur content of about 500 ppm.
    Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule. EPA issued this rule in July 2000.
This rule includes standards limiting the sulfur content of diesel
fuel, which went into effect in 2004. A second phase took effect in
2007 which reduced fine particle emissions from heavy-duty highway
engines and further reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to
15 ppm. The total program is estimated to achieve a 90% reduction in
direct PM2.5 emissions and a 95% reduction in NOX
emissions for these new engines using low sulfur diesel, compared to
existing engines using higher sulfur content diesel. The reduction in
fuel sulfur content also yielded an immediate reduction in sulfate
particle emissions from all diesel vehicles.
    Nonroad Diesel Rule. In May 2004, EPA promulgated a new rule for
large nonroad diesel engines, such as those used in construction,
agriculture and mining equipment, to be phased in between 2008 and
2014. The rule also reduces the sulfur content in nonroad diesel fuel
by over 99%. Prior to 2006, nonroad diesel fuel averaged approximately
3,400 ppm sulfur. This rule limited nonroad diesel sulfur content to
500 ppm by 2006, with a further reduction to 15 ppm by 2010. The
combined engine and fuel rules will reduce NOX and
PM2.5 emissions from large nonroad diesel engines by over
90%, compared to current nonroad engines using higher sulfur content
diesel. It is estimated that compliance with this rule will cut
NOX emissions from nonroad diesel engines by up to 90%. This
rule achieved some emission reductions by 2008, and was fully
implemented by 2010. The reduction in fuel sulfur content also yielded
an immediate reduction in sulfate particle emissions from all diesel
vehicles.
    Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engine and Recreational Engine
Standards. In November 2002, EPA promulgated emission standards for
groups of previously unregulated nonroad engines. These engines include
large spark-ignition engines such as those used in forklifts and
airport ground-service equipment; recreational vehicles using spark-
ignition engines such as off-highway motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles
and snowmobiles; and recreational marine diesel engines. Emission
standards from large spark-ignition engines were implemented in two
tiers, with Tier 1 starting in 2004 and Tier 2 in 2007. Recreational
vehicle emission standards are being phased in from 2006 through 2012.
Marine diesel engine standards were phased in from 2006 through 2009.
With full implementation of the entire nonroad spark-ignition engine
and recreational engine standards, an 80% reduction in NOX
is expected by 2020. Most of these emission reductions occurred by the
2015-2017 period used to demonstrate attainment, but additional
emission reductions will occur during the maintenance period.
ii. Control Measures in Contributing Areas
    NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued a
NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22
states to reduce emissions of NOX. Affected states were
required to comply with Phase I of the SIP Call beginning in 2004, and
Phase II beginning in 2007. Emission reductions resulting from
regulations developed in response to the NOX SIP Call are
permanent and enforceable.
    Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). On March 10, 2004, EPA
promulgated the CAIR. The CAIR rule required Electric Generating Units
(EGUs) in 28 eastern states and the District of Columbia to
significantly reduce emissions of NOX and SO2. On
July 6, 2011, EPA finalized Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) as a
replacement for CAIR. CSAPR became effective on January 1, 2015, for
SO2 and annual NOX, and May 1, 2015, for ozone
season NOX. EPA estimated CSAPR will reduce EGU
SO2 emissions by 73% and NOX emissions by 54%
from 2005 levels in the CSAPR region, which includes Ohio. Between 2011
and 2015, in Ohio alone, annual NOX EGU emissions decreased
from 103,592 tons per year (TPY) to 67,059 TPY and SO2 EGU
emissions decreased from 575,474 TPY to 177,257 TPY.
    On September 7, 2016, EPA promulgated an update to CSAPR that will
bring even greater reductions in NOX emissions. EPA
estimated that the CSAPR update and other changes already underway in
the power sector will cut ozone season NOX emissions from
power plants in the eastern United States by 20%, resulting in a
reduction of 80,000 tons in 2017 compared to 2015 levels.
    Several facilities in the Cleveland have reduced PM2.5
and precursor emissions, and Ohio has made the reductions permanent and
enforceable. Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co., Lake Shore Plant in
Cuyahoga County, permanently shut down December 17, 2015. The Medical
Center in Cuyahoga County converted to natural gas by January 13, 2017,
shuttering its two coal-fired boilers (B003 and B004) and replacing
them with a natural gas boiler (B023) with a federally-enforceable
SO2 limit of 1.18 TPY. Cleveland Thermal LLC in Cuyahoga
County retired all coal-fired and oil-fired boilers by January 31,
2017, except two oil-fired boilers retained for auxiliary use. The Avon
Lake Power Plant in Lorain County accepted a federally enforceable
combined emissions limitation on all SO2 emitting sources at
the facility at 9,600 lbs/hr, effective beginning January 13, 2017, to
satisfy the 1-hour SO2 standard. Oberlin College in Lorain
County shut down coal fired boilers on April 22, 2014. These emissions
reductions are detailed in Table 2.

