[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 27 (Thursday, February 11, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9031-9036]
[FR Doc No: 2021-02587]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2020-0597; FRL-10019-43-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Plans; Pennsylvania;
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Determinations for Case-
by-Case Sources Under the 1997 and 2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve multiple state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. These revisions were submitted by the
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) to
establish and require reasonably available control technology (RACT)
for nine major sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and/or
nitrogen oxides (NOX) pursuant to the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania's conditionally approved RACT regulations. In this
rulemaking action, EPA is only proposing to approve source-specific
(also referred to as ``case-by-case'') RACT determinations for eight of
the nine major sources submitted by PADEP. These RACT evaluations were
submitted to meet RACT requirements for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). This action is being
taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 15, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2020-0597 at https://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: Ms. Emily Bertram, Permits Branch
(3AD10), Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Ms. Bertram can also be reached
via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 9, 2020, PADEP submitted a revision
to its SIP to address case-by-case NOX and/or VOC RACT for
nine major facilities. This SIP revision is intended to address the
NOX and/or VOC RACT requirements under sections 182 and 184
of the CAA for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Table 1 of this
document lists the SIP submittal date and the facilities included in
PADEP's submittal. Although submitted in one SIP revision by PADEP, EPA
views each facility as a separable SIP revision and may take separate
final action on one or more facilities. In this rulemaking action, EPA
is only proposing to approve case-by-case RACT determinations for eight
of the nine sources submitted to EPA by PADEP. The remaining major
source, Montour LLC, will be acted on in a future rulemaking action.
    For additional background information on Pennsylvania's
``presumptive'' RACT II SIP see 84 FR 20274 (May 9, 2019) and on
Pennsylvania's source-specific or ``case-by-case'' RACT determinations
see the appropriate technical support document (TSD) which is available
online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA-R03-OAR-2020-
0597.

    Table 1--PADEP SIP Submittals for Major NOX and/or VOC Sources in
 Pennsylvania Subject to Source-Specific RACT Under the 1997 and 2008 8-
                           Hour Ozone Standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      SIP submittal date                 Major source (county)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3/9/2020.....................  Volvo Construction Equipment North
                                America (Franklin).
                               National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation--
                                Roystone Compressor Station (Warren).
                               Montour, LLC (Montour).\a\
                               E.I DuPont de Nemours and Co. (Bradford).
                               Carmeuse Lime Inc. (Lebanon).
                               Kovatch Mobile Equipment Corp. (Carbon).
                               Merck, Sharpe & Dohme Corp. (formerly
                                Merck and Co., Inc.--West Point
                                Facility) (Montgomery).
                               Letterkenny Army Depot (formerly
                                Department of the Army) (Franklin).
                               Fairless Energy, LLC (Bucks).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ EPA will be taking action on this source in a future rulemaking
  action.

I. Background

A. 1997 and 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

    Ground level ozone is not emitted directly into the air but is
created by chemical reactions between NOX and VOC in the
presence of sunlight. Emissions from industrial facilities, electric
utilities, motor vehicle exhaust, gasoline vapors, and chemical
solvents are some of the major sources of NOX and VOC.
Breathing ozone can trigger a variety of health problems, particularly
for children, the elderly, and people of all ages who have lung
diseases such as asthma. Ground level ozone can also have harmful
effects on sensitive vegetation and ecosystems.
    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a standard for ground level ozone
based on 8-hour average concentrations. 62 FR 38856. The 8-hour
averaging period replaced the previous 1-hour averaging period, and the
level of the NAAQS was changed from 0.12 parts per million (ppm) to
0.08 ppm. EPA has designated two moderate nonattainment areas in
Pennsylvania under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, namely Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE (the Philadelphia Area) and
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley (the Pittsburgh Area). See 40 CFR 81.339.
    On March 12, 2008, EPA strengthened the 8-hour ozone standards, by
revising its level to 0.075 ppm averaged over an 8-hour period (2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS). On May 21, 2012, EPA designated five marginal
nonattainment areas in Pennsylvania for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS:
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, Lancaster, Reading, the Philadelphia Area,
and the Pittsburgh Area. 77 FR 30088; see also 40 CFR 81.339.
    On March 6, 2015, EPA announced its revocation of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for all purposes and for all areas in the country,
effective on April 6, 2015. 80 FR 12264. EPA has determined that
certain nonattainment planning requirements continue to be in effect
under the revoked standard for nonattainment areas under the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS, including RACT.

