[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 219 (Tuesday, November 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68483-68489]
[FR Doc No: 2022-24790]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10366-01-R9]

Official Release of EMFAC2021 Motor Vehicle Emission Factor Model
for Use in the State of California

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving and
announcing the availability of the latest version of the California
EMFAC (short for EMission FACtor) model for use in state implementation
plan (SIP) development and transportation conformity in California.
EMFAC2021 is the latest update to the EMFAC model for use by California
state and local governments to meet Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements.
The new model, which is based on new and improved data and new and
amended regulations in California, calculates air pollution emissions
factors for passenger cars, trucks, motorcycles, motor homes, and
buses. The EPA is also approving EMFAC2017 adjustment factors, which
are based on these same new regulations, for those areas that have
already begun SIP development with EMFAC2017. This notice also sets the
date after which EMFAC2021, rather than EMFAC2017 or the EMFAC2017
adjustment factors discussed in this notice, must be used to satisfy
the requirement that conformity determinations be based on the latest
emissions model available. Because the EMFAC model is used only in
California, this notice does not affect the applicability of the Motor
Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) model for users in other states.

DATES: The EPA's approval of the EMFAC2021 emissions model and
EMFAC2017 adjustment factors for SIP, conformity purposes, and
applicable CAA purposes as described in this notice is effective
November 15, 2022. EMFAC2021 must be used as described in this notice
for all new regional emissions analyses for transportation conformity
purposes that are started on or after November 15, 2024 and for all new
carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter (PM10 and
PM2.5) hot-spot analyses that are started on or after
November 15, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karina O'Connor,
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER>, Air Planning Office (AIR-2),
Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, California 94105-3901.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of the official version of the
EMFAC2021 model and the EMFAC2017 adjustment factors, including
technical support documents, are available on the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/mobile-source-emissions-inventory/msei-modeling-tools-emfac-software-and.
    Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the
EPA. This document is organized as follows:

I. Background
    A. What is the EMFAC model?
    B. For what purposes is EMFAC used?
    C. What versions of EMFAC are currently in use in California?
    D. What has CARB submitted to the EPA for approval?
    E. How is EMFAC2021 different from the previous versions of
EMFAC?
    F. What is included in the EMFAC2017 adjustment factors?
    G. How were stakeholders and the public involved in the EMFAC
development process?
    H. Future Updates to EMFAC
II. The EPA's Action
    A. What actions are the EPA taking in this notice?
    B. Can EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2017 adjustment factors be used for
SIP development?
    C. What transportation conformity analyses can EMFAC2021 and
EMFAC2017 adjustment factors be used for?
    D. Does this notice establish a transportation conformity grace
period for the use of this model?

    E. Can areas use EMFAC2017 during the grace period?
III. Summary of the EPA's Actions

I. Background

A. What is the EMFAC model?

    The EMFAC model (``EMFAC'') is a computer model that can estimate
emissions rates of air pollutants for on-road mobile sources (``motor
vehicles''), for a range of past and future calendar years, that are
operating in California. Within the EMFAC model, emissions are
calculated for a variety of different vehicle classes composed of
passenger cars, various types of trucks and buses, motorcycles, and
motor homes.
    EMFAC is used to calculate current and future inventories of motor
vehicle emissions at the state, air district, air basin, county, and
project level. EMFAC contains default vehicle activity data, and the
option of modifying that data, so it can be used to estimate a motor
vehicle emissions inventory in tons per day for a specific year, month,
or season, and as a function of ambient temperature, relative humidity,
vehicle population, mileage accrual, miles of travel, and speed. Thus,
the model can be used to make decisions about air pollution policies
and programs at the local or state level.
    The EMFAC model is based on Python and MySQL software. This
structure was developed to allow CARB to incorporate new and updated
regulations and emissions data into the model and provide for a
simplified user experience. The model is operated in either the
Emissions Mode (total on-road emissions) or the Emissions Rate Mode
(emission factors) for regional emissions analyses to access emissions
databases and vehicle activity data for the appropriate geographic
subarea. EMFAC also includes the Project-Level Assessment (EMFAC2021-
PL) feature, which is available when EMFAC is run in Emissions Rate
Mode. When using EMFAC2021-PL, emissions rates are estimated based on
user-specified, project-specific conditions. An updated handbook for
using EMFAC at the project level is available from CARB.\1\ EMFAC
allows users to run one model for SIP inventories, regional emissions
analyses, and project analyses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021-06/emfac2021_volume_2_pl_handbook_ada.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. For what purposes is EMFAC used?

    The EMFAC model is used in California for modeling emissions of on-
road vehicles. Emissions inventories based on EMFAC are used to meet
SIP, conformity, and other applicable requirements under the CAA. EMFAC
is also used for National Environmental Protection Act and California
Environmental Quality Act analyses in California where the project
undergoing such analysis includes motor vehicle emissions. In addition,
EMFAC can be used to model carbon dioxide emissions and energy
consumption from on-road mobile sources in California, although that
modeling is not used for transportation conformity and SIP purposes
under the CAA.
    In this notice, the EPA is addressing the use of EMFAC for CAA
purposes, mainly SIP development and transportation conformity. The
latest version of EMFAC should be used in ozone, carbon monoxide (CO),
particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), and nitrogen
dioxide (NO2) SIP development as expeditiously as possible,
as there is no grace period for the use of the latest emissions model
in SIP submissions. The CAA requires that inventories and control
measures approved into the SIP be based on the most current information
and applicable models that are available when a SIP revision is
developed.\2\ Further discussion of the use of EMFAC in SIP revisions
is found in section II.B of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ CAA section 172(c)(3). Also see the discussion of emissions
inventory requirements in the ``Fine Particulate Matter National
Ambient Air Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan
Requirements'' rule (81 FR 58029, August 24, 2016) and in the
``Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Ozone: Nonattainment Area State Implementation Plan
Requirements'' rule (83 FR 63022, December 6, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA section 176(c)(1) and 40 CFR 93.111(a) require that the latest
emissions estimates be used in transportation conformity analyses. The
EPA approves models that fulfill these requirements. Under 40 CFR
93.111(a), the EPA must approve new versions of EMFAC for use in the
preparation or revision of SIPs before they can be used in
transportation conformity analyses.
    EMFAC is used statewide in all regional emissions analyses and CO,
PM10, and PM2.5 hot-spot analyses for
transportation conformity determinations in California. Transportation
conformity is required under CAA section 176(c) to ensure that
federally supported transportation plans, transportation improvement
programs (TIPs), and highway and transit projects are consistent with
(``conform to'') the purpose of the SIP. Conformity to a SIP means that
a transportation activity will not cause or contribute to new air
quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely
attainment of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) or
interim milestones. The EPA's transportation conformity regulations
describe how federally funded and approved highway and transit projects
meet these statutory requirements.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 40 CFR 51.390 and 40 CFR part 93.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What versions of EMFAC are currently in use in California?

    Most SIP revisions developed in California since 2015 were
developed using EMFAC2017 (released by CARB in December 2017) or
EMFAC2014 (released by CARB in December 2014). The EPA approved and
announced the availability of EMFAC2017 on August 15, 2019,\4\ and
approved and announced the availability of EMFAC2014 on December 14,
2015,\5\ for all nonattainment and maintenance areas in California.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 84 FR 41717.
    \5\ 80 FR 77337.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EMFAC2017 was considered a major update to EMFAC2014, and most SIP
revisions in California are being updated with EMFAC2017 in the 2021-
2022 timeframe. Also, California is in the process of developing SIP
revisions for the 2015 ozone NAAQS using EMFAC2017 with the adjustment
factors discussed in section I.F and elsewhere in this notice.

