[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 4, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23764-23766]
[FR Doc No: 2021-09385]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 34259; 812-15207]

HPS Corporate Lending Fund and HPS Investment Partners, LLC

April 29, 2021.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of an application under Section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from Sections
18(a)(2), 18(c), 18(i) and Section 61(a) of the Act.

Summary of Application:  Applicants request an order to permit certain
closed-end management investment companies that intend to elect to be
regulated as business development companies (``BDCs'') to issue
multiple classes of shares with varying sales loads and asset-based
service and/or distribution fees.

Applicants:  HPS Corporate Lending Fund (the ``Current Fund'') and HPS
Investment Partners, LLC (the ``Current Investment Adviser'').

Filing Dates:  The application was filed on March 5, 2021, and amended
on April 20, 2021.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing:  An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by emailing the Commission's
Secretary at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and serving applicants with a
copy of the request by email.
    Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m.
on May 24, 2021 and should be accompanied by proof of service on the
applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or, for lawyers, a certificate
of service. Pursuant to Rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should
state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the
desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request,
and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing
may request notification by emailing to the Commission's Secretary at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
ADDRESSES: The Commission<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Applicants:
Yoohyun K. Choi, HPS Investment Partners, LLC,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Richard Horowitz, Esq., Dechert LLP,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deepak Pai, Senior Counsel, at (202)
551-6876 or Trace Rakestraw, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division
of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's website by searching for the file number, or for an
applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. The Current Fund is a Delaware statutory trust that is an
externally managed, non-diversified, closed-end management investment
company that intends to elect to be regulated as a BDC under the
Act.\1\ The Current Fund's investment objective will be to produce
current income while preserving capital, by investing primarily in
newly originated secured debt. Prior to relying on the requested order,
the Current Fund will have filed an election to be regulated as a BDC
under the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 2(a)(48) of the Act defines a BDC to be any closed-
end investment company that operates for the purpose of making
investments in securities described in Sections 55(a)(1) through
55(a)(3) of the Act and makes available significant managerial
assistance with respect to the issuers of such securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The Current Investment Adviser is registered as an investment
adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and serves as
investment adviser to the Current Fund.
    3. Applicants seek an order to permit the Funds (defined below) to
offer investors multiple classes of shares, interests or units of
beneficial interest, as the case may be (``Shares'') with varying sales
loads and asset-based service and/or distribution fees.
    4. Applicants request that the order also apply to any continuously
offered registered closed-end management investment company that elects
to be regulated as a BDC that has been previously organized or that may
be organized in the future for which the Current Investment Adviser or
any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the
Current Investment Adviser, or any successor in interest to any such
entity,\2\ acts as investment adviser which periodically offers to
repurchase its Shares pursuant to Rule 13e-4 under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') and Section 23(c)(2) of the Act
(each, a ``Future Fund'' and together with the Current Fund, the
``Funds'').\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For purposes of the requested order, ``successor'' is
limited to any entity that results from a reorganization into
another jurisdiction or a change in the type of a business
organization.
    \3\ Any Fund relying on this relief in the future will do so in
compliance with the terms and conditions of the application.
Applicants represent that each entity presently intending to rely on
the requested relief is listed as an applicant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. As a BDC, the Current Fund is organized as a closed-end
investment company, but will offer its Shares continuously, similar to
an open-end management investment company. The Current Fund currently
will only issue a single class of Shares, but anticipates that if the
relief requested in its application is granted, then it may consider
adding additional classes of Shares to its public offering. Shares of
the Funds will not be offered or traded in a secondary market and will
not be listed on any securities exchange and do not trade on an over-
the-counter system.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Applicants are not requesting relief with respect to any
Fund listed on a securities exchange. Any Fund which relies on the
relief requested herein will cease relying on such relief upon the
listing of any class of its Shares on a securities exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Each Fund is seeking the ability to offer multiple classes of
Shares that may charge differing front-end sales loads, contingent
deferred sales charges (``CDSCs''), an early withdrawal charge
(``Repurchase Fee''), and/or annual asset-based service and/or
distribution fees. Each class of Shares will comply with the provisions
of Rule 2310 of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') Manual (``FINRA Rule 2310'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Any reference to FINRA Rule 2310 includes any successor or
replacement rule that may be adopted by FINRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Any Share of a Fund that is subject to asset-based service or
distribution fees shall convert to a class with no asset based service
or distribution fees upon such Share reaching the applicable sales
charge cap determined in accordance with FINRA Rule 2310. Further, if a
class of Shares were to be listed on an exchange in the future, all
other then-existing classes of Shares of the listing Fund will be
converted into the listed class, without the imposition of any sales
load, fee or other charge.
    8. In order to provide a limited degree of liquidity to
shareholders, Applicants state that each Fund may from time to time
offer to repurchase Shares in accordance with Rule 13e-4 under the
Exchange Act and Section 23(c)(2) of the Act. Applicants state further
that repurchases of each Fund's Shares will be made at such times, in
such amounts and on such terms as may be determined by the applicable
Fund's board of directors or trustees in its sole discretion.
    9. Each Fund will disclose in its prospectus the fees, expenses and
other characteristics of each class of Shares offered for sale by the
prospectus, as is required for open-end, multiple-class funds under
Form N-1A. As if it were an open-end management investment company,
each Fund will disclose fund expenses in shareholder reports,\6\ and
disclose in its prospectus any arrangements that result in breakpoints
in, or elimination of, sales loads.\7\ Each Fund will also comply with
any requirements the Commission or FINRA may adopt regarding disclosure
at the