B. RACT Requirements for Ozone

    The CAA regulates emissions of NOX and VOC to prevent
photochemical reactions that result in ozone formation. RACT is an
important strategy for reducing NOX and VOC emissions from
major stationary sources within areas not meeting the ozone NAAQS.
    Areas designated nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS are subject to
the general nonattainment planning requirements of CAA section 172.
Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides that SIPs for nonattainment areas
must include reasonably available control measures (RACM) for
demonstrating attainment of all NAAQS, including emissions reductions
from existing sources through the adoption of RACT. Further, section
182(b)(2) of the CAA sets forth additional RACT requirements for ozone
nonattainment areas classified as moderate or higher. Section 182(b)(2)
of the CAA sets forth requirements regarding RACT for the ozone NAAQS
for VOC sources. Section 182(f) subjects major stationary sources of
NOX to the same RACT requirements applicable to major
stationary sources of VOC.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A ``major source'' is defined based on the source's
potential to emit (PTE) of NOX or VOC, and the applicable
thresholds for RACT differs based on the classification of the
nonattainment area in which the source is located. See sections
182(c)-(f) and 302 of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA applies the RACT requirements in
section 182(b)(2) to nonattainment areas classified as marginal and to
attainment areas located within ozone transport regions established
pursuant to section 184 of the CAA. Section 184(a) of the CAA
established by law the current Ozone Transport Region (OTR) comprised
of 12 eastern states, including Pennsylvania. This requirement is
referred to as OTR RACT. As noted previously, a ``major source'' is
defined based on the source's PTE of NOX, VOC, or both
pollutants, and the applicable thresholds differ based on the
classification of the nonattainment area in which the source is
located. See sections 182(c)-(f) and 302 of the CAA.
    Since the 1970's, EPA has consistently defined ``RACT'' as the
lowest emission limit that a particular source is capable of meeting by
the application of the control technology that is reasonably available
considering technological and economic feasibility.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See December 9, 1976 memorandum from Roger Strelow,
Assistant Administrator for Air and Waste Management, to Regional
Administrators, ``Guidance for Determining Acceptability of SIP
Regulations in Non-Attainment Areas,'' and also 44 FR 53762
(September 17, 1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has provided more substantive RACT requirements through
implementation rules for each ozone NAAQS as well as through guidance.
In 2004 and 2005, EPA promulgated an implementation rule for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS in two phases (``Phase 1 of the 1997 Ozone
Implementation Rule'' and ``Phase 2 of the 1997 Ozone Implementation
Rule''). 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004) and 70 FR 71612 (November 29,
2005), respectively. Particularly, the Phase 2 Ozone Implementation
Rule addressed RACT statutory requirements under the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 70 FR 71652 (November 29, 2005).
    On March 6, 2015, EPA issued its final rule for implementing the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (``the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule''). 80
FR 12264. At the same time, EPA revoked the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
effective on April 6, 2015.\3\ The 2008 Ozone SIP

Requirements Rule provided comprehensive requirements to transition
from the revoked 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS to the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, as codified in 40 CFR part 51, subpart AA, following revocation.
Consistent with previous policy, EPA determined that areas designated
nonattainment for both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS at the time
of revocation, must retain implementation of certain nonattainment area
requirements (i.e., anti-backsliding requirements) for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS as specified under section 182 of the CAA, including RACT.
See 40 CFR 51.1100(o). An area remains subject to the anti-backsliding
requirements for a revoked NAAQS until EPA approves a redesignation to
attainment for the area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. There are no
effects on applicable requirements for areas within the OTR, as a
result of the revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Thus,
Pennsylvania, as a state within the OTR, remains subject to RACT
requirements for both the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ On February 16, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Cir. Court) issued an opinion
on the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule. South Coast Air Quality
Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, No. 15-1115 (D.C. Cir. February 16, 2018). The
D.C. Cir. Court found certain parts reasonable and denied the
petition for appeal on those. In particular, the D.C. Cir. Court
upheld the use of NOX averaging to meet RACT requirements
for 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. However, the Court also found certain
other provisions unreasonable. The D.C. Cir. Court vacated the
provisions it found unreasonable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addressing RACT, the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule is
consistent with existing policy and Phase 2 of the 1997 Ozone
Implementation Rule. In the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule, EPA
requires RACT measures to be implemented by January 1, 2017 for areas
classified as moderate nonattainment or above and all areas of the OTR.
EPA also provided in the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule that RACT
SIPs must contain adopted RACT regulations, certifications where
appropriate that existing provisions are RACT, and/or negative
declarations stating that there are no sources in the nonattainment
area covered by a specific control technique guidelines (CTG) source
category. In the preamble to the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule, EPA
clarified that states must provide notice and opportunity for public
comment on their RACT SIP submissions, even when submitting a
certification that the existing provisions remain RACT or a negative
declaration. States must submit appropriate supporting information for
their RACT submissions, in accordance with the Phase 2 of the 1997
Ozone Implementation Rule. Adequate documentation must support that
states have considered control technology that is economically and
technologically feasible in determining RACT, based on information that
is current as of the time of development of the RACT SIP.
    In addition, in the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule, EPA clarified
that states can use weighted average NOX emissions rates
from sources in the nonattainment area for meeting the major
NOX RACT requirement under the CAA, as consistent with
existing policy.\4\ EPA also recognized that states may conclude in
some cases that sources already addressed by RACT determinations for
the 1979 1-hour and/or 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS may not need to
implement additional controls to meet the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS RACT
requirement. See 80 FR 12278-12279 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ EPA's NOX RACT guidance ``Nitrogen Oxides
Supplement to the General Preamble'' (57 FR 55625; November 25,
1992) encouraged states to develop RACT programs that are based on
``area wide average emission rates.'' Additional guidance on area-
wide RACT provisions is provided by EPA's January 2001 economic
incentive program guidance titled ``Improving Air Quality with
Economic Incentive Programs,'' available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/eipfin.pdf. In addition, as mentioned previously,
the D.C. Cir. Court recently upheld the use of NOX
averaging to meet RACT requirements for 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, No. 15-1115 (D.C. Cir.
February 16, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Applicability of RACT Requirements in Pennsylvania

