ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63 [ R06 OAR 2005 NM 0005; FRL ]

New Source Performance Standards and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants; Delegation of Authority to Albuquerque  Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule; delegation of authority SUMMARY: The Albuquerque  Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board ( ABCAQCB) has submitted updated regulations for receiving delegation of EPA authority for implementation and enforcement of New Source Performance Standards ( NSPS) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ( NESHAPs) for all sources ( both 40 CFR part 70 and non part 70 sources). These regulations apply to certain NSPS promulgated by EPA, as amended through July 1, 2004, and certain NESHAPs promulgated by EPA, as amended through July 1, 2004 ( 40 CFR part 61 standards) and July 1, 2004 ( 40 CFR part 63 standards). The delegation of authority under this notice applies only to sources located in Bernalillo County, New Mexico, and does not extend to sources located in Indian country. EPA is providing notice that it has approved delegation of certain NSPS to ABCAQCB, and taking direct final action to approve the delegation of certain NESHAPs to ABCAQCB.

DATES: This rule is effective on [ Insert date 60 days from date of publication in the Federal 2 Register] without further notice, unless EPA receives relevant adverse comment by [ Insert date 30 days from date of publication in the Federal Register]. If EPA receives such comment,

EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Regional Materials in EDocket ( RME) ID No. R06 OAR 2005 NM 0005, by one of the following methods:

° Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www. regulations. gov. Follow the on line instructions for submitting comments.

° Agency Website: http:// docket. epa. gov/ rmepub/, Regional Materials in EDocket ( RME), EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Once in the system, select " quick search," then key in the appropriate RME Docket identification number. Follow the on line instructions for submitting comments.

° U. S. EPA Region 6 " Contact Us" web site: http:// epa. gov/ region6/ r6coment. htm Please click on " 6PD" ( Multimedia) and select " Air" before submitting comments.

° E mail: Jeff Robinson at robinson. jeffrey@ epa. gov.

° Fax: Mr. Jeff Robinson, Air Permits Section ( 6PD R), at fax number 214 665 7263.

° Mail: Mr. Jeff Robinson, Air Permits Section ( 6PD R), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202 2733.

° Hand or Courier Delivery: Mr. Jeff Robinson, Air Permits Section ( 6PD R),

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202 2733.

Such deliveries are accepted only between the hours of 8: 00 a. m. and 4: 00 p. m. weekdays except 3 for legal holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Regional Materials in EDocket ( RME) ID No. R06 OAR

2005 NM 0005. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public file without change, change and may be made available online at http:// docket. epa. gov/ rmepub/,

including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information through Regional Material in EDocket ( RME),

regulations. gov, or e mail if you believe that it is CBI or otherwise protected from disclosure.

The EPA RME website and the federal regulations. gov are " anonymous access" systems, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e mail comment directly to EPA without going through RME or regulations. gov, your e mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public file and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the Regional Materials in EDocket ( RME) index at http:// docket. epa. gov/ rmepub/. Although listed in the index, some information is 4 not publicly available, i. e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in RME or in the official file which is available at the Air Permitting Section (

6PDR Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202 2733.

The file will be made available by appointment for public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review Room between the hours of 8: 30 a. m. and 4: 30 p. m. weekdays except for legal holidays. Contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph below to make an appointment. If possible, please make the appointment at least two working days in advance of your visit. There will be a 15 cent per page fee for making photocopies of documents. On the day of the visit, please check in at the EPA Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas.

The delegation request is also available for public inspection at the State Air Agency listed below during official business hours by appointment:

City of Albuquerque, Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Division, 11850 Sunset Gardens SW, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87121 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeff Robinson, U. S. EPA, Region 6,

Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division ( 6PD), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202

2733, telephone ( 214) 665 6435; fax number 214 665 7263; or electronic mail at robinson. jeffrey@ epa. gov. 5 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever " we," " us," or " our" is used, we mean the EPA.

Table of Contents I. General Information II. What Does This Action Do?

III. What Is The Authority For Delegation?

IV. What Criteria Must ABCAQCB's Program Meet To Be Approved?

V. How Did ABCAQCB Meet The Subpart E Approval Criteria?

VI. What Is Being Delegated?

VII. What Is Not Being Delegated?

VIII. How Will Applicability Determinations Under Section 112 Be Made?

IX. What Authority Does EPA Have?

X. What Information Must ABCAQCB Provide To EPA?

XI. What Is EPA's Oversight Of This Delegation To ABCAQCB?

XII. Should Sources Submit Notices To EPA Or ABCAQCB?

XIII. How Will Unchanged Authorities Be Delegated To ABCAQCB In The Future?

XIV. What Is The Relationship Between RCRA And The Hazardous Waste Combustor MACT?

XV. Final Action XVI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. General Information 6 A. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.

When submitting comments, remember to:

1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information ( subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).

2. Follow directions  The agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR) part or section number.

3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.

4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/ or data that you used.

5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.

6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives.

7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.

8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified.

B. Submitting confidential business information ( CBI)

Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations. gov or e mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify 7 electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

II. What Does This Notice Do?

EPA is providing notice that it is delegating authority for implementation and enforcement of certain NSPS to ABCAQCB. EPA is also taking direct final action to approve the delegation of certain NESHAPs to ABCAQCB. With this delegation, ABCAQCB has the primary responsibility to implement and enforce the delegated standards. The notice also consolidates the table which specifies the part 63 delegations in New Mexico to the New Mexico Environment Department ( NMED) and ABCAQCB. The subpart delegations previously made to the NMED on February 9, 2004, are not open to public comment. 68 FR 69036 ( December 11, 2003). See Section VI, below, for a complete discussion of which standards are being delegated and which are not being delegated.

III. What Is The Authority For Delegation?

Section 111( c)( 1) of the Clean Air Act ( CAA) authorizes EPA to delegate authority to any state agency which submits adequate regulatory procedures for implementation and 8 enforcement of the NSPS program. The NSPS standards are codified at 40 CFR Part 60.

Section 112( l) of the CAA and 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart E, authorizes EPA to delegate authority to any state or local agency which submits adequate regulatory procedures for implementation and enforcement of emission standards for hazardous air pollutants. The hazardous air pollutant standards are codified at 40 CFR Parts 61 and 63.

IV. What Criteria Must ABCAQCB's Program Meet To Be Approved?

This notice notifies the public that EPA is updating ABCAQCB's delegation to implement and enforce certain NSPS. EPA previously approved ABCAQCB's program for the delegation of NSPS. 54 FR 52031 ( December 20, 1989), 57 FR 48563 ( October 27, 1992), and 60 FR 52329 ( October 6, 1995). As to the NESHAP standards in Parts 61 and 63, Section 112( l) of the CAA enables EPA to approve State and local air pollution agencies air toxics programs or rules to operate in place of the Federal air toxics program or rules. 40 CFR part 63, Subpart E ( Subpart E) governs EPA's approval of State rules or programs under Section 112( l).

A. NSPS Criteria EPA will approve an air toxics program if we find that:

( 1) the State program or local air pollution agency is " no less stringent" than the corresponding Federal program or rule;

( 2) the State or local air pollution agency has adequate authority and resources to 9 implement and enforce the program;

( 3) the schedule for implementation and compliance is sufficiently expeditious; and ( 4) the program otherwise complies with Federal guidance.

B. NESHAP Criteria In order to obtain approval of its program to implement and enforce Federal section 112 rules as promulgated without changes ( straight delegation), only the criteria of 40 CFR 63.91( d)

must be met in addition to the requirements listed above as NSPS criteria. Section 63.91( d)( 3)

provides that interim or final Title V program approval will satisfy the criteria of § 63.91( d) for Part 70 sources. EPA previously approved ABCAQCB's program for the delegation of NESHAPS in 40 CFR part 61. 54 FR 52031 ( December 20, 1989), 57 FR 48563 ( October 27,

1992), and 60 FR 52329 ( October 6, 1995).