                Table 2--2011 and 2016 Emissions Totals for the Cleveland 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Pollutant                                  2011            2016         Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5...........................................................         5843.68         4989.39         -854.29
NOX.............................................................        46892.19        35414.24       -11477.95
SO2.............................................................        39406.99        14724.02       -24682.97
VOC.............................................................        33402.70        26968.63        -6434.07
NH3.............................................................         1606.26         1570.86           -35.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
    In conjunction with Ohio's request to redesignate the Cleveland
nonattainment area to attainment status, Ohio has submitted a SIP
revision to provide for maintenance of the 2012 annual PM2.5
NAAQS in the area through 2030.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the required elements of a
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment. Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued
attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least ten years after EPA
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after
redesignation, the state must submit a revised maintenance plan which
demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for ten
years following the initial 10-year maintenance period. To address the
possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must
contain contingency measures with a schedule for implementation as EPA
deems necessary to assure prompt correction of any future
PM2.5 NAAQS violations.
    The Calcagni memorandum provides additional guidance on the content
of a maintenance plan. The memorandum states that a maintenance plan
should address the following items: The attainment emissions inventory,
a maintenance demonstration showing maintenance for the 10 years of the
maintenance period, a commitment to maintain the existing monitoring
network, factors and procedures to be used for verification of
continued attainment of the NAAQS, and a contingency plan to prevent or
correct future violations of the NAAQS.
    As discussed in detail in the section below, the state's
maintenance plan submission expressly documents that the area's
emissions inventory and modeling show that the area will remain below
the attainment year inventories through 2030, more than ten years after
redesignation.
b. Attainment Inventory
    Ohio developed an emissions inventory for annual PM2.5
emissions for 2016, one of the years in the period during which the
Cleveland area monitored attainment of the 2012 annual PM2.5
NAAQS. The attainment levels of emissions are summarized in Tables 3
through 7, along with future maintenance projections.
c. Demonstration of Maintenance
    As discussed above, EPA has determined that the Cleveland area
attained the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS based on monitoring
data for the 3-year period from 2015-2017. In its maintenance plan,
Ohio selected 2016 as the attainment emission inventory year. The
attainment inventory identifies the level of emissions in the Cleveland
area that is sufficient to attain the 2012 annual PM2.5
NAAQS. Ohio began development of the attainment inventory by first
generating a baseline emissions inventory for the Cleveland area. The
year 2011 was chosen as the base year for developing a comprehensive
emissions inventory for direct PM2.5, NOX,
SO2, VOC, and NH3. The projected inventory
included with the maintenance plan estimates emissions forward to 2022
and 2030, which satisfies the 10-year interval required in section
175(A) of the CAA.
    The emissions inventories address four major types of sources:
Point, area, on-road mobile, and non-road mobile. The future year
emissions inventories have been estimated using projected rates of
growth in population, traffic, economic activity, expected control
programs, and other parameters. Non-road mobile emissions estimates
were based on EPA's non-road mobile model, with the exception of the
railroad locomotives, commercial marine, and aircraft. On-road mobile
source emissions were calculated using EPA's MOVES2014a on-road mobile
emission model. The 2016 PM2.5, NOX,
SO2, VOC, and NH3 emissions for Cleveland area,
as well as the emissions for other years, were developed consistent
with EPA guidance.
    Section 175A requires a state seeking redesignation to attainment
to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in
the area ``for at least 10 years after the redesignation.'' EPA has
interpreted this as a showing of maintenance ``for a period of ten
years following redesignation.'' Calcagni Memorandum, p. 9. Where the
emissions inventory method of showing maintenance is used, the purpose
is to show that emissions during the maintenance period will not
increase over the attainment year inventory. Calcagni Memorandum, pp.
9-10.
    As discussed in detail below, Ohio's maintenance plan submission
expressly documents that the Cleveland area's overall emissions
inventories will remain well below the attainment year inventories
through 2030. In addition, for the reasons set forth below, EPA
believes that the Cleveland area will continue to maintain the 2012
annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2030. Thus, if EPA finalizes its
proposed approval of the redesignation request and maintenance plan,
the approval will be based upon this showing, in accordance with
section 175A, and EPA's analysis described herein, that the Ohio's
maintenance plan provides for maintenance for at least 10 years after
redesignation.
    The maintenance plan for the Cleveland 2012 annual PM2.5
area includes a maintenance demonstration that:
    (i) Shows compliance with and maintenance of the annual
PM2.5 standard by providing information to support the
demonstration that current and future emissions of PM2.5 and
NOX, as well as other precursors, remain at or below 2016
emissions levels.
    (ii) Uses 2016 as the attainment year and includes future emission
inventory projections for 2022 and 2030.
    (iii) Identifies an ``out year'' at least 10 years after EPA review
and potential approval of the maintenance plan. Per 40 CFR part 93,
PM2.5, and NOX MVEBs were established for the
last year (2030) of the maintenance plan.