    As indicated earlier, RACT requirements apply to any ozone
nonattainment areas classified as moderate or higher (serious, severe
or extreme) under CAA sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f). Pennsylvania has
outstanding ozone RACT requirements for both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. The entire Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is part of the OTR
established under section 184 of the CAA and thus is subject statewide
to the RACT requirements of CAA sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f), pursuant
to section 184(b).
    At the time of revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (effective
April 6, 2015), only two moderate nonattainment areas remained in the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for this standard, the Philadelphia and
the Pittsburgh Areas. As required under EPA's anti-backsliding
provisions, these two moderate nonattainment areas continue to be
subject to RACT under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Given its location
in the OTR, the remainder of the Commonwealth is also treated as
moderate nonattainment area under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for any
planning requirements under the revoked standard, including RACT. The
OTR RACT requirement is also in effect under the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS throughout the Commonwealth, since EPA did not designate any
nonattainment areas above marginal for this standard in Pennsylvania.
Thus, in practice, the same RACT requirements continue to be applicable
in Pennsylvania for both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. RACT
must be evaluated and satisfied as separate requirements under each
applicable standard.
    RACT applies to major sources of NOX and VOC under each
ozone NAAQS or any VOC sources subject to CTG RACT. Which
NOX and VOC sources in Pennsylvania are considered ``major''
and are therefore subject to RACT is dependent on the location of each
source within the Commonwealth. Sources located in nonattainment areas
would be subject to the ``major source'' definitions established under
the CAA. In the case of Pennsylvania, sources located in any areas
outside of moderate or above nonattainment areas, as part of the OTR,
shall be treated as if these areas were moderate.
    In Pennsylvania, the SIP program is implemented primarily by the
PADEP, but also by local air agencies in Philadelphia County (the City
of Philadelphia's Air Management Services [AMS]) and Allegheny County,
(the Allegheny County Health Department [ACHD]). These agencies have
implemented numerous RACT regulations and source-specific measures in
Pennsylvania to meet the applicable ozone RACT requirements.
Historically, statewide RACT controls have been promulgated by PADEP in
Pennsylvania Code Title 25--Environmental Resources, Part I--Department
of Environmental Protection, Subpart C--Protection of Natural
Resources, Article III--Air Resources, (25 Pa. Code) Chapter 129. AMS
and ACHD have incorporated by reference Pennsylvania regulations, but
have also promulgated regulations adopting RACT controls for their own
jurisdictions. In addition, AMS and ACHD have submitted, through PADEP,
separate source-specific RACT determinations as SIP revisions for
sources within their respective jurisdictions, which have been approved
by EPA. See 40 CFR 52.2020(d)(1).
    States were required to make RACT SIP submissions for the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS by September 15, 2006. PADEP submitted a SIP revision
on September 25, 2006, certifying that a number of previously approved
VOC RACT rules continued to satisfy RACT under the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS

for the remainder of Pennsylvania.\5\ PADEP has met its obligations
under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for its CTG and non-CTG VOC sources.
See 82 FR 31464 (July 7, 2017). RACT control measures addressing all
applicable CAA RACT requirements under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS have
been implemented and fully approved in the jurisdictions of ACHD and
AMS. See 78 FR 34584 (June 10, 2013) and 81 FR 69687 (October 7, 2016).
For the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, states were required to submit RACT
SIP revisions by July 20, 2014. On May 16, 2016, PADEP submitted a SIP
revision addressing RACT under both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in Pennsylvania. Specifically, the May 16, 2016 SIP submittal
intended to satisfy sections 182(b)(2)(C), 182(f), and 184 of the CAA
for both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for Pennsylvania's major
NOX and VOC non-CTG sources, except ethylene production
plants, surface active agents manufacturing, and mobile equipment
repair and refinishing.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The September 15, 2006 SIP submittal initially included
Pennsylvania's certification of NOX RACT regulations;
however, NOX RACT portions were withdrawn by PADEP on
June 27, 2016.
    \6\ EPA's conditional approval of PADEP's May 16, 2016 SIP
revision covered relevant sources located in both Philadelphia and
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. EPA's Conditional Approval for Pennsylvania's RACT Requirements
Under the 1997 and 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

    On May 16, 2016, PADEP submitted a SIP revision addressing RACT
under both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in Pennsylvania.
PADEP's May 16, 2016 SIP revision intended to address certain
outstanding non-CTG VOC RACT, VOC CTG RACT, and major NOX
RACT requirements under the CAA for both standards. The SIP revision
requested approval of Pennsylvania's 25 Pa. Code 129.96-100, Additional
RACT Requirements for Major Sources of NOX and VOCs (the
``presumptive'' RACT II rule). Prior to the adoption of the RACT II
rule, Pennsylvania relied on the NOX and VOC control
measures in 25 Pa. Code 129.92-95, Stationary Sources of NOX and VOCs,
(the RACT I rule) to meet RACT for non-CTG major VOC sources and major
NOX sources. The requirements of the RACT I rule remain in
effect and continue to be implemented as RACT.\7\ On September 26,
2017, PADEP submitted a supplemental SIP revision which committed to
address various deficiencies identified by EPA in their May 16, 2016
``presumptive'' RACT II rule SIP revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ These requirements were initially approved as RACT for
Pennsylvania under the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 9, 2019, EPA conditionally approved the RACT II rule based
on PADEP's September 26, 2017 commitment letter.\8\ See 84 FR 20274. In
EPA's final conditional approval, EPA noted that PADEP would be
required to submit, for EPA's approval, SIP revisions to address any
facility-wide or system-wide averaging plan approved under 25 Pa. Code
129.98 and any case-by-case RACT determinations under 25 Pa. Code
129.99. PADEP committed to submitting these additional SIP revisions
within 12 months of EPA's final conditional approval, specifically May
9, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ On August 27, 2020, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals
vacated three provisions of Pennsylvania's presumptive RACT II rule
applicable to certain coal-fired power plants. Sierra Club v. EPA,
No. 19-2562 (3rd Cir. August 27, 2020). None of the sources in this
proposed rulemaking are subject to the presumptive RACT II
provisions at issue in the Sierra Club decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, as authorized in CAA section 110(k)(3) and (k)(4),
Pennsylvania was required to submit the following as case-by-case SIP
revisions, by May 9, 2020, for EPA's approval as a condition of
approval of 25 Pa. Code 128 and 129 in the May 16, 2016 SIP revision:
(1) All facility-wide or system-wide averaging plans approved by PADEP
under 25 Pa. Code 129.98 including, but not limited to, any terms and
conditions that ensure the enforceability of the averaging plan as a
practical matter (i.e., any monitoring, reporting, recordkeeping, or
testing requirements); and (2) all source-specific RACT determinations
approved by PADEP under 25 Pa. Code 129.99, including any alternative
compliance schedules approved under 25 Pa. Code 129.97(k) and
129.99(i); the case-by-case RACT determinations submitted to EPA for
approval into the SIP should include any terms and conditions that
ensure the enforceability of the case-by-case or source-specific RACT
emission limitation as a practical matter (i.e., any monitoring,
reporting, recordkeeping, or testing requirements). See May 9, 2019 (84
FR 20274). Through multiple submissions between 2017 and 2020, PADEP
has submitted to EPA for approval various SIP submissions to implement
its RACT II case-by-case determinations and averaging plans. This
proposed rulemaking is based on EPA's review of one of these SIP
revisions.