point of sale and in transaction confirmations about the costs and
conflicts of interest arising out of the distribution of open-end
management investment company shares, and regarding prospectus
disclosure of sales loads and revenue sharing arrangements as if those
requirements applied to the Fund.\8\ Each Fund will contractually
require that any distributor of a Fund's Shares comply with such
requirements in connection with the distribution of such Fund's shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Shareholder Reports and Quarterly Portfolio Disclosure
of Registered Management Investment Companies, Investment Co. Act
Rel. No. 26372 (Feb. 27, 2004) (adopting release).
    \7\ See Disclosure of Breakpoint Discounts by Mutual Funds,
Investment Co. Act Rel. No. 26464 (June 7, 2004) (adopting release).
    \8\ See Confirmation Requirements and Point of Sale Disclosure
Requirements for Transactions in Certain Mutual Funds and Other
Securities, and Other Confirmation Requirement Amendments, and
Amendments to the Registration Form for Mutual Funds, Investment Co.
Act Rel. No. 26341 (Jan. 29, 2004) (proposing release).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. Distribution fees will be paid pursuant to a plan of
distribution adopted by each Fund in compliance with Rules 12b-1 and
17d-3 under the Act, as if those rules applied to closed-end funds
electing to be regulated as BDCs, with respect to a class (a
``Distribution Plan'').
    11. Each Fund will allocate all expenses incurred by it among the
various classes of Shares based on the respective net assets of the
Fund attributable to each such class, except that the net asset value
and expenses of each class will reflect the expenses associated with
the Distribution Plan of that class (if any), shareholder servicing
fees attributable to a particular class (including transfer agency
fees, if any) and any other incremental expenses of that class.
Expenses of the Fund allocated to a particular class of the Fund's
Shares will be borne on a pro rata basis by each outstanding Share of
that class. Applicants state that each Fund will comply with the
provisions of Rule 18f-3 under the Act as if it were an open-end
management investment company.
    12. Any Fund that imposes a CDSC will comply with the provisions of
Rule 6c-10 (except to the extent a Fund will comply with FINRA Rule
2310 rather than FINRA Rule 2341, as such rule may be amended (``FINRA
Rule 2341'')), as if that rule applied to BDCs. With respect to any
waiver of, scheduled variation in, or elimination of the CDSC, a Fund
will comply with the requirements of Rule 22d-1 under the Act as if the
Fund were an open-end management investment company. Each Fund also
will disclose CDSCs in accordance with the requirements of Form N-1A
concerning CDSCs as if the Fund were an open-end management investment
company.
    13. Funds may impose a Repurchase Fee at a rate no greater than 2%
of the shareholder's repurchase proceeds if the interval between the
date of purchase of the Shares and the valuation date with respect to
the repurchase of such Shares is less than a specified period. Any
Repurchase Fee will apply equally to all shareholders of the applicable
Fund, regardless of class, consistent with Section 18 of the Act and
Rule 18f-3 under the Act. To the extent a Fund determines to waive,
impose scheduled variations of, or eliminate any Repurchase Fees, it
will do so consistently with the requirements of Rule 22d-1 under the
Act as if the Repurchase Fee were a CDSC and as if the Fund were an
open-end investment company and the Fund's waiver of, scheduled
variation in, or elimination of, the Repurchase Fee will apply
uniformly to all shareholders of the Fund.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

Multiple Classes of Shares

    1. Section 18(a)(2) of the Act provides that a closed-end
investment company may not issue or sell a senior security that is a
stock unless certain requirements are met. Applicants state that the
creation of multiple classes of shares of the Funds may violate Section
18(a)(2), which is made applicable to BDCs through Section 61(a) of the
Act, because the Funds may not meet such requirements with respect to a
class of shares that may be a senior security.
    2. Section 18(c) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that a
closed-end investment company may not issue or sell any senior security
if, immediately thereafter, the company has outstanding more than one
class of senior security. Applicants state that the creation of
multiple classes of Shares of the Funds may be prohibited by Section
18(c), which is made applicable to BDCs through Section 61(a) of the
Act, as a class may have priority over another class as to payment of
dividends because shareholders of different classes would pay different
fees and expenses.
    3. Section 18(i) of the Act provides that each share of stock
issued by a registered management investment company will be a voting
stock and have equal voting rights with every other outstanding voting
stock. Applicants state that multiple classes of shares of the Funds
may violate Section 18(i) of the Act, which is made applicable to BDCs
through Section 61(a) of the Act, because each class would be entitled
to exclusive voting rights with respect to matters solely related to
that class.
    4. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security or transaction or any class or classes of persons,
securities or transactions from any provision of the Act, or from any
rule or regulation under the Act, if and to the extent such exemption
is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with
the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the
policy and provisions of the Act. Applicants request an exemption under
Section 6(c) from Sections 18(a)(2), 18(c) and 18(i) (which are made
applicable to BDCs by Section 61(a) of the Act) to permit the Funds to
issue multiple classes of Shares.
    5. Applicants submit that the proposed allocation of expenses
relating to distribution and voting rights among multiple classes is
equitable and will not discriminate against any group or class of
shareholders. Applicants submit that the proposed arrangements would
permit a Fund to facilitate the distribution of its Shares and provide
investors with a broader choice of fee options. Applicants assert that
the proposed BDC multiple class structure does not raise the concerns
underlying Section 18 of the Act to any greater degree than open-end
management investment companies' multiple class structures that are
permitted by Rule 18f-3 under the Act.