    (iv) Provides, as shown in Tables 3 through 7 below, the estimated
and projected emissions inventories, in tons per year, for the
Cleveland area, for PM2.5, NOX, SO2,
VOC, and NH3.

                               Table 3--Cleveland, Ohio PM2.5 Emission Inventories
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       2016                            2030         Difference
                     Sector                         Attainment     2022 Interim     Maintenance      2016-2030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EGU Point.......................................          244.52           244.2          244.06           -0.46
Non-EGU.........................................          959.26          947.74          947.74          -11.52
Non-road........................................           483.3          404.76          389.63          -93.67
Area............................................         2618.69         2632.91         2612.65           -6.04
MAR.............................................           109.8           97.54           79.43          -30.37
On-road.........................................          573.82          353.73          235.28         -338.54
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................         4989.39         4680.88         4508.79          -480.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Table 4--Cleveland, Ohio NOX Emission Inventories
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       2016                            2030         Difference
                     Sector                         Attainment     2022 Interim     Maintenance      2016-2030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EGU Point.......................................         2094.74         2130.53         2081.42          -13.32
Non-EGU.........................................          3019.4         2472.33         2472.33         -547.07
Non-road........................................         5302.02         4259.67         3888.48        -1413.54
Area............................................         5979.36         6033.34         6034.14           54.78
MAR.............................................         3693.28         3391.82         2847.09         -846.19
On-road.........................................        15325.44         8201.77         4267.43       -11058.01
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................        35414.24        26489.46        21590.89       -13823.35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Table 5--Cleveland, Ohio SO2 Emission Inventories
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       2016                            2030         Difference
                     Sector                         Attainment     2022 Interim     Maintenance      2016-2030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EGU Point.......................................         9022.75         9020.59         9020.59           -2.16
Non-EGU.........................................         5312.54         1411.93         1411.93        -3900.61
Non-road........................................            9.39           12.63           13.89             4.5
Area............................................           183.9          200.83          200.92           17.02
MAR.............................................            94.2          118.21          119.03           24.83
On-road.........................................          101.24           88.63           70.59          -30.65
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................        14724.02        10852.82        10836.95        -3887.07
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Table 6--Cleveland, Ohio VOC Emission Inventories
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       2016                            2030         Difference
                     Sector                         Attainment     2022 Interim     Maintenance      2016-2030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EGU Point.......................................           15.74           16.76           15.45           -0.29
Non-EGU.........................................         1354.24         1202.43         1202.43         -151.81
Non-road........................................         7687.75         6725.32          6625.2        -1062.55
Area............................................        14994.33         14988.5        14913.02          -81.31
MAR.............................................          325.14          336.16          313.96          -11.18
On-road.........................................         2591.43          1095.4          470.43           -2121
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................        26968.63        24364.57        23540.49        -3428.14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Table 7--Cleveland, Ohio NH3 Emission Inventories
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       2016                            2030         Difference
                     Sector                         Attainment     2022 Interim     Maintenance      2016-2030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EGU Point.......................................            0.13            0.13            0.13               0