II. Summary of SIP Revisions

    In order to satisfy a requirement from EPA's May 9, 2019
conditional approval, PADEP has submitted to EPA, SIP revisions
addressing case-by-case RACT requirements for major sources in
Pennsylvania subject to 25 Pa. Code 129.99. As noted in Table 1 of this
document, on March 9, 2020, PADEP submitted to EPA, a SIP revision
pertaining to Pennsylvania's case-by-case NOX and/or VOC
RACT determinations for nine major sources located in the Commonwealth.
PADEP provided documentation in its SIP revisions to support its case-
by-case RACT determinations for affected emission units at each major
source subject to 25 Pa. Code 129.99. Specifically, in this SIP
submittal, PADEP evaluated a total of nine major NOX and/or
VOC sources in Pennsylvania for case-by-case RACT.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ As noted previously, EPA, in this action, is proposing
approval for eight of the nine case-by-case RACT determinations
submitted by PADEP in the applicable SIP revision. See Table 1 of
this document for more detailed information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Pennsylvania RACT SIP revision, PADEP included a case-by-
case RACT determination for the existing emissions units at each of
these major sources of NOX and/or VOC that required a source
specific RACT determination. In PADEP's RACT determinations an
evaluation was completed to determine if previously SIP-approved, case-
by-case RACT requirements (herein referred to as RACT I) were more
stringent and required to be retained in the sources Title V air
quality permit and subsequently, the Federally-approved SIP, or if the
new case-by-case RACT requirements are more stringent and supersede the
previous Federally-approved provisions.
    In this rulemaking action, EPA is taking action on eight major
sources of NOX and/or VOC in Pennsylvania, subject to
Pennsylvania's case-by-case RACT requirements, as summarized in Table
2.

 Table 2--Eight Major NOX and/or VOC Sources in Pennsylvania Subject to Case-by-Case RACT II Under the 1997 and
                                             2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          1-Hour ozone RACT     Major source  pollutant       RACT II permit
        Major source (county)              source? (RACT I)         (NOX and/or VOC)         (effective date)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volvo Construction Equipment North     No.....................  VOC....................  28-05012 (6/1/2019).
 America (Franklin).
National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation-- Yes....................  NOX and VOC............  62-141H (1/16/2018).
 Roystone Compressor Station (Warren).
E.I DuPont de Nemours and Co.          Yes....................  NOX and VOC............  08-00002 (9/28/2018).
 (Bradford).
Carmeuse Lime Inc. (Lebanon).........  Yes....................  NOX....................  38-05003 (3/6/2019).
Kovatch Mobile Equipment Corp.         No.....................  VOC....................  13-00008 (10/27/2017).
 (Carbon).
Merck, Sharpe & Dohme Corp. (formerly  Yes....................  NOX and VOC............  46-00005 (1/5/2017).
 Merck and Co., Inc.--West Point
 Facility) (Montgomery).
Letterkenny Army Depot (formerly       Yes....................  VOC....................  28-05002 (6/1/2018).
 Department of the Army) (Franklin).
Fairless Energy, LLC (Bucks).........  No.....................  NOX and VOC............  09-00124 (12/6/2016).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The case-by-case RACT determinations submitted by PADEP consist of
an evaluation of all reasonably available controls at the time of
evaluation for each affected emissions unit, resulting in a PADEP
determination of what specific control requirements, if any, satisfy
RACT for that particular unit. The adoption of new or additional
controls or the revisions to existing controls as RACT were specified
as requirements in new or revised Federally enforceable permits
(hereafter RACT II permits) issued by PADEP to the source. The RACT II
permits, which revise or adopt additional source-specific controls,
have been submitted as part of the Pennsylvania RACT SIP revisions for
EPA's approval in the Pennsylvania SIP under 40 CFR 52.2020(d)(1). The
RACT II permits submitted by PADEP are listed in the last column of
Table 2 of this document, along with the permit effective date, and are
part of the docket for this rulemaking, which is available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA-R03-OAR-2020-0597.\10\ EPA
is proposing to incorporate by reference in the Pennsylvania SIP, via
the RACT II permits, source-specific RACT determinations under the 1997
and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for certain major sources of NOX
and VOC emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The RACT II permits are redacted versions of a facility's
Federally enforceable permits and reflect the specific RACT
requirements being approved into the Pennsylvania SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. EPA's Evaluation of SIP Revisions

    After thorough review and evaluation of the information provided by
PADEP for eight major sources of NOX and/or VOC in
Pennsylvania in its SIP revision submittal, EPA finds that PADEP's
case-by-case RACT determinations and conclusions provided are
reasonable and appropriately considered technically and economically
feasible controls, while setting lowest achievable limits. EPA finds
that the proposed source-specific RACT controls for the sources subject
to this rulemaking action adequately meet the CAA RACT requirements for
the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the major sources of
NOX and/or VOC in Pennsylvania, as they are not covered by
or cannot meet Pennsylvania's presumptive RACT regulation.
    EPA also finds that all the proposed revisions to previously SIP
approved RACT requirements, under the 1979 1-hour ozone standard (RACT
I), as discussed in PADEP's SIP revisions, will result in equivalent or
additional reductions of NOX and/or VOC emissions and should
not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment or
reasonable further progress with the NAAQS or interfere with other
applicable CAA requirement in section 110(l) of the CAA.
    EPA's complete analysis of PADEP's case-by-case RACT SIP revisions
is included in the TSD available in the docket for this rulemaking
action and available online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket
number EPA-R03-OAR-2020-0597.