Applicants' Condition

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following condition:
    1. Each Fund will comply with the provisions of Rules 6c-10 (except
to the extent a Fund will comply with FINRA Rule 2310 rather than FINRA
Rule 2341), 12b-1, 17d-3, 18f-3, 22d-1, and, where applicable, 11a-3
under the Act, as amended from time to time, or any successor rules
thereto, as if those rules applied to BDCs. In addition, each Fund will
comply with FINRA Rule 2310, as amended from time to time, or any
successor rule thereto, and will make available to any distributor of a
Fund's shares all of the information necessary to permit the
distributor to prepare client account statements in compliance with
FINRA Rule 2231.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-09385 Filed 5-3-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 50 (Friday, March 13, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14574-14576]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05145]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2020-0149]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Munitions Transfer Safety Zone; Alameda Estuary,
Alameda, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the
navigable waters of the Alameda Estuary near Coast Guard Island in
Alameda, CA in support of a munitions transfer on March 15, 2020. This
safety zone is necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine
environment from the dangers associated with live munitions.
Unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into,
transiting through, or remaining in the safety zone without permission
of the Captain of the Port or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. on March 15,
2020.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2020-0149 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Emily Rowan, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San
Francisco; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port San Francisco
DHS Department of Homeland Security
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking with
respect to this rule because it is impracticable. The Coast Guard did
not receive final details for this event until March 4, 2020. There was
insufficient time to undergo the full rulemaking process, including
providing a reasonable comment period and considering those comments,
because the Coast Guard must establish this temporary safety zone by
March 15, 2020.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be contrary to public interest because immediate action
is necessary to respond to the potential safety hazards associated with
the munitions transfer near Alameda, CA.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port San
Francisco has determined that potential hazards associated with the
munitions transfer on March 15, 2020, will be a safety concern for
anyone within 250-foot radius of the pier. This rule is needed to
protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable
waters around the munitions transfer site during the munitions
transfer.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone from 8 a.m. to 3:30
p.m. on March 15, 2020. At 8 a.m. the safety zone will encompass the
navigable waters, from surface to bottom, within 250 feet of the
munitions transfer pier located on the southwest side of Coast Guard
Island near the South Channel of the Alameda Estuary. The safety zone
will terminate at 3:30 p.m. on March 15, 2020.
    This regulation is needed to keep persons and vessels away from the
immediate vicinity of the munitions transfer location to ensure the
safety of people and transiting vessels. Except for persons or vessels
authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative, no
person or vessel may enter or remain in the restricted area. A
``designated representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander,
including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer
operating a Coast Guard vessel or a Federal, State, or local officer
designated by or assisting the COTP in the enforcement of the safety
zone. The COTP or the COTP's designated representative will notify the
maritime community of periods during which this zone will be enforced
using information broadcasts.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the limited
duration and narrowly tailored geographic area of the safety zone. This
safety zone impacts a 250-foot-wide portion of the South Channel of the
Alameda Estuary along the southwest side of Coast Guard Island in
Alameda, CA for 7 hours and 30 minutes. The vessels desiring to transit
through or around the temporary safety zone may do so upon express
permission from the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
temporary safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in
section V.A. above, this rule will not have a

significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Policy,
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-
4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This rule involves a safety zone
lasting six hours and thirty minutes that prevents entry to a 250-foot-
wide area of the Alameda Estuary in Alameda, CA. It is categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) in Table 3-1 of
Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01. A Record of
Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available
in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-020 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-020   Safety Zone; Munitions Transfer Safety Zone,
Alameda Estuary, Alameda, CA.

    (a) Location. This temporary safety zone is established in the
navigable waters of the South Channel of the Alameda Estuary near the
Pier along the southwest side of Coast Guard Island in Alameda, CA as
depicted in National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
Chart 18662. From 8:00 a.m. until 3:30 p.m. on March 15, 2020, the
temporary safety zone will apply to all navigable waters of the Alameda
Estuary, from surface to bottom, within 250 feet of the pier along the
southwest side of Coast Guard Island, during which time the pier will
be used as the munitions transfer location.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer on a Coast Guard
vessel, or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or
assisting the Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP) in the
enforcement of the safety zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart B, you may not enter the safety zone described in paragraph (a)
of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the COTP or the COTP's designated representative to
obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter
or operate in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative. Persons and vessels may request permission to enter the
safety zone on VHF-23A or through the 24-hour Command Center at
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 8 a.m.
until 3:30 p.m. on March 15, 2020.

    (e) Information broadcasts. The COTP or the COTP's designated
representative will notify the maritime community of periods during
which this zone will be enforced in accordance with Sec.  165.7.

