              UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)
                            REGION IX AIR DIVISION

                          Technical Support Document
                                      for
                              EPA's Rulemaking
                                    for the
                  California State Implementation Plan (SIP)

        San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District's
            Rule 4905, Natural-Gas-Fired, Fan-Type Central Furnaces

                            Prepared by: Kevin Gong

	October 5, 2015

Agency:	San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD or the District)

SIP Approved Rule:	Adopted November 20, 2005, approved into the SIP May 30, 2007, 72 FR 29886

Subject of this TSD:	SJVUAPCD Rule 4905 Natural-Gas-Fired, Fan-Type Central Furnaces
                         Submitted version amended January 22, 2015
                         Submitted to EPA April 7, 2015

RULE SUMMARY
Rule 4905 establishes oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emission limits from natural-gas fired fan-type central furnaces. NOx is a precursor to both ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5).

This is a point-of-sale rule that applies to all home and commercial furnaces with a rated heat capacity of less than 175,000 British thermal units per hour (BTU/hr), or combination heating and cooling units with a cooling rate of less than 65,000 BTU/hr.

The 2015 amendments expand applicability to include equivalent furnaces for commercial buildings and furnaces for manufactured homes, strengthen NOx limits on newly installed furnaces, allow for a 300 day sell-through period following the compliance date for furnaces complying with the old limit but not the new limit for each furnace category, and establish an emissions fee option for manufacturers through a 36 month period following the compliance date.

The District estimates that 2.1 tons per day of NOx emissions reductions will be achieved upon full turnover of all furnaces to compliant units in 2036, according to the emission reduction analysis for these amendments.

Other rule provisions include definitions, allowable test methods and procedures, certification procedures for furnaces, and records requirements for manufacturers.

EVALUATION CRITERIA
The following criteria were used to evaluate the submitted rule.

1.	Enforceability
	Section 110(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that the rule be enforceable. The Bluebook (Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations, EPA, May 25, 1988) and the Little Bluebook (Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001) were used to help evaluate compliance with this requirement.

      2.	Stringency
      	Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA requires nonattainment areas to implement all reasonably available control measures (RACM), including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology (RACT), as expeditiously as practicable. In addition, ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above must require RACT for all major sources of NOx (CAA § 182(f); 40 CFR § 51.912(a)).

      SJVUAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area that is classified as an Extreme nonattainment area for the 1-hour and 1997 and 2008 8-hour Standards (40 CFR § 81.305). Rule 4905 regulates area sources that are too small to exceed the major source threshold of 10 tons per year for Extreme ozone nonattainment areas (see CAA § 182(e) and (f)) and is therefore not subject to major source ozone RACT requirements under CAA section 182(b)(2) and (f). Nonetheless, SCAQMD must implement all RACM/RACT for NOx necessary to demonstrate attainment as expeditiously as practicable and to meet any reasonable further progress (RFP) requirements (CAA § 172(c)(1), 40 CFR §§ 51.912(d), 51.1112(c)) .

      SJVUAPCD also regulates a PM2.5 nonattainment area that is classified as a Moderate for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard and Serious for the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards  (40 CFR § 81.305). CAA sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C) require Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment areas to implement RACM, including RACT, as expeditiously as possible. Therefore, SJVUAPCD must implement RACM, including RACT, for PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors. EPA has interpreted the RACM/RACT requirement under 189(a)(1)(C) to include control measures that are technologically and economically feasible and not "absurd, unenforceable, or impracticable" (see, e.g., 57 FR 13560, 80 FR 15372). Additional control measures for natural gas-fired furnaces may be required pursuant to CAA section 172(c)(1) if those additional measures are reasonably available and either: the area cannot practicably attain by the statutory attainment date, or additionally reasonably available measures will advance attainment in the area when considered collectively (see, e.g., 80 FR 15375-76).

      SJVUAPCD also regulates a Serious nonattainment area for the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards (40 CFR § 81.305). CAA section 189(b)(1)(B) requires serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas to implement best available control measures (BACM), including best available control technology (BACT), within 4 years after reclassification of the area to serious. Therefore, SJVUAPCD must implement BACM, including BACT, for PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors. BACM represents a more stringent and potentially more costly level of control than RACM (see, e.g., 80 FR 15405), so a separate analysis for PM2.5 RACM beyond that for BACM is not necessary.

      3.	SIP Revisions
      	CAA section 110(l) prohibits EPA from approving any SIP revision that would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP) or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. In addition, CAA section 193 prohibits the modification of any SIP-approved control requirement in effect before November 15, 1990, in a nonattainment area.

      4.	Economic Incentive Programs (EIPs)
      	EPA's guidance (Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs, EPA-452/R/01-01-002, January 2001) outlines key principles that must be incorporated in an EIP in order for the EIP to be approved into a SIP. Emission reductions generated through implementation of EIPs must be surplus, quantifiable, enforceable, and permanent, among other requirements.

EPA EVALUATION
A summary of our evaluation of the four criteria follows.

      1. 	Enforceability
      	The certification process, identification requirements for compliant and non-compliant units (the latter of which are allowed to be stored in the District for sale elsewhere), and enforcement mechanisms in this point of sale rule are clear. Table 1 of the rule outlines the more stringent emission limits for four categories of furnaces, and their respective compliance dates. The addition of the emission fee option to Rule 4905 is evaluated below as an EIP.

      2. 	Stringency

      	PM2.5 RACM/RACT and BACM/BACT

      	SJVUAPCD asserts that Rule 4905 implements BACM for PM2.5 because it is the most stringent rule in the country for this source category. In particular, SJVUACPD compared Rule 4905 to similar natural gas-fired furnace rules in other jurisdictions (South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1111, Bay Area Air Quality Management District Regulation 9 Rule 4, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Rule 414) and found no requirements that were more stringent than those already in Rule 4905. We agree with SJVUAPCD that Rule 4905 implements BACM/BACT for PM2.5 for natural gas-fired furnaces for the following reasons:

 The NOx emission limit for new furnaces is comparable to, or more stringent than other limits in similar rules found in other jurisdictions such as Bay Area Air Quality Management District Regulation 9, Rule 4, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Rule 414, and South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1111.

 This rule's development was a part of a technology forcing effort (in partnership with the South Coast Air Quality Management District) to assess and support the development of new furnace designs with lower NOx emissions rates compared to what was then commercially available. We are not aware of any other efforts to develop applicable furnace technologies that have suggested currently feasible lower emission units.

 EPA has not issued a Control Techniques Guideline for furnaces covered by this rule, and we are not aware of any other federal, state or local regulations or guidance suggesting more stringent requirements for these sources have been demonstrated to be technically and economically feasible.

 The District calculated the absolute cost effectiveness (total annual cost for compliance compared to total emissions reductions) to be between $30,590 and $40,808 per ton of NOx reduced. Neither SJVUAPCD nor we are aware of any other technology or furnace type that could serve as an alternative to natural gas-fired fan-driven central furnaces in a home heating application while emitting similar levels of NOx.

      	Ozone RACM/RACT

      	We believe that Rule 4905 implements all reasonably available controls for NOx emissions for natural gas-fired furnaces for the same reasons noted in our PM2.5 BACM/BACT evaluation.

