[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 54 (Friday, March 20, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14847-14852]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06512]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[EPA-R04-RCRA-2014-0712; FRL-9924-83-Region-4]

Tennessee: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste
Management Program Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Tennessee has applied to the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) for final authorization of changes to its
hazardous waste program

under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA has
determined that these changes satisfy all requirements needed to
qualify for final authorization, and is authorizing the State's changes
through this direct final rule. In the ``Proposed Rules'' section of
this issue of the Federal Register, EPA is also publishing a separate
document that serves as the proposal to authorize these changes. EPA
believes this action is not controversial and does not expect comments
that oppose it. Unless EPA receives written comments that oppose this
authorization during the comment period, the decision to authorize
Tennessee's changes to its hazardous waste program will take effect. If
EPA receives comments that oppose this action, EPA will publish a
document in the Federal Register withdrawing this direct final rule
before it takes effect, and the separate document published in the
``Proposed Rules'' section of this issue of the Federal Register will
serve as the proposal to authorize the changes.

DATES: This final authorization will become effective on May 19, 2015
unless EPA receives adverse written comment by April 20, 2015. If EPA
receives such comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this
direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that
this authorization will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
RCRA-2014-0712, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> (prior to faxing, please notify the
EPA contact listed below).
     Mail: Send written comments to Carlos E. Merizalde, RCRA
Corrective Action and Permitting Section, RCRA Cleanup and Brownfields
Branch, Resource Conservation and Restoration Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Carlos
E. Merizalde, RCRA Corrective Action and Permitting Section, RCRA
Cleanup and Brownfields Branch, Resource Conservation and Restoration
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center,
61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation,
and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: EPA must receive your comments by April 20, 2015.
Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-RCRA-2014-0712. EPA's
policy is that all comments received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made publicly available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. (For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm).
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov, or in hard copy.
    You may view and copy Tennessee's applications and associated
publicly available materials from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the following
locations: EPA, Region 4, Resource Conservation and Restoration
Division, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta,
Georgia 30303-8960; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; and the Tennessee
Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Solid Waste
Management, William R. Snodgrass Tennessee Tower, 312 Rosa L. Parks
Avenue, 14th Floor, Nashville, Tennessee; telephone number: (615) 532-
0825. Interested persons wanting to examine these documents should make
an appointment with the office at least a week in advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carlos E. Merizalde, RCRA Corrective
Action and Permitting Section, RCRA Cleanup and Brownfields Branch,
Resource Conservation and Restoration Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Why are revisions to state programs necessary?

    States which have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA
section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste
program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent
than the Federal program. As the Federal program changes, States must
change their programs and ask EPA to authorize the changes. Changes to
State programs may be necessary when Federal or State statutory or
regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur.
Most commonly, States must change their programs because of changes to
EPA's regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 124,
260 through 268, 270, 273, and 279.
    New Federal requirements and prohibitions imposed by Federal
regulations that EPA promulgates pursuant to the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) take effect in authorized States at the
same time that they take effect in unauthorized States. Thus, EPA will
implement those requirements and prohibitions in Tennessee, including
the issuance of new permits implementing those requirements, until the
State is granted authorization to do so.

B. What decisions has EPA made in this rule?

    On March 9, 2010 and January 15, 2013, Tennessee submitted final
complete program revision applications seeking authorization of changes
to its hazardous waste program that correspond to certain Federal rules
promulgated between July 1, 2004 and June 30, 2006 (also known as RCRA
Clusters XV and XVI). Tennessee

supplemented these applications on September 16, 2014. EPA concludes
that Tennessee's applications to revise its authorized program meet all
of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA, as
set forth in RCRA section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), and 40 CFR part
271. Therefore, EPA grants Tennessee final authorization to operate its
hazardous waste program with the changes described in the authorization
applications, and as outlined below in Section G of this document.
    Tennessee has responsibility for permitting treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities within its borders and for carrying out the aspects
of the RCRA program described in its revised program applications,
subject to the limitations of HSWA, as discussed above.

C. What is the effect of this authorization decision?

    The effect of this decision is that the changes described in
Tennessee's authorization applications will become part of the
authorized State hazardous waste program, and will therefore be
federally enforceable. Tennessee will continue to have primary
enforcement authority and responsibility for its State hazardous waste
program. EPA retains its authorities under RCRA sections 3007, 3008,
3013, and 7003, including its authority to:
     Conduct inspections, and require monitoring, tests,
analyses, or reports;
     Enforce RCRA requirements, including authorized State
program requirements, and suspend or revoke permits; and
     Take enforcement actions regardless of whether the State
has taken its own actions.
    This action does not impose additional requirements on the
regulated community because the regulations for which Tennessee is
being authorized by this action are already effective and enforceable
requirements under State law, and are not changed by this action.

D. Why wasn't there a proposed rule before this rule?

    Along with this direct final rule, EPA is publishing a separate
document in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of this issue of the Federal
Register that serves as the proposal to authorize these State program
changes. EPA did not publish a proposed rule before today because EPA
views this as a routine program change and does not expect comments
that oppose this approval. EPA is providing an opportunity for public
comment now, as described in Section E of this document.

E. What happens if EPA receives comments that oppose this action?

    If EPA receives comments that oppose this authorization, EPA will
withdraw this direct final rule by publishing a document in the Federal
Register before the rule becomes effective. EPA will base any further
decision on the authorization of the State program changes on the
proposed rule mentioned in the previous section, after considering all
comments received during the comment period, and will address all such
comments in a later final rule. You may not have another opportunity to
comment on these State program changes. If you want to comment on this
authorization, you must do so at this time.
    If EPA receives comments that oppose only the authorization of a
particular change to the State hazardous waste program, EPA will
withdraw that part of this direct final rule, but the authorization of
the program changes that the comments do not oppose will become
effective on the date specified above. The Federal Register withdrawal
document will specify which part of the authorization will become
effective, and which part is being withdrawn.

F. What has Tennessee previously been authorized for?

    Tennessee initially received final authorization on January 22,
1985, effective February 5, 1985 (50 FR 2820), to implement a RCRA
hazardous waste management program. EPA granted authorization for
changes to Tennessee's program on the following dates: June 12, 1987,
effective August 11, 1987 (52 FR 22443); June 1, 1992, effective July
31, 1992 (57 FR 23063); May 8, 1995, effective July 7, 1995 (60 FR
22524); August 24, 1995, effective October 23, 1995 (60 FR 43979); May
23, 1996, effective July 22, 1996 (61 FR 25796); January 30, 1998,
effective March 31, 1998 (63 FR 4587); September 15, 1999, effective
November 15, 1999 (64 FR 49998); October 26, 2000, effective December
26, 2000 (65 FR 64161); December 26, 2001, effective February 25, 2002
(66 FR 66342); April 11, 2003, effective June 10, 2003 (68 FR 17748);
March 14, 2005, effective May 13, 2005 (70 FR 12416); May 11, 2006,
effective July 10, 2006 (71 FR 27405); and October 5, 2012, effective
December 4, 2012 (77 FR 60919).