D. What has CARB submitted to the EPA for approval?

    In letters dated August 30, 2021 and August 31, 2021, CARB
initially requested that the EPA approve EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2017
adjustment factors, respectively, for use in developing SIP revisions
and in determining conformity in California.\6\ As described in section
E of this notice, EMFAC2021 is a significant change from previous EMFAC
models and can calculate motor vehicle emissions for all areas in
California.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The EMFAC2021 model and supporting information is available
for downloading at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/mobile-source-emissions-inventory/msei-modeling-tools-emfac-software-and.
Technical documentation explaining the changes to the model and the
technical foundation for the model is available at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021-08/emfac2021_technical_documentation_april2021.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 14, 2022, CARB sent the EPA a subsequent letter
(``October 14, 2022 letter'') that noted CARB had found and fixed a
computational error related to NOX idling emissions from
heavy-duty trucks. CARB noted this error has been fixed in EMFAC2021
version 1.0.2 and requested the EPA approve this latest version. CARB's
October 14, 2022 letter also requested that the EPA approve both the
desktop and web platform for version 1.02 of the of EMFAC2021 model. To
create the

web platform, CARB runs the model for all areas and uploads the results
to a database on the web that allows users to retrieve the needed
information based on what they are modeling. The web platform database
is based on the corrected version of EMFAC2021.
    Finally, CARB submitted revised EMFAC2017 adjustment factors in the
October 14, 2022 letter and noted that these adjustment factors have
also been revised to correct the NOX computational error and
include factors by vehicle category in addition to by calendar year. In
the October 14, 2022 letter, CARB requested that the EPA approve the
EMFAC2017 adjustment factors for both SIP and conformity purposes.
    CARB's August 30, 2021, August 31, 2021, and October 14, 2022
letters to the EPA are available on our website.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/policy-and-technical-guidance-state-and-local-transportation#emission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. How is EMFAC2021 different from the previous versions of EMFAC?

    The EMFAC2021 model interface and overall design has not changed
significantly as compared to EMFAC2017. However, EMFAC2021 emissions
estimates have changed significantly because the model includes new
data, new features, significant changes to the methodologies regarding
calculation of motor vehicle emissions, the effect of new emission
regulations, and revisions to implementation data for control measures.
For example, EMFAC2021 includes updates to modules, pollutants,
emissions factors and data on car and truck activities, and emissions
reductions associated with new and amended regulations reducing
emissions from heavy-duty diesel trucks and buses.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Regulations include the Advanced Clean Truck, Innovative
Clean Transit, Heavy-duty Omnibus, Heavy-Duty Emission Warranty
Phase 1, Heavy-duty Vehicle Inspection, and Periodic Smoke
Inspection Programs. Requests for waivers of CAA section 209(a)
preemption, which prohibits states and political subdivisions from
adopting and enforcing emission standards for new motor vehicles and
engines, have been submitted by CARB to the EPA for the new
regulations that require such a waiver, i.e., the Advanced Clean
Truck and the Heavy-duty Omnibus regulations. CARB has submitted a
request that the EPA confirm that the Heavy-Duty Emission Warranty
Phase 1 regulation falls within the scope of an existing waiver, or
in the alternative that a waiver be granted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New features in EMFAC2021 include the addition of plug-in hybrid
and natural gas-powered vehicles, the addition of ammonia emissions,
and new forecasting approaches for heavy-duty and light-duty vehicles.
New methodologies for brake and tire wear and evaporative emissions are
included; and new emissions factor data have been developed based on
CARB's Vehicle, Truck and Bus Surveillance Programs, the EPA's In-Use
Vehicle Program, dynamometer and Portable Emission Measurement Systems
data, and transit bus testing. Motor vehicle fleet age, vehicle types,
and vehicle populations have also been updated based on 2013-2019
California Department of Motor Vehicle data, International Registration
Plan data, Port Vehicle Identification Number data, California Highway
Patrol School Bus Inspections data, and National Transit Database
information. Each of these changes affect emissions factors for each
area in California. CARB's website describes these and other model
changes.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/mobile-source-emissions-inventory/msei-modeling-tools-emfac-software-and.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. What is included in the EMFAC2017 adjustment factors?

    CARB has developed adjustment factors for EMFAC2017 that account
for the emissions reductions associated with the same regulations
included in EMFAC2021. When EMFAC2017 was developed and submitted to
the EPA for approval, the model included regulations adopted by CARB as
of December 2017.\10\ From 2018-2021, CARB adopted new regulations and
amended existing regulations that will reduce emissions from heavy-duty
diesel trucks and buses, including the Advanced Clean Truck, Innovative
Clean Transit, Heavy-duty Omnibus, Heavy-duty Warranty Phase 1, Heavy-
duty Vehicle Inspection, and Periodic Smoke Inspection Programs. The
EMFAC2017 adjustment factors would be applied to the emission output of
the EMFAC2017 model for all vehicle categories by calendar year to
account for the benefits of these new regulations in motor vehicle
emission budgets (``budgets'') and in conformity analyses to such
budgets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For further information, see the EPA's Notice of
Availability for EMFAC2017 (84 FR 41717, August 15, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. How were stakeholders and the public involved in the EMFAC
development process?

    Since 2019, CARB has held a series of public workshops to discuss
emissions inventory updates and EMFAC updates, and to receive comments
on the resulting changes in the emissions inventory and models.\11\
CARB also conducted beta testing of interim versions of the model with
air districts and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs).
Stakeholders and other members of the public had the opportunity to
request briefings with CARB staff and provide them with comments and
suggestions to improve the model. CARB also developed and posted
training materials for EMFAC2021 and supports a mobile source emissions
inventory email listserv to announce updates and changes to the EMFAC
supporting material.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/mobile-source-emissions-inventory/msei-meetings-workshops.
    \12\ To subscribe to CARB's listserv for Mobile Source Emission
Inventory development, click ``Subscribe'' at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/mobile-source-emissions-inventory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CARB also made available to the public a technical document that
describes updates to the model and public presentations that summarize
the changes from earlier versions of the model. The technical
documentation is available on CARB's website.\13\ CARB provided
information on specific changes incorporated into the EMFAC2021 model
and included all presentations from the public workshops on the CARB
website.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/mobile-source-emissions-inventory/msei-modeling-tools-emfac-software-and.
    \14\ See https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021-08/emfac2021_technical_documentation_april2021.pdf and https://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/workshop-meetings.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. Future Updates to EMFAC

    On January 31, 2006, CARB submitted a letter to the EPA and to the
California Division of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
indicating the State's intention to make future revisions to update
EMFAC. These EMFAC updates would reflect, among other new information,
updated vehicle fleet data every three years. In California, MPOs and
air districts cannot update vehicle fleet data embedded within EMFAC,
only CARB can update the fleet data with each new EMFAC update because
of the model design. The EPA's July 2004 final rule \15\ states that
new vehicle registration data must be used when available, prior to the
start of new conformity analyses, and that states and MPOs are strongly
encouraged to update the data at least every five years as described in
guidance issued December 2008 by the EPA and U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).\16\ CARB's next

update to the planning assumptions in EMFAC is expected in 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 69 FR 40004 (July 1, 2004).
    \16\ For more information, see the EPA and DOT's joint
``Guidance for The Use of Latest Planning Assumptions in
Transportation Conformity Determinations'' (EPA420-B-08-901,
December 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. The EPA's Action