    Dated: March 9, 2020.
Howard H. Wright,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Alternate Captain of the Port, San
Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2020-05145 Filed 3-12-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: March 31, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 62)]
[Notices]
[Page 17850-17852]
[DOCID:fr31mr11-48]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER01-989-008.
    Applicants: Green Mountain Power Corporation.
    Description: Supplemental of Green Mountain Power Corporation to
triennial market power update report.
    Filed Date: 03/15/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110315-5176.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 5, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2365-000; ER11-2365-001.
    Applicants: Paradise Solar Urban Renewal, L.L.C.
    Description: Paradise Solar Urban Renewal, L.L.C. Revision to
Market Power Analysis.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5129.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2774-000.
    Applicants: Virginia Electric and Power Company, Dominion Energy
Marketing, Inc., Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., Dominion Energy
Kewaunee, Inc., Dominion Energy Brayton Point, LLC, Dominion Energy
Manchester Street, Inc. Dominion Energy New England, Inc., Dominion
Energy Salem Harbor, LLC, Dominion Retail, Inc., Elwood Energy, LLC,
Fairless Energy, LLC, Kincaid Generation, L.L.C. NedPower Mt. Storm,
LLC, State Line Energy, L.L.C., Fowler Ridge Wind Farm LLC.

    Description: Response of the Dominion Companies to the letter dated
February 24, 2011 from FERC Staff.
    Filed Date: 03/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110317-5075.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 7, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3053-001.
    Applicants: Holcim (US) Inc.
    Description: Holcim (US) Inc. submits tariff filing per 35.17(b):
Holcim MBRA App Amendment to be effective 5/9/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5001.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3173-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Arizona Public Service Company submits tariff filing
per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: Rate Schedule No. 217 Amendment to Exhibit B.CAG
to be effective 11/15/2010.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5002.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3174-000.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.
    Description: Idaho Power Company submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: Imnaha Service Agreement to be effective 4/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5003.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3176-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: Cancellation of BREC RR-1 to
be effective 3/24/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5022.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3177-000.
    Applicants: Union Leader Corporation.
    Description: Union Leader Corporation submits tariff filing per
35.1: Union Leader Baseline Electric Tariff to be effective 3/23/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5025.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3178-000.
    Applicants: The Order of St. Benedict of New Hampshire.
    Description: The Order of St. Benedict of New Hampshire submits
tariff filing per 35.1: Order of St. Benedict FERC Electric Tariff to
be effective 3/23/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5026.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3179-000.
    Applicants: North American Energy Markets Association.
    Description: Mid-Continent Energy Marketers Association submits
tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: Notice of Succession to be effective
2/22/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5064.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3180-000.
    Applicants: Westerly Hospital Energy Company, LLC.
    Description: Westerly Hospital Energy Company, LLC submits tariff
filing per 35.1: Westerly Hospital FERC Electric Tariff to be effective
3/23/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5065.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3181-000.
    Applicants: Ohio Valley Electric Corporation.
    Description: Ohio Valley Electric Corporation submits tariff filing
per 35.1: OVEC Inter-Company Power Agreement and OVEC-IKEC Power
Agreement to be effective 5/23/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5071.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3182-000.
    Applicants: The Connecticut Light and Power Company.
    Description: The Connecticut Light and Power Company submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: Interconnection Agreement Between CL&P and
NRG to be effective 3/13/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5078.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3183-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Arkansas, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: Attachment V Amendments re: On-Peak Hours, etc. to be
effective 5/22/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5102.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3184-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: Revisions to Schedule 10-NERC of the PJM Tariff to
correct typographical errors to be effective 6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110323-5103.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of
self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not
institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice
of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides
notification that the entity making the filing has determined the
facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets
that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-
recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to
notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications
and self-recertifications.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 24, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-7563 Filed 3-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 34 (Wednesday, February 20, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5074-5075]
[FR Doc No: 2019-02826]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2386-000]

City of Holyoke Gas and Electric Department; Notice of
Authorization for Continued Project Operation

    On August 31, 2016, City of Holyoke Gas and Electric Department,
licensee for the Holyoke No. 1 Hydroelectric Project, filed an
Application for a New License pursuant to the Federal Power Act (FPA)
and the Commission's regulations thereunder. The Holyoke No. 1
Hydroelectric Project is located between the first and second canals
adjacent to the Connecticut River, in the City of Holyoke in Hampton
County, Massachusetts.
    The license for Project No. 2386 was issued for a period ending
January 31, 2019. Section 15(a)(1) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 808(a)(1),
requires the Commission, at the expiration of a