V. How Did ABCAQCB Meet The Approval Criteria?

A. NSPS Criteria ABCAQCB adopted the Federal requirements via incorporation by reference. As a result,

the minimum requirement of CAA Section 111, that their standard is at least as stringent as EPA's rules, has been met. ABCAQCB demonstrated the remaining criteria when EPA previously approved ABCAQCB's program for the delegation of NSPS. 54 FR 52031 ( December 20,

1989), 57 FR 48563 ( October 27, 1992), and 60 FR 52329 ( October 6, 1995). 10 B. NESHAP Criteria As part of its Title V submission, ABCAQCB stated that it intended to use the mechanism of incorporation by reference to adopt unchanged Federal section 112 into its regulations. This applied to both existing and future standards as they applied to Part 70 sources. 60 FR 2527

2534 ( January 10, 1995), EPA approved ABCAQCB's program for receiving delegation of existing and future standards when it granted final interim approval to ABCAQCB's Title V program. 60 FR 2527  2534 ( January 10, 1995), 60 FR 13046  13047 ( March 10, 1995). In addition, on November 26, 1996, EPA promulgated full approval of Albuquerque  Bernalillo County's operating permits program. 61 FR 60032. Under 40 CFR 63.91( d)( 2), once a state or local air pollution agency has satisfied up front approval criteria, it needs only to reference the previous demonstration and reaffirm that it still meets the criteria for any subsequent submittals.

ABCAQCB has affirmed that it still meets the up front approval criteria.

VI. What Is Being Delegated?

EPA received a request to update the NSPS and NESHAP delegations on April 11, 2005.

ABCAQCB requested the EPA to update the delegation of authority for the following:

A. NSPS ( 40 CFR Part 60 standards) through July 1, 2004;

B. NESHAPs ( 40 CFR Part 61 standards) through July 1, 2004; and C. NESHAPs ( 40 CFR Part 63 standards) through July 1, 2004.

ABCAQCB's request was for delegation of certain NSPS and NESHAP for all sources 11 ( both Part 70 and non Part 70 sources). The request includes revisions of 20.11.63 NMAC,

20.11.64 NMAC, as adopted by the Albuquerque  Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board.

For NSPS, this revision incorporated all NSPS promulgated by EPA ( except Subpart AAA

Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters, Subpart WWW  Standards of Performance for Muncipal Solid Waste Landfills, and Subpart Cc  Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills) as amended in the Federal Register through July 1, 2004. The effective date of the Federal delegation for NSPS under Section 111 is the date that this Federal Register is published. For the Part 61 NESHAPs, this revision included all NESHAPs promulgated by EPA as amended in the Federal Register through July 1, 2004,

excluding Subparts B, H, I, K, Q, R, T, and W. For the Part 63 NESHAPs, the request includes the NESHAPs set forth in Table 1 below. The effective date of the Federal delegation for Parts 61 and 63 standards is the effective date of this rule.

Table 1 40 CFR Part 63 NESHAPs for Source Categories Delegated to ABCAQCB Subpart Source Category A General Provisions D Early Reductions F Hazardous Organic NESHAP ( HON)  Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry ( SOCMI)

G HON  SOCMI Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations and Wastewater H HON  Equipment Leaks I HON  Certain Processes Negotiated Equipment Leak Regulation J Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production L Coke Oven Batteries M Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning N Chromium Electroplating and Chromium Anodizing Tanks 12 O Ethylene Oxide Sterilizers Q Industrial Process Cooling Towers R Gasoline Distribution S Pulp and Paper Industry T Halogenated Solvent Cleaning U Group I Polymers and Resins W Epoxy Resins Production and Non Nylon Polyamides Production X Secondary Lead Smelting Y Marine Tank Vessel Loading AA Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing Plants BB Phosphate Fertilizers Production Plants CC Petroleum Refineries DD Off Site Waste and Recovery Operations EE Magnetic Tape Manufacturing GG Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Facilities HH Oil and Natural Gas Production Facilities II Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Facilities JJ Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations KK Printing and Publishing Industry LL Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants MM Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfide, and Stand Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills OO Tanks  Level 1 PP Containers QQ Surface Impoundments RR Individual Drain Systems SS Closed Vent Systems, Control Devices, Recovery Devices and Routing to a Fuel Gas System or a Process TT Equipment Leaks  Control Level 1 UU Equipment Leaks  Control Level 2 Standards VV Oil Water Separators and Organic Water Separators 13 WW Storage Vessels ( Tanks)  Control Level 2 YY Generic Maximum Achievable Control Technology Standards CCC Steel Pickling  HCl Process Facilities and Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration Plants DDD Mineral Wool Production EEE Hazardous Waste Combustors GGG Pharmaceuticals Production HHH Natural Gas Transmission and Storage Facilities III Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production JJJ Group IV Polymers and Resins LLL Portland Cement Manufacturing MMM Pesticide Active Ingredient Production NNN Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing OOO Amino/ Phenolic Resins PPP Polyether Polyols Production QQQ Primary Copper Smelting RRR Secondary Aluminum Production TTT Primary Lead Smelting UUU Petroleum Refineries  Catalytic Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming Units and Sulfur Recovery Plants VVV Publicly Owned Treatment Works ( POTW)

XXX Ferroalloys Production: Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese AAAA Municipal Solid Waste Landfills CCCC Nutritional Yeast Manufacturing EEEE Organic Liquid Distribution FFFF Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing GGGG Solvent Extraction for Vegetable Oil Production HHHH Wet Formed Fiberglass Mat Production IIII Auto & Light Duty Truck JJJJ Paper & Other Web Coating 14 KKKK Surface Coating of Metal Cans MMMM Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products NNNN Surface Coating of Large Appliances OOOO Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles PPPP Plastic Parts QQQQ Surface Coating of Wood Building Products RRRR Surface Coating of Metal Furniture SSSS Surface Coating of Metal Coil TTTT Leather Finishing Operations UUUU Cellulose Production Manufacture VVVV Boat Manufacturing WWWW Reinforced Plastic Composites Production XXXX Tire Manufacturing YYYY Stationary Combustion Turbines ZZZZ Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines AAAAA Lime Manufacturing Plants BBBBB Semiconductor Manufacturing CCCCC Coke Ovens: Pushing, Quenching and Battery Stacks EEEEE Iron and Steel Foundries FFFFF Integrated Iron and Steel GGGGG Site Remediation HHHHH Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing IIIII Mercury Cell Chlor Alkali Plants JJJJJ Brick and Structural Clay Products KKKKK Clay Ceramics Manufacturing LLLLL Asphalt Roofing and Processing MMMMM Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication Operation NNNNN Hydrochloric Acid Production PPPPP Engine Test Cells/ Stands QQQQQ Friction Products Manufacturing 15 RRRRR Taconite Iron Ore Processing SSSSS Refractory Products Manufacturing TTTTT Primary Magnesium Refining VII. What Is Not Being Delegated?

As mentioned above, ABCAQCB has not requested and has not been delegated the authority for the following standards:

40 CFR Part 60, Subpart AAA ( Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters);

40 CFR Part 60, Subpart WWW, ( Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills);

40 CFR Part 60, Subpart Cc, ( Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills);

40 CFR Part 61, Subpart B ( National Emission Standards for Radon Emissions from Underground Uranium Mines);

40 CFR Part 61, Subpart H ( National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides 16 Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities);

40 CFR Part 61, Subpart I ( National Emission Standards for Radionuclide Emissions from Federal Facilities Other Than Nuclear Regulatory Commission Licensees and Not Covered by Subpart H);

40 CFR Part 61, Subpart K  ( National Emission Standards for Radionuclide Emissions from Elemental Phosphorus Plants);

40 CFR Part 61, Subpart Q ( National Emission Standards for Radon Emissions from Department of Energy facilities);

40 CFR Part 61, Subpart R ( National Emission Standards for Radon Emissions from Phosphogypsum Stacks);

40 CFR Part 61, Subpart T ( National Emission Standards for Radon Emissions from the Disposal of Uranium Mill Tailings); and 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart W ( National Emission Standards for Radon Emissions from Operating Mill Tailings).

It should be noted that the ABCAQCB adopted 40 CFR part 63, Subpart J ( Polyvinyl 17 Chloride and Copolymers Production) unchanged and requested delegation of the standard. The standard was vacated and remanded to EPA by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on June 18, 2004, and EPA's petition for rehearing was denied on April 15, 2005. Because the Court vacated Subpart J, that standard is not being delegated at this time to ABCAQCB.

In addition, EPA cannot delegate to a State any of the Category II Subpart A authorities set forth in 40 CFR 63.91( g)( 2). These include the following provisions: § 63.6( g), Approval of Alternative Non Opacity Standards; § 63.6( h)( 9), Approval of Alternative Opacity Standards; §

63.7( e)( 2)( ii) and ( f), Approval of Major Alternatives to Test Methods; § 63.8( f), Approval of Major Alternatives to Monitoring; and § 63.10( f), Approval of Major Alternatives to Recordkeeping and Reporting. Also, some MACT standards have certain provisions that cannot be delegated to the States [ e. g. 40 CFR 63.106( b)]. Therefore, any MACT standard that EPA is delegating to ABCAQCB that provides that certain authorities cannot be delegated are retained by EPA and not delegated. Furthermore, no authorities are delegated that require rulemaking in the Federal Register to implement, or where Federal overview is the only way to ensure national consistency in the application of the standards or requirements of CAA Section 112. Finally,

Section 112( r), the accidental release program authority, is not being delegated by this approval.