A. What actions are the EPA taking in this notice?

    In this notice, the EPA is approving and announcing that EMFAC2021
\17\ is available for use in statewide California SIP development, and
for transportation conformity regional emissions analyses, and CO,
PM10, and PM2.5 hot-spot analyses. The EPA is
approving both the desktop computer and web platform for version 1.02
of the EMFAC2021 model. CARB has provided documentation that these two
forms of EMFAC2021 would be identical for criteria pollutant analyses
for SIP and conformity purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ EMFAC2021, v1.0.2 (October 14, 2022 release).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is also approving the EMFAC2017 adjustment factors and
announcing that the factors are available for use in statewide
California SIP development and in regional conformity emissions
analyses where SIPs are based on EMFAC2017 with adjustment factors.
However, EMFAC2017 adjustment factors are not approved for CO,
PM10, or PM2.5 hot-spot analyses for
transportation conformity.
    Because the EMFAC model is used only in California, the EPA's
statewide approval of the model does not affect the applicability of
the MOVES emissions factor model for users in other states. The EPA
also notes that this approval action does not affect the methodology
required for calculating re-entrained road dust for PM10 and
PM2.5 SIP revisions and transportation conformity analyses.
Estimates for PM10 and PM2.5 in EMFAC2021 do not
include such emissions. When applicable, PM10 and
PM2.5 nonattainment and maintenance areas are required to
use the EPA's AP-42 road dust method for calculating road dust
emissions, unless a local method is approved in advance by the EPA.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ For further information, see the EPA's notice of
availability for the January 2011 AP-42 Method for Estimating Re-
entrained Road Dust from Paved Roads (76 FR 6328, February 4, 2011).
Also, for using AP-42 for unpaved roads, see the EPA's memorandum
dated August 2, 2007, ``Policy Guidance on the Use of the November
1, 2006, Update to AP-42 for Re-entrained Road Dust for SIP
Development and Transportation Conformity.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Use of these EMFAC models in SIP revisions is covered further in
section II.B, and use of these EMFAC models for conformity is covered
further in section II.C. The grace period for conformity is covered in
section II.D.

B. Can EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2017 adjustment factors be used for SIP
development?

    The EPA is approving EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2017 adjustment factors for
areas in California to use for SIP development. The EPA has previously
articulated its policy with respect to how new emissions models are
used in SIPs in earlier EMFAC approval notices as well as in MOVES
policy guidance and Federal Register announcements. This notice
describes how this policy applies for EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2017
adjustment factors.
    EMFAC2021 should be used to estimate emissions of hydrocarbon (HC),
CO, NOX, PM10, PM2.5, ammonia, and
sulfur oxides in SIP revisions that are being developed for individual
nonattainment and maintenance areas in California as expeditiously as
possible. The CAA requires that SIP inventories and control measures be
based on the most current information and applicable models that are
available when a SIP revision is developed and thus there is no grace
period for use of EMFAC2021 in SIP revisions. However, the EPA also
recognizes the time and level of effort that air quality planning
agencies may have already undertaken in SIP development using
EMFAC2017. Agencies should consult with EPA Region IX if they have
questions about how EMFAC2021 affects SIP revisions under development
in specific nonattainment or maintenance areas. Early consultation can
facilitate the EPA's adequacy finding for motor vehicle emissions
budgets for transportation conformity purposes or the EPA's action on
SIP revisions.
    Agencies should use the latest version of EMFAC that is available
at the time that a SIP is developed. EMFAC2021 should be used for SIP
revisions that will be submitted in the future so that they are based
on the most accurate estimates of emissions possible. However, agencies
that have already completed significant work on a SIP revision using
EMFAC2017 (e.g., attainment modeling has already been completed with
EMFAC2017) may continue to rely on this earlier version of EMFAC
because significant work has already occurred based on the latest
information available at the time the SIP revision was developed.
    The CAA does not require agencies that have already submitted SIP
revisions or will submit SIP revisions shortly after the release of a
new model to revise these SIP revisions simply because a new motor
vehicle emissions model is now available.
    CARB's request for the EPA to approve EMFAC2017 adjustment factors
helps in this regard because these adjustment factors address a gap for
those agencies that have been diligently working towards meeting SIP
submission deadlines with the latest emissions model available at the
time. The adjustment factors allow the emissions benefits of the latest
CARB rules that are included in EMFAC2021 to be included in these SIP
revisions as well, which will help these areas demonstrate attainment
of the NAAQS. Note that EMFAC2017 adjustment factors are approved for
use in nonattainment and maintenance area SIP revisions only where
agencies have already completed significant SIP work with EMFAC2017. In
all other cases, agencies should use EMFAC2021, particularly in
instances where SIP development is in its initial stages or has not
progressed far enough along that switching from a previous model
version would create a significant adverse impact on state and local
resources.
    Incorporating EMFAC2021 into an individual area's nonattainment and
maintenance SIP revisions now could assist areas in mitigating possible
transportation conformity difficulties in the future after the
EMFAC2021 transportation conformity grace period ends.\19\ New regional
emissions analyses using the emissions model that are started after the
grace period is over must be based on EMFAC2021,\20\ so having
EMFAC2021-based budgets in place at that time could provide more
consistency with transportation conformity determinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Transportation conformity grace periods are discussed later
in this notice in section II.D.
    \20\ 40 CFR 93.111.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When individual area SIP revisions based on either EMFAC2021 or
EMFAC2017 with adjustment factors are submitted to the EPA, we will
begin the adequacy process for the motor vehicle emissions budgets
according to the process in 40 CFR 93.118(f) and find them adequate if
they meet the criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e). However, we will not be
able to approve SIP revisions based on EMFAC2021 or EMFAC2017
adjustment factors unless applicable regulations preempted by section
209(a) of the CAA, that are included in EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2017
adjustment factors, have been granted a waiver by the EPA under section
209(b) of the CAA. California's new motor vehicle emissions standards
are preempted under section 209(a) of the CAA and therefore, California
can only enforce such standards upon the EPA's

waiver of this preemption under section 209(b) of the CAA. The new
regulations that CARB adopted that will require waiver actions include
the Advanced Clean Truck, Heavy-duty Emission Warranty Phase 1, and the
Heavy-duty Omnibus regulations.\21\ Based on a court decision, these
regulations must also be approved into the California SIP before we can
approve the SIP submissions for individual California areas that
incorporate the associated emissions reductions to meet CAA
requirements.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ CARB has submitted requests that the EPA grant California
waivers of CAA section 209(a) preemption for the Advanced Clean
Truck and the Heavy-Duty Omnibus regulations, and that the EPA
confirm the Heavy-Duty Emission Warranty Phase 1 regulation falls
within the scope of an existing waiver, or in the alternative that a
waiver be granted. See footnote 8.
    \22\ Committee for a Better Arvin v. EPA, 786 F.3d 1169 (9th
Cir. 2015). section 110(a) requires these standards to be
enforceable before they are approved into a SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What transportation conformity analyses can EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2017
adjustment factors be used for?