IV. Proposed Action

    Based on EPA's review, EPA is proposing to approve the Pennsylvania
SIP revisions for the eight case-by-case RACT facilities listed in
Table 2 of this document and incorporate by reference in the
Pennsylvania SIP, via the RACT II permits, source specific RACT
determinations under the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for certain
major sources of NOX and VOC emissions. EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues discussed in this document. These
comments will be considered before taking final action. As EPA views
each facility as a separable SIP revision, should EPA receive comment
on one facility but not others, EPA may take separate, final action on
the remaining facilities.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference source specific RACT determinations via the RACT II permits
as described in Sections II and III of this document--Summary of SIP
Revisions and EPA's Evaluation of SIP Revisions. EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials generally available through https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region III Office (please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).

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 proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because it is not a significant

regulatory action 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, this proposed rulemaking, addressing Pennsylvania's
NOX and VOC RACT requirements for eight case-by-case
facilities for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, does not have
tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian
country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: February 3, 2021.
Diana Esher,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2021-02587 Filed 2-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: July 14, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 134)]
[Notices]
[Page 40819]
[DOCID:fr14jy10-61]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM98-1-000]

Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public Notice

July 6, 2010.
    This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of
the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.
    Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission
decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-
the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested
proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of
the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any
oral communication.
    Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional
file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the
proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited
communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the
decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not
be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a
proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or
contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may
request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and
responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant
such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any
person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record
communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the
official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with
Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.
    Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional
record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a
cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR
385.2201(e)(1)(v).
    The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently
received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed
are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are
available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or
may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using
the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three
digits, in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, please contact FERC, Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Exempt

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      File
            Docket No.                date      Presenter or requester
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. P-516-459......................   6-24-10  Lee Emery.\1\
2. P-739-000......................   6-15-10  Kristen Murphy.\2\
3. P-2621-009.....................   6-24-10  Alicia M. Rowe.
4. P-2677-019.....................   6-15-10  John Smith.\3\
5. P-2850-016.....................   6-29-10  John Baummer.\4\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ E-mail (from Alan Stuart and Noah Silverman).
\2\ Telephone record.
\3\ E-mail exchange (with Arie DeWaal and Byron Dale Simon).
\4\ Record of telephone call with Matt Maraglio of New York State
  Division of Coastal Resources regarding Natural Dam hydroelectric
  project.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-17098 Filed 7-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 105 (Monday, June 1, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33235-33239]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11645]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88938; File No. SR-BX-2020-009]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Relocate the BX
Disciplinary Rules and Incorporate by Reference the Disciplinary Rules
of The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC

May 26, 2020.
    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 May 15, 2020, Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``BX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to (A) relocate the BX Series 8000 and 9000
Rules (the ``Current BX 8000 Series,'' ``Current BX 9000 Series,'' and,
collectively, the ``Disciplinary Rules'') to the Exchange's rulebook's
(``Rulebook'') shell structure; \3\ (B) the Exchange is also proposing
to simultaneously replace the text of the Disciplinary Rules with
introductory paragraphs in each that incorporate by reference The
Nasdaq Stock Market LLC's (``Nasdaq'') Series 8000 and 9000 Rules,
currently located under the General 5 title of the Nasdaq rulebook.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In 2017, the Exchange added a shell structure to its
Rulebook with the purpose of improving efficiency and readability
and to align its rules closer to those of its five sister exchanges,
The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Nasdaq ISE, LLC
(``ISE''); Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (``GEMX''); and Nasdaq MRX, LLC
(``MRX'') (together, the ``Affiliated Exchanges''). See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 82174 (November 29, 2017), 82 FR 57492
(December 5, 2017) (SR-BX-2017-054).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87778 (December 17,
2019), 84 FR 70590 (December 23, 2019) (SR-NASDAQ-2019-098).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://nasdaqbx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal office
of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
A. Rule Relocation
    The Exchange proposes to relocate the Disciplinary Rules under the
General 5 title (``Discipline'') in the Rulebook shell. The relocation
and harmonization of these rules is part of the Exchange's continued
effort to promote efficiency and conformity of its processes with those
of its Affiliated Exchanges. The Exchange believes that the placement
of the Disciplinary Rules into their new location in the shell will
facilitate the use of the Rulebook by members, associated persons, or
other persons subject to BX's jurisdiction.
    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to relocate the Disciplinary
Rules as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 General 5--Discipline: Proposed new rule No.                          Current BX rule No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1.....................................  8000. Investigations and Sanctions.
Section 2.....................................  9000. Code of Procedure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Incorporation by Reference
    The Exchange also proposes to simultaneously replace the current BX
Series 8000 and 9000 Rules with introductory paragraphs to each that
incorporate by reference the Nasdaq Series 8000 and 9000 Rules (located
in General 5 Discipline), respectively, and state that such Nasdaq
Rules shall be applicable to Exchange Members, associated persons, and
other persons subject to the Exchange's jurisdiction.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange notes that the proposed changes will not become
operative unless and until the Commission approves the Exchange's
request, to be filed pursuant to Section 36 of the Exchange Act and
SEC Rule 0-12 thereunder, for an exemption from the rule filing
requirements of Section 19(b) of the Exchange Act as to changes to
the BX 8000 Series (New General 5, Section 1) and BX 9000 Series
(New General 5, Section 2) that are effected solely by virtue of a
change to the Nasdaq Series 8000 or 9000 Rules Series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Except as noted below, the Nasdaq Series 8000 and 9000 Rules are
substantially similar to BX's Disciplinary Rules. The proposed
introductory paragraphs list instances in which cross-references in the
Nasdaq Series 8000 and 9000 Rules to other Nasdaq rules shall be read
to refer instead to the Exchange Rules, and references to Nasdaq terms
(whether or not defined) shall be read to refer to the Exchange-related
meanings of those terms. For instance, references in both the Nasdaq
Series 8000 and 9000 Rules to the following terms shall be read to
refer to the Exchange-specific meanings of those terms: The terms
``Exchange'' or ``Nasdaq'' shall be read to refer to BX; the terms
``Rule,'' ``Rules of Nasdaq,'' or ``Nasdaq Rules'' shall be read to
refer to the BX Rules (also referenced in the Disciplinary Rules as
``Equity Rules''); in Rules 9521(b)(2) and 9521(b)(3) the term ``Nasdaq
By-Laws'' shall be read as a reference to BX's Rules; the terms
``Board'' or ``Nasdaq Board'' shall be read to refer to the BX Board of
Directors; the terms ``Member,'' ``member firm,'' or ``associated
person'' shall be read to refer to a BX Member, BX member firm, or BX
associated person; the terms ``Nasdaq Regulation'' or ``Nasdaq
Regulation Department'' shall be read to refer to the BX Regulation
Department; the term ``Nasdaq Options Market'' shall be read to refer
to the BX Options Market; and the term ``Chief Regulatory Officer''
shall be read to refer to BX's Chief Regulatory Officer.
    Additionally, the Exchange proposes that the references in the
Nasdaq Rule 9000 Series to Equity 5, Sections 4 and 5 shall be read,
respectively, to refer to BX's Rules 7440A and 7450A.
    Moreover, in addition to the proposed introduction to the BX Series
9000 Rules (New General 5, Section 2) indicating how certain Nasdaq
Series 9000 Rules should be read to apply to Exchange members,
associated persons, and other persons subject to the Exchange's
jurisdiction, the proposed introduction will indicate that specific
language in certain Disciplinary Rules will be preserved. Specifically:
     Rule 9231(b)(1)(C) in the Nasdaq rules shall be read to
allow the Chief Hearing Officer to select as a Panelist a person who
previously served as a Governor of the Exchange prior to its
acquisition by Nasdaq, Inc., but does not serve currently in that
position; and 9231(b)(1)(D) shall be read to allow a person who is a
member of FINRA's Market Regulation Committee to be among the FINRA
Panelists approved by the Exchange Board at least annually whom the
Chief Hearing Officer may also select as a Panelist. This language is
necessary to preserve the pool of individuals from whom the Chief
Hearing Officer may select to serve as a Panelist for BX disciplinary
matters.
     The term ``Nasdaq By-Laws'' in Nasdaq Rules 9521(b)(2) and
(b)(3) shall be read as a reference to BX's Rules (or ``Rules of the
Exchange,'' as described in Current BX Rules 9521(b)(2) and (b)(3)) for
purposes of determining the disqualification of members and associated
persons to the Exchange.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In a future filing, Nasdaq will amend its Rules 9521(b)(2)
and (b)(3) concerning the qualification/disqualification of Exchange
members, to align its rules closer to BX and Phlx's rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rules 9552(f), 9553(g), 9554(g), 9555(g), 9556(g), and
9558(g) in the Nasdaq 9000 Series shall be read to continue to allow
the filing of a request for termination of a suspension (or a request
for termination of the limitation, prohibition or suspension with
respect to Rules 9555(g) and 9558(g)), to be made with either the head
of the Exchange or the FINRA department or office that issued the
notice or that is handling the matter on behalf of the issuing
department or office. The inclusion of this language is necessary so
that it is clear that such filings may continue to be made with the
Exchange.
    The Exchange also believes that it is necessary, as a consequence
of the relocation of its Disciplinary Rules and the incorporation by
reference of the Nasdaq rules as previously described, to eliminate
certain differences between the BX and Nasdaq rules by adopting the
Nasdaq rule text by reference. The following discussions identify the
differences between the current BX Disciplinary Rules and the
corresponding Nasdaq Disciplinary Rules to be incorporated by
reference:
Current BX IM-8310-3(b)
    Current BX Rule 9120(f) provides that ``[t]he term ``Department of
Enforcement'' means the Department of Enforcement of FINRA Regulation,
acting on behalf of the Exchange pursuant to the FINRA Regulatory
Contract.'' \7\ Current BX IM-8310-3(b), however, uses the term
``Department of Enforcement of FINRA.'' Since Nasdaq IM-8310-3(b) uses
the term ``Department of Enforcement'' and to the extent that such term
is already defined in the BX rulebook, the Exchange believes that it is
appropriate to apply the term provided in Nasdaq IM-8310-3(b) and
incorporate it by reference into the BX rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ This definition mirrors the one in the Nasdaq rulebook under
Rule 9120(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current BX Rule 8320
    In 2010, Nasdaq created Rule 7007 (``Collection of Fees'') to
facilitate an efficient method of collecting undisputed or final fees,
fines, charges and/or other monetary sanctions or monies due and owing
to Nasdaq from The Nasdaq Option Market (``NOM'') Participants.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63536 (December 14,
2010), 75 FR 80102 (December 21, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-163). Nasdaq
Rule 7007 was later relocated to Options Chapter XV, Section 1 and
then moved to its current location under Options 7, Section 1, in
the Nasdaq rulebook shell. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
66158 (January 13, 2012), 75 FR 80102 (January 13, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-
2012-006) and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84684 (November
29, 2018), 83 FR 62936 (December 6, 2018) (SR-NASDAQ-2018-098).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, in 2012, BX adopted its options market rules (``BX
Options Market'') to operate as a fully automated, price/time priority
execution system built on the core functionality of the NOM.\9\ In its
filing,