G. What changes is EPA authorizing with this action?

    On March 9, 2010 and January 15, 2013, Tennessee submitted final
complete program revision applications seeking authorization of its
changes in accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. Tennessee supplemented these
applications on September 16, 2014. EPA now makes an immediate final
decision, subject to receipt of written comments that oppose this
action, that Tennessee's hazardous waste program revisions are
equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than the Federal
program, and therefore satisfy all of the requirements necessary to
qualify for final authorization. Therefore, EPA grants Tennessee final
authorization for the following program changes:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Description of federal requirement    Federal Register date and page        Analogous State Authority 1 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
206--Nonwastewaters from Dyes and       70 FR 9138 02/24/05 and 70 FR   Tennessee Revised Code:
 Pigments.                               35032 06/16/05.                0400-12-01-.02(1)(d)2(xii)(I)-(V);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.02(4)(c)1-4;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.02(5) (App. VII & VIII);
                                                                         0400-12-01-.10(2)(k)-(t);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.10(3)(a) (Table of Treatment
                                                                         Standards for Hazardous Waste); and
                                                                         .10(3)(i)1 (Universal Treatment
                                                                         Standards Table)
Checklist 207--Uniform Hazardous Waste  70 FR 10776 03/04/05 and 70 FR  Tennessee Revised Code:
 Manifest Rule.                          35034 06/16/05.                0400-12-01-.01(2)(a);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.02(1)(g)2(i)(III)I-II;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.03(3)(a)1(i)-(ii);
                                                                         .03(3)(b)1(a)-(m); .03(3)(h)1-2;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.03(4)(c)2; .03(4)(d);
                                                                         .03(4)(e)16(i)-(ii);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.03(7)(e)3 & 5;

                                                                        0400-12-01-.03(8)(a)3-5;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.03(13)(a) (App.);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.04(3)(a)1-3 & 7(i)-(iv);
                                                                         .04(3)(b)2(i)-(ii);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(5)(a)1-2; .06(5)(b)1(i)-
                                                                         (iii); .06(5)(b)2(iv); .06(5)(b)5;
                                                                         .06(5)(c)1-5; .06(5)(c)6(i)-(vii);
                                                                         .06(5)(c)7; .06(5)(g)1-2;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(5)(a)1-2; .05(5)(b)1(i)-
                                                                         (iii); .05(5)(b)2(iv); .05(5)(b)5;
                                                                         .05(5)(c)1-5; .05(5)(c)6(i)-(vii);
                                                                         .05(5)(c)7; and .05(5)(g)1-2.
208--Methods Innovation Rule and SW-    70 FR 34538 06/14/05 and 70 FR  Tennessee Revised Code:
 846 Final Update IIIB.                  44150 08/01/05.                0400-12-01-.01(2)(b)1-2;
                                                                        0400-12-01-02(1)(c)1(ii)(V);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.02(3)(b)1(i); .02(3)(c)1(i)-
                                                                         (ii);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.02(4)(f)2(ii)(III);
                                                                        0400-12-01-02(5) (App. I-III);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(10)(a)1;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(14)(o)2;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(30)(e)3(i)(II) & (IV);
                                                                         .06(30)(e)4(i)(III); .06(30)(e)6;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(31)(n)4(ii);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(57)(i) (App. IX);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(10)(a)1;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(14)(o)3;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(27)(e)3(i)(II) & (IV);
                                                                         .05(27)(e)4(i)(III); .05(27)(e)6;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(28)(n)4(ii);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(29)(b);
                                                                         .05(29)(e)1(iii)(II)III;
                                                                         .05(29)(e)1(iii)(III);
                                                                         .05(29)(e)2(iii)(II)III;
                                                                         .05(29)(e)2(iii)(III);
                                                                         .05(29)(e)3(iii)(I);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.09(8)(a)4(i)(II);
                                                                         .09(8)(a)7(ii); .09(8)(c)2(i);
                                                                         .09(8)(g)1; .09(8)(m)2(i);
                                                                         .09(8)(m)2(ii)(I);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.09(30) (App. IX);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.10(3)(a)2; .10(3)(a) (Table
                                                                         of Treatment Standards for Hazardous
                                                                         Waste), footnote 7; .10(3)(i)1
                                                                         (Universal Treatment Standards Table),
                                                                         footnote 4;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.07(5)(b)5(iii)(I)III-IV;
                                                                         .07(5)(b)8(i)(II)II.B;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.07(1)(e)2(ii)(I)III-IV;
                                                                         .07(1)(j)3(ii)(I)-II);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.11(2)(a)2(i)(II);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.11(5)(e)3;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.11(6)(d)3; and
                                                                        0400-12-01-.11(7)(d)3.
209--Universal Waste Rule: Specific     70 FR 45508 08/05/05..........  Tennessee Revised Code:
 Provisions for Mercury Containing                                      0400-12-01-.01(2)(a);
 Equipment.                                                             0400-12-01-.02(1)(j);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(1)(b)2(x);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(1)(b)2(xii);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.10(1)(a)6;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.07(1)(b)4(ix);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.12(1)(a); .12(1)(a)1(iii);
                                                                         .12(1)(f)1-3; .12(1)(b);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.12(2)(d)3(i)-(iv);
                                                                         .12(2)(e)4(i)-(ii);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.12(3)(c)2(iv)-(v);
                                                                         .12(3)(d)3(i)-(iv); and .12(3)(e)4(i)-
                                                                         (ii).
211--Wastewater Treatment Exemptions    70 FR 57769 10/04/05..........  Tennessee Revised Code:
 for Hazardous Waste Mixtures                                           0400-12-01-.02(1)(c)1(ii)(IV)I-II;
 (``Headworks exemptions'').                                             .02(1)(c)1(ii)(IV)IV; and
                                                                         .02(1)(c)1(ii)(IV)VI-VII.
213--Burden Reduction Initiative......  71 FR 16862 04/04/06..........  Tennessee Revised Code:
                                                                        0400-12-01-.01(4)(b)2(ii-vii);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.02(1)(d)1(ix)(III)V;
                                                                         .02(1)(d)6(ix);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(2)(f)2(iv)-(v);
                                                                         .06(2)(g)1(iv);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(4)(c)2; .06(4)(g)9;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(5)(d)2; .06(5)(d)2(i)-
                                                                         (ii), (vi), (viii), (x) & (xviii)-
                                                                         (xix);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(6)(i)4; .06(6)(i)7(ii)-
                                                                         (iii); .06(6)(j)6-7; .06(6)(k)7;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(7)(d)5(v); .06(7)(f) &
                                                                         (k);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(8)(d)4(i); .06(8)(f)4(i);
                                                                         .06(8)(n)5;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(9)(e);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(10)(b)1;
                                                                         .06(10)(b)2(v)(II); .06(10)(c)1-2;
                                                                         .06(10)(d)1(i)-(ii); .06(10)(d)9(ii);
                                                                         .06(10)(f)2-8; .06(10)(g)6;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(12)(b)3;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(13)(k)2;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(14)(o)1-5;