    The EPA is approving EMFAC2021 to estimate emissions of HC, CO,
NOX, PM10, PM2.5, ammonia, and sulfur
oxides in regional emissions analyses or transportation conformity
determinations.\23\ The EPA is also approving the use of EMFAC2017
adjustment factors to estimate regional emissions of these same
pollutants for transportation conformity only in areas that have
adequate SIP-approved budgets that are based on EMFAC2017 with
adjustment factors. EMFAC2017 adjustment factors can be used only for
regional conformity emissions analyses that are started before the end
of the conformity grace period (as discussed in section II.E). For any
regional emissions analyses that begin on or after that date, EMFAC2021
must be used.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The EPA notes that EMFAC2021 can be used for CO2
emissions analyses as well, but these analyses are not being used
for SIP or transportation conformity purposes. In addition, although
sulfur dioxide and ammonia are listed as potential precursors for
PM2.5 formation in 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(v), these
precursors have not been considered significant for the on-road
mobile sources covered by transportation conformity in California to
date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is also approving EMFAC2021 to estimate CO,
PM10, and PM2.5 emissions for conformity hot-spot
analyses involving individual transportation projects. A hot-spot
analysis is defined in 40 CFR 93.101 as an estimation of likely future
localized pollutant concentrations and a comparison of those
concentrations to the relevant NAAQS. This analysis is conducted on a
smaller scale than a nonattainment or maintenance area, e.g., for a
congested roadway intersection. Hot-spot analyses are completed for
only certain types of transportation projects; see 40 CFR 93.123(a) and
(b) for further information.
    However, note that EMFAC2017 adjustment factors are not approved
for estimating CO, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions for
conformity hot-spot analyses involving individual transportation
projects. Because hot-spot analyses are not compared to SIP-approved
budgets, there is no reason to use EMFAC2017 with adjustment factors
for hot-spot analyses even in areas with budgets based on EMFAC2017
with adjustment factors; EMFAC2021 can and should be used instead.
(Note that during the conformity grace period (discussed in section
II.D), EMFAC2017 without the adjustment factors could be used for hot-
spot analyses as well.) Furthermore, we believe project sponsors would
want to use EMFAC2021 rather than EMFAC2017 for hot-spot analyses of
transportation projects, such as PM hot-spot analyses on highway or
terminal expansions involving significant new levels of diesel trucks
(per 40 CFR 93.116 and 93.123), as it would allow them to incorporate
the latest planning assumptions included in EMFAC2021 (per 40 CFR
93.110).
    The EPA is approving EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2017 adjustment factors for
transportation conformity purposes as described in this notice. The
regulations included in these models have already been adopted by CARB,
the State has completed its regulatory process, and CARB has submitted
to the EPA the requests for waivers on the previously mentioned
regulations. Thus, any regional emissions analyses that are based on
these models meet the transportation conformity rule's requirement in
40 CFR 93.122(a)(3)(i). The emission benefits from these regulations
can be included in regional emissions analyses, even before the EPA
approves the regulations into the statewide SIP.

D. Does this notice establish a transportation conformity grace period
for the use of this model?

    The EPA is establishing a two-year grace period before EMFAC2021 is
required for all new HC, NOX, PM10,
PM2.5, and CO regional emissions analyses (e.g., supporting
transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations) and a one-year
grace period before EMFAC2021 is required in conformity analyses for
all new CO, PM10, and PM2.5 hot-spot analyses
supporting project-level conformity determinations. The grace period
for regional emissions analyses begins on November 15, 2022 and ends on
November 15, 2024. Areas have the option of using the new model for
regional emissions analyses prior to the end of the grace period.
    The transportation conformity rule \24\ requires that conformity
determinations be based on the latest motor vehicle emissions model
approved by the EPA for SIP purposes for a state or area. Section
176(c)(1) of the CAA states that ``. . . [t]he determination of
conformity shall be based on the most recent estimates of emissions,
and such estimates shall be determined from the most recent population,
employment, travel, and congestion estimates. . . .''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 40 CFR 93.111.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When the EPA approves and announces the availability of a new
emissions model such as EMFAC2021, the EPA will consult with DOT to
establish a grace period before the model is required for conformity
analyses.\25\ The conformity rule provides for a grace period for new
emissions models of between 3 and 24 months after notice of
availability is published in the Federal Register.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 40 CFR 93.111(b).
    \26\ 40 CFR 93.111(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA articulated its intentions for establishing the length of a
conformity grace period in the preamble to the 1993 transportation
conformity rule: \27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 58 FR 62211 (November 24, 1993).

    EPA and DOT will consider extending the grace period if the
effects of the new emissions model are so significant that previous
SIP demonstrations of what emission levels are consistent with
attainment would be substantially affected. In such cases, States
should have an opportunity to revise their SIPs before MPOs must use
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the model's new emissions factors.

    In consultation with FHWA and the Federal Transit Administration,
the EPA considers ``the degree of change in the model and the scope of
re-planning likely to be necessary by MPOs in order to assure
conformity'' in establishing the length of the grace period.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 40 CFR 93.111(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA considered the time it will take state and local
transportation and air quality agencies to conduct and provide
technical support for analyses. State and local agencies will need to
become familiar with the EMFAC2021 emissions model. Since 1993, the
purpose of section 93.111(b) of the transportation conformity rule has
been to provide a sufficient amount of time for MPOs and other state
and local agencies to learn and employ new emissions models. The
transition to a new emissions model for conformity