All of the inquiries and requests concerning implementation and enforcement of the excluded standards in the State of New Mexico should be directed to the EPA Region 6 Office. 18 In addition, this delegation to ABCAQCB to implement and enforce certain NSPS and NESHAPs does not extend to sources or activities located in Indian country, as defined in 18 U. S. C. 1151. Under this definition, EPA treats as reservations, trust lands validly set aside for the use of a Tribe even if the trust lands have not been formally designated as a reservation.

Consistent with previous Federal program approvals or delegations, EPA will continue to implement the NSPS and NESHAPs in Indian country because ABCAQCB has not adequately demonstrated its authority over sources and activities located within the exterior boundaries of Indian reservations and other areas in Indian country.

Also, this delegation does not extend to sources or activities located outside of Bernalillo County because the Albuquerque  Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board only has jurisdiction to administer and enforce provisions of the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act in Bernalillo County ( excluding Indian country). The Albuquerque  Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board and the Albuquerque Environmental Health Department was previously delegated the authority to implement and enforce certain NSPS and NESHAPs by EPA. See 60 FR 52329 ( October 6, 1995).

VIII. How Will Applicability Determinations Under Section 112 Be Made?

In approving this delegation, ABCAQCB will obtain concurrence from EPA on any matter involving the interpretation of section 112 of the CAA or 40 CFR Part 63 to the extent that implementation, administration, or enforcement of these sections have not been covered by EPA 19 determinations or guidance.

IX. What Authority Does EPA Have?

We retain the right, as provided by CAA § 112( l)( 7), to enforce any applicable emission standard or requirement under Section 112. EPA also has the authority to make certain decisions under the General Provisions ( subpart A) of Part 63. We are granting ABCAQCB some of these authorities, and retaining others, as explained in Sections VI and VII above. In addition, EPA may review and disapprove of State determinations and subsequently require corrections. ( See 40 CFR 63.91( g) and 65 FR 55810, 55823, September 14, 2000.)

Furthermore, we retain any authority in an individual emission standard that may not be delegated according to provisions of the standard. Also, listed in the footnotes of the Part 63 delegation table at the end of this rule are the authorities that cannot be delegated to any State or local agency which we therefore retain.

X. What Information Must ABCAQCB Provide To EPA?

In delegating the authority to implement and enforce these rules and in granting a waiver of EPA notification requirements, we require ABCAQCB to input all source information into the Aerometric Information Retrieval System ( AIRS) for both point and area sources. ABCAQCB must enter this information into the AIRS system and update the information by 20 September 30 of every year. ABCAQCB must provide any additional compliance related information to EPA, Region 6, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance within 45 days of a request under 40 CFR 63.96( a).

In receiving delegation for specific General Provisions authorities, ABCAQCB must submit to EPA Region 6 on a semi annual basis, copies of determinations issued under these authorities. For Part 63 standards, these determinations include: applicability determinations ( 63.1); approval/ disapprovals of construction and reconstruction [ 63.5( e) and ( f)]; notifications regarding the use of a continuous opacity monitoring system [ 63.6( h)( 7)( ii)]; finding of compliance [ 63.6( h)( 8)]; approval/ disapprovals of compliance extensions [ 63.6( i)];

approvals/ disapprovals of minor [ 63.7( e)( 2)( i)] or intermediate [ 63.7( e)( 2)( ii) and ( f)] alternative test methods; approval of shorter sampling times and volumes [ 63.7( e)( 2)( iii)]; waiver of performance testing [ 63.7( e)( 2)( iv) and ( h)( 2), ( 3)]; approvals/ disapprovals of minor or intermediate alternative monitoring methods [ 63.8( f)]; approval of adjustments to time periods for submitting reports ( 63.9 and 63.10); and approvals/ disapprovals of minor alternatives to recordkeeping and reporting [ 63.10( f)].

Additionally, EPA's Emission Measurement Center of the Emissions Monitoring and Analysis Division must receive copies of any approved intermediate changes to test methods or monitoring. ( Please note that intermediate changes to test methods must be demonstrated as equivalent through the procedures set out in EPA method 301.) This information on approved intermediate changes to test methods and monitoring will be used to compile a database of 21 decisions that will be accessible to State and local agencies and EPA Regions for reference in making future decisions. ( For definitions of major, intermediate and minor alternative test methods or monitoring methods, see 40 CFR 63.90). The ABCAQCB should forward these intermediate test methods or monitoring changes via mail or facsimile to: Chief, Source Categorization Group A, EPA ( MD 19), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Facsimile telephone number: ( 919) 541 1039.

XI. What Is EPA's Oversight Of This Delegation To ABCAQCB?

EPA must oversee ABCAQCB's decisions to ensure the delegated authorities are being adequately implemented and enforced. We will integrate oversight of the delegated authorities into the existing mechanisms and resources for oversight currently in place. If, during oversight,

we determine that ABCAQCB made decisions that decreased the stringency of the delegated standards, then ABCAQCB shall be required to take corrective actions and the source( s) affected by the decisions will be notified, as required by 40 CFR 63.91( g)( 1)( ii). We will initiate withdrawal of the program or rule if the corrective actions taken are insufficient.

XII. Should Sources Submit Notices To EPA Or ABCAQCB?

All of the information required pursuant to the Federal NSPS and NESHAP ( 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63) should be submitted by sources located inside the boundaries of Bernalillo County ( excluding Indian country), directly to the City of Albuquerque, Environmental Health 22 Department, Air Quality Division, P. O. Box 1293, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103. The ABCAQCB c/ o the City of Albuquerque, Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Division is the primary point of contact with respect to delegated NSPS and NESHAPs in Bernalillo County ( excluding Indian country). Sources do not need to send a copy to EPA. EPA Region 6 waives the requirement that notifications and reports for delegated standards be submitted to EPA in addition to ABCAQCB in accordance with 40 CFR 63.9( a)( 4)( ii) and 63.10( a)( 4)( ii).

XIII. How Will Unchanged Authorities Be Delegated To ABCAQCB In The Future?

In the future, ABCAQCB will only need to send a letter of request to EPA, Region 6, for those NSPS and NESHAP regulations that ABCAQCB has adopted by reference. The letter must reference the previous up front approval demonstration and reaffirm that it still meets the up front approval criteria. We will respond in writing to the request stating that the request for delegation is either granted or denied. A Federal Register notice will be published to inform the public and affected sources of the delegation, indicating where source notifications and reports should be sent, and to amend the relevant portions of the Code of Federal Regulations showing which NSPS and NESHAP standards have been delegated to ABCAQCB.

XIV. What Is The Relationship Between RCRA And The Hazardous Waste Combustor MACT?

As part of today's rule, we are delegating, under the CAA, implementation and 23 1EPA promulgated the HWC MACT ( 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart EEE) under the joint authority of the CAA and RCRA. Before this rule went in to effect, the air emissions from these sources were primarily regulated under the authority of RCRA. See 40 CFR Parts 264, 265, 266, and 270. With the release of HWC MACT, the air emissions are now regulated under both CAA and RCRA. Even though both statutes give EPA the authority to regulate air emissions, we determined that having the emissions standards and permitting requirements in both sets of implementing regulations would be duplicative. For this reason, using the authority provided by Section 1006( b) of RCRA, EPA deferred the RCRA requirements for the HWC emission controls to the CAA requirements of 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart EEE. After a facility has demonstrated compliance with the HWC MACT, the RCRA standards for air emissions from these units will no longer apply, with the exception of Section 3005( c)( 3) of RCRA, which requires that each RCRA permit contain the terms and conditions necessary to protect human health and the environment. Under this provision of RCRA, if a regulatory authority determines that more stringent conditions than the HWC MACT are necessary to protect human health and the environment for a particular facility, then that regulatory authority may impose those conditions in the facility's RCRA permit. enforcement authority for the Hazardous Waste Combustor ( HWC) MACT ( Subpart EEE) to ABCAQCB. Many of the sources subject to the HWC MACT are also subject to the RCRA permitting requirements. We expect air emissions and related operating requirements found in the HWC MACT will be included in part 70 permits issued by ABCAQCB. However, RCRA permits will still be required for all other aspects of the combustion unit and the facility that are governed by RCRA ( e. g., corrective action, general facility standards, other combustor specific concerns such as materials handling, risk based emissions limits and operating requirements, as appropriate and other hazardous waste management units). 1 See the HWC MACT rule preamble discussion [ 64 FR 52828, 52839 43 ( September 30, 1999)], and the RCRA Site Specific Risk Assessment Policy for HWC Facilities dated June 2000 for more information on the interrelationship of the MACT rule with the RCRA Omnibus provision and site specific risk assessments.