Non-EGU.........................................           57.58           44.99           44.99          -12.59
Non-road........................................           11.93           12.97           14.31            2.38
Area............................................         1131.54         1134.31         1134.25            2.71
MAR.............................................            1.55            1.54            1.54           -0.01
On-road.........................................          368.13          322.31          313.39          -54.74
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................         1570.86         1516.25         1508.61          -62.25
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the section below, the state's maintenance plan
submission expressly documents that the area's emission levels will
remain below the attainment year emission levels through 2030.
d. Monitoring Network
    Ohio operates eight PM2.5 monitors in the Cleveland,
Ohio area. Ohio's maintenance plan includes a commitment to continue to
operate an adequate EPA-approved monitoring network to demonstrate
ongoing compliance with the NAAQS.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
    Ohio remains obligated to continue to quality-assure monitoring
data and enter all data into the Air Quality System in accordance with
Federal guidelines. Ohio will use these data, supplemented with
additional information as necessary, to assure that the area continues
to attain the standard. Ohio will also continue to develop and submit
periodic emission inventories as required by the Federal Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule (67 FR 39602, June 10, 2002) to track future
levels of emissions. Both of these actions will help to verify
continued attainment in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
f. Contingency Plan
    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct or
prevent a violation of the NAAQS that might occur after redesignation
of an area to attainment. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a
maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to assure that the state will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should
identify the contingency measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedure for adoption and implementation of the contingency measures,
and a time limit for action by the state. The state should also
identify specific indicators to be used to determine when the
contingency measures need to be adopted and implemented. The
maintenance plan must include a requirement that the state will
implement all pollution control measures that were contained in the SIP
before redesignation of the area to attainment. See section 175A(d) of
the CAA.
    Ohio's contingency plan defines a warning level and action level
response. The warning level response will trigger when the
PM2.5 average of the weighted annual mean of 12.5 [micro]g/
m\3\ or greater occurs in a single calendar year within the maintenance
area. A warning level response will consist of a study to determine
whether the PM2.5 value indicates a trend toward higher
PM2.5 values or whether emissions appear to be increasing.
The action level response will be prompted whenever a two-year average
of the weighted annual means of greater than 12.0 [micro]g/m\3\ occurs
within the maintenance area. A violation of the standard (three-year
average of the weighted annual means of greater than 12.0 [micro]g/
m\3\) shall also prompt an action level response. If the action level
is triggered and is not found to be due to an exceptional event,
malfunction, or noncompliance with a permit condition or rule
requirement, Ohio EPA, in conjunction with the metropolitan planning
organization or regional council of governments, will determine
additional control measures needed to assure future attainment of the
NAAQS for annual PM2.5. Action level measures that can be
implemented in a short time will be selected to be in place within 18
months from the close of the calendar year that prompted the action
level. Ohio EPA will also consider the timing of an action level
trigger and determine if additional, significant new regulations not
currently included as part of the maintenance provisions will be
implemented in a timely manner and will constitute our response.
    Because it is not possible to determine what control measures will
be appropriate at an unspecified time in the future, the list of
contingency measures outlined below is not exhaustive.
    (1) Diesel reduction emission strategies.
    (2) Alternative fuel (e.g., liquid propane and compressed natural
gas) and diesel retrofit programs for fleet vehicle operations.
    (3) Tighter PM2.5, SO2, and NOX
emissions offsets for new and modified major sources.
    (4) Impact crushers located at recycle scrap yards--upgrade wet
suppression.
    (5) Concrete manufacturing--upgrade wet suppression.
    (6) Additional NOX RACT statewide.
    As required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, Ohio commits to submit
to EPA an updated PM2.5 maintenance plan eight years after
redesignation of the Cleveland area to cover an additional ten-year
period beyond the initial 10 year maintenance period.
    For the reasons set forth above, EPA is proposing to approve Ohio's
2012 annual PM2.5 maintenance plan for the Cleveland area as
meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A.
    Ohio further commits to conduct ongoing review of its data, and if
monitored concentrations or emissions are trending upward, Ohio commits
to take appropriate steps to avoid a violation if possible. Ohio
commits to continue implementing SIP requirements upon and after
redesignation.
    EPA finds that Ohio's approved contingency measures, as well as the
commitment to continue implementing any SIP requirements, satisfy the
pertinent requirements of section 175A.
5. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEBs) for PM2.5 and
NOX, and Safety Margin for the Cleveland Area
    The maintenance plan submitted by Ohio for the Cleveland contain
new primary PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the area for
the years 2022 and 2030. MVEBs are the projected levels of controlled
emissions from the transportation sector (mobile sources) that are
estimated in the SIP to provide

for maintenance of the ozone standard. The MVEBs were calculated using
MOVES2014a. Table 8 details Ohio's 2022 and 2030 MVEBs for the
Cleveland.

    Table 8--MVEBs for the Cleveland 2012 Annual PM Maintenance Plan
                               [tons/year]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Pollutant                    2022 MVEB       2030 MVEB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5...................................          406.79          270.57
NOX.....................................        9,432.04        4,907.54
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ohio included ``safety margins'' as provided for in 40 CFR
93.124(a). A ``safety margin'', as defined in the transportation
conformity rule (40 CFR part 93 subpart A), is the amount by which the
total projected emissions from all sources of a given pollutant are
less than the total emissions that would satisfy the applicable
requirement for reasonable further progress, attainment, or
maintenance. The attainment level of PM2.5 and
NOX emissions for the Cleveland is shown in tables 3 and 4.
Tables 9 and 10 show the remaining safety margin for the Cleveland area
following the allocation to the PM2.5 and NOX
MVEBs.

                    Table 9--2022 Safety Margin for Cleveland 2012 annual PM Maintenance Plan
                                                   [tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Safety margin
                            Pollutant                               2022 Safety    allocated to    Safety margin
                                                                      margin         2022 MVEB       remaining
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5...........................................................          308.51           53.06          255.45
NOX.............................................................         8924.78         1230.27         7694.51
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   Table 10--2030 Safety Margin for Cleveland 2012 Annual PM Maintenance Plan
                                                   [tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Safety margin
                            Pollutant                               2030 Safety    allocated to    Safety margin
                                                                      margin         2030 MVEB       remaining
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5...........................................................           480.6           35.29          445.31
NOX.............................................................        13823.35          640.11        13183.24
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2022 and 2030 projected emissions, even with this allocation,
will be below the 2016 attainment year emissions for both
PM2.5 and NOX. For this reason, EPA finds that
the allocation of the safety margin to the MVEBs for the Cleveland area
meet the requirements of the transportation conformity regulations at
40 CFR part 93, and are approvable. Once allocated to mobile sources,
these portions of the safety margins will not be available for use by
other sources.