license term, to issue from year-to-year an annual license to the then
licensee under the terms and conditions of the prior license until a
new license is issued, or the project is otherwise disposed of as
provided in section 15 or any other applicable section of the FPA. If
the project's prior license waived the applicability of section 15 of
the FPA, then, based on section 9(b) of the Administrative Procedure
Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c), and as set forth at 18 CFR 16.21(a), if the
licensee of such project has filed an application for a subsequent
license, the licensee may continue to operate the project in accordance
with the terms and conditions of the license after the minor or minor
part license expires, until the Commission acts on its application. If
the licensee of such a project has not filed an application for a
subsequent license, then it may be required, pursuant to 18 CFR
16.21(b), to continue project operations until the Commission issues
someone else a license for the project or otherwise orders disposition
of the project.
    If the project is subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is
hereby given that an annual license for Project No. 2386 is issued to
the licensee for a period effective February 1, 2019 through January
31, 2020, or until the issuance of a new license for the project or
other disposition under the FPA, whichever comes first. If issuance of
a new license (or other disposition) does not take place on or before
January 31, 2020, notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 18 CFR
16.18(c), an annual license under section 15(a)(1) of the FPA is
renewed automatically without further order or notice by the
Commission, unless the Commission orders otherwise.
    If the project is not subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is
hereby given that the licensee, City of Holyoke Gas and Electric
Department, Inc., is authorized to continue operation of the Holyoke
No. 1 Hydroelectric Project until such time as the Commission acts on
its application for a subsequent license.

    Dated: February 13, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-02826 Filed 2-19-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 1, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11293-11295]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04154]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 888

[Docket No. FDA-2022-N-0114]

Medical Devices; Orthopedic Devices; Classification of the Screw
Sleeve Bone Fixation Device

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final amendment; final order.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) is
classifying the screw sleeve bone fixation device into class II
(special controls). The special controls that apply to the device type
are identified in this order and will be part of the codified language
for the screw sleeve bone fixation device's classification. We are
taking this action because we have determined that classifying the
device into class II (special controls) will provide a reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness of the device. We believe this
action will also enhance patients' access to beneficial innovative
devices.

DATES:
    This order is effective March 1, 2022. The classification was
applicable on May 1, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jesse Muir, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 4508, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Upon request, FDA has classified the screw sleeve bone fixation
device as class II (special controls), which we have determined will
provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness. In
addition, we believe this action will enhance patients' access to
beneficial innovation, by placing the device into a lower device class
than the automatic class III assignment.
    The automatic assignment of class III occurs by operation of law
and without any action by FDA, regardless of the level of risk posed by
the new device. Any device that was not in commercial distribution
before May 28, 1976, is automatically classified as, and remains
within, class III and requires premarket approval unless and until FDA
takes an action to classify or reclassify the device (see 21 U.S.C.
360c(f)(1)). We refer to these devices as ``postamendments devices''
because they were not in commercial distribution prior to the date of
enactment of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976, which amended the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).
    FDA may take a variety of actions in appropriate circumstances to
classify or reclassify a device into class I or II. We may issue an
order finding a new device to be substantially equivalent under section
513(i) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360c(i)) to a predicate device that
does not require premarket approval. We determine whether a new device
is substantially equivalent to a predicate device by means of the
procedures for premarket notification under section 510(k) of the FD&C
Act (21 U.S.C. 360(k)) and part 807 (21 CFR part 807).
    FDA may also classify a device through ``De Novo'' classification,
a common name for the process authorized under section 513(f)(2) of the
FD&C Act. Section 207 of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization
Act of 1997 (Pub. L. 105-115) established the first procedure for De
Novo classification. Section 607 of the Food and Drug Administration
Safety and Innovation Act (Pub. L. 112-144) modified the De Novo
application process by adding a second procedure. A device sponsor may
utilize either procedure for De Novo classification.
    Under the first procedure, the person submits a 510(k) for a device
that has not previously been classified. After receiving an order from
FDA classifying the device into class III under section 513(f)(1) of
the FD&C Act, the person then requests a classification under section
513(f)(2).
    Under the second procedure, rather than first submitting a 510(k)
and then a request for classification, if the person determines that
there is no legally marketed device upon which to base a determination
of substantial equivalence, that person requests a classification under
section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act.
    Under either procedure for De Novo classification, FDA is required
to classify the device by written order within 120 days. The
classification will be according to the criteria under section
513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act. Although the device was automatically placed
within class III, the De Novo classification is considered to be the
initial classification of the device.
    When FDA classifies a device into class I or II via the De Novo
process, the device can serve as a predicate for future devices of that
type, including for 510(k)s (see section 513(f)(2)(B)(i) of the FD&C
Act). As a result, other device sponsors do not have to submit a De
Novo request or premarket approval application to market a
substantially equivalent device (see section 513(i) of the FD&C Act,
defining ``substantial equivalence''). Instead, sponsors can use the
less-burdensome 510(k) process, when necessary, to market their device.

II. De Novo Classification

    On December 13, 2018, FDA received Woven Orthopedic Technologies,
LLC's request for De Novo classification of the OGmend[supreg] Implant
System. FDA reviewed the request in order to classify the device under
the criteria for classification set forth in section 513(a)(1) of the
FD&C Act.
    We classify devices into class II if general controls by themselves
are insufficient to provide reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness, but there is sufficient information to establish special
controls that, in combination with the general controls, provide
reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for
its intended use (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(a)(1)(B)). After review of the
information submitted in the request, we determined that the device can
be classified into class II with the establishment of special controls.
FDA has determined that these special controls, in addition to the
general controls, will provide reasonable assurance of the safety and
effectiveness of the device.
    Therefore, on May 1, 2020, FDA issued an order to the requester
classifying the device into class II. In this final order, FDA is
codifying the classification of the device by adding 21 CFR
888.3043.\1\ We have named the generic type of device ``screw sleeve
bone fixation device,'' and it is intended to be implanted in
conjunction with a non-resorbable, metallic bone screw where the screw
has lost purchase due to loosening, backout, or breakage. The device
fits between the screw threads and surrounding bone and provides
increased surface area to create an