involves more than learning to use the new model and preparing input
data and model output.
    In addition to incorporating the new EMFAC2021 emissions rate and
fleet data, state and local agencies also need to consider how the
model affects regional conformity analysis results and whether SIP and/
or transportation plan/TIP changes are necessary to assure future
conformity determinations. As stated earlier in the notice, the changes
to EMFAC affect emissions factors for each area in California. CARB has
requested a 24-month grace period for regional emissions analyses to
allow them to update SIP revisions previously developed using EMFAC2014
or EMFAC2017 with the updated emissions from EMFAC2021, as necessary.
The EPA agrees that a two-year regional emissions analysis grace period
provides time for CARB to revise previously approved SIP revisions with
EMFAC2021 if needed so that MPOs can incorporate revised SIP-approved
motor vehicle emission budgets into the transportation conformity
process.
    When the regional emissions analysis grace period ends on November
15, 2024, EMFAC2021 will become the only approved motor vehicle
emissions model for all new regional transportation conformity analyses
in California for meeting the requirement to use the latest emissions
information in conformity analyses. In general, this means that all new
HC, NOX, PM10, PM2.5, and CO regional
conformity analyses started after the end of the two-year grace period
must be based on EMFAC2021, even if the SIP is based on an earlier
version of the EMFAC model, such as EMFAC2014, EMFAC2017, or EMFAC2017
with adjustment factors.
    In addition, in most cases, if an area revises previously approved
EMFAC2014 or EMFAC2017-based SIP-approved budgets using EMFAC2021, the
revised EMFAC2021 budgets would be used for conformity purposes once
the EPA approves the SIP revision. In general, the EPA will not make
adequacy findings for these SIP revisions because submitted SIPs cannot
supersede approved budgets until they are approved. However, 40 CFR
93.118(e)(1) allows an approved budget to be replaced by an adequate
budget if the EPA's approval of the initial budgets specifies that the
budgets being approved may be replaced in the future by new adequate
budgets. This flexibility has been used in limited situations in the
past, such as during the transition from EMFAC7F and EMFAC7G to
EMFAC2002.\29\ In such cases, the EMFAC2021-based budgets would be used
for conformity purposes once they have been found adequate. California
air agencies should consult with the EPA as needed to determine if this
flexibility applies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 67 FR 46618 (July 16, 2002), 67 FR 69139 (November 15,
2002), and 68 FR 15720 (April 1, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon consideration of the transportation conformity rule's factors,
the EPA is also establishing a one-year grace period before EMFAC2021
is required in conformity analyses for all new CO, PM10 and
PM2.5 hot-spot analyses supporting project-level conformity
determinations. The grace period for hot-spot analyses begins on
November 15, 2022 and ends on November 15, 2023. Areas have the option
of using the new model for hot-spot analyses prior to the end of the
grace period.
    For application of EMFAC2021 at the project level, the application
of EMFAC2021 and the model's overall design and interface are similar
to EMFAC2017. As a result, project sponsors developing future hot-spot
analyses for projects that require such analyses in CO and PM
nonattainment and maintenance areas that have already used EMFAC2021
should not need significant time to familiarize themselves with this
model.\30\ In addition, the fact that time may be needed for revising
SIPs or transportation plans/TIPs due to the emissions factor changes
in EMFAC2021 is irrelevant for hot-spot analyses because hot-spot
analyses do not rely upon such planning documents. But while
EMFAC2021's model design and interface has not significantly changed
from EMFAC2017, project sponsors may still need some time to
familiarize themselves with CARB's updated EMFAC2021-PL handbook and
consider technical resource allocation issues to incorporate EMFAC2021
into any future hot-spot analyses in multiple CO, PM10, and
PM2.5 nonattainment and maintenance areas across California.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ The EPA's PM Hot-Spot Guidance, found on the EPA's website
at: https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/project-level-conformity-and-hot-spot-analyses, continues to apply for PM
hot-spot analyses along with CARB's PL handbook for EMFAC2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, it is appropriate to set a one-year grace period to
allow all areas in California to incorporate EMFAC2021 in conformity
hot-spot analyses for required project types and apply the updated
planning assumptions incorporated in EMFAC2021 in a timely manner. In
the interim, new PM and CO hot-spot analyses that are started prior to
the end of the EMFAC2021 grace period can be based on EMFAC2017.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 40 CFR 93.111(c); see also the EPA's website: https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/project-level-conformity-and-hot-spot-analyses for the latest guidance documents and
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When the hot-spot analysis grace period ends on November 15, 2023,
EMFAC2021 will become the only approved motor vehicle emissions model
for all new hot-spot transportation conformity analyses for required
project types across California for meeting the requirement to use the
latest emissions information in conformity. In general, this means that
all new CO, PM10, and PM2.5 hot-spot analyses
started after the end of the one-year grace period must be based on
EMFAC2021 rather than EMFAC2017.

E. Can areas use EMFAC2017 during the grace period?

    The conformity rule provides some flexibility for regional
emissions analyses that are started before the end of the grace
period.\32\ Analyses that begin before or during the grace period may
continue to rely on EMFAC2017. Also note that these regional emissions
analysis results, when compared to an EMFAC2017-based motor vehicle
emissions budget, can include the EMFAC2017 adjustment factors only if
those adjustment factors were used in the motor vehicle emissions
budget. This is the one case where a regional emissions analysis would
need to use either EMFAC2017 with adjustment factors (or EMFAC2021) to
show that conformity with the SIP is demonstrated. The interagency
consultation process should be used if it is unclear if an EMFAC2017-
based analysis was begun before the end of the 24-month grace period.
When the grace period ends, EMFAC2021 will become the EPA-approved
motor vehicle emissions model for regional emissions analyses for
transportation conformity in California.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 40 CFR 93.111(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CO, PM10, and PM2.5 hot-spot analyses for
project-level conformity determinations can be based on EMFAC2017 if
the analysis was started before the end of the 12-month grace period,
and if the final environmental document for the project is issued no
more than three years after the issuance of the draft environmental
document.\33\ Quantitative analysis already underway that was started
before the end of the grace period using EMFAC2017 can be completed as
long as 40 CFR 93.111(c) is satisfied. The interagency consultation
process should be used if

it is unclear whether an EMFAC2017-based analysis is covered by the
circumstances described in the transportation conformity rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of the EPA's Actions

    As described in this notice, the EPA is approving and announcing
the availability of EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2017 adjustment factors as
submitted by CARB on October 14, 2022, for SIP, conformity, and
applicable CAA purposes with the following limitations and conditions:
    (1) The approval is limited to California,
    (2) The approval is statewide and applies to estimation of
emissions of HC, CO, NOX, PM10, PM2.5,
ammonia and sulfur oxides. In addition, EMFAC2021 will be used for
pollutants and precursors that are applicable in a given nonattainment
or maintenance area. The EPA is approving the emissions factor elements
of EMFAC2021, but not the associated default travel activity (e.g.,
vehicle miles traveled).
    (3) The approval of EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2017 adjustment factors is
for the development of individual nonattainment and maintenance area
SIPs. The EPA will not be able to approve these SIPs unless applicable
regulations preempted by section 209(a) of the CAA included in
EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2017 adjustment factors have been granted a waiver
by the EPA under section 209(b) of the CAA. These regulations must also
be approved into the California state SIP before we can approve SIP
submissions for individual California areas.
    (4) A 24-month statewide transportation conformity grace period for
regional emissions analyses will be established beginning November 15,
2022 and ending November 15, 2024 for the transportation conformity
uses described in (2) above.
    (5) The EPA is also approving EMFAC2021's Emission Rate Mode that
allows the model to estimate project-level emissions for CO,
PM10, and PM2.5 conformity hot-spot analyses.
    (6) The EPA is also approving EMFAC2017 adjustment factors that
account for the emission reductions consistent with the CARB
regulations incorporated into EMFAC2021 for use in SIP development and
in regional emissions analyses for pollutants and precursors that are
applicable in a given nonattainment or maintenance area that has SIP-
approved motor vehicle emissions budgets based on EMFAC2017 with
adjustment factors. These adjustment factors can be used in regional
emissions analyses for transportation conformity only until November
15, 2024 and cannot be used in transportation conformity hot-spot
analyses.
    (7) A 12-month statewide transportation conformity grace period for
hot-spot analyses will be established beginning November 15, 2022 and
ending November 15, 2023 for the transportation conformity uses
described in (4) above.