      3. 	SIP Revisions
      	There is a previous version of Rule 4905 in the California SIP, approved by the EPA in 2007.

      	The 2015 amendments expand applicability to include additional classifications of natural gas-fired furnaces, and strengthen the emission limits for all classes of furnaces to eventually reach 14 nanograms per Joule of NOx by 2018. A sell-through provision allows units that were manufactured before the applicable compliance date to be sold within the district for 300 days following the compliance date, as listed in Table 2 of the rule, if they meet the old emission limit of 40 nanograms per Joule of NOx. In addition, the 2015 amendments allow the sale of non-compliant units after the applicable compliance date in exchange for the payment by the manufacturer of an emissions fee for each non-compliant unit sold, if they meet the old emission limit of 40 nanograms per Joule of NOx. This mitigation fee option for the sale of noncompliant units effectively extends compliance deadlines by 36 months.

       	Our EIP analysis in section 4 below further evaluates this provision. However, this provision does not constitute a SIP "relaxation" as the new emission limits are more stringent that the current SIP-approved requirements, and the existing 40 nanograms per Joule limit will still be in effect during the mitigation fee period.

      	We propose to determine that our approval of the submittal would comply with CAA sections 110(l) and 193 because the proposed SIP revision strengthens the SIP and would not interfere with the on-going process for ensuring that requirements for RFP and attainment of the NAAQS are met and would not weaken any SIP control requirement that was in effect before November 15, 1990.

      4.	Economic Incentive Programs
      	The CAA explicitly allows states to use EIPs as measures in SIPs (see, e.g. CAA § 110(a)(2)(A)). The mitigation fee option in Rule 4905 falls under the definition of "financial mechanism program," which is a type of EIP. See 2001 EIP Guidance Section 8. However, SJVUAPCD and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have not relied on emission reductions from the rule until after expiration of the mitigation fee option. In particular, CARB's review of the District's "2015 Plan for the 1997 PM 2.5 Standard" indicates that the District intends to claim reductions from this rule starting in 2018 (0.2 tons per day of winter average NOx in 2018).  This corresponds to the expiration of the mitigation fee options for non-weatherized units in non-manufactured homes, which the District expects to comprise the vast majority of sales in the District.  Since reductions are not credited to this rule until the mitigation fee option for these categories of furnaces expires, we do not need to ensure that the reductions associated with the mitigation fee are surplus, quantifiable, enforceable and permanent. Accordingly, we have not evaluated Rule 4905 with respect to these principles.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE NEXT RULE REVISION
We have no recommendations for the next rule revision.

EPA ACTION  - The submitted Rule 4905 strengthens the SIP and fulfils other relevant CAA requirements. EPA staff recommends the approval of Rule 4905 into the California SIP.

REFERENCES

1.	San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Rule 4905, Natural-Gas-Fired Fan-Type Central Furnaces, January 22, 2015.

2.	Letter dated April 7 2015, from Richard Corey, Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, with enclosures including "SJVUAPCD Final Staff Report  -  Amendments to Rule 4905" and other SIP submittal documents.

3.	"Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs," January 2001 (EPA-452/R-01-001).

4.	Bay Area Air Quality Management District Regulation 9, Rule 4, "Nitrogen Oxides From Fan Type Residential Central Furnaces," December 7, 1983.

5.	Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, Rule 414, "Water Heaters, Boilers, and Process Heaters Rated Less Than 1,000,000 BTU per Hour," March 25, 2010.

6.	South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1111, "Reduction of NOx Emissions From Natural-Gas-Fired, Fan-Type Central Furnaces," September 5, 2014.

6.	Letter dated June 25, 2015, from Richard Corey, Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, with enclosures including "2015 Plan for the 1997 PM2.5 Standard," "Staff Report  -  ARB Review of San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 State Implementation Plan" and other SIP submittal documents.


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 96 (Monday, May 19, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28607-28612]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11211]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0760; FRL-9909-91-R04]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
Florida: New Source Review--Prevention of Significant Deterioration

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve a revision to the Florida State Implementation Plan
(SIP), submitted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP), Division of Air Resources Management, to EPA on December 19,
2013. The SIP revision modifies Florida's New Source Review (NSR)
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting regulations to
provide FDEP with the authority to issue PSD permits governing
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, to establish appropriate emission
thresholds for determining which new stationary sources and
modifications to existing stationary sources become subject to
Florida's PSD permitting requirements for their GHG emissions, and to
facilitate the implementation of GHG Plantwide Applicability Limits
(PALs) by allowing consideration of GHG PALs in determining whether
GHGs are ``subject to regulation.'' The changes to Florida's
regulations also update Florida's SIP to incorporate provisions
addressing issuance of GHG PALs on a carbon dioxide equivalent
(CO2e) basis. EPA is taking final action to approve
Florida's December 19, 2013 SIP revision because it is in accordance
with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA regulations regarding the
PSD permitting program. Concurrent with this final approval, EPA is
rescinding the GHG PSD Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for Florida
that was put in place on December 30, 2010, to ensure the availability
of a permitting authority for GHG permitting in Florida.

DATES: This rule is effective May 19, 2014.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0760. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding the Florida
SIP, contact Ms. Twunjala Bradley, Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Bradley's telephone number is (404)
562-9352; email address: bradley.twunjala@epa,gov. For information
regarding Region 4 NSR and GHG permitting, contact Ms. Yolanda Adams,
Air Permits Section, at the same address above. Ms. Adams' telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For
Information regarding EPA's GHG SIP Call or FIP, contact Ms. Cheryl
Vetter, Air Quality Policy Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (C504-03), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
facsimile number:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. This Action
III. Effective Date of This Action
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Florida's December 19, 2013 SIP revision provides the State the
authority to regulate GHG \1\ emissions under its PSD program and
establishes appropriate emission thresholds for determining which new
stationary sources and modification projects become subject to PSD
permitting requirements for their GHG emissions as promulgated in the
GHG Tailoring Rule, 75 FR 31514 (June 3, 2010).\2\ These GHG PSD
applicability provisions became State effective on October 23, 2013.
Additionally, Florida's December 19, 2013 submission reflects the fact
that Florida has updated State law to incorporate by reference \3\
certain changes made to 40 CFR part 52 related to the implementation of
GHG PALs that were promulgated in EPA's July 12, 2012, Step 3 GHG
Tailoring Rule.\4\ This change to state law results in an update to the
incorporation by reference of the portions of 40 CFR 52.21 cited in
Florida's existing SIP-approved PAL regulations, such that those
provisions now include provisions of 40 CFR 52.21 that, among other
things, address issuance of GHG PALs on a CO2e basis in
addition to the available mass-basis. EPA's final approval of Florida's
December 19, 2013 SIP revision includes approval of Florida's GHG PSD
Permit Transition Plan, under which