XV. Final Action 24 The public was provided the opportunity to comment on the proposed approval of the program and mechanism for delegation of Section 112 standards, as applied to Part 70 sources,

on January 10, 1995. The proposal was part of EPA's proposed approval of the Albuquerque

Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board's Operating Permits Program. 60 FR 2527. The EPA did not receive adverse public comments on the proposed delegation of Section 112 standards. 60 FR 13046 ( March 10, 1995). In this action, the public is given the opportunity to comment on the approval of ABCAQCB request for delegation of authority to implement and enforce certain Section 112 standards for all sources ( both Part 70 and non Part 70 sources)

which have been adopted by reference into New Mexico's state regulations. However, the Agency views the approval of these requests as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no adverse comments. Therefore, EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal. However, in the " Proposed Rules" section of today's Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the program and delegation of authority described in this action if adverse comments are received. This action will be effective [ Insert date 60 days from date of publication in the Federal Register] without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant adverse comments by [ Insert date 30 days from date of publication in the Federal Register].

If EPA receives adverse comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public the rule will not take effect. We will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. Please note 25 that if we receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

XVI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 ( 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a " significant regulatory action" and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, " Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use" ( 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act ( 5 U. S. C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ( Public Law 104 4).

This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government 26 and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 ( 65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 ( 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state request to receive delegation of certain Federal standards, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 " Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks" ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

In reviewing delegation submissions, EPA's role is to approve submissions provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards ( VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a delegation submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA to use VCS in place of a delegation submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12( d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 ( 15 U. S. C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 ( 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq.).

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U. S. C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take 27 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 rule and other required information to the U. S. Senate, the U. S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of 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).

Under Section 307( b)( 1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by [ FEDERAL REGISTER OFFICE: insert date 60 days from date of publication of this document in the Federal Register]. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule 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 section 307( b)( 2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Administrative practice and procedure,

Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 61 28 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Administrative practice and procedure,

Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Administrative practice and procedure,

Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Authority: This action is issued under the authority of Sections 111 and 112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U. S. C. 7411 and 7412.

Dated: November 29, 2005 / s/ Carl E. Edlund Acting Regional Administrator Region 6 29 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63 are amended as follows:

Part 60  [ AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 60 continues to read as follows:

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

2. Section 60.4 is amended by revising paragraph ( b)( GG)( i) to read as follows:

§ 60.4  Address ( b) *****

( GG) *****

( i) Albuquerque  Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board, c/ o Environmental Health Department, P. O. Box 1293, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103 3. Section 60.4 is amended by adding paragraph ( e)( 3) as follows:

( e) *****

( 3) Albuquerque  Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board. The Albuquerque

Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board has been delegated all Part 60 standards promulgated by EPA, except Subpart AAA  Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters; Subpart WWW  Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills; Subpart Cc  Emissions Guidelines and Compliance Times for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, as amended in the Federal Register through July 1, 2004. 30 Part 61  [ AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 61 continues to read as follows:

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

2. Section 61.04 is amended by revising paragraph ( b)( GG) to read as follows:

§ 61.04  Address ( b) *****

( GG) *****

( i) Albuquerque  Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board, c/ o Environmental Health Department, P. O. Box 1293, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103 3. Section 61.04 is amended by revising paragraph ( c)( 6) as follows:

( c) *****

( 6) The following lists the specific Part 61 standards that have been delegated unchanged to the air pollution control agencies in Region 6.

( i) [ Reserved]

( ii) *****

( iii) *****

( iv) ( v) [ Reserved]

( vi) Albuquerque  Bernalillo County, New Mexico. The Albuquerque  Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board ( ABCAQCB) has been delegated the following Part 61 31 standards promulgated by EPA, as amended in the Federal Register through July 1, 2004.

The ( X) symbol is used to indicate each subpart that has been delegated.

DELEGATION STATUS FOR NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS ( PART 61 STANDARDS) FOR ALBUQUERQUE  BERNALILLO COUNTY AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD ( EXCLUDING INDIAN COUNTRY) 1 SUBPART SOURCE CATEGORY ABCAQCB A General Provisions X B Radon Emissions From Underground Uranium Mines C Beryllium X D Beryllium Rocket Motor Firing X E Mercury X F Vinyl Chloride X G ( Reserved)

H Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities I Radionuclide Emissions From Federal Facilities Other Than Nuclear Regulatory Commission Licensees and Not Covered by Subpart H J Equipment Leaks ( Fugitive Emission Sources) of Benxene X K Radionuclide Emissions From Elemental Phosphorus Plants L Benzene Emissions From Coke By Product Recovery Plants X M Asbestos X N Inorganic Arsenic Emissions From Glass Manufacturing Plants X O Inorganic Arsenic Emissions From Primary Copper Smelters X P Inorganic Arsenic Emissions From Arsenic Trioxide and Metallic Arsenic Production Facilities X Q Radon Emissions From Department of Energy Facilities R Radon Emissions From Phosphogypsum Stacks 32 S ( Reserved)

T Radon Emissions From the Disposal of Uranium Mill Tailings U ( Reserved)

V Equipment Leaks ( Fugitive Emission Sources) X W Radon Emissions From Operating Mill Tailings X ( Reserved)

Y Benzene Emissions From Benzene Storage Vessels X Z AA ( Reserved)

BB Benzene Emissions From Benzene Transfer Operations X CC EE ( Reserved)

FF Benzene Waste Operations X 1 Program delegated to Albuquerque Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board ( ABCAQCB)

Part 63   [ AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 63 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: 42 U. S. C. 7401, et seq.

2. Section 63.99 is amended by revising paragraph ( a)( 31) to read as follows:

( a) *****

( 31) New Mexico.

( i) The following table lists the delegation status of specific part 63 subparts that have been delegated unchanged to state and local air pollution agencies in New Mexico. The " X" symbol is used to indicate each subpart that has been delegated.. 33 DELEGATION STATUS FOR PART 63 STANDARDS  STATE OF NEW MEXICO ( EXCLUDING INDIAN COUNTRY)

SUBPART SOURCE CATEGORY NMED1,2 ABCAQCB1,3 A General Provisions3 X X D Early Reductions X X F Hazardous Organic NESHAP ( HON)  Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry ( SOCMI) X X G HON  SOCMI Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations and Wastewater X X H HON  Equipment Leaks X X I HON  Certain Processes Negotiated Equipment Leak Regulation X X J Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production X4 4 K ( Reserved)

L Coke Oven Batteries X X M Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning X X N Chromium Electroplating and Chromium Anodizing Tanks X X O Ethylene Oxide Sterilizers X X P ( Reserved)

Q Industrial Process Cooling Towers X X R Gasoline Distribution X X S Pulp and Paper Industry X X T Halogenated Solvent Cleaning X X U Group I Polymers and Resins X X V ( Reserved)

W Epoxy Resins Production and Non Nylon Polyamides Production X X X Secondary Lead Smelting X X Y Marine Tank Vessel Loading X X Z ( Reserved)

AA Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing Plants X X BB Phosphate Fertilizers Production Plants X X CC Petroleum Refineries X X 34 DD Off Site Waste and Recovery Operations X X EE Magnetic Tape Manufacturing X X FF ( Reserved)

GG Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Facilities X X HH Oil and Natural Gas Production Facilities X X II Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Facilities X X JJ Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations X X KK Printing and Publishing Industry X X LL Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants X X MM Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfide, and Stand Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills X NN ( Reserved)

OO Tanks  Level 1 X X PP Containers X X QQ Surface Impoundments X X RR Individual Drain Systems X X SS Closed Vent Systems, Control Devices, Recovery Devices and Routing to a Fuel Gas System or a Process X X TT Equipment Leaks  Control Level 1 X X UU Equipment Leaks  Control Level 2 Standards X X VV Oil Water Separators and Organic Water Separators X X WW Storage Vessels ( Tanks)  Control Level 2 X X XX ( Reserved)

YY Generic Maximum Achievable Control Technology Standards X X ZZ BBB ( Reserved)