V. What are the effects of EPA's actions?

    EPA is proposing to change the official designation of the
Cleveland, Ohio area for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, found
at 40 CFR part 81, from nonattainment to attainment. EPA is proposing
to determine that the Cleveland area has attained the 2012 annual
PM2.5 standard, based on the most recent three years of
certified air quality data. This action also proposes to approve the
maintenance plan for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS as
revisions to the Ohio SIP for the Cleveland area. Finally, EPA finds
adequate and is proposing to approve 2022 and 2030 primary
PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the Cleveland area. These
MVEBs will be used in future transportation conformity analyses for the
area.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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
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 action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);

     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Sulfur oxides.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: December 6, 2018.
Cathy Stepp,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2018-27746 Filed 12-21-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 119 (Thursday, June 22, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28432-28433]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12963]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0152; FRL-9963-81-Region 1]

Air Plan Approval; Delaware; Infrastructure Requirements for the
2012 Fine Particulate Matter Standard; Extension of Comment Period;
Availability of Data

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period; availability of
supplemental information.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is extending the
comment period for a proposed rule published on June 1, 2017. In the
June 1, 2017 proposed rule, EPA proposed to approve portions of the
State of Delaware's December 14, 2015 state implementation plan (SIP)
submittal to address the infrastructure requirements for the 2012 fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS). EPA is extending the comment period due to
erroneously

omitting the technical support document (TSD) in the docket. This
proposed rule corrects this omission and provides notice of the
availability of the TSD which supports EPA's analysis. All comments
received on or before July 24, 2017 will be entered into the public
record and considered by EPA before taking final action on the proposed
rule. Comments submitted between the close of the original comment
period and the re-opening of this comment period will be accepted and
considered.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 24, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2017-0152 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gavin Huang,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 1, 2017, EPA published in the
Federal Register a proposal to approve portions of the State of
Delaware's SIP submittal to address the infrastructure requirements for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 82 FR 25211. Comments on the proposed
rule were required to be received by July 3, 2017. We are extending the
comment period until July 24, 2017. This action will allow interested
persons additional time to prepare and submit comments. EPA is also
announcing the availability in the docket of the TSD EPA prepared for
this proposed rulemaking which includes EPA's analysis supporting
approval of portions of Delaware's December 14, 2015 infrastructure SIP
submission for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The TSD is available in
the docket for this rulemaking and online at www.regulations.gov.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

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

    Dated: June 8, 2017
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2017-12963 Filed 6-21-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 124 (Thursday, June 29, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42076-42079]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13860]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2019-N-3657]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Accreditation Scheme
for Conformity Assessment Program

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Submit written comments (including recommendations) on the
collection of information by July 31, 2023.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be submitted to https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under Review--Open for Public
Comments'' or by using the search function. The OMB control number for
this information collection is 0910-0889. Also include the FDA docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domini Bean, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Accreditation Scheme for Conformity Assessment Program

OMB Control Number 0910-0889--Revision

    Section 514 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act)
(21 U.S.C. 360d) provides for the establishment of performance
standards, authorizing the Accreditation Scheme for Conformity
Assessment Program (ASCA Program) under section 514(d). On September
25, 2020 (85 FR 60471), we announced the