EPA will transfer existing EPA-issued GHG permits for Florida sources
to Florida for administration and enforcement. Florida's Transition
Plan also included that EPA would retain PSD permit implementation
authority (under 40 CFR 52.21) for pending GHG permit applications,
draft permits, and final permits for which final agency action has not
been taken or for which all administrative and judicial appeals
processes pursuant to 40 CFR part 124 (including any associated remand
actions) have not been completed by the effective date of today's final
action. However, because there are no such GHG PSD permits (as describe
above) before EPA for review or process, this portion of Florida's GHG
Transition Plan (the management of pending GHG PSD projects) is no
longer applicable. Therefore, EPA is not taking final action to retain
implementation authority (under 40 CFR 52.21) for pending GHG permit
applications, draft permits, and final permits for which final agency
action has not been taken or for which all administrative and judicial
appeals processes pursuant to 40 CFR part 124 (including any associated
remand actions) have not been completed by the effective date of
today's final action. Florida will assume full responsibility for the
administration and implementation of such GHG PSD permits immediately
upon notification from EPA that all administrative and judicial appeals
processes and any associated remand actions have been completed or
concluded for any such permit application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Throughout this document, where appropriate, EPA will use
the acronyms ``GHG'' and ``GHGs'' to express the term greenhouse gas
or greenhouse gases, respectively.
    \2\ ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule,'' 75 FR 31514 (June 3,
2010) (GHG Tailoring Rule).
    \4\ ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V
Operating Permit Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Tailoring Rule Step 3 and GHG
Plantwide Applicability Limits,'' 77 FR 41051 (July 12, 2012) (Step
3 GHG Tailoring Rule). Step 3 of the Tailoring Rule included
revisions to the regulations at 40 CFR 52.21 that allow GHG PALs
under those regulations to be established on a CO2e basis
in addition to the previously available mass basis and allow a GHG-
only source to obtain a GHG PAL under those regulations while still
maintaining its minor source status, so long as it complies with its
PAL and its GHG emissions remain below the PAL. See 77 FR 41051.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 30, 2010, EPA promulgated a GHG PSD FIP for Florida
(among other states/areas) to ensure the availability of a permitting
authority for GHGs where no authority was available.\5\ See 75 FR
82246. Concurrent with this final approval, EPA is rescinding the GHG
PSD FIP for Florida at 40 CFR 52.37 that was put in place on December
30, 2010, to ensure EPA was the GHG permitting authority in the State
of Florida.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Federal Implementation Plan,'' 75 FR 82246
(December 30, 2010) (GHG PSD FIP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Detailed background information for today's final rule including
EPA's national actions pertaining to PSD permitting of sources of GHGs
is provided in EPA's January 7, 2014, proposed rulemaking. See 79 FR
778. Comments on the proposed rulemaking were due on or before February
6, 2014, and EPA received one comment on the proposed rulemaking. The
comment received was related to the use of E15 (15 percent ethanol) in
gasoline for motorcycles and is irrelevant to EPA's action to approve
Florida's December 19, 2013 SIP revision to adopt PSD permitting
provisions to regulate GHG-emitting sources in the State. Therefore,
EPA need not provide a response to this comment for today's final
rulemaking. Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is now taking final
action to approve the changes to Florida's NSR PSD program as submitted
in its December 19, 2013 SIP revision, and to rescind the GHG FIP for
Florida at 40 CFR 52.37(b)(3).

II. This Action

    EPA is taking final action to approve Florida's December 19, 2013
SIP revision to adopt the Federal PSD permitting requirements related
to the regulation of GHG-emitting sources. Florida's NSR permitting
program is based on the application of the term ``PSD pollutant'' at
Rule 62-210.200(234), F.A.C. Florida previously defined ``PSD
pollutant'' \6\ as any pollutant listed as having a ``significant
emission rate'' as defined in Rule 62-210.200. Chapter 62-210, F.A.C.
entitled ``Stationary Sources--General Requirements,'' contains
definitions of terms (at Rule 62-210.200, F.A.C.) used in Chapter 62-
212, F.A.C.,\7\ as well as other stationary source rules. Florida's
December 19, 2013 SIP submission revises the definition of ``PSD
pollutant'' at 62-210.200 to incorporate the term ``regulated NSR
pollutant'' as defined in 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50), which in turn references
the term ``subject to regulation'' (defined at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)).
The definition of ``subject to regulation'' at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)
specifies the circumstances under which GHGs are considered subject to
regulation and therefore regulated under the PSD program. The term
``subject to regulation'' in turn references the PAL provisions at
52.21(aa)(1) through (15) and, as explained in more detail below, would
allow consideration of GHG PALs in determining whether GHGs are
``subject to regulation.'' In relevant part, Florida's revised
definition of ``PSD pollutant'' provides:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Florida adopted into its SIP the term ``PSD pollutant''
(which references significant emissions rate) to replace the term
``NSR Pollutant'' at Rule 62-210.200, F.A.C. as part of its February
3, 2006, SIP submission to adopt the 2002 NSR Reform permitting
provisions. See 73 FR 36435 (June 27, 2008). At that time, FDEP
provided EPA with an equivalency demonstration establishing the
definitions of ``PSD pollutant'' and ``significant emissions rate''
as being equivalent to the Federal definition of ``regulated NSR
pollutant'' since they included all pollutants for which a national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) had been promulgated, all
precursors for such pollutants which had been identified by the
Administrator, all pollutants subject to standards promulgated under
section 111 of the Act, and all pollutants regulated under the Act.
Florida's definitions however lacked the catch-all phrase ``subject
to regulation,'' which is part of the Federal definition of
``regulated NSR pollutant.'' Florida explained that if any new
pollutant or precursor subsequently became ``subject to
regulation,'' Florida would revise its SIP to include such new
pollutant or precursor soon thereafter.
    \7\ Chapter 62-210, F.A.C., also establishes general permitting,
public notice, reporting, and permit application requirements.
Chapter 62-212, F.A.C., entitled ``Stationary Sources--
Preconstruction Review'' contains specific preconstruction
permitting requirements for various types of air construction
permits, including minor source permits, PSD permits, nonattainment
new source review permits, and PALs permits. Rule 62-212.400, F.A.C.
contains the State's PSD preconstruction review program as required
under part C of title I of the CAA. The PSD program applies to major
stationary sources or modifications constructing in areas that are
designated as attainment or unclassifiable with respect to the
NAAQS.

    62-210.200--PSD pollutant--(a) Any pollutant listed as having a
significant emission rate as defined in Rule 62-210.200, F.A.C.; and
(b) Any Regulated NSR Pollutant as defined at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)
and as adopted and incorporated by reference at Rule 62-204.800,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.A.C.

    As provided in the December 19, 2013 SIP submission, Florida's
amendment to ``PSD pollutant'' to include the phrase ``Any Regulated
NSR Pollutant'' as defined at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50) does not, in and of
itself, provide Florida the authority to regulate GHGs in its PSD
program. Florida's State Rule 62-204.800, F.A.C., incorporation by
reference the relevant section of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
(including 40 CFR 52.21) into the Florida regulations, as well as
specified amendments thereto.\8\ To ``activate'' the applicability of a
Federal rule within Florida's regulations, the state references Rule
62-204.800, F.A.C. within the state regulations (such as 62-
210.200).\9\ The previous incorporation by reference of Federal
provisions at 40 CFR 52.21 into State Rule 62-204.800, F.A.C. predated
EPA's adoption of the GHG Tailoring Rule and the Step 3 GHG Tailoring
Rule. In order for the incorporation by reference of EPA's updated
definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50) to be