CCC Steel Pickling  HCl Process Facilities and Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration X X DDD Mineral Wool Production X X EEE Hazardous Waste Combustors X X FFF ( Reserved)

GGG Pharmaceuticals Production X X 35 HHH Natural Gas Transmission and Storage Facilities X X III Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production X X JJJ Group IV Polymers and Resins X X KKK ( Reserved)

LLL Portland Cement Manufacturing X X MMM Pesticide Active Ingredient Production X X NNN Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing X X OOO Amino/ Phenolic Resins X X PPP Polyether Polyols Production X X QQQ Primary Copper Smelting X X RRR Secondary Aluminum Production X X SSS ( Reserved)

TTT Primary Lead Smelting X X UUU Petroleum Refineries   Catalytic Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming Units and Sulfur Recovery Plants X X VVV Publicly Owned Treatment Works ( POTW) X X WWW ( Reserved)

XXX Ferroalloys Production: Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese X X AAAA Municipal Solid Waste Landfills X CCCC Nutritional Yeast Manufacturing X X EEEE Organic Liquids Distribution X GGGG Solvent Extraction for Vegetable Oil Production X X HHHH Wet Formed Fiberglass Mat Production X X JJJJ Paper and other Web ( Surface Coating) X KKKK Metal Can ( Surface Coating) X NNNN Surface Coating of Large Appliances X X OOOO Fabric Printing Coating and Dyeing X PPPP Plastic Parts ( Surface Coating) X QQQQ Surface Coating of Wood Building Products X RRRR Surface Coating of Metal Furniture X 36 SSSS Surface Coating for Metal Coil X X TTTT Leather Finishing Operations X X UUUU Cellulose Production Manufacture X X VVVV Boat Manufacturing X X WWWW Reinforced Plastic Composites Production X XXXX Tire Manufacturing X X YYYY Combustion Turbines X AAAAA Lime Manufacturing Plants X BBBBB Semiconductor Manufacturing X CCCCC Coke Ovens: Pushing, Quenching and Battery Stacks X X DDDDD Industrial/ Commerical/ Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters EEEEE Iron Foundries X FFFFF Integrated Iron and Steel X GGGGG Site Remediation X HHHHH Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing X IIIII Mercury Cell Chlor Alkali Plants X JJJJJ Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing X KKKKK Clay Ceramics Manufacturing X LLLLL Asphalt Roofing and Processing X MMMMM Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication Operation X NNNNN Hydrochloric Acid Production, Fumed Silica Production X PPPPP Engine Test Facilities X QQQQQ Friction Products Manufacturing X RRRRR Taconite Iron Ore Processing X SSSSS Refractory Products Manufacture X TTTTT Primary Magnesium Refining X 1 Authorities that cannot be delegated include § 63.6( g), Approval of Alternative Non Opacity Standards; § 63.6( h)( 9), Approval of Alternative Opacity Standards; § 63.7( e)( 2)( ii) and ( f), Approval of Major Alternatives to Test Methods; § 63.8( f), Approval of Major Alternatives to Monitoring; and § 63.10( f), Approval of Major Alternatives to Recordkeeping and Reporting. In addition, all authorities identified in the certain subparts that EPA has designated that cannot be 37 delegated.

2 Program delegated to New Mexico Environment Department ( NMED) for standards promulgated by EPA, as amended in the Federal Register through September 1, 2002.

3 Program delegated to Albuquerque  Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board ( ABCAQCB) for standards promulgated by EPA, as amended in the Federal Register through July 1, 2004.

4 This standard was originally delegated to NMED on February 9, 2004. The ABCAQCB has adopted the subpart unchanged and applied for delegation of the standard. The standard was vacated and remanded to EPA by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on June 18, 2004, and EPA's petition for rehearing was denied on April 15, 2005. The standard is not being delegated at this time to ABCAQCB.


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 185 (Wednesday, September 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57160-57161]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22669]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73137; File No. SR-NYSE-2014-40]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a
Proposed Rule Change Establishing the NYSE Best Quote & Trades Data
Feed

September 18, 2014.
    On July 21, 2014, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``Exchange'' or
``NYSE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to establish the NYSE Best Quote & Trades (``NYSE
BQT'') data feed. The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on August 8, 2014.\3\ One comment on the proposal
has been received.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72750 (August 4,
2014), 79 FR 46494.
    \4\ See Letter from Ira D. Hammerman, General Counsel, SIFMA, to
Kevin M. O'Neill, Deputy Secretary, Commission, dated August 28,
2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \5\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding, or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be

disapproved. The Commission is extending this 45-day time period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that
it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change and the
comments received. Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section
19(b)(2) of the Act,\6\ designates November 6, 2014, as the date by
which the Commission shall either approve or disapprove or institute
proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change
(File No. SR-NYSE-2014-40).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-22669 Filed 9-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 100 (Friday, May 22, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 31177]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11117]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP20-452-000]

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Notice of Request Under
Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on May 7, 2020, National Fuel Gas Supply
Corporation (National Fuel), 6363 Main Street, Williamsville, New York
14221, filed a prior notice application pursuant to sections 157.205
and 157.216 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and National Fuel's
blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP83-4-000. National Fuel
requests authorization to abandon three injection/withdrawal (I/W)
storage wells in its East Branch Storage Field (East Branch), and the
associated well lines, all located in within the Allegheny National
Forest (ANF) in Sheffield Township, Warren County, and Hamilton
Township, McKean County, Pennsylvania, all as more fully set forth in
the request, which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding
the last three digits in the docket number field to access the
document. For assistance, contact FERC at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Specifically, National Fuel proposes to plug and abandon East
Branch Wells 426P, 870P, and 873P, abandon the associated well lines
SW426, SW870 and SW873 in place, all located in located within the
Allegheny National Forest (ANF) in Sheffield Township, Warren County,
and Hamilton Township, McKean County, Pennsylvania.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Meghan M. Emes Attorney, National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation, 6363
Main Street, Williamsville, New York 14221-5887 or phone (716) 857-
7004, or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 days after
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of
the regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the
proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day
after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and
not withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed time for filing a
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, and will be
notified of any meetings associated with the Commission's environmental
review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve
copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party
commenter will not receive copies of all documents filed by other
parties or issued by the Commission and will not have the right to seek
court review of the Commission's final order.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. At this time, the
Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free, (886) 208-
3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at
http://www.ferc.gov.

    Dated: May 18, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-11117 Filed 5-21-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 27, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 208)]
[Notices]
[Page 63747-63749]
[DOCID:fr27oc08-100]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58823; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-30]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as
Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, Relating to Amendments to Rule
9.21 (Communications to Customers)

October 21, 2008.
    On March 19, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') \1\,
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\2\ CBOE filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change on June 9, 2008.\3\ Notice of the proposal, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, was published for comment in the Federal
Register on July 17, 2008.\4\ The Commission received one comment
letter regarding the proposed rule change \5\ and a response to
comments from CBOE.\6\ This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Amendment No. 1 replaces the original filing in its
entirety.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58138 (Jul. 10,
2008) 73 FR 40886 (Jul. 17, 2008) (SR-CBOE-2007-30) (notice).
    \5\ See Letter from Melissa MacGregor, Vice President and
Assistant General Counsel, Securities Industry and Financial Markets
Association (``SIFMA''), dated July 31, 2008.
    \6\ See Letter from Lawrence J. Bresnahan, Vice President, CBOE,
dated September 30, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    On December 23, 2002, the Commission published final rules that
exempt standardized options, as defined in Rule 9b-1 \7\ under the
Exchange Act, that are issued by a registered clearing agency and
traded on a registered national securities exchange or on a registered
national securities association, from all provisions of the Securities
Act (other than the anti-fraud provisions) and the registration
requirements of the Exchange Act.\8\ Because the Securities Act of 1933
(``Securities Act'') \9\ and the rules thereunder (other than the anti-
fraud provisions) are no longer applicable to such standardized
options, CBOE proposed to remove elements of the Securities Act that
are embedded in CBOE Rule 9.21 (``Communications to Customers''). In
particular, CBOE proposed to remove all references to a ``prospectus''
from Rule 9.21. Prospectuses are no longer required for such
standardized options, and the Options Clearing Corporation has, in
fact, ceased publication of a prospectus.\10\ In addition, the proposed
amendments expand the types of communications governed by Rule 9.21 to
include independently prepared reprints and other communications
between a member or member organization and a customer, exempt certain
options communications from the pre-approval requirement by a
Registered Options Principal (``ROP'') and update and reorganize Rule
9.21. The proposed amendments are similar to amendments filed with the
Commission by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'').\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 240.9b-1.
    \8\ See ``Exemption for Standardized Options From Provisions of
the Securities Act of 1933 and From the Registration Requirements of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Final Rule,'' Securities Act
Release No. 8171 and Exchange Act Release No. 47082 (Dec. 23, 2002),
68 FR 188 (Jan. 2, 2003).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.
    \10\ The options disclosure document (``ODD'') prepared in
accordance with Rule 9b-1 under the Exchange Act is not deemed to be
a prospectus. 17 CFR 230.135b. See, e.g., Securities Act Release No.
8049 (Dec. 21, 2001), 67 FR 228 (Jan. 2, 2002).
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57720 (Apr. 25,
2008) 73 FR 24332 (May 2, 2008), Exchange Act Release No. 58738
(approval order) (Oct. 6, 2008) 73 FR 60371 (Oct. 10, 2008) (SR-
FINRA-2008-13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Deletion of Certain Provisions