    Dated: November 8, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2022-24790 Filed 11-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 80 (Monday, April 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23264-23265]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09688]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP15-160-000; PF14-15-000]

Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC, KO Transmission Company; Notice
of Application

    Take notice that on April 7, 2015, Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC
(Columbia), 5151 San Felipe, Suite 2500, Houston, Texas 77056, and KO
Transmission Company (KOT), 139 East Fourth Street, Cincinnati, Ohio
45202, jointly filed in the above referenced docket an application
pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and Part 157 of
the Commission's regulations requesting authorization for the
replacement of existing high pressure, bare steel pipeline located in
Menifee, Montgomery, Bath, Nicholas, Robertson, and Bracken counties,
Kentucky (referred as the E System Project), all as more fully set
forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open
to public inspection. The filing is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site web 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, contact
FERC at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to
counsel for Columbia Gas, Tyler R. Brown, Senior Counsel, Columbia Gas
Transmission, LLC, 5151 San Felipe Suite 2500, Houston, Texas 77056 at
(713) 386-3797.
    Specifically the applicants propose to replace approximately 22.1
miles of existing 20-inch bare pipe with new coated pipe from North
Fork of Licking River to Foster Station, 0.4 miles of existing 14-inch
pipeline, installing one bi-directional launcher/receiver assembly on
EM2 line at South Means and one bi-directional launcher/receiver
assembly at Foster Station, as well as eight mainline valve settings,
and appurtenant facilities. The Applicants requested a pre-
determination of rolled-in rates treatment for the Project. The cost of
the project will be approximately $119.5 million.
    On June 27, 2014, the Commission staff granted Columbia's request
to utilize the Pre-Filing Process and assigned Docket No. PF14-15-000
to staff activities involved in the Project. Now, as of the filing of
the April 7, 2015 application, the Pre-Filing Process for this project
has ended. From this time forward, this proceeding will be conducted in
Docket No. CP15-160-000, as noted in the caption of this Notice.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules (18 CFR 157.9),
within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit seven copies of filings made in the proceeding with the
Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other
party. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of
Commission orders in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be

taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the
filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that
persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of
their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the
protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    Comment Date: May 11, 2015.

    Dated: April 20, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-09688 Filed 4-24-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 250 (Wednesday, December 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81609-81611]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32817]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76748; File No. SR-NYSE-2015-52]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change to the Co-Location Services Offered by
the Exchange (the Offering of a Wireless Connection To Allow Users To
Receive Market Data Feeds From Third Party Markets) and To Reflect
Changes to the Exchange's Price List Related to These Services

December 23, 2015.

I. Introduction

    On October 23, 2015, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities
Exchange Act

of 1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ a proposed rule
change to amend the co-location services offered by the Exchange to
include a means for co-located Users to receive market data feeds from
third party markets through a wireless connection. The proposed rule
change was published in the Federal Register on November 12, 2015.\4\
No comment letters were received in response to the Notice. This order
approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76374 (November 5,
2015), 80 FR 70021 (November 12, 2015) (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to change the co-location services offered by
the Exchange to include a means for Users to receive market data feeds
from third party markets (the ``Third Party Data'') through a wireless
connection.\5\ In addition, the proposed rule change reflects changes
to the Exchange's Price List related to these co-location services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, a
``User'' means any market participant that requests to receive co-
location services directly from the Exchange. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 76008 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR 60190
(October 5, 2015) (SR-NYSE-2015-40). As specified in the Price List,
a User that incurs co-location fees for a particular co-location
service pursuant thereto would not be subject to co-location fees
for the same co-location service charged by the Exchange's
affiliates NYSE MKT LLC and NYSE Arca, Inc. See Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 70206 (August 15, 2013), 78 FR 51765 (August 21,
2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to offer the wireless connection to provide
Users with an alternative means of connectivity for Third Party Data.
As the Exchange notes, wireless connections involve beaming signals
through the air between antennas that are within sight of one
another.\6\ Because the signals travel a straight, unimpeded line, and
because light waves travel faster through air than through glass (fiber
optics), wireless messages have lower latency than messages travelling
through fiber optics.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Notice, supra note 4 at 70021.
    \7\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposed rule change, the Exchange would utilize a
network vendor to provide a wireless connection to the Third Party Data
through wireless connections from the Exchange access centers in
Secaucus and Carteret, New Jersey, to its data center in Mahwah, New
Jersey, through a series of towers equipped with wireless equipment.\8\
A User that chooses this optional service would be able to receive data
feeds from NASDAQ and BATS Exchange, Inc. over a wireless connection.
To receive Third Party Data, the User would enter into a contract with
the relevant third party market, which would charge the User the
applicable market data fees for the Third Party Data. The Exchange
would charge the User fees for the wireless connection for the Third
Party Data.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'') offers a similar
wireless service. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68735
(January 25, 2013), 78 FR 6842 (January 31, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-
119) (approving a proposed rule change to establish a new optional
wireless connectivity for co-located clients).
    \9\ A User would only receive the Third Party Data for which it
had entered into a contract. For example, a User that contracted
with NASDAQ for the NASDAQ Totalview-ITCH data feed but did not
contract to receive any other Third Party Data would receive only
the NASDAQ Totalview-ITCH data feed through its wireless connection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A User would be charged a $5,000 non-recurring initial charge for
each wireless connection and a monthly recurring charge (``MRC'') that
would vary depending upon the feed that the User opts to receive. If a
User purchased two wireless connections, it would pay two non-recurring
initial charges. The MRC for a wireless connection to each of BATS
Pitch BZX Gig shaped data, DirectEdge EDGX Gig shaped data, and NASDAQ
BX Totalview-ITCH data will be $6,000; the MRC for a wireless
connection of NASDAQ Totalview-ITCH data will be $8,500; and the MRC
for a wireless connection of NASDAQ Totalview-ITCH and BX Totalview-
ITCH data will be $12,000. The Exchange proposes to waive the first
month's MRC, to allow Users to test the receipt of the feed(s) for a
month before incurring any MRCs.
    The wireless connections would include the use of one port for
connectivity to the Third Party Data. A User will only require one port
to connect to the Third Party Data, irrespective of how many of the
five wireless connections it orders. If a User that has more than one
wireless connection wishes to use more than one port to connect to the
Third Party Data,\10\ the Exchange proposes to make such additional
ports available for a monthly fee per port of $3,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For example, a User with two wireless connections for Third
Party Data may opt to purchase an additional port in order to route
the options and equity data it receives to different cabinets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange represents that there is limited bandwidth available
on the wireless connection for data feeds from third parties. As a
result, the Exchange has decided to offer as Third Party Data only the
data feeds that are in high demand from Users. Although constrained by
bandwidth with respect to the number of feeds it can carry, the
Exchange represents that the wireless network offered by the Exchange
can be made available to an unlimited number of Users.
    The wireless connection would provide Users with an alternative
means of connectivity for Third Party Data. Currently, Users can
receive Third Party Data through other methods, including, for example,
from another User, through a telecommunications provider, or over the
internet protocol (``IP'') network.\11\ In addition, Users can receive
Third Party Data from wireless networks offered by third party vendors.
The Exchange represents that there are currently at least four third
party vendors that offer Users wireless network connections using
wireless equipment installed on towers and buildings near the data
center. The Exchange states that its proposed wireless connection would
traverse wireless connections through a series of towers equipped with
wireless equipment, including a pole on the grounds of the data
center.\12\ The Exchange states that access to such pole or the roof is
not required for third parties to establish wireless networks that can
compete with Exchange's proposed service and, in particular, represents
that based on the information available to it, the proposed wireless
connection would provide data at the same or similar speed, and at the
same or similar cost, as existing wireless networks, thereby enhancing
competition.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The IP network is a local area network available in the
data center. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74222 (February
6, 2015), 80 FR 7888 (February 12, 2015) (SR-NYSE-2015-05) (notice
of filing and immediate effectiveness of proposed rule change to
include IP network connections).
    \12\ See Notice, supra note 4 at 70023.
    \13\ See Notice, supra note 4 at 70022-23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The wireless connection to the Third Party Data is expected to be
available no later than March 1, 2016. The Exchange will announce the
date that the wireless connection to the Third Party Data will be
available through a customer notice.