applicable in Florida's regulations, FDEP amended State Rule
62.204.800, F.A.C., to incorporation by reference 40 CFR 52.21, Subpart
A as of July 1, 2011, and as amended on July 12, 2012 at 77 FR 41051.
This amendment to Rule 62-204.800 became state effective on December
17, 2013.\10\ This change incorporates into the F.A.C. the applicable
GHG regulations established in the GHG Tailoring Rule and ensures that
the provisions of 40 CFR 52.21 incorporated into Florida's regulations
reflect revisions in the PALs program to address GHGs that were
finalized in the Step 3 GHG Tailoring Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ When FDEP incorporates by reference a Federal regulation,
any subsequent change to the Federal CFR is not automatically
incorporated into Florida's rules. See Section 120.54(1)(i)1., F.S.
(``A rule may incorporate material by reference but only as the
material exists on the date the rule is adopted.'').
    \9\ The incorporation by reference of the CFR (such as 40 CFR
52.21) at 62-204.800 does not by itself make those regulations
applicable within Florida's SIP regulations; it's the actual
reference to State Rule 62-204.800 within Florida regulations that
makes the Federal regulation applicable. In other words, Rule 62-
204.800, F.A.C., is the mechanism Florida uses to make specific
Federal requirements applicable within SIP-approved regulations.
    \10\ Florida's Rule 62-204.800, F.A.C., is a state law.
Therefore the amendment to update the incorporation by reference
date for 40 CFR 52.21 at 62-204.800 is not part of the State's
December 19, 2013 SIP revision. However, as noted, without it the
reference to 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50) in the definition of ``PSD
pollutant'' would be referring to an older version of 40 CFR 52.21
which did not include the GHG Tailoring Rule's regulatory amendments
for regulated NSR pollutant and the inclusion of ``subject to
regulation'' (nor the Step 3 GHG Tailoring Rule)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to ensuring that Florida's definition of ``PSD
pollutant'' incorporates the EPA's updated definition of ``regulated
NSR pollutant,'' Florida's updated incorporation by reference of 40 CFR
52.21 in State Rule 62-204.800, F.A.C. results in an update to the
incorporation by reference of portions of 40 CFR 52.21 cited in
Florida's existing SIP-approved PAL regulations in Florida's PSD Rule
62-212.720, F.A.C.\11\ This update incorporates changes made to 40 CFR
52.21 promulgated in the July 12, 2012 Step 3 GHG Tailoring Rule. Step
3 of the Tailoring Rule finalized revisions to the regulations at 40
CFR 52.21 to enable the establishment of GHG PALs on a CO2e
basis in addition to the available mass-basis and to allow a GHG-only
source to apply for a GHG PAL while still maintaining its minor source
status. See 77 FR 41051 and 79 FR 778.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ EPA initially adopted the PAL regulations into the Florida
SIP on June 27, 2008, at Rule 62-212.720, F.A.C., as part of the
State's February 3, 2006, SIP submission to adopt the 2002 NSR
Reform permitting provisions (which established the PALs
provisions). See 73 FR 36435. In relevant part, Florida's
regulations at 62-212.720, F.A.C., incorporation by reference
specific provisions from EPA's PAL rules at 40 CFR 52.21(aa),
adopted by reference in Rule 62-204.800, F.A.C. The relevant portion
of the updated version of Florida's Rule 62-204.800, F.A.C., states:
``(3) Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 52, Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans. The following subparts of 40
CFR Part 52, revised as of July 1, 2003, or later as specifically
indicated, are adopted and incorporated by reference: (a) 40 CFR
Part 52, Subpart A, General Provisions; revised as of July 1, 2011
(https://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-03499), or
later as specifically indicated, are adopted and incorporated by
reference; amended July 12, 2012, at 77 FR 41051 (https://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-03489); amended October
25, 2012, at 77 FR 65107 (https://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-03486); amended January 15, 2013, at 78 FR 3085
(https://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-03487).'' The
July 12, 2012 amendments at 77 FR 41051 are those made under the
Step 3 GHG Tailoring Rule described earlier in this preamble. See
also 77 FR 41051. Therefore, the specific provisions of 40 CFR 52.21
that are incorporated into Florida's regulations include any
amendments made as part of the Step 3 Tailoring Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, taken together, Florida's amendment to the definition of
``PSD pollutant'' at Rule 62-210.200, F.A.C., and its update to the
incorporation by reference of 40 CFR 52.21 in State Rule 62-204.800
provide Florida the authority to regulate GHG under the PSD program,
establish in the Florida SIP the thresholds for GHG permitting
promulgated in the GHG Tailoring Rule, and update provisions previously
incorporated into Florida's regulations to reflect the revisions
relating to GHG PALs promulgated in the Step 3 GHG Tailoring Rule.
    As discussed in EPA's January 7, 2014, proposed rulemaking, Florida
included a GHG PSD Permit Transition Plan in its December 19, 2013 SIP
submission. See GHG Transition Plan in Appendix B of Florida's December
19, 2013 submission in the docket using Docket ID: EPA-R04-OAR-2013-
0760. Under the plan, FDEP would exercise its authority to administer
and enforce GHG PSD permits issued by EPA under its FIP to sources
located in the State of Florida.\12\ Pursuant to the criteria under
section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) of the CAA, EPA has determined that Florida has
the authority, personnel, and funding to implement the PSD program for
GHGs for existing EPA-issued permits. Therefore, concurrent with EPA's
approval of Florida's December 19, 2013 GHG SIP revision, EPA will
transfer existing EPA-issued GHG permits for Florida sources to FDEP
for administration and enforcement.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ This includes authority for the general administration of
these existing permits, authority to process and issue any and all
subsequent PSD permit actions relating to such permits including,
but not limited to, modifications, amendments, or revisions of any
nature, and the authority to enforce such permits.
    \13\ At the time this final rulemaking was published, EPA Region
4 had issued four, final and effective GHG PSD permits for Florida
sources for Florida Power & Light Company (FPL)--Port Everglades
Plant (Permit PSD-EPA-R4010), Tampa Electric Company--Polk Power
Station (Permit PSD-EPA-R4014), EFS Shady Hills LLC--Shady Hills
Generating Station (Permit PSD-EPA-R4013) and New Hope (Permit PSD-
EPA-R4016). EPA has provided FDEP with a copy of these permits and
will provide a copy of the permit records upon request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In EPA's January 7, 2014 rulemaking the Agency proposed to retain
GHG PSD permit implementation authority at 40 CFR 52.530 for pending
applications, draft permits, and final permits for which final agency
action had not been taken or for which all administrative and judicial
appeals processes pursuant to 40 CFR part 124 (including any associated
remand actions).\14\ See 79 FR 778 at 783. However, since publication
of EPA's proposed rule, the administrative and procedural status of
Florida GHG PSD permits have changed resulting in four final GHG PSD
permits being issued and three permits withdrawn by the respective
facilities. Therefore at the time of finalization of this rulemaking,
no such GHG PSD permits in various stages described above were before
EPA for review. For that reason, the retaining of GHG PSD permit
implementation authority at 40 CFR 52.530 is no longer relevant nor
required. Therefore, EPA is not taking final action to retain
implementation authority at 40 CFR 52.51 for pending applications,
draft permits, and final permits for which final agency action had not
been taken or for which all administrative and judicial appeals
processes pursuant to 40 CFR part 124 (including any associated remand
actions). EPA is not altering FDEP's original GHG Transition Plan but
rather adapting to the current circumstances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ In FDEP's GHG Transition Plan the State indicated that EPA
would retain GHG PSD permit implementation authority for pending
applications and/or permits or final permits (not yet effective) in
various stages of process and review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned above and as a result of this approval, EPA is
rescinding the GHG PSD FIP for Florida codified at 40 CFR 52.37(b)(3)
that was put in place on December 30, 2010, to ensure EPA was the
applicable permitting authority for GHG permitting in Florida. This GHG
FIP is no longer necessary since approval of Florida's December 19,
2013 SIP revision establishes PSD applicability thresholds for GHG
emissions at the same emissions thresholds and in the same timeframes
as those specified by EPA in the GHG Tailoring Rule, giving FDEP the
authority to regulate GHG-emitting sources and to issue GHG PSD
permits. Therefore, this final action removes Florida from the GHG FIP
list at 40 CFR 52.37(b)(3). Upon the effective date of today's final
rulemaking to approve the Florida's December 19, 2013 SIP revision,
FDEP will immediately assume full responsibility for new GHG PSD
applications for Florida sources. As such, new applications will be
submitted to and processed by FDEP's Division of Air Resource
Management.