    As noted above, CBOE Rule 9.21 contains a number of references to a
prospectus and other Securities Act requirements. The Exchange proposed
to delete the following from Rule 9.21:
    (1) Rule 9.21(a)(iv), which references the Securities Act
definition of prospectus,
    (2) Rule 9.21(d), which incorporates Securities Act principles in
that it prohibits written material concerning options from being
furnished to any person who has not previously or contemporaneously
received the ODD,
    (3) Rule 9.21(e)(ii), which defines the term ``Educational
Material,'' \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ This paragraph essentially incorporates language of
Securities Act Rule 134a. While this amendment would eliminate the
separate educational material category, as discussed below the
Exchange also proposed to revise the definition of Sales Literature
to include educational material.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (4) Interpretation and Policy .02A of Rule 9.21, which outlines
what is permitted in an ``Advertisement,'' \13\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ This paragraph essentially incorporates language of
Securities Act Rule 134.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (5) Interpretation and Policy .03 of Rule 9.21, which concerns
educational material.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See note 12, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Redesignation of Rule 9.21(a) to Proposed Rule 9.21(d) and Related
Amendments

    Rule 9.21(a) currently contains an outline of the ``General Rule''
for options communications. CBOE proposed to redesignate paragraph (a)
as paragraph (d), and to incorporate limitations on the use of options
communications contained in Interpretations and Policies .01 of Rule
9.21 into proposed Rule 9.21(d). In addition, proposed Rule
9.21(d)(iii) would amend Rule 9.21(a)(iii) by clarifying the types of
cautionary statements and caveats that are prohibited. Also, as
previously noted, CBOE proposed to delete Rule 9.21(a)(iv).

C. Proposed Amendments to Rule 9.21(b)

    CBOE proposed to amend Rule 9.21(b) to include the types of
communications

proposed to be added to the definition of ``Options Communications'' in
proposed Rule 9.21(a). Proposed Rules 9.21(b)(ii) and (b)(iii) would
also amend the current requirements to obtain advance approval by a ROP
for most options communications by exempting certain options
communications, defined as ``Correspondence'' and ``Institutional Sales
Material.'' Specifically, proposed Rule 9.21(b)(ii) would exempt
correspondence from the pre-approval requirement unless the
correspondence is distributed to 25 or more existing retail customers
within any 30 calendar-day period and makes any financial or investment
recommendation or otherwise promotes a product or service of the
member. All correspondence would be subject to general supervision and
review requirements.\15\ Proposed Rule 9.21(b)(iii) would exempt
institutional sales material from the pre-approval requirement if the
material is distributed to ``qualified investors'' (as defined in
Section 3(a)(54) of the Exchange Act \16\).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See CBOE Rule 9.8.
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(54).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pre-approval by a ROP would, however, be required with respect to
independently prepared reprints. In addition, Proposed Rule 9.21(b)(iv)
would require that firms retain options communications in accordance
with the recordkeeping requirements of Rule 17a-4 under the Exchange
Act.\17\ Proposed Rule 9.21(b)(iv) would also require that firms retain
other related documents in the form and for the time periods required
for options communications by Rule 17a-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 240.17a-4. More specifically, Rule 17a-4(b)(4)
requires that a broker-dealer retain ``originals of all
communications received and copies of all communications sent * * *
including all communications which are subject to rules of a self-
regulatory organization of which the member, broker or dealer is a
member regarding communications with the public.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Proposed Amendments to Rule 9.21(c)

    Rule 9.21(c) currently requires members to obtain approval for
every advertisement and all educational material from the Exchange's
Department of Compliance. This requirement applies regardless of
whether the options communications are used before or after the
delivery of a current ODD. CBOE proposed to amend this provision to
require approval by the Exchange only with respect to options
communications used prior to the delivery of a current ODD. The
Exchange pre-approval requirement for options communications used
subsequent to the delivery of the ODD is being eliminated because the
ODD should help alert the customer to the characteristics and risks
associated with trading in options and because Rule 9.21(b) requires
the Registered Options Principal of a member organization to pre-
approve options communications (with certain exceptions for
``Correspondence'' and ``Institutional Sales Material''). Rule 9.21(c)
would also be amended to include the types of communications added to
the definition of ``Options Communications'' in proposed Rule 9.21(a).

E. Redesignation of Rule 9.21(e) to Proposed Rule 9.21(a) and Related
Amendments

    Rule 9.21(e) currently defines terms used in Rule 9.21. CBOE
proposed to redesignate paragraph (e) as paragraph (a). CBOE also
proposed to amend the definition of ``Options Communications'' in
proposed Rule 9.21(a) to expand the types of communications governed by
Rule 9.21 to include independently prepared reprints and other
communications between a member or member organization and a customer.
The Exchange proposed to amend the definitions of ``Advertisement'' and
``Sales Literature;'' and define ``Correspondence,'' ``Institutional
Sales Material,'' ``Public Appearances,'' and ``Independently Prepared
Reprints;'' to clarify the rule. In addition, as previously noted, CBOE
proposed to delete the definition of ``Educational Material.''

F. Proposed Rule 9.21(e)

    Proposed Rule 9.21(e) would set forth (i) standards for options
communications that are not preceded or accompanied by an ODD and (ii)
standards for options communications used prior to delivery of an ODD.
These requirements generally would clarify and restate the requirements
contained in the current Interpretations and Policies .02 of Rule 9.21.

G. Interpretations and Policies

    Proposed Rule 9.21(e)(i)(B) would require options communications to
contain contact information for obtaining a copy of the ODD. Proposed
Interpretation and Policy .01 would include the provisions found in
current Section A of Interpretation and Policy .02 regarding how this
requirement may be satisfied. In addition, as noted above, the
provisions of Interpretation and Policy .01 regarding limitations on
the use of options communications are proposed to be incorporated into
proposed Rule 9.21(d).
    As previously noted, the provisions of Interpretation and Policy
.02 that outline what is permitted in an advertisement are proposed to
be deleted and the provisions relating to standards for options
communications used prior to delivery of the ODD are proposed to be
incorporated into proposed Rule 9.21(e)(ii).
    Interpretation and Policy .03, which concerns educational material,
is proposed to be deleted as noted above.
    Interpretation and Policy .04 sets forth the standards applicable
to Sales Literature. Section A of Interpretation and Policy .04 sets
forth the requirement that Sales Literature shall state that supporting
documentation for any claims, comparisons, recommendations, statistics
or other technical data will be supplied upon request. The Exchange
proposed to redesignate Section A of Interpretation and Policy .04 as
proposed Rule 9.21(d)(vii).
    Section B of Interpretation and Policy .04 pertains to standards
for Sales Literature that contains projected performance figures.
Section C of Interpretation and Policy .04 pertains to standards for
Sales Literature that contains historical performance figures. The
Exchange proposed to redesignate Section B of Interpretation and Policy
.04 as proposed Interpretation and Policy .02 and Section C of
Interpretation and Policy .04 as proposed Interpretation and Policy
.03.
    Rule 9.21 currently requires that a copy of the ODD precede or
accompany options related sales literature. The Exchange is proposing
to modify the ODD delivery requirement applicable to sales literature
to provide that an ODD must precede or accompany any communication that
conveys past or projected performance figures involving options or
constitutes a recommendation pertaining to options.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See proposed Rule 9.21(e)(i)(C) and proposed Interpretation
and Policies .02 and .03.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A notice providing the name and address of a person from whom the
ODD may be obtained would be required in sales literature that does not
contain a recommendation or past or projected performance figures.
Because CBOE is proposing to merge educational material into the sales
literature category,\19\ this amendment would continue to allow
communications that are educational in nature to be disseminated
without being preceded or accompanied by a copy of the ODD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Proposed Rule 9.21(a)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposed to redesignate Section D of Interpretation
and Policy .04 as proposed Interpretation and

Policy .04. The Exchange proposed to delete Sections E and F of
Interpretation and Policy .04. The Exchange believes Section E is
unnecessary because worksheets are included in the definition of
``Sales Literature.'' The Exchange believes Section F is no longer
necessary because the Exchange is proposing to clarify the record-
keeping requirements applicable to options communications in proposed
Rule 9.21(b)(iv).