                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(15)(d)1(ii); .06(15)(h)4;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(22)(e)3(ii);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(26)(b)1-3;
                                                                         .06(26)(d)1(iv)(II); .06(26)(d)7;
                                                                         .06(26)(e)1;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(31)(l)2(i)-(ii);
                                                                         .06(31)(m)1;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.06(33)(a); .06(33)(b)3(ii);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(2)(f)2(iv);
                                                                         .05(2)(g)1(iv);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(4)(c)2; .05(4)(g)9;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(5)(d)2(i)-(ii), (vi)-
                                                                         (viii) & (xv);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(6)(a)4(i) & (iii);
                                                                         .05(6)(d)4(ii) & (v);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(7)(d)5(v); .05(7)(f);
                                                                         .05(7)(k);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(8)(d)3(i); .05(8)(f)3(i);
                                                                         .05(8)(n)5;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(9)(e);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(10)(b)1;
                                                                         .05(10)(b)2(v)(II); .05(10)(c)1 & 2;
                                                                         .05(10)(d)1(i)-(ii); .05(10)(d)9(ii);
                                                                         .05(10)(f)1-7; .05(10)(g)6; .05(10)(l)3-
                                                                         8;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(11)(b)1; .05(11)(e)1;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(12)(j)1;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(13)(k)5;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(14)(b)1; .05(14)(d)1;
                                                                         .05(14)(o)1-6;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(23)(b)1-3;
                                                                         .05(23)(d)1(iv)(II); .05(23)(d)7;
                                                                         .05(23)(e)1;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(28)(l)2(i)-(ii);
                                                                         .05(28)(m)1;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.05(30)(a); .05(30)(b)3(ii);
                                                                        0400-12-01-.09(8)(c)5(x); .09(8)(d)4 &
                                                                         11;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.10(1)(g)1(i)-(ii);
                                                                         .10(1)(g)2(vi); .10(1)(i)1 & 4;
                                                                        0400-12-01-.07(5); .07(5)(b)2(i);
                                                                         .07(5)(b)12(iii)(XV); and
                                                                        0400-12-01-.07(10)(o).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Tennessee provisions for RCRA Cluster XV (Checklists 206, 207, and 208) and Cluster XVI (Checklists 209,
  211, and 213) are from the Tennessee Hazardous Waste Management Regulations, Chapter 0400-12-01, effective
  November 5, 2013.
\2\ Chapter 1200-01-11 was renumbered as Chapter 0400-12-01, effective September 17, 2012. The chapter title,
  ``Hazardous Waste Management,'' remained the same and the contents of the chapter did not change as a result
  of the renumbering.

H. Where are the revised State rules different from the Federal rules?

    We consider Tennessee Hazardous Waste Management Regulations 0400-
12-01-.05(5)(d)2 and -.06(5)(d)2 to be more stringent than the Federal
counterparts at 40 CFR 265.73(b) and 264.73(b) because the State
requires owners and operators of interim status and permitted
treatment, storage, and disposal facilities to maintain information in
the facility's operating record on site for no less than five (5)
years. The Federal requirements at 40 CFR 265.73(b) and 264.73(b)
require that owners and operators of the same types of facilities
maintain such records for no less than three (3) years. These five-year
document retention requirements are part of the Tennessee authorized
program and are federally enforceable.

I. Who handles permits after the authorization takes effect?

    Tennessee will issue permits for all the provisions for which it is
authorized and will administer the permits it issues. EPA will continue
to administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits or portions of permits
which EPA issued prior to the effective date of this authorization
until they expire or are terminated. EPA will not issue any more
permits or new portions of permits for the provisions listed in the
Table above after the effective date of this authorization. EPA will
continue to implement and issue permits for HSWA requirements for which
Tennessee is not authorized.

J. What is codification and is EPA codifying Tennessee's hazardous
waste program as authorized in this rule?

    Codification is the process of placing the State's statutes and
regulations that comprise the State's authorized hazardous waste
program into the Code of Federal Regulations. EPA does this by
referencing the authorized State rules in 40 CFR part 272. EPA is not
codifying the authorization of Tennessee's changes at this time.
However, EPA reserves the amendment of 40 CFR part 272, subpart RR, for
the authorization of Tennessee's program changes at a later date.

K. Administrative Requirements

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action
from the requirements of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4,
1993), and therefore this action is not subject to review by OMB. This
action authorizes State requirements for the purpose of RCRA 3006 and
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law.
Accordingly, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this action
authorizes pre-existing requirements under State law and does not
impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by State
law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). For the same reason, this
action also does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities
of Tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000). This action will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it
merely authorizes State requirements as part of the State RCRA
hazardous waste program without altering the relationship or the
distribution of power and responsibilities established by RCRA. This
action also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant and it does not
make decisions based on environmental

health or safety risks. This rule is not subject to Executive Order
13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001)
because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
    Under RCRA section 3006(b), EPA grants a State's application for
authorization as long as the State meets the criteria required by RCRA.
It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it
reviews a State authorization application, to require the use of any
particular voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard
that otherwise satisfies the requirements of RCRA. Thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996),
in issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied
with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining
the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this document 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 in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This
action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This
action will be effective May 19, 2015, unless objections to this
authorization are received.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Authority: This action is issued under the authority of sections
2002(a), 3006, and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, and 6974(b).

    Dated: March 2, 2015.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2015-06512 Filed 3-19-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 72 (Tuesday, April 14, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 20625]
[FR Doc No: 2020-07472]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 257

[EPA-HQ-OLEM-2019-0361; FRL-10007-70-OLEM]

Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System: Disposal of Coal
Combustion Residuals From Electric Utilities; Federal CCR Permit
Program; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is
extending the comment period on EPA's proposal to establish a federal
Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) permit program. The notice announcing
this proposal was published on February 20, 2020, and the public
comment period was scheduled to end on April 20, 2020. However, a
number of public interest groups have requested additional time to
develop and submit comments on the proposal. In response to the request
for additional time, EPA is extending the comment period through May
20, 2020.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 20, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OLEM-2019-0361; Title: Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System:
Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities; Federal
CCR Permit Program, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stacey Yonce, Materials Recovery and
Waste Management Division, Office of Resource Conservation and
Recovery, Mail Code 5304P, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (703)
308-8476; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In December 2016, Congress passed, and the
President signed the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation
(WIIN) Act, amending section 4005 of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA). The WIIN Act, among other things, requires the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) to implement a
federal coal combustion residuals (CCR) permit program in Indian
country and, subject to the availability of appropriations specifically
provided to carry out a program, to implement a federal CCR permit
program in nonparticipating states. The Fiscal Year 2018 and 2019
Omnibus Appropriations Acts provided appropriations to the EPA to
develop and implement a federal permit program for the regulation of
CCR in nonparticipating states.
    The Agency is proposing to establish a federal CCR permit program
in accordance with the requirements of the WIIN Act. The EPA is
proposing to establish requirements and procedures to issue federal
permits for disposal and other solid waste management of CCR in 40 CFR
part 257 subpart E. The proposed permit requirements would include
definitions, compliance deadlines, application requirements, content
and duration, and modification requirements and procedures.
    The EPA is also proposing to rely on the general administrative
procedures applicable to several EPA permit programs. These procedures,
which are found in 40 CFR parts 22 and 124, apply to all other RCRA
permits, as well as to certain permits issued under the Clean Water Act
(CWA), the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), and the Clean Air Act (CAA).
The EPA is proposing to rely on these general procedures without
substantive modification and is proposing only to modify provisions in
parts 22 and 124 to the extent necessary to ensure they apply to the
federal CCR permit program.
    The notice proposing to establish a federal CCR permit program was
published on February 20, 2020, and the comment period was scheduled to
end on April 20, 2020. See 85 FR 9940. Since publication of the notice,
a number of stakeholders have requested additional time to review the
proposal and to develop and submit comments. After considering this
request for additional time, EPA has decided to extend the comment
period until May 20, 2020.