III. Effective Date of This Action

    EPA is making May 19, 2014 the effective date of today's final
action. In

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d), EPA finds there is good cause for this
action to become effective on May 19, 2014. The May 19, 2014, effective
date for this action is authorized under both 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which
provides that rulemaking actions may become effective less than 30 days
after and section 553(d)(3), which allows an effective date less than
30 days after publication ``as otherwise provided by the agency for
good cause found and published with the rule.'' The purpose of the 30-
day waiting period prescribed in section 553(d) is to give affected
parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior and prepare before,
the final rule takes effect. Today's rule, however, does not create any
new regulatory requirements such that affected parties would need time
to prepare before the rule takes effect. Rather, today's final rule
provides Florida with the authority to regulate GHG-emitting sources
making FDEP the sole PSD permitting authority in the State.
Additionally, an immediate effective date would promote an orderly
transition of the GHG PSD program from the EPA to Florida, the
efficient use of Florida's and EPA's resources, and certainty for the
regulated community and the public. For this reason, EPA finds good
cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for this action to become effective May
19, 2014.

IV. Final Action

    Florida's December 19, 2013 SIP revision amends the State's
definition of ``PSD pollutant'' to provide Florida with the authority
to regulate GHG under its PSD program, to establish PSD applicability
thresholds for GHG emissions at the same emissions thresholds and in
the same timeframes as those specified by EPA in the GHG Tailoring
Rule, and to facilitate the implementation of GHG PALs by allowing
consideration of GHG PALs in determining whether GHGs are ``subject to
regulation.'' The changes to Florida's regulations also update
Florida's SIP to incorporate provisions addressing issuance of GHG PALs
on a CO2e basis. EPA has made the determination that
Florida's December 19, 2013 SIP revision is consistent with EPA's PSD
regulations for GHG-emitting sources as promulgated in the GHG
Tailoring Rule, Step 3 GHG Tailoring Rule and section 110 of the CAA.
Therefore, EPA is taking final action to approve Florida's December 19,
2013 SIP submission.
    EPA is also taking final action to rescind the Florida GHG PSD FIP
at 40 CFR 52.37(b)(3). EPA's approval of Florida's December 19, 2013
SIP revision includes approval of FDEP's GHG PSD Permit Transition
Plan, under which EPA will transfer existing EPA-issued GHG permits for
Florida sources to Florida for administration and enforcement. However,
EPA is not taking final action to retain PSD permit implementation
authority at 40 CFR 52.530 for pending GHG permit applications, draft
permits, and final permits for which final agency action has not been
taken or for which all administrative and judicial appeals processes
pursuant to 40 CFR part 124 (including any associated remand actions)
have not been completed by the effective date of today's final action
because there are currently no such GHG PSD permits before the agency
for review. Additionally, EPA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)
for this action to become effective May 19, 2014. Upon the effective
date of today's final rulemaking to approve the Florida's December 19,
2013 SIP revision, FDEP will immediately assume full responsibility for
new GHG PSD applications for Florida sources. As such, new applications
will be submitted to and processed by FDEP's Division of Air Resource
Management.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
because this SIP approval and FIP rescission under section 110 and part
C of the CAA will not in-and-of itself create any new information
collection burdens but simply transfers the permitting authority from
EPA to the State. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). Because this
final action does not impose an information collection burden, the
Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to
conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice
and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies that
the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
    This rule will transfer GHG PSD permitting responsibility from EPA
to the State of Florida. This final rule applies to large GHG emitters
that tend to be large sources. Further, this rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because
SIP approvals under section 110 and part C of the CAA do not create any
new requirements but simply approve existing requirements in State law.
The result of this final action simply is to transfer authority to
administer the PSD program for GHGs from EPA to the State of Florida.
The substantive requirement for a source to obtain a PSD permit prior
to construction of a new major source of GHGs or modification of an
existing major source that will significantly increase GHGs is not
changed by this final action. After considering the economic impacts of
this rule on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This final rule will not impose any new requirements on small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for State, local, or tribal governments or the private
sector. This action imposes no additional enforceable duty on any
State, local or tribal governments or the private sector beyond that
required by state law. Therefore, this action is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA.
    This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203
of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action
transfers permitting responsibility of GHG emissions from

EPA to the State of Florida. Small governments are not impacted.

E. Executive Order 13132--Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on Florida, on the relationship between the
national government and the State of Florida, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. The CAA specifies conditions under
which states may request, and EPA may approve state implementation of
CAA requirements. This rulemaking approves PSD permitting provisions in
the State of Florida for GHG emissions, and as a consequence of the SIP
approval, simultaneously rescinds Federal PSD permitting responsibility
for GHG emissions in Florida. This rulemaking is pursuant to the SIP
approval and requirements of the CAA. As such, this final rule does not
change the balance of power between Florida and EPA as provided for in
the CAA. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicited comment on the proposed action
from State and local officials. EPA received no comments from state or
local governments on this rulemaking.

F. Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). In this action,
EPA is not addressing any Tribal Implementation Plans. This action is
limited to Florida's SIP related to GHG PSD permitting. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying
only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks,
such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the EO has the
potential to influence the regulation. This action is not subject to EO
13045 because EPA is approving revisions to the Florida PSD SIP for
permitting of GHG emissions, as authorized by the CAA.

H. Executive Order 13211--Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This action
does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA did not consider
the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

J. Executive Order 12898--Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not alter
the level of protection provided to human health or the environment by
the PSD program. Rather, the result of this final action is to transfer
authority over the administration of CAA requirements governing PSD
permitting for GHGs from EPA to the State of Florida. This transfer of
authority will not have any disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects on any population, including any
minority or low-income population. This final rule approves the Florida
SIP as meeting Federal requirements for GHG PSD permitting and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by Florida law.

K. Congressional Review Act

    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 action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule 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).

L. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by July 18, 2014. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See CAA section 307(b)(2); 5 U.S.C.
7607(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Greenhouse gas, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic
compounds.

    Dated: May 1, 2014.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator, U.S. EPA.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--General Provisions

Sec.  52.37  [Amended]

0
2. Section 52.37 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (b)(3).