BX proposed to adopt, under respective Chapter XV, Section 2 a rule
identical to the Nasdaq Collection of Fees rule.\10\ Although, at the
time of its creation, the Nasdaq Collection of Fees rule was cross-
referenced to current Nasdaq Rule 8320(a)(1),\11\ such cross-reference
was not included in the filing that created the BX Options Market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67256 (June 26, 2012),
77 FR 39277 (July 2, 2012) (SR-BX-2012-030). This rule was later
relocated to the BX Rulebook shell. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 84326 (October 1, 2018), 83 FR 50414 (October 1, 2018)
(SR-BX-2018-046).
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ See supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the above, the Exchange believes that it is appropriate
that BX adopts the aforementioned cross-reference to make the
collection of fees owed to the Exchange more efficient. Therefore, the
Exchange believes that it is appropriate to incorporate by reference
Nasdaq Rule 8320.
Current BX Rule 9120
    In 2018, the Exchange amended its Disciplinary Rules to align them
with the investigatory and disciplinary processes of Nasdaq PHLX LLC
(``Phlx'').\12\ As stated in its proposal, the changes to the
``Interested Staff'' concept (which, at the time, was relocated under
9120(r)) were done to conform the BX rule to Phlx's definition. At the
time, however, the proposed harmonizing changes to BX Rule
9120(r)(1)(B) inadvertently excluded the words ``Head of'' and omitted
to add the word ``the''; indeed, the text should have read ``Head of
the Exchange's Regulation Department'' instead of, simply, ``Exchange's
Regulation Department.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84354 (October 3,
2018), 83 FR 50723 (October 9, 2018) (SR-BX-2018-042).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The correct definition, as explained above, would also align with
the term currently defined in Nasdaq Rule 9120(r)(1)(B), which provides
that ``Interested Staff'' shall mean ``an Exchange employee of the
Nasdaq Regulation Department who reports, directly or indirectly, to
the Head of the Nasdaq Regulation Department.''
    The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to apply Nasdaq Rule
9120 and to incorporate it by reference into the BX rule. Additionally,
the Exchange notes applying the Nasdaq Rule 9120 and incorporating it
by reference into the Exchange rule should correct a typo in Current BX
Rule 9120(v) that erroneously uses the term ``RINRA'' instead of the
acronym ``FINRA.''
Current BX IM-9216
    In 2007, Nasdaq filed a proposal to adopt rules that would govern
participation in the NOM.\13\ This proposal, among other changes,
adopted NOM Rule Chapter X, Section 7 (``Penalty for Minor Rule
Violations'') and was cross-referenced in Nasdaq IM-9216.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57478 (March 12,
2008), 73 FR 14521 (March 12, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2007-004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The provisions in the Nasdaq Penalty for Minor Rule Violations rule
were identical to those adopted in 2012 by the BX Options Market.\14\
Similarly, the Exchange adopted under BX IM-9216 a cross-reference to
BX Chapter X, Section 7 \15\ (Chapter X, Section 7, was later relocated
under the Options 11 title in the Rulebook shell \16\); however, such
cross-reference was inadvertently left out of the Rulebook. Thus, the
Exchange believes that incorporating by reference Nasdaq IM-9216 into
the BX rule will restore the cross-reference to the current BX's
Penalty for Minor Rule Violations rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See supra note 9.
    \15\ Id.
    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87468 (November 5,
2019), 84 FR 61091 (November 12, 2019) (SR-BX-2019-039).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that incorporating by reference Nasdaq
IM-9216 will correct a typo in the BX cross-reference that currently
points to SEC Exchange Act (``SEA'') Rule 602(b)(5). The cross-
reference refers to the failure to properly update published quotations
in certain Electronic Communication Networks; however, the rules for
the dissemination of such information are actually described in SEA
Rule 605(b)(5).
Current BX Rule 9231
    The Exchange proposes to adopt the cross-reference in Nasdaq Rule
9231(c) concerning the appointment of arbitrators pursuant to the FINRA
Rules 12000 and 13000 Series (the ``FINRA Arbitration Rules''). Current
BX Rule 9231(c) provides that arbitrators shall be appointed pursuant
to BX General 6 (``BX Arbitration Rules'').\17\ The BX Arbitration
Rules incorporate by reference the similar Nasdaq arbitration rules
(also under Nasdaq's General 6 title); in turn, the Nasdaq rules
incorporate the FINRA Arbitration Rules by reference into its text.
Following the incorporation by reference of Nasdaq Rule 9231, BX Rule
9231(c) will directly cross-reference the FINRA Arbitration Rules,
which will not create any differences from the current BX rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84476 (October 24,
2018), 83 FR 54630 (October 30, 2018) (SR-BX-2018-048).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current BX Rule 9232
    Currently, Nasdaq Rule 9232(a) provides a cross-reference to
subsections (A) through (D) in Nasdaq Rule 9231(b)(1), whereas Current
BX Rule 9232(a) simply provides a reference to BX Rule 9231(b)(1). The
Exchange believes that it is appropriate to apply Nasdaq Rule 9232(a)
and incorporate it by reference into the BX rule since the Nasdaq rule
contains a more precise cross-reference to Nasdaq Rule 9231(b)(1).
Current BX Rule 9522
    The Exchange proposes to apply and incorporate by reference Nasdaq
Rule 9522 into current BX Rule 9522. This will amend the first sentence
in Current BX Rule 9522(a)(1) by replacing the term ``Exchange's
Regulation Department'' with the term ``Department of Member
Regulation'' as currently provided in Nasdaq Rule 9522(a)(1). As
previously indicated by the Exchange,\18\ the FINRA Department of
Member Regulation \19\ currently performs the functions described in
Current BX Rule 9522. Therefore applying the Nasdaq rule and
incorporating it by reference into BX Rule 9522 provides clarity to the
rule text and aligns it with Nasdaq and Phlx's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84354 (October 3,
2018), 83 FR 50724 (October 9, 2018) (SR-BX-2018-042).
    \19\ As defined in BX 9120(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
Rule Relocation
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\20\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\21\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors
and the public interest by bringing greater transparency to its rules
by relocating its Rules into the new Rulebook shell together with other
rules which have already been relocated. The Exchange's proposal is
consistent with the Act and will protect investors and the public
interest by harmonizing its rules, where applicable, across Nasdaq
markets so that members can readily locate rules which cover similar
topics. The relocation and harmonization of the Disciplinary Rules is
part of the Exchange's continued effort to promote efficiency and
conformity of its processes with those of its Affiliated Exchanges. The
Exchange believes that the placement of these Disciplinary Rules into
their new location in the