interference fit to restore stability of the implant construct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ FDA notes that the ``ACTION'' caption for this final order
is styled as ``Final amendment; final order,'' rather than ``Final
order.'' Beginning in December 2019, this editorial change was made
to indicate that the document ``amends'' the Code of Federal
Regulations. The change was made in accordance with the Office of
Federal Register's (OFR) interpretations of the Federal Register Act
(44 U.S.C. chapter 15), its implementing regulations (1 CFR 5.9 and
parts 21 and 22), and the Document Drafting Handbook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FDA has identified the following risks to health associated
specifically with this type of device and the measures required to
mitigate these risks in table 1.

Table 1--Screw Sleeve Bone Fixation Device Risks and Mitigation Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Identified risks                   Mitigation measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loss of function/mechanical integrity    In vivo performance testing;
 resulting from:                          Non-clinical performance
[ssquf] Device malposition.               testing; Shelf life testing;
[ssquf] Device breakage.                  and Labeling.
[ssquf] Damage to screw during
 insertion.
[ssquf] Deterioration due to aging.
[ssquf] Insufficient restoration of
 screw fixation.
Revision...............................  In vivo performance testing;
                                          Non-clinical performance
                                          testing; and Labeling.
Adverse tissue reaction................  Biocompatibility evaluation; In
                                          vivo performance testing; Non-
                                          clinical performance testing;
                                          and Labeling.
Infection..............................  Sterilization validation; and
                                          Shelf life testing.
Febrile response due to endotoxins.....  Pyrogenicity testing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FDA has determined that special controls, in combination with the
general controls, address these risks to health and provide reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness. For a device to fall within this
classification, and thus avoid automatic classification in class III,
it would have to comply with the special controls named in this final
order. The necessary special controls appear in the regulation codified
by this order. We encourage sponsors to consult with us if they wish to
use a non-animal testing method that they believe is suitable,
adequate, validated, and feasible. We will consider if such an
alternative method could be assessed for equivalency to an animal test
method. This device is subject to premarket notification requirements
under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act.

III. Analysis of Environmental Impact

    The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.34(b) that this action is
of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This final order establishes special controls that refer to
previously approved collections of information found in other FDA
regulations and guidance. These collections of information are subject
to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The collections
of information in 21 CFR part 860, subpart D, regarding De Novo
classification have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0844;
the collections of information in 21 CFR part 814, subparts A through
E, regarding premarket approval, have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0231; the collections of information in part 807, subpart
E, regarding premarket notification submissions, have been approved
under OMB control number 0910-0120; the collections of information in
21 CFR part 820, regarding quality system regulation, have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0073; and the collections of
information in 21 CFR part 801, regarding labeling, have been approved
under OMB control number 0910-0485.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 888

    Medical devices.

    Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part
888 is amended as follows:

PART 888--ORTHOPEDIC DEVICES

0
1. The authority citation for part 888 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 360j, 360l, 371.

0
2. Add Sec.  888.3043 to subpart D to read as follows:

Sec.  888.3043  Screw sleeve bone fixation device.

    (a) Identification. A screw sleeve bone fixation device is intended
to be implanted in conjunction with a non-resorbable, metallic bone
screw where the screw has lost purchase due to loosening, backout, or
breakage. The device fits between the screw threads and surrounding
bone and provides increased surface area to create an interference fit
to restore stability of the implant construct.
    (b) Classification. Class II (special controls). The special
controls for this device are:
    (1) In vivo performance testing under anticipated conditions of use
must demonstrate:
    (i) The device provides sufficient stability to allow for fracture
healing; and
    (ii) A lack of adverse biologic response to the implant through
histopathological and histomorphometric assessment.
    (2) Non-clinical performance testing must demonstrate that the
device performs as intended under anticipated conditions of use.
Testing must:
    (i) Assess the stability of the device in a rescue screw scenario;
    (ii) Demonstrate that the device can be inserted and removed
without damage to the implant or associated hardware;
    (iii) Demonstrate the device can withstand dynamic loading without
device failure; and
    (iv) Characterize wear particle generation.
    (3) The device must be demonstrated to be biocompatible.
    (4) The device must be demonstrated to be non-pyrogenic.
    (5) Performance data must demonstrate the sterility of the device.
    (6) Performance data must support the labeled shelf life of the
device by demonstrating continued sterility, package integrity, and
device functionality over the established shelf life.
    (7) Labeling must include:
    (i) A detailed summary of the device technical parameters;
    (ii) Information describing all materials of the device;
    (iii) Instructions for use, including device removal; and
    (iv) A shelf life.