Subpart K--Florida

0
3. Section 52.520(c) is amended under Chapter 62-210 by revising the
entry for ``Section 62-210.200'', by revising the heading for Chapter
62-212, and under Chapter 62-212 by revising the entry for `` ``Section
62-212.720'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.520  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                        EPA-Approved Florida Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        State
      State citation            Title/subject      effective date     EPA Approval date         Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Chapter 62-210 Stationary Sources--General Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
62-210.200...............  Definitions...........        10/23/13  5/19/14 [Insert         As of September 19,
                                                                    citation of             2012, 61-210.200
                                                                    publication].           does not include
                                                                                Florida's revision
                                                                                to adopt the PM2.5
                                                                                SILs threshold and
                                                                                provisions (as
                                                                                promulgated in the
                                                                                October 20, 2010,
                                                                                PM2.5 PSD Increment-
                                                                                SILs-SMC Rule at 40
                                                                                CFR 52.21(k)(2)).

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Chapter 62-212 Stationary Sources--Preconstruction Review
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
62-212.720...............  Actuals Plantwide           12/17/2013  5/19/14 [Insert         As of May 19, 2014
                            Applicability Limits                    citation of             the PAL provisions
                            (PALs).                                 publication].           include certain
                                                                                revisions to 40 CFR
                                                                                52.21 finalized July
                                                                                12, 2012 (Step 3 GHG
                                                                                Tailoring Rule) and
                                                                                relating to GHG
                                                                                PALs, which are
                                                                                incorporated by
                                                                                reference at 62-
                                                                                212.720 through
                                                                                Florida State Rule
                                                                                62.204.800, F.A.C.,
                                                                                (which incorporates
                                                                                by reference 40 CFR
                                                                                52.21, subpart A as
                                                                                of July 1, 2011, and
                                                                                as amended on July
                                                                                12, 2012 at 77 FR
                                                                                41051. December 17,
                                                                                2013.)

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

* * * * *

0
4. Section 52.530 is amended by adding paragraph (b) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.530  Significant deterioration of air quality.

* * * * *
    (b) Pursuant to part C, subpart 1 of the Clean Air Act, EPA is
approving a December 19, 2013 SIP revision submitted by the State of
Florida, through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP), Division of Air Resource Management that establishes prevention
of significant deterioration (PSD) applicability thresholds for
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at the same emissions thresholds and in
the same timeframes as those specified by EPA in the GHG Tailoring
Rule. This approval gives FDEP the authority to regulate GHG-emitting
sources and issue GHG PSD permits. FDEP's December 19, 2013 SIP
revision also includes a GHG PSD Permit Transition Plan which governs
the transition from EPA administering GHG PSD permitting requirements
for Florida sources under a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to the
State administering GHG PSD permitting requirements under its approved
SIP. Under this GHG PSD Permit Transition Plan, FDEP will administer
and enforce GHG PSD permits issued by EPA to Florida sources under the
GHG PSD FIP. FDEP's authority over these existing EPA-issued GHG PSD
permits includes the authority for FDEP to conduct general
administration of these existing permits, authority to process and
issue any and all subsequent permit actions relating to such permits,
and authority to enforce such permits.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-11211 Filed 5-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 243 (Thursday, December 17, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81920-81921]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27798]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP20-479-000]

Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Availability of the
Environmental Assessment for the Proposed 2021 Auburn A-Line
Abandonment and Capacity Replacement Project

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for the 2021
Auburn A-Line Abandonment and Capacity Replacement Project, proposed by
Northern Natural Gas Company (Northern), in the above-referenced
docket. Northern requests authorization to construct, own, and operate
a pipeline loop \1\ and appurtenant aboveground facilities, and
abandon-in-place a segment of its A-line pipeline in Nebraska.
Northern's purpose for the project is to improve reliability, enable
safer long-term operation of Northern's system, and serve the needs of
its shippers more effectively by eliminating inefficiencies associated
with the operation and maintenance of the A-line segment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A loop is a pipeline that is constructed adjacent to another
pipeline for the purpose of increasing capacity in this portion of
the system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the
construction, operation, and abandonment activities associated with the
2021 Auburn A-Line Abandonment and Capacity Replacement Project in
accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). The FERC staff concludes that approval of the proposed
project, with appropriate mitigating measures, would not constitute a
major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment.
    The proposed 2021 Auburn A-Line Abandonment and Capacity
Replacement Project includes the following:
     Construction of approximately 4.4 miles of new 8-inch-
diameter pipeline loop in Lancaster and Otoe Counties, Nebraska
(proposed B-line);
     installation of a pig \2\ launcher and valve station in
Lancaster County, Nebraska;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ A pig is a tool that is inserted into and pushed through the
pipeline for cleaning the pipeline, conducting internal inspections,
or other purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     installation of a regulation station in Otoe County,
Nebraska; and
     abandonment in-place of approximately 31.7 miles of 4- and
6-inch-diameter A-line in Lancaster, Otoe, Johnson, and Nemaha
counties, Nebraska.
    The Commission mailed a copy of the Notice of Availability to
federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies;
elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native
American tribes; potentially affected landowners and other interested
individuals and groups; and newspapers and libraries in the project
area. The EA is only available in electronic format. It may be viewed
and downloaded from the FERC's website (www.ferc.gov), on the natural
gas environmental documents page (https://www.ferc.gov/industries-data/natural-gas/environment/environmental-documents). In addition, the EA
may be accessed by using the eLibrary link on the FERC's website. Click
on the eLibrary link (https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/search),
select General Search and enter the docket number in the Docket Number
field, excluding the last three digits (i.e. CP20-479). Be sure you
have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866)
208-3676, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The EA is not a decision document. It presents Commission staff's
independent analysis of the environmental issues for the Commission to
consider when addressing the merits of all issues in this proceeding.
Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. Your comments should
focus on the EA's disclosure and discussion of potential environmental
effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen
environmental impacts. The more specific your comments, the more useful
they will be. To ensure that the Commission has the opportunity to
consider your comments prior to making its decision on this project, it
is important that we receive your comments in Washington, DC on or
before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on January 11, 2021.
    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to file
your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic
filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-
3676 or [email protected]. Please carefully follow these
instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
FERC Online. This is an easy method for submitting brief, text-only
comments on a project;
    (2) You can also file your comments electronically using the
eFiling feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the
link to FERC Online. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a
variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission.
New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on
eRegister. You must select the type of filing you are making. If you
are filing a comment on a particular project, please select Comment on
a Filing; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the Commission. Be sure to reference the project docket number (CP20-
479) on your letter. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must
be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    Filing environmental comments will not give you intervenor status,
but you do not need intervenor status to have your comments considered.
Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing or judicial review of
the Commission's decision. At this point in this proceeding, the
timeframe for filing timely intervention requests has expired. Any
person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion
to intervene out-of-time pursuant to Rule 214(b)(3) and (d) of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.214(b)(3) and
(d)) and show good cause why the time

limitation should be waived. Motions to intervene are more fully
described at https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/ferc-online/how-guides.
    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. The eLibrary link
also provides access to the texts of all formal documents issued by the
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/overview to
register for eSubscription.

    Dated: December 11, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-27798 Filed 12-16-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: June 6, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 108)]
[Notices]
[Page 32619-32622]
[DOCID:fr06jn06-76]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53879; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2006-03]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change and
Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto To Establish a Public Disclosure Program

May 26, 2006.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on April 6, 2006, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. On May 9, 2006, NYSE Arca filed
Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. On May 17, 2006, NYSE Arca
filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change,
as amended, from interested persons and is approving the proposal on an
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NYSE Arca proposes to implement a new rule, NYSE Arca Rule 10.17,
that would institute and govern a program (``Public Disclosure
Program'') in which certain disciplinary actions involving Option
Trading Permit Holders (``OTP Holders''), Option Trading Permit Firms
(``OTP Firms''), and associated persons thereof would be publicized.
The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new language is
in italics.