shell will facilitate the use of the Rulebook by members, associated
persons, and other persons subject to the Exchange's jurisdiction.
Specifically, the Exchange believes that market participants that are
members of more than one Nasdaq market will benefit from the ability to
compare Rulebooks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is not substantively amending rule text unless noted
otherwise within this proposal. The Exchange's Affiliated Exchanges
have already completed or are in the process of completing the
relocation of corresponding disciplinary rules into the same location
of their rulebooks for ease of reference.\22\ The Exchange believes its
proposal will benefit investors and the general public by increasing
the transparency of its Rulebook and promoting easy comparisons among
the various Nasdaq Rulebooks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86138 (July 18,
2019), 84 FR 29567 (July 24, 2019) (SR-ISE-2019-17); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 86346 (July 10, 2019), 84 FR 33999 (July
16, 2019) (SR-GEMX-2019-08); and Securities Exchange Act Release No.
86424 (July 12, 2019), 84 FR 36134 (July 26, 2019) (SR-MRX-2019-15);
and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87778 (December 17, 2019),
84 FR 70590 (December 23, 2019) (SR-NASDAQ-2019-098). Similarly,
Phlx recently submitted a proposal to relocate its disciplinary
rules. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88519 (March 31,
2020), 85 FR 19203 (April 6, 2020) (SR-Phlx-2020-09).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Incorporation by Reference
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\23\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\24\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest, by consolidating its rules into a single rule set. The
Exchange's Affiliated Exchanges have filed similar proposed rule
changes to amend and relocate their disciplinary rules \25\ so that the
Nasdaq 8000 Series and 9000 Series Rules, which govern the
investigative and disciplinary processes, are similarly consolidated
and incorporated by reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See supra note 20.
    \24\ See supra note 21.
    \25\ See supra note 22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Replacing the Current BX Series 8000 (to be relocated under General
5, Section 1) and 9000 (to be relocated under General 5, Section 2)
Rules with introductory paragraphs to each that incorporate by
reference Nasdaq Series 8000 and 9000 Rules, respectively, will provide
an easy reference for members, associated persons, and other persons
subject to the Exchange's jurisdiction seeking to understand and follow
the investigative and disciplinary processes across all of Nasdaq's
Exchanges. As noted, the Exchange's Affiliated Exchanges have filed
similar proposed rule changes to amend and relocate their disciplinary
rules to incorporate by reference the Nasdaq rules so that the Nasdaq
Series 8000 and 9000 Rules are the source document for all of the
Nasdaq Exchanges' investigative and disciplinary processes. The
Exchange notes that the substance of the current rules is not changing.
The Exchange desires to conform its rules to give its members and the
members of its Affiliated Exchanges the ability to quickly locate rules
in one central location.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposal is consistent with
Section 6(b)(6) of the Act,\26\ which requires that the rules of an
exchange provide that its members be appropriately disciplined for
violations of the Act as well as the rules and regulations thereunder,
or the rules of the Exchange, by expulsion, suspension, limitation of
activities, functions, and operations, fine, censure, being suspended
or barred from being associated with a member, or any other fitting
sanction. As noted above, the Exchange proposes to include introductory
paragraphs to each of BX's Disciplinary Rules (to be relocated,
respectively, under General 5, Sections 1 and 2) that list instances in
which cross references in the Nasdaq Series 8000 and 9000 Rules to
other Nasdaq rules should be read to refer instead to the Exchange
Rules and references to Nasdaq terms (whether or not defined) shall be
read to refer to the Exchange-related meanings of those terms. This is
consistent with the Act because it minimizes confusion and ensures the
proper application of the Nasdaq Rules to BX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that this
rule change does not impose an undue burden on competition because the
Exchange is merely incorporating the Nasdaq Series 8000 and 9000 Rules,
which are substantially similar to BX's Disciplinary Rules (to be
relocated, respectively, under General 5, Sections 1 and 2). Those
rules will now apply to BX members, associated persons, and other
persons subject to the Exchange's jurisdiction. To the extent that
there are differences between the two rule sets, the Exchange notes
those differences in introductory paragraphs to each of BX's
Disciplinary Rules (to be relocated, respectively, under General 5,
Sections 1 and 2). As noted above, the proposed introductory paragraphs
list instances in which cross references in Nasdaq Series 8000 and 9000
Rules to other Nasdaq rules shall be read to refer instead to the
Exchange Rules, and references to Nasdaq terms (whether or not defined)
shall be read to refer to the Exchange-related meanings of those terms.
Because Nasdaq Current Series 8000 and 9000 Rules are substantially
similar to BX's Disciplinary Rules (General 5, Sections 1 and 2,
respectively), and because the introductory paragraphs ensure that any
differences are preserved, the proposed changes do not impose any
burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that the proposed amendments do not
impose an undue burden on competition because the amendments to
relocate the Rules are non-substantive. This rule change is intended to
bring greater clarity to the Exchange's Rules.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \27\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \28\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may

temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BX-2020-009 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2020-009. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-BX-2020-009 and should be submitted on
or before June 22, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-11645 Filed 5-29-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P