    Dated: April 3, 2020.
Peter Wright,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Land and Emergency Management.
[FR Doc. 2020-07472 Filed 4-13-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


8458 Columbia Road ( 440) 263 8214 / FAX: { W) 2354982 Email: 92riPo@ rrai. com / Website: www. rrai. com 0 Olmsted Falls, Ohio 44138 2206 December 28,2001 whitman, Administrator ai Protection Agency Headquarters Washington, D. C. 2046 Subjecf: Enforc of MACT emissions limitations given emissions testing methods.

Dear Administrator Whitman,

In my August 30, 1999 tetter to Administrator Browner on this subject, I explained that Document ( TSD) for the HWC MACT Rule erroneously stated d agreed with EPAs assessment of the expanded uncertainty of methods, the range of a d emissions represented by a stack i at there were significant errors in the TSD analysis.

On November 9 1999, OSW'Director Cotsworth wrote me suggesting that review of the rred pending completion of the hexican Society of Mechanical h Committee on Industrial and M ~ c i p a l Waste's ReMAP ( Reference and Precision) program and asked that I involve EMC's Mr William H. Lamason in tie foilow up. ,

The inm 1 ReMAP report confirmed the methodologid deficiencies 1 identified 1999 letter and identified an additional problem with the TSD analysis.

In  A's response to some of the comments I made on the Small MWC MACT M e g the expanded uncertainty of manual sampling methods ( the range of contain the measurand), the Agency stated that dioxin test y promulgated and that measurement uncertaimy was considered. response does not address the concern because EPA never established fication limit for Method 23 ( or RCRA Method 0023 for that #

d could not have because the Method 23 validation oIumes needed to calculate concentration. Hence, the capability of Method 23 at the regulatory concentrations.

Environrnenra1 and Statistical Consuiting c Subject: Enforceability of MACT emissions limitations aven the uncertainty of manual Page 2 December 28,2001 emissions testing methods.

Because of my concerns about enforceability, I expanded a demonstration project I was conducting in November 1997 to include simultaneous Method 23 sampling. I gave those data to EPA and ASME used them in ReMAP. I recently incorporated the results of a few more simultaneous Method 23 tests into an updated assessment of dioxin measurement uncertainty, which I have expanded to include "  3098 dioxin toxic equivalency as well. The range of the data now covers the entire range of regulated concentrations instead of ing at 27.6 ng/ dsm3 ( no diluent correction). Those updated results are attached to

I determined the relationship between the standard deviation of simultaneous test results d concentration using the procedures developed in ReMAP. That relationship d along with Monte Carlo Simulation ( MCS) to determine the credible range of standard deviations and measured values likely to be observed ( Cox, M. G., M. P. Dainton and P. M. Harris, So@ are Support for Metwhgy Best Practice Guide No. 6, Uncertainty and Stdistical Modeling, National Physics Laboratory, Toddington, March 2001). Specific characteristics of the measurement method such as the limit were extracted from the Monte Carlo Simulation results. the attachment to this letter conform to the A m k a n National Uncertainty  U S. Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in SL 2540 2 199' 7). The data and results are attached to this \

letter.

Method 301 is the only promulgated rule establishing the lower limit of applicability of an emissions test method. Both Method 301 itself and the preamble make it clear that under the current regulatory scheme, test results can only be used for enforcement when above the practical quantification limit. Of course, this caveat should be able to citly waived when promulgated emissions limitations explicitly incorporate ent uncertainty. I The statistical concept underlying the Method 30 1 definition the practical quantification limit is that the PQL is the concentration where the measured concentration ( measurement) is likely to be within 10 percent of the true, but unknowable emitted source concentration ( measurand). I used the statistical concept rather than the formulas found in Method 301. because the HWC MACT TSD correctly states that the Method 301 formulas do not apply for manual stack emissions testing methods. For these methods, the standard deviation between simultaneous replicate measurements is neither constant nor decreases with concentration; rather, it increases with concent , Subject: Enforceability of MACT emissions limitations given the uncertzlinty of manual Page 3 December 28,200 1 emissions testing methods.

The practical quantiation limit for total dioxins is 34 & dsm3. Since total dioxin MACT limitations include 7, 13 and 30 ng/ dsm3 corrected to 7 percent oxygen, which are equivalent to 5 75 9 14 and 21 32 ng/ dsm3 on an uncorrected basis for typical MWCs, it is clear that that PQL is above the enforcement levels.

The new data did not materially change the results for ITEQ dioxins. The PQL for ITEQ dioxins is 1.6 ng/ dsm3. So, the PQL is above 0.2 and 0.4 ng/ dsm3 corrected to 7 percent oxygen emissions limitations found in the now remanded HWC MACT rule.

I remain convinced that measurement uncertainty must be known and properly considered when MACT standards are established. Absent such, I am deeply concerned that truly excessive emissions will not be reduced while sources that are actually achieving MACT risk being punished in the press and by unwarranted enforcement actions every time they conduct a source emissions test.

Very truly yours, H G Rig0 & Associates, Inc.

H. Gregor Rigo, PhD, PE, QEP, DEE President Attachments: Updated measurement uncertainty results for Total, ITEQ and WHO98 TEQ Dioxins RCRA Docket: F96 RCSP FFFF Air & Radiation Docket HWC: A 9045  MWC: A 98 18  MWI: A 91 6  WC: A 94 63 Mi. William H. Lamason, EMC, EPA 7 Updated measurement uncertainty results for Total, ITEQ and TEQ Dioxins The following three sheets are all similarly arranged. They provide summary statistical characteristics and measurement uncertainty results for Total Dioxins, ITEQ Dioxins and WHO98 TEQ dioxins.

The upper lee hand corner of each page is a tabulation of the statistical characteristics of the data. These statistical characteristics describe the applicable range of the results and provide the input parameters needed to determine measurement uncertainty using either main line GUM ( Guide to expressing uncertainty in measurement) or Monte Carlo Simulation WCS) techniques. MCS is the correct technique to apply since fbndamental assumptions implicit in main line GUM are violated by the nature of the relationship between standard deviation and concentration for manual emissions measurements.