implementation of a pilot program under which testing laboratories may
be accredited by ASCA-recognized accreditation bodies meeting criteria
specified by FDA to assess the conformance of a device to certain FDA-
recognized standards. These testing laboratories then receive ASCA
Accreditation from FDA. Determinations by ASCA-accredited testing
laboratories that a device conforms with an eligible standard included
as part of the program are accepted by FDA for the purposes of
demonstrating conformity unless FDA finds that a particular such
determination shall not be so accepted.\1\ The statute provides that
FDA may review determinations by accredited testing laboratories,
including by conducting periodic audits of such determinations or
processes of accreditation bodies or testing laboratories.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See section 514(d)(1)(B) of the FD&C Act.
    \2\ See section 514(d)(2)(A) of the FD&C Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following such a review, or if FDA becomes aware of information
materially bearing on safety or effectiveness of a device tested by an
ASCA-accredited testing laboratory, FDA may take additional measures as
determined appropriate, including suspension or withdrawal of ASCA
Accreditation of a testing laboratory, withdrawal of ASCA Recognition
of an accreditation body, or a request for additional information
regarding a specific device.\3\ The establishment of the goals, scope,
procedures, and a suitable framework for the voluntary ASCA Program
supports the Agency's continued efforts to use its scientific resources
effectively and efficiently to protect and promote public health. FDA
believes the voluntary ASCA Program may further encourage international
harmonization of medical device regulation because it incorporates
elements, where appropriate, from a well-established set of
international conformity assessment practices and standards (e.g., ISO/
IEC 17000 series). The voluntary ASCA Program does not supplant or
alter any other existing statutory or regulatory requirements governing
the decision-making process for premarket submissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See section 514(d)(2)(A)-(B) of the FD&C Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are revising the information collection to reflect recent
legislative changes. In accordance with amendments made to section 514
by the FDA Reauthorization Act of 2022 (FDARA),\4\ and as part of the
enactment of the Medical Device User Fee Amendments of 2022 (MDUFA
V),\5\ the ``pilot'' language and sunset clause was removed from the
section, allowing FDA to conclude the pilot and continue to operate the
program consistent with the amended section 514(d) of the FD&C Act. In
accordance with these updates and as included in the Center for Devices
and Radiological Health Proposed Guidances for Fiscal Year 2023,\6\ we
intend to update the applicable guidance documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Public Law 117-180, section 2005.
    \5\ See also MDUFA V Commitment Letter: https://www.fda.gov/media/158308/download.
    \6\ See CDRH Proposed Guidances for Fiscal Year 2023, B-list:
https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/guidance-documents-medical-devices-and-radiation-emitting-products/cdrh-proposed-guidances-fiscal-year-2023-fy2023#b.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, to assist testing laboratories and accreditation bodies in
submitting information to FDA, we are developing webforms for applying
for ASCA Accreditation and ASCA Recognition, respectively.
    Under the ASCA Program's conformity assessment scheme, ASCA-
recognized accreditation bodies accredit testing laboratories using
ISO/IEC 17025:2017: ``General requirements for the competence of
testing and calibration laboratories'' and the ASCA program
specifications associated with each eligible standard and test method
included in the ASCA Program. ASCA-accredited testing laboratories may
conduct testing to determine conformance of a device with at least one
of the standards eligible for inclusion in the ASCA Program. When an
ASCA-accredited testing laboratory conducts such testing, it provides a
complete test report and an ASCA Summary Test Report to the device
manufacturer. A device manufacturer who utilizes an ASCA-accredited
testing laboratory to perform testing in accordance with the provisions
of the ASCA Program can then include a declaration of conformity with
supplemental documentation (including an ASCA Summary Test Report) as
part of a premarket submission to FDA. Testing performed by an ASCA-
accredited testing laboratory can be used to support a premarket
submission for any device if the testing was conducted using a standard
included in the ASCA Program and in accordance with the ASCA program
specifications for that standard.
    The ASCA Program includes participation from accreditation bodies,
testing laboratories, device manufacturers, and FDA staff. Each of
these entities plays a critical role in the ASCA Program to ensure that
patients and healthcare providers have timely and continued access to
safe, effective, and high-quality medical devices.
    To participate in the ASCA Program, accreditation bodies and
testing laboratories apply to FDA to demonstrate that they have the
qualifications for their respective roles within the program. An
application includes agreement to terms of participation. For example,
a participating accreditation body or testing laboratory agrees to
attend training, regularly communicate with FDA, and support periodic
FDA audits. FDA will identify the scope of ASCA Recognition (for
accreditation bodies) and ASCA Accreditation (for testing laboratories)
for specific standards and test methods to which each participant may
accredit or test as part of the ASCA Program.
    During the ASCA Program, FDA generally will accept test results
from ASCA-accredited testing laboratories to support conformity of a
medical device to a particular standard and does not intend to review
complete test reports from ASCA-accredited testing laboratories in
support of a declaration of conformity submitted with a premarket
submission except in certain circumstances.
    Note that ASCA Accreditation is separate from any accreditation
that an accreditation body may provide to a testing laboratory for
purposes other than the ASCA Program.
    The ASCA Program does not address specific content for a particular
premarket submission. Information collections associated with premarket
submissions have been previously approved.
    We plan to issue draft guidance updates to the three published ASCA
Pilot guidance documents \7\ to improve and streamline the ASCA
Program. The guidance updates are being issued to discuss the lessons
learned during ASCA's pilot phase and to help

facilitate the transition from a pilot to a permanent program. As a
result of these guidance updates, there is minimal adjustment to the
burden estimate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Accreditation Scheme for Conformity Assessment (ASCA)
Pilot Program (https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/accreditation-scheme-conformity-assessment-asca-pilot-program). Basic Safety and Essential Performance of
Medical Electrical Equipment, Medical Electrical Systems, and
Laboratory Medical Equipment--Standards Specific Information for the
Accreditation Scheme for Conformity Assessment (ASCA) Pilot Program
(https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/basic-safety-and-essential-performance-medical-electrical-equipment-medical-electrical-systems-and). Biocompatibility Testing
of Medical Devices--Standards Specific Information for the
Accreditation Scheme for Conformity Assessment (ASCA) Pilot Program
(https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/biocompatibility-testing-medical-devices-standards-specific-information-accreditation-scheme).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Respondents are accreditation bodies (ABs) and testing laboratories
(TLs). In tables 1 through 3, these abbreviations are used.
    In the Federal Register of January 19, 2023 (88 FR 3419), we
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. No comments were received.
    We estimate the burden of the information collection as follows:

                                 Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Number of
          Activity               Number of     responses per   Total annual   Average burden per    Total hours
                                respondents     respondent       responses         response             \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application by AB for ASCA                 8               1               8  6.................              48
 Recognition.
Request by AB to continue                  2               1               2  6.................              12
 ASCA Recognition.
Request by AB for ASCA                     1               1               1  6.................               6
 Recognition (subsequent to
 withdrawal).
Request by AB to expand                    1               1               1  6.................               6
 scope of ASCA Recognition.
AB annual status report.....               8               1               8  3.................              24
AB notification of change...               8               1               8  1.................               8
Application by TL for ASCA               150               1             150  4.................             600
 Accreditation.
Request by TL to continue                 75               1              75  4.................             300
 ASCA Accreditation.
Request by TL for ASCA                     5               1               5  4.................              20
 Accreditation (subsequent
 to withdrawal or
 suspension).
Request by TL to expand                   75               1              75  4.................             300
 scope of ASCA Accreditation.
TL annual status report.....             150               1             150  1.5...............             225
TL notification of change...               5               1               5  1.................               5
Request for withdrawal or                  6               1               6  0.08 (5 minutes)..               1
 suspension of ASCA
 Accreditation (TLs) or
 request for withdrawal of
 ASCA Recognition (ABs).
Feedback questionnaire (ABs              158               1             158  0.5 (30 minutes)..              79
 and TLs).
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..................           1,634
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Totals have been rounded to the nearest hour.
\2\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

                               Table 2--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of                    Average burden
            Activity                 Number of      records per    Total annual         per         Total hours
                                   recordkeepers   recordkeeper       records      recordkeeping
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AB setup documentation standard                3               1               3              25              75
 operating procedures (SOPs) &
 training (one-time burden).....
TL setup documentation SOPs &                 20               1              20              25             500
 training (one-time burden).....
AB record maintenance...........               8               1               8               1               8
TL record maintenance...........             150               1             150               1             150
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............             733
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

                           Table 3--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Number of
                                 Number of      disclosures    Total annual   Average burden per
          Activity              respondents         per         disclosures       disclosure        Total hours
                                                respondent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Request for Accreditation                150               1             150  0.5 (30 minutes)..              75
 (TLs requesting
 accreditation from ABs).
Review/Acknowledgement of                  8              22             176  40................           7,040
 accreditation request (ABs).
Test Reports (TLs)..........             880               1             880  1.................             880
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..................           7,995
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    Our estimate of eight ABs is based on the number of International
Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation signatories in the U.S. economy.
We estimate that approximately 150 testing labs will seek ASCA
Accreditation. Our estimate of Test Reports is based on the number of
premarket submissions we expect per year with testing from an ASCA-
accredited testing laboratory.
    Our estimates for the number of respondents and average burden per

response, recordkeeping, and disclosure are based on our experience
with the pilot program.
    Our estimated burden for the information collection reflects an
overall decrease of 3,129 hours and an increase of 94 responses/
records. We attribute this adjustment to a decrease in the one-time
burden for accreditation bodies and testing laboratories training and
SOPs because much of this activity was completed during the pilot. In
addition, there is an increase in the annual responses/records because
there is an increase in renewal requests (by accreditation bodies to
continue ASCA Recognition and by testing laboratories to continue ASCA
Accreditation) since the pilot program was initiated.

    Dated: June 26, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-13860 Filed 6-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: July 26, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 143)]
[Notices]
[Page 42434-42435]
[DOCID:fr26jy06-124]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54178; File No. SR-NYSE-2006-47]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Requiring Member Organizations to Remit a Branch Office System
Processing Fee in Connection with the Registration of Branch Offices
via the Uniform Branch Office Registration Form Through the National
Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.'s Central Registration
Depository System