II. Comment Letter

    The Commission received one comment letter from SIFMA on the
proposed rule change.\20\ CBOE responded to this comment letter.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See note 5, supra.
    \21\ See note 6, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SIFMA expressed support for the proposed rule change and
incorporated by reference SIFMA's prior comments on a similar proposal
by FINRA regarding options communications with the public.\22\ FINRA
addressed SIFMA's prior comments in an amendment to FINRA's proposed
rule change.\23\ CBOE stated it concurred in general with FINRA's
responses to SIFMA's prior comments.\24\ Therefore, CBOE did not
believe that additional changes to the proposed rule change were
required.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Letter from Melissa MacGregor, Vice President and
Assistant General Counsel, SIFMA, dated May 22, 2008, regarding
Exchange Act Release No. 57720 (Apr. 25, 2008) 73 FR 24332 (May 2,
2008).
    \23\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58738 (Oct. 6,
2008) 73 FR 60371 (Oct. 10, 2008) (SR-FINRA-2008-13).
    \24\ See note 6, supra.
    \25\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Findings

    After careful review of the proposed rule change, the comment
letter and CBOE's response to the comment letter, the Commission finds
that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of
the Exchange Act, and the rules and regulations thereunder that are
applicable to a national securities exchange.\26\ In particular, the
Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Exchange Act \27\ in general and would further the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) \28\ in particular in that it is designed
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest by providing the investing public
with options communications rules that are designed to provide
appropriate safeguards and greater clarity by promoting harmonization
between CBOE's and other SROs' options communications rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered
the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\29\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2007-30), as modified
by Amendment No. 1 thereto, be, and hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-25504 Filed 10-24-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72227-72230]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30053]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65765; File No. S7-04-09]

Order Extending Temporary Conditional Exemption for Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations From Requirements of Rule
17g-5 Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Request for Comment

November 16, 2011.

I. Introduction

    On May 19, 2010, the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') conditionally exempted, with respect to certain credit
ratings and until December 2, 2010, nationally recognized statistical
rating organizations (``NRSROs'') from certain requirements

in Rule 17g-5(a)(3) \1\ under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act''), which had a compliance date of June 2, 2010.\2\
Pursuant to the Order, an NRSRO is not required to comply with Rule
17g-5(a)(3) until December 2, 2010 with respect to credit ratings
where: (1) The issuer of the structured finance product is a non-U.S.
person; and (2) the NRSRO has a reasonable basis to conclude that the
structured finance product will be offered and sold upon issuance, and
that any arranger linked to the structured finance product will effect
transactions of the structured finance product after issuance, only in
transactions that occur outside the U.S. (``covered transactions'').\3\
On November 23, 2010, the Commission extended the conditional temporary
exemption until December 2, 2011 (the ``Extension Order'').\4\ The
Commission is extending the temporary conditional exemption exempting
NRSROs from complying with Rule 17g-5(a)(3) with respect to rating
covered transactions until December 2, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 17 CFR 240.17g-5(a)(3).
    \2\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62120 (May 19,
2010), 75 FR 28825 (May 24, 2010) (``Order'').
    \3\ See id. at 28827-28 (setting forth conditions of relief).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63363 (Nov. 23,
2010), 75 FR 73137 (Nov. 29, 2010) (``Extension Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background

    Rule 17g-5 identifies, in paragraphs (b) and (c) of the rule, a
series of conflicts of interest arising from the business of
determining credit ratings.\5\ Paragraph (a) of Rule 17g-5 \6\
prohibits an NRSRO from issuing or maintaining a credit rating if it is
subject to the conflicts of interest identified in paragraph (b) of
Rule 17g-5 unless the NRSRO has taken the steps prescribed in paragraph
(a)(1) (i.e., disclosed the type of conflict of interest in Exhibit 6
to Form NRSRO in accordance with Section 15E(a)(1)(B)(vi) of the
Exchange Act \7\ and Rule 17g-1) \8\ and paragraph (a)(2) (i.e.,
established and is maintaining and enforcing written policies and
procedures to address and manage conflicts of interest in accordance
with Section 15E(h) of the Exchange Act).\9\ Paragraph (c) of Rule 17g-
5 specifically prohibits seven types of conflicts of interest.
Consequently, an NRSRO is prohibited from issuing or maintaining a
credit rating when it is subject to these conflicts regardless of
whether it had disclosed them and established procedures reasonably
designed to address them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 240.17g-5(b) and (c).
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.17g-5(a).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-7(a)(1)(B)(vi).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.17g-1.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-7(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In December 2009, the Commission adopted subparagraph (a)(3) to
Rule 17g-5. This provision requires an NRSRO that is hired by an
arranger to determine an initial credit rating for a structured finance
product to take certain steps designed to allow an NRSRO that is not
hired by the arranger to nonetheless determine an initial credit
rating--and subsequently monitor that credit rating--for the structured
finance product.\10\ In particular, under Rule 17g-5(a)(3), an NRSRO is
prohibited from issuing or maintaining a credit rating when it is
subject to the conflict of interest identified in paragraph (b)(9) of
Rule 17g-5 (i.e., being hired by an arranger to determine a credit
rating for a structured finance product) \11\ unless it has taken the
steps prescribed in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of Rule 17g-5 (discussed
above) and the steps prescribed in new paragraph (a)(3) of Rule 17g-
5.\12\ Rule 17g-5(a)(3), among other things, requires that the NRSRO
must:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 17 CFR 240.17g-5(a)(3); see also Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 61050 (November 23, 2009), 74 FR 63832 (``Adopting
Release'') at 63844-45.
    \11\ Paragraph (b)(9) of Rule 17g-5 identifies the following
conflict of interest: issuing or maintaining a credit rating for a
security or money market instrument issued by an asset pool or as
part of any asset-backed or mortgage-backed securities transaction
that was paid for by the issuer, sponsor, or underwriter of the
security or money market instrument. 17 CFR 240.17g-5(b)(9).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.17g-5(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Maintain on a password-protected Internet Web site a list
of each structured finance product for which it currently is in the
process of determining an initial credit rating in chronological order
and identifying the type of structured finance product, the name of the
issuer, the date the rating process was initiated, and the Internet Web
site address where the arranger represents the information provided to
the hired NRSRO can be accessed by other NRSROs;
     Provide free and unlimited access to such password-
protected Internet Web site during the applicable calendar year to any
NRSRO that provides it with a copy of the certification described in
paragraph (e) of Rule 17g-5 that covers that calendar year; \13\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Paragraph (e) of Rule 17g-5 requires that an NRSRO seeking
to access the hired NRSRO's Internet Web site during the applicable
calendar year must furnish the Commission with the following
certification:
    The undersigned hereby certifies that it will access the
Internet Web sites described in 17 CFR 240.17g-5(a)(3) solely for
the purpose of determining or monitoring credit ratings. Further,
the undersigned certifies that it will keep the information it
accesses pursuant to 17 CFR 240.17g-5(a)(3) confidential and treat
it as material nonpublic information subject to its written policies
and procedures established, maintained, and enforced pursuant to
section 15E(g)(1) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78o-7(g)(1)) and 17 CFR
240.17g-4. Further, the undersigned certifies that it will determine
and maintain credit ratings for at least 10% of the issued
securities and money market instruments for which it accesses
information pursuant to 17 CFR 240.17g-5(a)(3)(iii), if it accesses
such information for 10 or more issued securities or money market
instruments in the calendar year covered by the certification.
Further, the undersigned certifies one of the following as
applicable: (1) In the most recent calendar year during which it
accessed information pursuant to 17 CFR 240.17g-5(a)(3), the
undersigned accessed information for [Insert Number] issued
securities and money market instruments through Internet Web sites
described in 17 CFR 240.17g-5(a)(3) and determined and maintained
credit ratings for [Insert Number] of such securities and money
market instruments; or (2) The undersigned previously has not
accessed information pursuant to 17 CFR 240.17g-5(a)(3) 10 or more
times during the most recently ended calendar year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Obtain from the arranger a written representation that can
reasonably be relied upon that the arranger will, among other things,
disclose on a password-protected Internet Web site the information it
provides to the hired NRSRO to determine the initial credit rating (and
monitor that credit rating) and provide access to the Web site to an
NRSRO that provides it with a copy of the certification described in
paragraph (e) Rule 17g-5.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ In particular, under paragraph (a)(3)(iii) of Rule 17g-5,
the arranger must represent to the hired NRSRO that it will:
    (1) Maintain the information described in paragraphs
(a)(3)(iii)(C) and (a)(3)(iii)(D) of Rule 17g-5 available at an
identified password-protected Internet Web site that presents the
information in a manner indicating which information currently
should be relied on to determine or monitor the credit rating;
    (2) Provide access to such password-protected Internet Web site
during the applicable calendar year to any NRSRO that provides it
with a copy of the certification described in paragraph (e) of Rule
17g-5 that covers that calendar year, provided that such
certification indicates that the nationally recognized statistical
rating organization providing the certification either: (i)
Determined and maintained credit ratings for at least 10% of the
issued securities and money market instruments for which it accessed
information pursuant to paragraph (a)(3)(iii) of Rule 17g-5 in the
calendar year prior to the year covered by the certification, if it
accessed such information for 10 or more issued securities or money
market instruments; or (ii) has not accessed information pursuant to
paragraph (a)(3) of Rule 17g-5 10 or more times during the most
recently ended calendar year.
    (3) Post on such password-protected Internet Web site all
information the arranger provides to the NRSRO, or contracts with a
third party to provide to the NRSRO, for the purpose of determining
the initial credit rating for the security or money market
instrument, including information about the characteristics of the
assets underlying or referenced by the security or money market
instrument, and the legal structure of the security or money market
instrument, at the same time such information is provided to the
NRSRO; and
    (4) Post on such password-protected Internet Web site all
information the arranger provides to the NRSRO, or contracts with a
third party to provide to the NRSRO, for the purpose of undertaking
credit rating surveillance on the security or money market
instrument, including information about the characteristics and
performance of the assets underlying or referenced by the security
or money market instrument at the same time such information is
provided to the NRSRO.