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds 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.\14\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\15\ which
requires that

the rules of a national securities exchange provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its members
and issuers and other persons using its facilities, and with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\16\ which requires, among other things, that the
rules of a national securities exchange be 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, and not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers. In addition, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\17\
which requires that the rules of the exchange not impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes
of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the Exchange's proposal to provide
this additional connectivity option is consistent with the requirement
of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act. The Commission believes that the
proposal is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers because the Exchange makes
wireless connectivity available to all Users on an equal basis. All
Users that voluntarily select this service option will be charged the
same amount for the same services, and there would be no
differentiation among Users with regard to the fees charged for the
service. Further, the Exchange represents that Users of the new
wireless connection would not receive Third Party Data that is not
available to all Users. In addition, the Exchange represents that Users
that do not opt to utilize the Exchange's wireless connections would
still be able to obtain Third Party Data through other methods, such as
from wireless networks offered by third party vendors, other Users,
through telecommunications providers, or over the IP network.
    The Commission also believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act.\18\ All Users that
voluntarily select this service option will be charged the same amount
for the same services, and there would be no differentiation among
Users with regard to the fees charged for the service. The Commission
notes the Exchange's representation that the fees associated with
providing the wireless connections are reasonable because the Exchange
will incur certain costs, including costs related to the data center
facility, hardware and equipment and costs related to personnel
required for initial installation and monitoring, support and
maintenance of such services. The Exchange states that the costs
associated with the wireless connections are incrementally higher than
fiber optics-based solutions due to the expense of the wireless
equipment, cost of installation and testing and ongoing maintenance of
the network, and that fees also reflect the benefit received by Users
in terms of lower latency over the fiber optics option. In addition,
the Exchange believes that the proposed waiver of the first month's MRC
is reasonable as it would allow Users to test the receipt of the
feed(s) for a month before incurring any monthly recurring fees and may
act as an incentive to Users to utilize the new service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also finds that consistent with Section 6(b)(8) of
the Act the proposed rule change does not impose a burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes
of the Act. The Exchange states that Users currently can receive Third
Party Data from competing wireless networks offered by third party
vendors, including at least four third party vendors that offer Users
wireless network connections using wireless equipment installed on
towers and buildings near the data center. The Exchange represents,
based on the information available to it, that the proposed wireless
connection would provide data at the same or similar speed, and at the
same or similar cost, as existing wireless networks, thereby enhancing
competition.\19\ The Exchange also notes that the proposed wireless
connection would compete not just with other wireless connections, but
also with fiber optic networks, which may be more attractive to some
Users as they are more reliable and less susceptible to weather
conditions. For these reasons, the Commission does not believe that the
proposed rule change imposes a burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See supra notes 12 and 13 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\20\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2015-52) be, and it
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-32817 Filed 12-29-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 164 (Wednesday, August 24, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52875-52879]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21371]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0430; FRL-8881-5]

2-Propenoic Acid, Polymer With Ethenylbenzene and (1-
methylethenyl) Benzene, Sodium Salt; Tolerance Exemption

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt when used as
an inert ingredient in a pesticide chemical formulation under 40 CFR
180.960. BASF Corporation submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. This

regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-
methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt on food or feed commodities.

DATES: This regulation is effective August 24, 2011. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 24, 2011,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0430. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alganesh Debesai, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. Can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0430 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
October 24, 2011. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2
may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit a copy of
your non-CBI objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0430, by one of the following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register Wednesday, July 6, 2011 (76 FR 39358) (FRL-
8875-6), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408 of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a, announcing the receipt of a pesticide petition (PP 1E7862)
filed by BASF Corporation, 100 Campus Drive, Florham Park, NJ 07932.
The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.960 be amended by establishing
an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of 2-
Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl)
benzene, sodium salt; CAS Reg. No. 129811-24-1. That notice included a
summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner and solicited
comments on the petitioner's request. The Agency did not receive any
comments.
    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and use in residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance and to ``ensure that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. * * *'' and
specifies factors EPA is to consider in establishing an exemption.

III. Risk Assessment and Statutory Findings

    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be shown that the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide chemical residues under

reasonably foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to
human health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure
to pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of
the inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the
inert ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other
exposures that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential
settings. If EPA is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not
necessary to ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action and considered its validity, completeness and reliability
and the relationship of this information to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children. In the case of certain chemical substances that
are defined as polymers, the Agency has established a set of criteria
to identify categories of polymers expected to present minimal or no
risk. The definition of a polymer is given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and the
exclusion criteria for identifying these low-risk polymers are
described in 40 CFR 723.250(d). 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt conforms to
the definition of a polymer given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and meets the
following criteria that are used to identify low-risk polymers.
    1. The polymer is not a cationic polymer nor is it reasonably
anticipated to become a cationic polymer in a natural aquatic
environment.
    2. The polymer does contain as an integral part of its composition
the atomic elements carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
    3. The polymer does not contain as an integral part of its
composition, except as impurities, any element other than those listed
in 40 CFR 723.250(d)(2)(ii).
    4. The polymer is neither designed nor can it be reasonably
anticipated to substantially degrade, decompose, or depolymerize.
    5. The polymer is manufactured or imported from monomers and/or
reactants that are already included on the TSCA Chemical Substance
Inventory or manufactured under an applicable TSCA section 5 exemption.
    6. The polymer is not a water absorbing polymer with a number
average molecular weight (MW) greater than or equal to 10,000 daltons.
    Additionally, the polymer also meets as required the following
exemption criteria specified in 40 CFR 723.250(e).
    7. The polymer's number average MW of is greater than 1,000 and
less than 10,000 daltons. The polymer contains less than 10% oligomeric
material below MW 500 and less than 25% oligomeric material below MW
1,000, and the polymer does not contain any reactive functional groups.
    Thus, 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-
methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt meets the criteria for a polymer to
be considered low risk under 40 CFR 723.250. Based on its conformance
to the criteria in this unit, no mammalian toxicity is anticipated from
dietary, inhalation, or dermal exposure to 2-Propenoic acid, polymer
with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt.

IV. Aggregate Exposures

    For the purposes of assessing potential exposure under this
exemption, EPA considered that 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt could be
present in all raw and processed agricultural commodities and drinking
water, and that non-occupational non-dietary exposure was possible. The
number average MW of 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and
(1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt is 2,863 daltons. Generally, a
polymer of this size would be poorly absorbed through the intact
gastrointestinal tract or through intact human skin. Since 2-Propenoic
acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium
salt conform to the criteria that identify a low-risk polymer, there
are no concerns for risks associated with any potential exposure
scenarios that are reasonably foreseeable. The Agency has determined
that a tolerance is not necessary to protect the public health.

V. Cumulative Effects From Substances With a Common Mechanism of
Toxicity

    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering
whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency
consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative effects of
a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances that have a
common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and
(1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For
the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl)
benzene, sodium salt does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

VI. Additional Safety Factor for the Protection of Infants and Children

    Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the data base unless EPA concludes
that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and
children. Due to the expected low toxicity of 2-Propenoic acid, polymer
with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt, EPA has
not used a safety factor analysis to assess the risk. For the same
reasons the additional tenfold safety factor is unnecessary.