Using the total dioxins sheet as an example:

0 Simultaneous replicate data has been obtained between 0.5 and 399 ng/ dsm3. The average and standard deviation of the natural logarithms of the concentration averages are 1. .9 and 2.06 ln( ng/ dsm") respectively. of the sample size bias corrected standard deviation estimates is 4 while the average of the predicted standard deviations is 2.6 leading to a retransformation bias correction factor of 1.58. The natural logarithm of this factor is added to the regression intercept to correct for this bias The retransformation bias corrected equation relating average concentration and the standard deviation of the measurements used to generate the average is: S =  1.69 + 0.83( concentration). The statistical characteristics are based on 27 dual train samplings.

A 10,000 iteration Monte Carlo Simulation was used to determine that for total dioxins: Blank trains are likely to yield measured total dioxin concentrations up to 0.07 ng/ dsm3. The detection limit, the lowest concentration we are statistically certain is greater If we are interested in making sure that a reported result has at least one significant digit, then the true concentration has to be above 0.5 ng/ dsm3 and the lowest level at which two significant digits may be properly reported is 24 ng/ dsm3. than a blank train, is 0.9 ng/ dsm3. I The long, thin dashed line on the graphs is the central value estimated & om the data. The heavy lines demark the upper and lower 95% ( 2 tailed) confidence intervals and the surrounding light dotted lines indicate the uncertainty range associated with these bounds.  2

At the bottom left hand comer:

0 The relative standard deviation is plotted against measurand, the " true" but unknown and unknowable value of the concentration. PQL is the concentration corresponding to a 10 percent relative standard deviation. The analytic result has at least one significant digit when upper confidence limit for the standard deviation equals 50 percent and may have more than one significant digit when the lower confidence limit for the standard deviation is below 5 percent. 0 At the right hand side of each sheet, the range of measured values is plotted against the measurand. Like a typical calibration curve, if the measurand is known ( for example, when a standard solution is analyzed) then reading up the graph indicates the range of Its that can be expected using the Method. In stack testing, however, the s are what we have and the measurand is both unknown and unknowable. If I conducted 5t test and measured 100 ng/ dsm3, the total dioxin graphic lets me figure out that the " true" measured concentration ( measurand) is between 80 and 130 ng/ dsm3. Of course, these concentrations must still be multiplied by the dilution correction factor to express the result in the units of a diluent corrected regulatory standard. Summary statistics for simultaneous repIicate Method 23 dioxin measurements.

Run ID TO1 TO2 TO3 TO4 TO5 TO6 TO7 f l 0 T11 T12 T13 T14 T15 T16 T17 T18 T19 EERTRCl EERTRC2 EERTRC3 wes runl 1 wes run 1 2 wes run13 wes run2 2 wes rur12 3 TOTAL DIOXINS totdxna totdxns 2.1840 0.1291 2.8496 0.2731 1.3521 0.3703 3.2676 0.6022 0.8941 0.0900 15.3254 3.9617 0.0558 2.0002 8.2172 0.1709 5.3342 0.1218 1.9771 0.9554 5.5100 ,0.8090 0.9638 0.1478 1.0459 0.7357 4.7550 1.8872 15.7800 0.7797 27.5550 0.2924 ITEQ DIOXINS iteqa itqs 0.2524 0.0572 0.1086 0.0016 0.1256 0.0227 0.0731 0.0261 0.1486 0.0361 0.0426 0.01 30 0.5208 0.0833 0.9128 0.0537 0.41 90 0.0727 0.3813 0.0002 0.2489 0.0202 0.0508 0.01 71 0.0582 0.0354 0.0357 0.0009 0.0459 0.0286 0.0408 0.0117 0.0423 0.0222 0.0209 0.001 5 0.0489 0.01 17 0.1776 0.001 7 0.3182 0.0019 7.7605 0.2028 7.5280 0.7809 3.5069 0.4250 4.3743 0.4541 3.5287 0.2606 WHO98 DIOXINS who98a who98s 0.161 1 0.0349 0.0709 0.0039 0.0876 0.0042 0.0482 0.0130 0.0896 0.0229 0.0332 0.0035 0.3268 0.0087 0.6133 0.0420 0.2793 0.0437 0.2430 0.0071 0.1620 0.0126 0.0508 004 0.0496 055 0.0286 0.0006 0.031 1 0.01 05 0.0314 0.0043 0.0310 0.0217 0.0223 0.0027 0.0203 0.0022 8.5165 0.1963 8.1251 0.8271 3.8095 0.4470 4.4339 1.1388 3.9597 0.201 3 Notes: all standard deviations are sample size bias corrected  multiplied by 1.253 all statistical results derived from pairs, EERTRC results are cross traverse " wes" runs are new since ASMEIRCIMW ReMAP report ( October 2000 testing) 0 0 0 '

8 3 Z 1 n U i e * b  r I I LI U ¶


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1886-1889]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00255]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68576; File No. SR-Phlx-2012-145]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its
Fee Schedule for the Following Direct Data Feed Products: Top of Phlx
Options Data Feed, the Top of Phlx Options Plus Orders Data Feed, the
PHLX Orders Data Feed and the PHLX Depth of Market Data Feed

January 3, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 21, 2012, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule for the four direct
data feed products.
    While changes to the Pricing Schedule pursuant to this proposal are
effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated the proposed
amendment to be operative on January 2, 2013.
    The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new
language is italicized; proposed deletions are bracketed.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Changes are marked to the rules of PHLX are found at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

IX. Proprietary Data Feed Fees

                     Top of PHLX Options (``TOPO'')
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Monthly
                         Account type                            charge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internal Distributor.........................................     $2,000
External Distributor.........................................      2,500
Non-Professional Subscriber..................................          1
Professional Subscriber......................................         40
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     A Non-Professional Subscriber is a natural person who is
neither: (i) registered or qualified in any capacity with the
Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, any state
securities agency, any securities exchange or association, or any
commodities or futures contract market or association; (ii) engaged as
an ``investment adviser'' as that term is defined in Section 201(11) of
the Investment Advisors Act of 1940 (whether or not registered or
qualified under that Act); nor (iii) employed by a bank or other
organization exempt from registration under federal or state securities
laws to perform functions that would require registration or
qualification if such functions were performed for an organization not
so exempt. A Non-Professional Subscriber may only use the data provided
for personal purposes and not for any commercial purpose.
     A Professional Subscriber is any Subscriber that is not a
Non-Professional Subscriber. If the NASDAQ OMX Subscriber agreement is
signed in the name of a business or commercial entity, such entity
would be considered a Professional Subscriber.
     The Monthly Charge per Subscriber (both Professional and
Non-Professional) covers the usage of all four PHLX data products and
will not be assessed separately for each data product. PHLX data is
comprised of Top of Phlx Options (``TOPO''), TOPO Plus Orders, PHLX
Orders and PHLX Depth Data feeds. For example, if a firm has one
Professional (Non-Professional) Subscriber accessing TOPO, TOPO Plus
Orders, PHLX Orders and PHLX Depth of Market the firm would only report
the Subscriber once and pay $40 ($1 for Non-Professional).
     A ``distributor'' of NASDAQ OMX PHLX data is any entity
that receives a feed or data file of data directly from NASDAQ OMX PHLX
or indirectly through another entity and then distributes it either
internally (within that entity) or externally (outside that entity).
All distributors shall execute a NASDAQ OMX Subscriber agreement.