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

    The Commission stated in the Adopting Release that subparagraph
Rule 17g-5(a)(3) is designed to address conflicts of interest and
improve the quality of credit ratings for structured finance products
by making it possible for more NRSROs to rate structured finance
products.\15\ For example, the Commission noted that when an NRSRO is
hired to rate a structured finance product, some of the information it
relies on to determine the rating is generally not made public.\16\ As
a result, structured finance products frequently are issued with
ratings from only the one or two NRSROs that have been hired by the
arranger, with the attendant conflict of interest that creates.\17\ The
Commission stated that subparagraph Rule 17g-5(a)(3) was designed to
increase the number of credit ratings extant for a given structured
finance product and, in particular, to promote the issuance of credit
ratings by NRSROs that are not hired by arrangers.\18\ The Commission's
goal in adopting the rule was to provide users of credit ratings with
more views on the creditworthiness of structured finance products.\19\
In addition, the Commission stated that Rule 17g-5(a)(3) was designed
to reduce the ability of arrangers to obtain better than warranted
ratings by exerting influence over NRSROs hired to determine credit
ratings for structured finance products.\20\ Specifically, by opening
up the rating process to more NRSROs, the Commission intended to make
it easier for the hired NRSRO to resist such pressure by increasing the
likelihood that any steps taken to inappropriately favor the arranger
could be exposed to the market through the credit ratings issued by
other NRSROs.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Adopting Release at 63844.
    \16\ Id.
    \17\ Id.
    \18\ Id.
    \19\ Id.
    \20\ Id.
    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17g-5(a)(3) became effective on February 2, 2010, and the
compliance date for Rule 17g-5(a)(3) was June 2, 2010.

III. Extension of Conditional Temporary Extension

    In the Order, the Commission requested comment generally, but also
on a number of specific issues.\22\ The Commission received six
comments in response to this solicitation of comment.\23\ The
commenters expressed concern that the extraterritorial application of
Rule 17g-5(a)(3) could, in the commenter's view, among other things,
disrupt local securitization markets,\24\ inhibit the ability of local
firms to raise capital,\25\ and conflict with local laws.\26\ Several
commenters also requested that the conditional temporary exemption be
extended or made permanent.\27\ The Extension Order again solicited
public comment on issues raised in connection with the extra-
territorial application of Rule 17g-5(a)(3).\28\ One comment letter
requested that the Order be made permanent, citing many of the same
reasons set forth in prior comment letters.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Order, supra note 2, at 28828.
    \23\ Letter from Masamichi Kono, Vice Commissioner for
International Affairs, Financial Services Agency, Japan, to
Elizabeth Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated Nov. 12, 2010
(``Japan FSA Letter''); Letter from Masaru Ono, Executive Director,
Securitization Forum of Japan, to Elizabeth Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated Nov. 12, 2010 (``SFJ Letter''); Letter from Rick
Watson, Managing Director, Association for Financial Markets in
Europe/European Securitisation Forum, to Elizabeth Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated Nov. 11, 2010 (``AFME Letter''); Letter
from Jack Rando, Director, Capital Markets, Investment Industry
Association of Canada, to Randall Roy, Assistant Director, Division,
Commission, dated Sep. 22, 2010 (``IIAC Letter''); Letter from
Christopher Dalton, Chief Executive Officer, Australian
Securitisation Forum, to Randall Roy, Assistant Director, Division,
Commission, dated Jun. 27, 2010 (``AuSF Letter''); Letter from
Takefumi Emori, Managing Director, Japan Credit Rating Agency, Ltd.
(``JCR'') to Elizabeth Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated Jun. 25,
2010 (``JCR Letter'').
    \24\ See Japan FSA Letter; SFJ Letter; AFME Letter; JCR Letter,
AuSF Letter.
    \25\ See AFME Letter; JCR Letter; AuSF Letter.
    \26\ See Japan FSA Letter; AFME Letter; JCR Letter; AuSF Letter;
IIAC Letter. With respect to local laws, we note that the European
Commission in recent months has issued a relevant proposal for
amendments to the European Union Regulation on Credit Ratings. See
``Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Counsel on
amending Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009 on credit rating agencies''
(available at http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/securities/docs/agencies/100602_proposal_en.pdf).
    \27\ See Japan FSA Letter; SFJ Letter; AFME Letter; JCR Letter.
    \28\ See Letter from Tom Deutsch, Executive Director, American
Securitization Forum, and Chris Dalton, Chief Executive Officer,
Australian Securitization Forum, to Randall Roy, Assistant Director,
and Joseph Levinson, Special Counsel, Division, Commission, dated
Aug. 9, 2011.
    \29\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given the continued concerns about potential disruptions of local
securitization markets, and because the Commission's consideration of
the issues raised will benefit from additional time to engage in
further dialogue with interested parties and to monitor market and
regulatory developments, the Commission believes extending the
conditional temporary exemption until December 2, 2012 is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, and is consistent with the
protection of investors.

IV. Request for Comment

    The Commission believes that it would be useful to continue to
provide interested parties opportunity to comment. Comments may be
submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/exorders.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number S7-04-09 on the subject line; or
     Use the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov). Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number S7-04-09. This file number
should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help us
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/exorders.shtml). Comments
are also available for Web site viewing and printing in the
Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F St. NE., Washington, DC 20549
on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. 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.

V. Conclusion

    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission believes it would be
necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the
protection of investors to extend the conditional temporary exemption
exempting NRSROs from complying with Rule 17g-5(a)(3) with respect to
rating covered transactions until December 2, 2012.
    Accordingly,
    It is hereby ordered, pursuant to Section 36 of the Exchange Act,
that a nationally recognized statistical rating

organization is exempt until December 2, 2012 from the requirements in
Rule 17g-5(a)(3) (17 CFR 240.17g-5(a)(3)) for credit ratings where:
    (1) The issuer of the security or money market instrument is not a
U.S. person (as defined under Securities Act Rule 902(k)); and
    (2) The nationally recognized statistical rating organization has a
reasonable basis to conclude that the structured finance product will
be offered and sold upon issuance, and that any arranger linked to the
structured finance product will effect transactions of the structured
finance product after issuance, only in transactions that occur outside
the U.S.

    By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-30053 Filed 11-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P