VII. Determination of Safety

    Based on the conformance to the criteria used to identify a low-
risk polymer, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty of no
harm to the U.S. population, including infants and children, from
aggregate exposure to residues of 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with
ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt.

VIII. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation.

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits

(MRLs) established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has not established a MRL for 2-Propenoic acid, polymer
with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt.

IX. Conclusion

    Accordingly, EPA finds that exempting residues of 2-Propenoic acid,
polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt
from the requirement of a tolerance will be safe.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these rules from review under
Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been exempted from
review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it involve any technical standards that
would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards
pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or otherwise have any unique
impacts on local governments. Thus, the Agency has determined that
Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) do not
apply to this final rule. In addition, this final rule does not impose
any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L.
104-4).
    Although this action does not require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994), EPA seeks to achieve
environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of
any group, including minority and/or low-income populations, in the
development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies. As such, to the extent that information is
publicly available or was submitted in comments to EPA, the Agency
considered whether groups or segments of the population, as a result of
their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical
or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or
environmental effects from exposure to the pesticide discussed in this
document, compared to the general population.

XI. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of this rule in the Federal
Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 15, 2011.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. In Sec.  180.960, the table is amended by adding alphabetically the
following polymer to read as follows:

Sec.  [emsp14]180.960  Polymers; exemptions from the requirement of a
tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Polymer                              CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
2-Propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-        129811-24-1
 methylethenyl) benzene, sodium salt, minimum number
 average molecular weight (in amu), 2,800...............

                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2011-21371 Filed 8-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: February 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 37)]
[Notices]
[Page 10087-10088]
[DOCID:fr25fe08-136]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Public Notice for a Change in Use of Aeronautical Property at St.
Marys Municipal Airport, St. Marys, PA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration is requesting public
comment on the City of St. Marys' request to change a portion 129.2
acres of airport property from aeronautical use to non-aeronautical
use.
    The requested release is for the purpose of permitting the Airport
Owner to sell and convey title of 114.8 acres for industrial/commercial
use. The parcel is located south and east of the newly constructed
airport access road, and east of the existing ``old RR Grade''. The
property is currently undeveloped but aeronautical use is shown for it
on the Airport Layout Plan. The tract currently consists of wooded land
with some open fields and is more particularly described below.
    The airport has also requested release for the purpose of
developing a portion of airport property 14.4 acres as non-aeronautical
use to generate revenue for the airport. The property is currently
undeveloped but is now shown as aeronautical land use on the Airport
Layout Plan. The tract is more particularly described below.
    Documents reflecting the Sponsor's request are available, by
appointment only, for inspection at the Airport Managers office and at
the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Bureau of Aviation in
the Keystone Building, Harrisburg, PA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 26, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Documents are available for review at the Airport Manager's
office: Joe Bologna, Manager, St Marys Municipal Airport, 119 Airport
Rd., P.O. Box 89, St Marys, PA 15857,<PHONE_NUMBER>; and at the
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Bureau of Aviation: Mr.
Brian Gearhart, Engineering Manager, PaDOT Bureau of Aviation, 400
North St., Sixth Floor, Harrisburg, PA 17120,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Brian Gearhart, Engineering
Manager PaDOT Bureau of Aviation at the location listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 125 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation
and Reform Act for the First Century (AIR-21) requires the FAA to
provide an opportunity for public notice and comment before the
Secretary may waive a sponsor's Federal obligation to use certain
airport land for aeronautical use.
    St. Marys Airport Land Release Parcel Description: The land to be
released from airport property and federal obligation is generally
described as follows. The property in question consists of a total
114.8 acres located south and east of the newly constructed airport
access road, and east of the existing ``old RR Grade''.
    To ease location by the public, the 114.8 acres can be broken into
a north and south area.
    North Area to be Released: The north area includes 18.9 acres of
property is bounded by the new airport access road to the north,
Airport Road to the west, an old railroad grade to the south along with
fields now or formerly owned by the Benzinger Township Camp Owners
Association, and bounded on the east by the west side of the soccer
field to remain airport property under a short-term lease.
    South Area to be Released: The remaining south area to be released
is east of the existing ``old RR Grade''. It includes the wooded area
starting at a point approximately 397 feet nearly due east of an old
railroad grade and bounded on the west by the fields now or formerly
owned by the Benzinger Township Camp Owners Association for a distance
of approximately 4,380 feet. The southern border runs nearly due east
for a distance of approximately 809 feet. The eastern border consists
of a line running nearly due north through the wooded area for a
distance of approximately 1957 feet, the eastern border then turns
nearly due east for approximately 792 feet, then continues nearly due
north for a distance of approximately 693 feet, then turns nearly due
east for a distance of

approximately 660 feet, then turns nearly due north for a distance of
approximately 628 feet, then turns nearly due west for a distance of
approximately 1226 feet in the wooded area adjacent to lands now or
formerly owned by Charles Sritz and generally along the south edge of
cultivated field now or formerly owned by Marshall V. Wolfe, then turns
nearly due north along the west edge of the cultivated field for a
distance of approximately 388 feet, then turns nearly due west along
the wooded area to the east side of the community soccer field, then
turns south along the east side of the community soccer field a
distance of approximately 438 feet, then nearly due west along the
southern side of the community soccer field a distance of approximately
572 feet to generally the northeast corner of the open fields now or
formerly owned by the Benzinger Township Camp Owners Association for an
area of 95.9 acres more or less.
    St. Marys Airport Land Use Change Request Parcel Description: In
addition, the airport has requested a change in land use of two areas
from ``aeronautical use'' to ``non-aeronautical''. The two areas will
remain airport property and are generally along the south side of the
existing airfield.
    Western Portion of the Land Use Change: Starting at the NE corner
of the intersection of Airport Road and the new airport access road,
then northerly along Airport Road for a distance of approximately 374
feet, then nearly due east a distance of approximately 1,229 feet to
near the west side of the existing tee hangar area, then nearly due
south a distance of 374 feet, then westerly along the north side of the
new airport access road back to the NE corner of Airport Road and said
new airport access road for an area of 10.3 acres more or less.
    Eastern Portion of the Land Use Change: Starting at the NE corner
of the intersection of Airport Road and the new airport access road,
then easterly along Airport Road for a distance of approximately 2,189
feet to the point of beginning being the northeast corner of the
eastern parcel on which the airport is requesting a change in land use.
Then nearly due south along the farm fence a distance of 438 feet, then
nearly due west a distance of 412 feet, then nearly due north a
distance of 438 feet, then nearly due east along what would be the
north right of way line of the new airport road if extended, a distance
of 410 feet back to the point of beginning. Said area containing 4.1
acres more or less.
    The parcel was acquired without Federal participation. The
requested release is for the purpose of both permitting the Sponsor to
sell and convey title, and to develop as non-aeronautical the areas
described above. The proceeds from the sale of property are to be used
for the capital and operating costs of the airport.
    Interested persons are invited to comment on the proposed release
from obligations. All comments will be considered by the FAA to the
extent practicable.

    Issued in Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, February 19, 2008.
Lori K. Pagnanelli,
Manager, Harrisburg Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. E8-3528 Filed 2-22-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P