Non-Display Enterprise License

    The $10,000 per month Non-Display Enterprise License fee permits
distribution to an unlimited number of internal non-display Subscribers
without incurring additional fees for each internal Subscriber. The
Non-Display Enterprise License covers non-display Subscriber fees for
all PHLX proprietary direct data feed products and is in addition to
any other associated distributor fees for PHLX proprietary direct data
feed products.

Managed Data Solutions

    The charges to be paid by Distributors and Subscribers of Managed
Data Solutions products containing Top of PHLX Options shall be:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Fee schedule for Managed Data
            Solutions                              Price
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Managed Data Solution              $1,500/mo Per Distributor.
 Administration Fee (for the
 right to offer Managed Data
 Solutions to client
 organizations).
PHLX Managed Data Solution         $250/mo per Subscriber.
 Subscriber Fee.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            TOPO Plus orders
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Monthly
                         Account type                            charge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internal Distributor.........................................     $4,000
External Distributor.........................................      5,000
Non-Professional Subscriber..................................          1
Professional Subscriber......................................      [2]40
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    [ The Monthly Charge and Subscriber Fees applicable to TOPO
Plus Orders users are effective beginning June 1, 2010.]
    [ The Monthly Charge applicable to Internal Distributors of
TOPO Plus Orders will apply to Specialized Order Feed users that have
not migrated to TOPO Plus Orders on or before June 1, 2010.]
    [ A Non-Professional Subscriber is a natural person who is
neither: (i) registered or qualified in any capacity with the
Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, any state
securities agency, any securities exchange or association, or any
commodities or futures contract market or association; (ii) engaged as
an ``investment adviser'' as that term is defined in Section 201(11) of
the Investment Advisors Act of 1940 (whether or not registered or
qualified under that Act); nor (iii) employed by a bank or other
organization exempt from registration under federal or state securities
laws to perform functions that would require registration or
qualification if such functions were performed for an organization not
so exempt. A Non-Professional Subscriber may only use the data provided
for

personal purposes and not for any commercial purpose.]
    [ A Professional Subscriber is any Subscriber that is not a
Non-Professional Subscriber. If the NASDAQ OMX Subscriber agreement is
signed in the name of a business or commercial entity, such entity
would be considered a Professional Subscriber.]

                               PHLX Orders
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Monthly
                         Account type                            charge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internal Distributor.........................................     $3,000
External Distributor.........................................      3,500
Non-Professional Subscriber..................................          1
Professional Subscriber......................................         40
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             PHLX Depth Data
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Monthly
                         Account type                            charge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internal Distributor.........................................     $4,000
External Distributor.........................................      4,500
Non-Professional Subscriber..................................          1
Professional Subscriber......................................         40
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 PHLX Options Trade Outline (``PHOTO'')
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Monthly
                         Account type                            charge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Day Product Subscriber................................       $500
Intra-Day Product Subscriber.................................      1,500
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PHOTO Historical Data
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Charge
                                                                  per
                         Account type                           calendar
                                                                 month
                                                               requested
------------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Day Product Subscriber................................        400
Intra-Day Product Subscriber.................................        750
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ For example, a subscriber who requests End of Day PHOTO
Historical Data for the Month of March, 2009 would be charged $400.
A subscriber who requests End of Day PHOTO Historical Data for the
months of March, 2009 and April, 2009 would be charged $400 for the
March, 2009 End of Day data and $400 for the April, 2009 End of day
data, for a total of $800, etc. A subscriber who requests Intra-Day
PHOTO Historical Data for the Month of March, 2009 would be charged
$750.00. A subscriber who requests Intra-Day PHOTO Historical Data
for the months of March, 2009 and April, 2009 would be charged $750
for the March, 2009 Intra-Day data and $750 for the April, 2009
Intra-Day data, for a total of $1,500, etc.
* * * * *

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the fees for
TOPO, TOPO Plus Orders, PHLX Orders and PHLX Depth of Market data
products. TOPO provides Subscribers a direct data feed that includes
the Exchange's best bid and offer position, with aggregate size, based
on displayable order and quoting interest. The TOPO Plus Orders data
feed product combines the TOPO and PHLX Orders data feeds and provides
Exchange top-of-market data (including quotes and trades), together
with real-time full depth order information. TOPO Plus Orders data
enables Subscribers to monitor their order book(s), including single
and complex orders,\4\ and Complex Order Live Auction (``COLA'') \5\
for all options listed on PHLX. The PHLX Orders data feed provides the
same single and complex order information described above that makes up
the ``Plus Orders'' portion of the TOPO Plus Orders data product. The
PHLX Depth of Market data feed includes full depth of quotes and
orders, imbalance information and last sale data for options listed on
PHLX.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A Complex Order is an order involving the simultaneous
purchase and/or sale of two or more different options series in the
same underlying security, priced as a net debit or credit based on
the relative prices of the individual components, for the same
account, for the purpose of executing a particular investment
strategy. See Exchange Rule 1080.08(a)(i).
    \5\ See Exchange Rule 1080.08(e).
    \6\ PHLX Depth of Market is the equivalent of, and is based on,
the NASDAQ ITCH to Trade Options or ``ITTO'' data feed that NASDAQ
offers under NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM'') Rules, Chapter VI,
Section 1(a)(3)(A). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63983
(February 25, 2011), 76 FR 12178 (March 4, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-
032).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to modify the method for assessing fees for
Professional Subscribers. Currently, the Exchange assesses a $20
monthly fee for Professional Subscribers to TOPO Plus Orders. There is
currently no monthly Professional Subscriber fee for TOPO, PHLX Orders,
or PHLX Depth of Market.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ PHLX proposes to move the definitions in the rule text above
without changing the meaning of the definitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to establish a single monthly Professional
Subscriber fee of $40 that will entitle such Subscriber to access all
PHLX data feeds. This will increase the monthly Professional Subscriber
Fee on TOPO Plus Orders from $20 to $40 per Subscriber, however it will
simultaneously add access to the remaining PHLX data feeds. The
proposal will result in the Exchange for the first time assessing a $40
per month fee for Professional Subscribers of TOPO, PHLX Orders and
PHLX Depth of Market. Professional Subscribers will pay the monthly
Subscriber fee once for access to any or all of the current data feeds
of PHLX data. For example, the firm would only report the Professional
Subscriber once and pay $40 for access to TOPO, TOPO Plus Orders, PHLX
Orders and PHLX Depth of Market.
    Similarly, the Exchange is modifying the method for assessing Non-
Professional Subscriber fees. Presently, the monthly Subscriber Fee
assessed to External Distributors for TOPO Plus Orders is $1 per Non-
Professional Subscriber. The Exchange now proposes to assess a monthly
Subscriber Fee of $1 per Non-Professional Subscriber to External
Distributors for TOPO, PHLX Orders and PHLX Depth of Market. Similar to
the inclusive fee for Professional Subscribers, Non-Professional
Subscribers will pay the monthly fee of $1 to access any or all of the
data feeds of PHLX data. The Exchange believes that by allowing access
to multiple products for one price, it will allow for a broad
dissemination of PHLX data overall and a wider range of consumer
choice.
    Finally, the Exchange proposes to establish a monthly Non-Display
Enterprise License fee of $10,000. This enterprise license will entitle
a distributor to provide market data to an unlimited number of internal
non-display devices within a firm rather than incurring per Subscriber
charges.\8\ This pricing structure offers two advantages. First, it
establishes a