    Dated: February 22, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-04154 Filed 2-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 160 (Monday, August 21, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39639-39641]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17548]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81401; File No. SR-Phlx-2017-68]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 925
To Create a Limited Exception to the Exchange's Procedures To Designate
an Inactive Nominee as an Effective Permit Holder Intra-Day and Make a
Non-Substantive Change to the Pricing Schedule

August 15, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on August 7, 2017 NASDAQ PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to (i) amend Rule 925 to create a limited
exception to the Exchange's existing procedures to designate an
Inactive Nominee as an effective permit holder and (ii) make a non-
substantive change to its Pricing Schedule related to the fees assessed
to Inactive Nominees.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqphlx.cchwallstreet.com/ com/, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to (i) amend Rule 925 to
create a limited exception to the Exchange's existing procedures to
designate an Inactive Nominee \3\ as an effective permit holder and
(ii) make a non-substantive change to its Pricing Schedule related to
the fees assessed to Inactive Nominees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``inactive nominee'' shall mean a natural person
associated with and designated as such by a member organization and
who has been approved for such status and is registered as such with
the Membership Department. An inactive nominee shall have no rights
or privileges under a permit unless and until said inactive nominee
becomes admitted as a member of the Exchange pursuant to the By-Laws
and Rules of the Exchange. An inactive nominee merely stands ready
to exercise rights under a permit upon notice by the member
organization to the Membership Department on an expedited basis. See
Rule 1(l).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule 925
    Today, the Exchange allows members on the Exchange's trading floor
to designate an ``Inactive Nominee'' pursuant to Rule 925. Rule 925(i)
requires, among other criteria, that an individual must be approved as
eligible to hold a permit in accordance with the Exchange's By-Laws and
Rules in order to be eligible for Inactive Nominee status.
Additionally, the member organization with whom an Inactive Nominee is
affiliated must pay an Inactive Nominee Fee for the privilege of
maintaining the Inactive Nominee status.\4\ Furthermore, the Rule
stipulates that an Inactive Nominee does not have any rights or
privileges of a permit holder unless and until the Inactive Nominee
becomes an effective permit holder and all applicable Exchange fees are
paid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange currently charges an Inactive Nominee Fee of
$600 for a six month period, which will be assessed to the member
organization at a rate of $100 per month for the applicable six
month period unless the member organization provides proper notice
of its intent to terminate an inactive nominee prior to the first
day of the next billing month. An inactive nominee's status expires
after six months unless it has been reaffirmed in writing by the
member organization or is sooner terminated. A member organization
will be assessed the Inactive Nominee Fee every time the status is
reaffirmed. See the Exchange's Pricing Schedule at: http://nasdaqphlx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQPHLXTools/PlatformViewer.asp?selectednode=chp_1_4_10&manual=%2Fnasdaqomxphlx%2Fphlx%2Fphlx-rulesbrd%2F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When a member organization desires to designate an Inactive Nominee
as an effective permit holder, Rule 925(ii)(a) states that the member
organization is required to notify the Exchange's