Rules of the NYSE Arca, Inc.

* * * * *

Rule 10 Disciplinary Proceedings and Appeals

* * * * *

Release of Disciplinary Information Through the Public Disclosure
Program

    Rule 10.17(a) The Exchange shall, in response to a request, release
a copy of any identified disciplinary decision issued by the Exchange
or any Committee thereof; provided, however, that each copy of:
    (1) A decision that is released prior to the expiration of the time
period provided under NYSE Arca Rule 10.8 for appeal or while such an
appeal is pending shall be accompanied by a statement that the findings
and sanctions imposed in the decision may be increased, decreased,
modified, or reversed by the Exchange;
    (2) A final decision of the Exchange that is released prior to the
time period provided under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for
appeal to the Securities and Exchange Commission or while such an
appeal is pending shall be accompanied by a statement that the findings
and sanctions of the Exchange are subject to review and modification by
the Securities and Exchange Commission; and
    (3) A final decision of the Exchange that is released after the
decision is appealed to the Securities and Exchange Commission shall be
accompanied by a statement as to whether the effectiveness of the
sanctions has been stayed pending the outcome of proceedings before the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
    (b)(1) The Exchange shall release to the public information with
respect to any disciplinary decision issued pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule
10 imposing: (i) A suspension, cancellation or expulsion upon an OTP
Holder or OTP Firm; or (ii) suspension or revocation of the
registration of an associated person of an OTP Holder or OTP Firm; or
(iii) suspension or barring of an OTP Holder or OTP Firm or associated
person from association with all OTP Holders or OTP Firms; or (iv)
imposition of monetary sanctions of $10,000 or more upon an OTP Holder
or OTP Firm or associated person; or (v) containing an allegation of a
violation of a Designated Rule; and may also release to the public such
information with respect to any disciplinary decision or group of
decisions that involve a significant policy or enforcement
determination where the release of information is deemed by the
President of the Exchange to be in the public interest. The Exchange
may, in its discretion, determine to waive the requirement to release
information with respect to a disciplinary decision under those
extraordinary circumstances where the release of such information

would violate fundamental notions of fairness or work as an injustice.
The Exchange may release to the public information on any disciplinary
or other decision issued pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule 10 not specifically
enumerated in this paragraph, regardless of sanctions imposed, so long
as the names of the parties and other identifying information is
redacted.
    A ``Designated Rule'' means (i) SEC Rule 10b-5, (ii) NYSE Arca Rule
11.5, or (iii) NYSE Arca Rule 11.2.
    (A) The Exchange shall release to the public, in unredacted form,
information with respect to any disciplinary decision issued pursuant
to NYSE Arca Rule 10.8 that does not meet one or more of the criteria
in section (b)(1) for the release of information to the public,
provided that the underlying decision issued pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule
10.7 meets one or more of the criteria in section (b)(1) for the
release of information to the public, and information regarding such
decision has been released to the public in unredacted form.
    (B) In the event there is more than one respondent in a
disciplinary decision issued pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule 10 and
sanctions imposed on one or more, but not all, of the respondents meets
one or more of the criteria in section (b)(1) for the release of
information to the public, the Exchange shall release to the public, in
unredacted form, information with respect to the respondent(s) who meet
such criteria, and may release to the public, in redacted form,
information with respect to the respondent(s) who do not meet such
criteria. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Exchange shall release to
the public, in unredacted form, information with respect to any
respondent in a disciplinary decision issued pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule
10.8 if the sanctions imposed on such respondent in the underlying
decision issued pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule 10.7 meet one or more of the
criteria for release of information to the public, and information with
respect to that respondent has been released in unredacted form.
    (2) Information released to the public pursuant to subparagraph
(b)(1) shall be accompanied by a statement to the extent required for
that type of information under subparagraphs (a)(1)-(3).
    (c) Information regarding any sanctions imposed pursuant to NYSE
Arca Rule 10.6 shall be released to the public pursuant to paragraph
(b) immediately upon such approval.
    (d) If a decision of the Exchange imposing monetary sanctions of
$10,000 or more or a penalty of expulsion, revocation, suspension and/
or barring of an OTP Holder or OTP Firm from being associated with all
OTP Holders or OTP Firms is appealed to the Securities and Exchange
Commission, notice thereof shall be given to all OTP Holders and OTP
Firms and to the press as soon as possible after receipt by the
Exchange of notice from the Securities and Exchange Commission of such
appeal and the Exchange's notice shall state whether the effectiveness
of the Exchange's decision has been stayed pending the outcome of
proceedings before the Securities and Exchange Commission.
    (e) In the event an appeal to the Federal courts is filed from a
decision by the Securities and Exchange Commission in a case previously
appealed to it from a decision of the Exchange, involving the
imposition of monetary sanctions of $10,000 or more or a penalty of
expulsion, revocation, suspension and/or barring of an OTP Holder or
OTP Firm from being associated with all OTP Holders or OTP Firms,
notice thereof shall be given to the OTP Holders or OTP Firms as soon
as possible after receipt by the Exchange of a formal notice of appeal.
Such notice shall include a statement whether the order of the
Securities and Exchange Commission has been stayed.
    (f) Any order issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission of
(i) revocation or suspension of an OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's broker/
dealer registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission; or
(ii) the suspension or expulsion of an OTP Holder or OTP Firm from the
Exchange; or (iii) the suspension or barring of an OTP Holder or OTP
Firm or an associated person from association with all broker/dealers
or OTP Holders or OTP Firms; or (iv) the imposition of monetary
sanctions of $10,000 or more shall be released to the public through a
notice containing the effective date thereof sent as soon as possible
after receipt by the Exchange of the order of the Securities and
Exchange Commission.
    (g) Cancellations of Option Trading Permits or registration
pursuant to the Exchange's Rules and interpretative material shall be
released to the public as soon after the effective date of the
cancellation as possible.
    (h) Releases to the public referred to in paragraph (b) above shall
identify the Exchange Rule(s) or the SEC Rule(s) violated, and shall
describe the conduct constituting such violation. Releases may also
identify the OTP Holder or OTP Firm with which an individual was
associated at the time the violations occurred if such identification
is determined by the Exchange to be in the public interest.
* * * * *

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

    In its filing with the Commission, NYSE Arca included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item III below, and is set forth in Sections A, B, and C below.