monthly fee cap for distributors with large customer bases, effectively
lowering average cost per user and marginal costs per user beyond the
monthly breakpoint. Second, the enterprise license offers
administrative ease by eliminating the need for distributors to tally,
track, and report to the Exchange a specific number of individual
users. This is a voluntary option; distributors are permitted to choose
between existing pricing and the new enterprise license.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The foregoing fee structure is similar to the structure in
place for the NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM'') enterprise license
which entitles a distributor to provide BONO\SM\ and ITTO market
data to an unlimited number of non-display devices within the firm
without any per Subscriber charge. See NASDAQ Options Rules, Chapter
XV, Sec. 4 (a) NASDAQ Options Market Data Distributor Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that the categories of TOPO, PHLX Orders, PHLX
Depth of Market or TOPO Plus Orders market data and fees compete with
similar products offered by other markets such as International Stock
Exchange (``ISE''), NYSE, NOM and Chicago Board Options Exchange
(``CBOE''). For example, ISE offers market data products that are
similar to TOPO: A data feed that shows the top of the market entitled
TOP Quote Feed, and a data feed that shows the top five price levels
entitled Depth of Market. NYSE offers a market data product for Arca
and Amex that is similar to TOPO and PHLX Depth of Market: a feed that
shows top of book, last sale, and depth of quote and is entitled NYSE
Arca Book for Options. A subsidiary of CBOE for which CBOE charges fees
offers a market data feed that is similar to TOPO and shows BBO, last
sale, and top of book data. And BATS offers Multicast PITCH, which is
their depth of market and last sale feed similar to PHLX Depth of
Market.
2. Statutory Basis
    Phlx believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\9\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it provides
an equitable allocation of reasonable fees among Subscribers and
recipients of PHLX data and is not designed to permit unfair
discrimination between them. In adopting Regulation NMS, the Commission
granted self-regulatory organizations and broker-dealers increased
authority and flexibility to offer new and unique market data to the
public. It was believed that this authority would expand the amount of
data available to consumers, and also spur innovation and competition
for the provision of market data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission concluded that Regulation NMS--by deregulating the
market in proprietary data--would itself further the Act's goals of
facilitating efficiency and competition:

    [E]fficiency is promoted when broker-dealers who do not need the
data beyond the prices, sizes, market center identifications of the
NBBO and consolidated last sale information are not required to
receive (and pay for) such data. The Commission also believes that
efficiency is promoted when broker-dealers may choose to receive
(and pay for) additional market data based on their own internal
analysis of the need for such data.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005),
70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).

By removing ``unnecessary regulatory restrictions'' on the ability of
exchanges to sell their own data, Regulation NMS advanced the goals of
the Act and the principles reflected in its legislative history. If the
free market should determine whether proprietary data is sold to
broker-dealers at all, it follows that the price at which such data is
sold should be set by the market as well. TOPO, TOPO Plus Orders, PHLX
Orders and PHLX Depth of Market data products are precisely the sort of
market data products that the Commission envisioned when it adopted
Regulation NMS.
    On July 21, 2010, President Barack Obama signed into law H.R. 4173,
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010
(``Dodd-Frank Act''), which amended Section 19 of the Act. Among other
things, Section 916 of the Dodd-Frank Act amended paragraph (A) of
Section 19(b)(3) of the Act by inserting the phrase ``on any person,
whether or not the person is a member of the self-regulatory
organization'' after ``due, fee or other charge imposed by the self-
regulatory organization.'' As a result, all self-regulatory
organization (``SRO'') rule proposals establishing or changing dues,
fees, or other charges are immediately effective upon filing regardless
of whether such dues, fees, or other charges are imposed on members of
the SRO, non-members, or both. Section 916 further amended paragraph
(C) of Section 19(b)(3) of the Act to read, in pertinent part, ``At any
time within the 60-day period beginning on the date of filing of such a
proposed rule change in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (1)
[of Section 19(b)], the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend
the change in the rules of the self-regulatory organization made
thereby, if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary
or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors,
or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of this title. If the
Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute
proceedings under paragraph (2)(B) [of Section 19(b)] to determine
whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.''
    The decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia Circuit in NetCoalition v. SEC, No. 09-1042 (D.C. Cir.
2010), although reviewing a Commission decision made prior to the
effective date of the Dodd-Frank Act, upheld the Commission's reliance
upon competitive markets to set reasonable and equitably allocated fees
for market data. ``In fact, the legislative history indicates that the
Congress intended that the market system `evolve through the interplay
of competitive forces as unnecessary regulatory restrictions are
removed' and that the SEC wield its regulatory power `in those
situations where competition may not be sufficient,' such as in the
creation of a `consolidated transactional reporting system.' ''
NetCoalition, at 15 (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 94-229, at 92 (1975), as
reprinted in 1975 U.S.C.C.A.N. 321, 323). The court's conclusions about
Congressional intent are therefore reinforced by the Dodd-Frank Act
amendments, which create a presumption that exchange fees, including
market data fees, may take effect immediately, without prior Commission
approval, and that the Commission should take action to suspend a fee
change and institute a proceeding to determine whether the fee change
should be approved or disapproved only where the Commission has
concerns that the change may not be consistent with the Act.
    Phlx believes that the proposed fee is fair and equitable in
accordance with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, and not unreasonably
discriminatory in accordance with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act. As
described above, the proposed fee is based on pricing conventions and
distinctions that exist in Phlx's current fee schedule, and the fee
schedules of other exchanges. These distinctions (top-of-book versus
Depth-of-Book, Professional versus non-Professional Subscribers, and
Internal versus External Distribution) are each based on principles of
fairness and equity that have helped for many years to maintain fair,
equitable, and not unreasonably discriminatory fees, and that apply
with equal or greater force to the current proposal. The use of
enterprise licenses is also a well-established method for assessing
equitable fees, providing as it does a pricing and administrative
efficiency benefit for high-volume usage.
    Importantly, the proposed products are entirely optional to all
parties. Firms are not required to purchase TOPO,