July 20, 2006.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 30, 2006, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange.\3\ NYSE has designated this proposal as establishing or
changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by NYSE pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \4\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\5\ which renders the proposal 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\ CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Pursuant to discussions with NYSE staff, the Commission has
made clarifying changes throughout this notice. Telephone
conversation between Stephen Kasprzak, Principal Counsel, and Cory
Figman, Senior Special Counsel, Rule and Interpretive Standards,
NYSE and Kate Robbins, Attorney, Division of Market Regulation
(``Division''), Commission, on July 6, 2006 (``July 6 Telephone
Conversation'').
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to require NYSE-only member organizations to
remit to the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'') two fees in connection with branch offices processed via
Form BR (Uniform Branch Office Registration Form) through NASD's
Central Registration Depository (``CRD'') system. The fees, an initial
$20.00 fee (``CRD Branch Office System Processing Fee'') and a $20.00
annual fee (``CRD Annual Branch Office System Processing Fee''), are
consistent with those paid by NASD-only and joint NYSE/NASD member
organizations. The fees would be reflected in the amended NYSE Price
List.\6\ The text of the proposed rule change is available on NYSE's
Web site (http://www.nyse.com), at NYSE's Office of the Secretary, and

at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange clarified that the amendments to the NYSE 2006
Price List would be inserted in the section entitled ``Registration
& Regulatory Fees,'' in the subsection entitled ``Registration
Fees,'' after the ``Branch Office Fee'' and before the ``Registered
Persons'' fees. Telephone conversation between Cory Figman, Senior
Special Counsel, NYSE and Kate Robbins, Attorney, Division,
Commission, on July 12, 2006. In addition, the Exchange clarified
that it intends to change the date on the NYSE Price List from 2005
to 2006. See July 6 Telephone Conversation, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 require NYSE-only member organizations to
remit to NASD two conforming branch office system processing fees in
connection with the registration of branch offices via Form BR through
NASD's CRD system.

Background

    On September 30, 2005, the SEC approved the Exchange's proposed
Form BR, which became effective on October 31, 2005.\7\ The Form BR
replaces Schedule E of the Form BD, the NYSE Branch Office Application
Form and certain state branch office forms. The Form BR enables firms
to register branch offices electronically with NASD, NYSE, and states
that require branch registration or reporting via a single filing
through the CRD system. At the same time, the SEC approved a comparable
NASD rule proposal.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Release No. 34-52543 (September 30, 2005), 70 FR 58771
(October 7, 2005) (SR-NYSE-2005-13). See also NYSE Information Memo
05-75.
    \8\ See Release No. 34-52544 (September 30, 2005), 70 FR 58764
(October 7, 2005) (SR-NASD-2005-030). See also NASD Notice to
Members 05-66.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Branch office registration through the CRD system creates
efficiencies for firms by, among other things, making it easier for
firms to register or report branch offices and to manage their ongoing
registration and/or reporting responsibilities with regard to those
branch offices. In addition to being able to submit a single filing to
fulfill the branch office registration requirements of NASD, NYSE and
the states, member organizations benefit from one centralized branch
office system, online work queues, electronic notifications and other
features available through the CRD system. Firms are also able to link
their registered persons to the physical location from which they work
via the Form BR, which not only aids regulators' examination efforts,
but helps firms in meeting certain recordkeeping requirements.
    On May 23, 2006, NASD filed for immediate effectiveness a filing
establishing an annual branch office system processing fee and waiver
of the annual branch office system processing fee and the annual branch
office registration fee for one branch office per member per year. \9\
The branch office system processing fee is set at $20.00 upon the
registration of a branch office and $20.00 annually thereafter per
registered branch. NASD will begin assessing the processing fee during
the third quarter of 2006 for all branch offices in existence as of
July 3, 2006.\10\ NASD will bill firms for all branch offices in
existence as of July 3, 2006 via invoices, rather than through the CRD
system.\11\ For any branch office that is registered on or after July
3, 2006, NASD will assess and collect the branch office system
processing fee through the CRD system at the time a firm registers a
new branch office.\12\ Starting December 2006, all firms will be
assessed $20.00 annually for each existing branch office as part of the
CRD renewal program.\13\ In NASD's filing, it was noted that the manner
of assessment and collection of branch office system processing fees
from firms that are solely members of other self-regulatory
organizations (``SROs'') that require their members to register branch
offices via the Form BR would be addressed by other SROs.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Release No. 34-53955 (June 7, 2006), 71 FR 34658 (June
15, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-065).
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ Id.
    \12\ Id.
    \13\ Id.
    \14\ Id.

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

    The proposed rule change would require NYSE-only members to remit
to NASD a conforming initial $20.00 CRD Branch Office System Processing
Fee and a conforming $20.00 CRD Annual Branch Office System Processing
Fee in connection with branch offices processed via Form BR through the
CRD system. These fees would be included on the NYSE Price List. The
purpose of these branch office system processing fees is to recover the
cost to NASD of developing and implementing the Form BR as well as for
ongoing branch office system maintenance and enhancements.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange, and in
particular, with the requirements of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\15\
which requires the rules of an Exchange to provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its
members, and issuers and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change does not impose
any burden on competition 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

    Comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) \16\ of the Act and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\17\ in that it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other
charge applicable to NYSE members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NYSE-2006-47 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2006-47. 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 also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the NYSE. 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 Number SR-NYSE-2006-47 and should be submitted on or before August
16, 2006

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 J. Lynn Taylor,
 Assistant Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-11929 Filed 7-25-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P