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

1. Purpose
    Under the proposed Public Disclosure Program, the Exchange would
release to the public certain information concerning the disciplinary
history of OTP Holders, OTP Firms, and associated persons. The Exchange
is instituting such procedures in order to provide investors with
information regarding final disciplinary decisions related to such OTP
Holders, OTP Firms, and associated persons. The primary purpose of the
Public Disclosure Program is to help investors make informed choices
about the individuals and firms with whom they may wish to do business.
Currently, the Exchange does not have rules related to the release of
disciplinary decisions to members of the public. Proposed NYSE Arca
Rule 10.17 would allow the Exchange to release such information upon
request and when certain other circumstances exist, as explained in
greater detail below.
    Disciplinary Decisions. If a member of the public requests a copy
of an identified disciplinary decision issued by the Exchange or any
committee thereof, a copy of the decision will be provided to the
requesting member of the public. The Exchange's practice will be to
provide such information on a per-OTP Holder, OTP Firm, or associated
person basis. The Exchange will not charge the public for this service.
    The Exchange will also release information to the public with
respect to disciplinary decisions that: (i) Impose a suspension,
cancellation, or expulsion of an OTP Holder or OTP Firm; (ii) impose
the suspension or revocation of the registration of an associated
person of an OTP Holder or OTP Firm; (iii) impose the suspension or
barring of an OTP Holder, OTP Firm, or associated person from
association with all OTP

Holders or OTP Firms; (iv) impose monetary sanctions of $10,000 or more
upon an OTP Holder, OTP Firm, or associated person; or (v) contain an
allegation of a violation of a Designated Rule.\3\ The Exchange will
release unredacted information concerning decisions issued by the Board
Appeals Committee that do not meet one or more of the criteria in
proposed NYSE Arca Rule 10.17(b)(1), provided that the underlying
decision meets one or more of the criteria in proposed NYSE Arca Rule
10.17(b)(1), and the information regarding the underlying decision was
released to the public in unredacted form.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A ``Designated Rule'' means (i) Commission Rule 10b-5 under
the Act, (ii) NYSE Arca Rule 11.5 (Manipulation), or (iii) NYSE Arca
Rule 11.2 (Prohibited Acts). See proposed NYSE Arca Rule
10.17(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the event that there is more than one respondent in a
disciplinary decision and sanctions are imposed on one or more of the
respondents, but not all of the respondents meet one or more of the
criteria in proposed NYSE Arca Rule 10.17(b)(1) for the release of
information, the Exchange will release to the public unredacted
information with respect to the respondents who meet such criteria. In
addition, the Exchange may release redacted information to the public
with respect to the respondents who do not meet the criteria in
proposed NYSE Arca Rule 10.17(b)(1).
    The Exchange may release information to the public concerning
disciplinary decisions that involve significant policy or enforcement
determinations where the release of such information is deemed by the
President of the Exchange to be in the public interest. In addition,
the Exchange may exercise its discretion and waive the requirement to
release information with respect to a disciplinary decision under
extraordinary circumstances where the release of the information would
violate fundamental notions of fairness or work as an injustice.
Finally, the Exchange may release public information concerning any
disciplinary or other decision issued pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule 10
that is not specifically enumerated in proposed NYSE Arca Rule
10.17(b)(1), regardless of the sanctions imposed, so long as the names
of the parties and other identifying information are redacted.
    Notices. Decisions that are released to a member of the public must
include certain notices. Decisions that are released prior to the
period in which a respondent may request an appeal pursuant to NYSE
Arca Rule 10.8 (Review) or while an appeal is pending must include a
statement that the findings and sanctions imposed in the decision may
be increased, decreased, modified, or reversed by the Exchange. In
addition, a final decision by the Exchange that is released prior to
the period in which a respondent may appeal to the Commission or while
such appeal is pending will include a statement that the findings and
sanctions of the Exchange are subject to review and modification by the
Commission. Lastly, a final decision of the Exchange that is released
after the decision is appealed to the Commission will include a
statement as to whether the effectiveness of the sanctions has been
stayed pending the outcome of proceedings before the Commission.
    Appeals. In the instance that the Exchange's decisions are appealed
to the Commission or the federal courts, the Exchange will notify all
OTP Holders, OTP Firms, and the press. This includes all Exchange
decisions imposing monetary sanctions of $10,000 or more or a penalty
of expulsion, revocation, suspension, and/or barring of an OTP Holder
or OTP Firm from being associated with all OTP Holders or OTP Firms.
    Commission Orders. The Exchange will release through a notice to
the public information with respect to any order issued by the
Commission: (i) Revoking or suspending an OTP Firm's or OTP Holder's
broker-dealer registration; (ii) suspending or expelling an OTP Firm or
OTP Holder from the Exchange; (iii) suspending or barring an OTP
Holder, OTP Firm, or an associated person from associating with all
broker-dealers, OTP Holders, or OTP Firms; or (iv) imposing monetary
sanctions of $10,000 or more.
    Offers of Settlement. The Exchange will release information
regarding sanctions imposed pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule 10.6 (Offers of
Settlement) upon the approval of offers of settlement.
    Cancellation of Option Trading Permits. In cases where the Exchange
cancels an Options Trading Permit or registration, the Exchange will
notify the public as soon after the effective date of the cancellation
as possible.
    While proposed NYSE Arca Rule 10.17 is based substantially on NASD
Rule 8310 (Sanctions for Violation of the Rules) and IM-8310-2 (Release
of Disciplinary and Other Information Through the Public Disclosure
Program), it does not incorporate all aspects of such NASD Rule. For
example, proposed NYSE Arca Rule 10.17 excludes public disclosure of
disciplinary complaints and arbitrations. The Exchange's intention is
for public disclosure not to apply to disciplinary complaints that
involve undecided issues or arbitrations between parties. The Exchange
plans to notify OTP Holders, OTP Firms, and associated persons of the
effectiveness of this proposed rule change through the Exchange's
Internet Web site and a regulatory bulletin.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b) of the Act \4\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of section 6(b)(5) \5\ in particular, in that it is designed
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions
in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

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

File Number SR-NYSEArca-2006-03 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2006-03. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the 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-NYSEArca-2006-03 and should be submitted on or before
June 27, 2006.

IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
Proposed Rule Change

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is
consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\6\
In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ which requires that an
exchange have rules designed, among other things, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and
in general to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposal to institute the Public
Disclosure Program, which is substantially based on NASD Rule 8310 and
IM-8310-2,\8\ serves the interest of investor protection because it
allows NYSE Arca members and the general public to promptly learn of
final disciplinary decisions involving its broker-dealer members or
associated persons of such members. By notifying the public of a final
decision issued by the Exchange or any committee of the Exchange that
results in the suspension, cancellation, expulsion, and/or barring of
an OTP Holder or OTP Firm or the imposition of monetary sanctions of
$10,000 or more, for example, the Commission believes that the Public
Disclosure Program should provide important information to the public,
create additional incentives for members of the Exchange to comply with
its rules, and help investors make informed choices and decisions about
the individuals and firms with whom they may wish to conduct business.
As such, the Commission finds that the proposed program promotes just
and equitable principles of trade, encourages the prevention of
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, and seeks to perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35138 (December 22,
1994), 59 FR 67362 (December 29, 1994) (approving the NASD program
to publish final disciplinary decisions involving its members).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds good cause for approving this proposed rule
change, as amended, before the thirtieth day after the publication of
notice thereof in the Federal Register. As noted earlier, prompt
disclosure of final disciplinary decisions serves the interest of
protecting investors and the general public.\9\ Therefore, accelerating
approval of the proposed rule change should benefit investors because
they will have access to the NYSE Arca disciplinary information sooner.
The Public Disclosure Program should foster compliance with NYSE Arca
rules, heighten awareness of the public investor with respect to the
conduct of business on the Exchange, and, in general, improve the
overall integrity of the market center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2006-03), as amended, is
hereby approved on an accelerated basis.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-8700 Filed 6-5-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P