TOPO Plus Orders, PHLX Orders and PHLX Depth of Market data feed or to
utilize any specific pricing alternative if they do choose to purchase
TOPO, TOPO Plus Orders, PHLX Orders and PHLX Depth of Market data feed.
Phlx is not required to make TOPO, TOPO Plus Orders, PHLX Orders and
PHLX Depth of Market data feed available or to offer specific pricing
alternatives for potential purchases. Phlx can discontinue offering a
pricing alternative (as it has in the past) and firms can discontinue
their use at any time and for any reason (as they often do), including
due to their assessment of the reasonableness of fees charged. Phlx
continues to establish and revise pricing policies aimed at increasing
fairness and equitable allocation of fees among Subscribers. If the
market deems the proposed fees to be unfair or inequitable, firms can
diminish or discontinue their use of this data.
    Phlx believes that periodically it must adjust TOPO, TOPO Plus
Orders, PHLX Orders and PHLX Depth of Market data feed Enterprise Data
Subscriber fees to reflect market forces. Given that this fee change
represents the first Professional and Non-Professional Subscriber price
change to TOPO, TOPO Plus Orders, PHLX Orders and PHLX Depth of Market
data products, Phlx believes it is an appropriate time to adjust these
fees to more accurately reflect the investments made to enhance this
product through capacity upgrades and data sets added. This also
reflects that the market for TOPO, TOPO Plus Orders, PHLX Orders and
PHLX Depth of Market data feed information is highly competitive and
continually evolves as products develop and change.

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

    Phlx does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. To the contrary,
the market for options orders and executions is already highly
competitive and Phlx's proposal is itself pro-competitive in several
ways. First, TOPO, TOPO Plus Orders, PHLX Orders and PHLX Depth of
Market data feed offer a comprehensive, competitive alternative to the
consolidated data OPRA feed for users and situations where consolidated
data is unnecessary. Second, Phlx believes that offering TOPO, TOPO
Plus Orders, PHLX Orders and PHLX Depth of Market data feed will help
attract new Subscribers and new order flow to the Phlx market, thereby
improving execution quality and Phlx's ability to compete in the market
for options order flow and executions.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\12\ At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml ); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2012-145 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2012-145. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2012-145 and should be
submitted on or before January 30, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-00255 Filed 1-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 165 (Monday, August 30, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48302-48304]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18639]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0431]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Tampa Bay, St. Petersburg, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a special local regulation for
certain waters of Tampa Bay, St. Petersburg, FL. This action is
necessary to provide for the safety of race participants, participant
vessels, spectators, and the general public on these navigable waters
near the St. Petersburg Pier during the St. Pete Powerboat Grand Prix
boat race. This rule will establish an enforcement area where all
persons and vessels, except those persons and vessels participating in
the high speed boat race, are prohibited from entering, transiting
through, anchoring in, or remaining within the regulated area without
obtaining permission from the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg or a
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective daily from 8 a.m. until 7 p.m. each day
from September 3, 2021, through September 5, 2021.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2021-0431 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Click on Open Docket
Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Marine Science Technician First Class Michael
Shackleford, U.S. Coast Guard Sector St. Petersburg Prevention
Department; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. Immediate action
is needed to protect persons and property from the potential safety
hazards associated with the power boat race. The NPRM process would
delay the establishment of the temporary special local regulation until
after the date of the event and compromise public safety. We must
establish this temporary special local regulation immediately and lack
sufficient time to provide a reasonable comment period and then
consider those comments before issuing the rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be contrary to the public interest because immediate
action is needed to respond to the potential safety hazards associated
with the power boat race.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70041. The Captain of the St. Petersburg (COTP) has determined that
potential hazards associated with the St. Pete Powerboat Grand Prix,
St. Petersburg, FL will be a safety concern for anyone within cetain
waters adjacent to St. Petersburg Pier. This rule is needed to protect
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters
within the regulated area during the event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary special local regulation daily
from 8:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. each day from September 3, 2021, through
Septenber 5, 2021. The temporary special local regulation will
establish an enforcement area where designated representatives may
control vessel traffic as determined by the prevailing conditions. The
enforcement area will cover all navigable waters of Tampa Bay near the
St. Petersburg Pier inside an area commencing at latitude
27[deg]46'56'' N, 082[deg]36'56'' W, thence to position 27[deg]47'9''
N, 082[deg]34'33'' W, thence to position 27[deg]46'7'' N,
082[deg]34'29'' W, thence to position 27[deg]45'59'' N, 082[deg]37'3''
W, thence to position 27[deg]46'24'' N, 082[deg]37'30'' W, thence back
to the original position, 27[deg]46'56'' N, 082[deg]36'56'' W.
    Persons and vessels may request authorization to enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area by contacting
the COTP St. Petersburg by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated
representative via VHF radio on channel 16. If authorization to enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area is
granted by the COTP St. Petersburg or a designated representative, all
persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the
instructions of the COTP St. Petersburg or a designated representative.
The Coast Guard will provide notice of the temporary special local
regulation by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners,
and/or on-scene designated representatives.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the following
reasons: (1) The special local regulation would be enforced in a small
designated area off of the St. Petersburg Pier for only eleven hours on
three days; (2) although persons and vessels may not enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area without
authorization from the COTP St. Petersburg or a designated
representative, they may operate in the surrounding area during the
enforcement period; (3) persons and vessels may still enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area during the
enforcement period if authorized by the COTP St. Petersburg or a
designated representative; and (4) the Coast Guard will provide advance
notification of the special local regulation to the local maritime
community by Local Notice to Mariners and/or Broadcast Notice to
Mariners.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves the
establishment of a temporary special local regulation related to
organized marine events lasting 11 hours each day for a total of three
days. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph
L(61) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01,
Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this
determination is available in the docket. For instructions on locating
the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70041; 33 CFR 1.05-1.

0
2. Add Sec.  100.T07-0431 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.T07-0431  Special Local Regulations; St. Pete Powerboat Grand
Prix, Tampa Bay; St. Petersburg, FL.

    (a) Location. The following regulated area is a special local
regulation: All waters of Tampa Bay contained within the following
points: 27[deg]46'56'' N, 082[deg]36'56'' W, thence to position
27[deg]47'9'' N, 082[deg]34'33'' W, thence to position 27[deg]46'7'',
N, 082[deg]34'29'' W, thence to position 27[deg]45'59'' N,
082[deg]37'3'' W, thence to position 27[deg]46'24'', N, 082[deg]37'30''
W, thence back to the original position, 27[deg]46'56'' N,
082[deg]36'56'' W. All coordinates are North American Datum 1983.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the COTP
St. Petersburg in the enforcement of the regulated areas.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All non-participant persons and vessels are
prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the race area unless an authorized by the COTP St.
Petersburg or a designated representative.
    (2) Designated representatives may control vessel traffic
throughout the enforcement area as determined by the prevailing
conditions.
    (3) Persons and vessels may request authorization to enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated areas by contacting
the COTP St. Petersburg by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated
representative via VHF radio on channel 16. If authorization is
granted, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization must
comply with the instructions of the COTP St. Petersburg or a designated
representative.
    (4) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by
Local Notice to Mariners and/or Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
    (d) Enforcement period. This rule will be enforced daily from 8
a.m. until 7 p.m., on September 3, 2021 through September 5, 2021.

    Dated: August 24, 2021.
Matthew A. Thompson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port St. Petersburg.
[FR Doc. 2021-18639 Filed 8-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P