Membership Department, in writing, prior to the opening of trading on
any business day the name of such Inactive Nominee. Further, the notice
must identify the name of the permit holder that the Inactive Nominee
will be acting on behalf of as well as the expected duration that such
Inactive Nominee will remain activated.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Inactive Nominees are essentially a pool of eligible
individuals who can substitute for traders on the Exchange trading
floor. The Inactive Nominee allows a member to have flexibility in
obtaining coverage on the trading floor. An Inactive Nominee stands
ready to assume a membership upon notice by the member requesting
that a specific permit be transferred intra-firm on an expedited and
temporary basis. This transfer allows an Inactive Nominee to become
an effective member of the Exchange. For example, an Inactive
Nominee might serve on behalf of a trader who needs to take leave
for surgery, or could serve when a trader takes vacation leave. This
allows a member organization to have full staff available to conduct
business on the Exchange trading floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to create a limited exception to the
Exchange's existing procedures to designate an Inactive Nominee as an
effective permit holder. In particular, the Exchange proposes to adopt
a new provision at Rule 925(ii)(b) to permit member organizations to
designate an Inactive Nominee intra-day in the event of an unforeseen
emergency,\6\ provided that such intra-day designations must be
approved by the Exchange's Chief Regulatory Officer (``CRO'') or his/
her designee prior to such Inactive Nominee becoming an effective
permit holder. Other than to reduce the time period and to require
prior approval of the CRO or his/her designee in the manner described
above, the Exchange is not proposing any other changes to its existing
procedures to designate an Inactive Nominee as an effective permit
holder. Therefore, if a member organization seeks to obtain coverage on
the trading floor intra-day due to unforeseen circumstances such as
sudden illness, the proposed rule would still require the member
organization to notify the Membership Department, in writing, of its
desire to designate an Inactive Nominee as an effective permit holder
intra-day. The notice must contain all of the information required
under paragraph (ii)(a) (i.e., the name of such Inactive Nominee, the
name of the permit holder that the Inactive Nominee will be acting on
behalf of, and the expected duration that such Inactive Nominee will
remain activated). Finally, the CRO or his/her designee must approve
the member organization's intra-day designation in order for the
Inactive Nominee to become an effective permit holder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Such circumstances include sudden illness, family
emergencies or other unavoidable factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is reasonable
and would serve to enhance the application of Rule 925 by allowing
members to quickly obtain coverage on the trading floor in limited
cases where an unforeseen emergency arises intra-day, therefore making
it impossible for a member to notify the Membership Department within
the required time period under the current Rule. While these
extraordinary circumstances rarely arise, the proposed rule change
would give the CRO (or his/her designee in the CRO's absence) the
flexibility to approve the intra-day designation so that members are
not adversely affected by unforeseen factors that prevented them from
notifying the Exchange within the allotted time period. Because each
individual on the floor is required to have a permit in order to trade,
such emergencies could especially affect members who have small
propriety businesses on the Exchange trading floor and therefore rely
on these Inactive Nominees as their only substitutes. Similarly, since
the time the Exchange adopted rules establishing the Inactive
Nominee,\7\ the number of permit holders associated with a member
organization on the Exchange trading floor has decreased. For the
foregoing reasons, the Exchange seeks to address these extraordinary
circumstances and allow its members to obtain coverage in such cases so
that they may continue to conduct their businesses efficiently. The
Exchange further believes that requiring the CRO's approval of the
intra-day designation would serve as a check to ensure that such
designations would be made on a limited case-by-case basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 39851 (April 10,
1998), 63 FR 19282 (April 17, 1998) (SR-PHLX-97-35) (order approving
rule changes to establish the Inactive Nominee).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pricing Schedule
    The Exchange is also proposing a non-substantive amendment to its
Pricing Schedule at Section VI.A relating to the fees assessed to
Inactive Nominees. In particular, Section VI.A of the Exchange's
Pricing Schedule states that an Inactive Nominee is also assessed the
Trading Floor Personnel Registration Fee.\8\ As part of a previous
filing, the Exchange renamed this fee as a ``Clerk Fee'' but
inadvertently retained the reference to ``Trading Floor Personnel
Registration Fee'' in Section VI.A.\9\ The Exchange now proposes to
replace the term ``Trading Floor Personnel Registration Fee'' with
``Clerk Fee'' in this section. The Exchange will continue to assess
Inactive Nominees the Clerk Fee as it is being assessed today.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ This fee is in addition to the Inactive Nominee Fee. See
note 4 above.
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Release No. 66004 (December 19,
2011), 76 FR 80442 (December 23, 2011) (SR-Phlx-2011-155).
    \10\ Today, an Inactive Nominee is assessed a Clerk Fee of $100
per month. See Section VI.A of the Pricing Schedule at: http://nasdaqphlx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQPHLXTools/PlatformViewer.asp?selectednode=chp_1_4_10&manual=%2Fnasdaqomxphlx%2Fphlx%2Fphlx-rulesbrd%2F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\11\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes
will allow members additional flexibility in obtaining coverage on the
trading floor. Inactive Nominees are essentially a pool of eligible
individuals who can substitute for traders on the Exchange's floor. By
allowing members flexibility in obtaining coverage intra-day in limited
circumstances as described above, the Exchange believes that the
proposal would assist in facilitating the smooth functioning of its
market operations, consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act. The
Exchange further believes that the proposed changes would allow members
to have a prepared roster of substitute traders who are available even
in unforeseen emergencies, which should help to facilitate transactions
in securities and remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of,
a free and open market, also consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act.
    Finally, the Exchange believes it is appropriate to make the non-
substantive change in its Pricing Schedule to replace the obsolete
reference to ``Trading Floor Personnel Registration Fee'' with ``Clerk
Fee'' so that members and investors have a clear and accurate
understanding of the Exchange's rules.

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

    Because the purpose of the proposal is to provide members with
additional flexibility to obtain coverage intra-day in limited
circumstances and to make a non-substantive change as discussed

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

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \13\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2017-68 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2017-68. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2017-68 and should be
submitted on or before September 11, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-17548 Filed 8-18-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 15, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38963-38965]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14180]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR PART 52

[EPA-R02-OAR-2016-0316; FRL-9947-77-Region 2]

Finding of Failure To Submit a State Implementation Plan; New
Jersey; Interstate Transport Requirements for 2008 8-Hour National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action finding that New Jersey has failed to submit an infrastructure
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to satisfy certain interstate
transport requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) with respect to the
2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS).
Specifically, these requirements pertain to the obligation to prohibit
emissions which significantly contribute to nonattainment, or interfere
with maintenance, of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in other states. This
finding of failure to submit establishes a 2-year deadline for the EPA
to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the
interstate transport SIP requirements pertaining to the state's
significant contribution to nonattainment and interference with
maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in other states unless, prior to
the EPA promulgating a FIP, the state submits, and the EPA approves, a
SIP that meets these requirements.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 15, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R02-OAR-2016-0316. All documents in the docket are
listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth Fradkin, Environmental
Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, NY 10007-1866,
(212) 637-3702, or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 553 of the Administrative Procedures
Act, 5 United States Code (U.S.C.) 553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when an
agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are
impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest, the
agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for
public comment. The EPA has determined that there is good cause for
making this rule final without prior proposal and opportunity for
comment because no significant EPA judgment is involved in making a
finding of failure to submit SIPs, or elements of SIPs, required by the
CAA, where states have made no submittals, or incomplete submittals, to
meet the requirement by the statutory date. Thus, notice and public
procedure are unnecessary. The EPA finds that this constitutes good
cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Section 110(a) of the CAA imposes an obligation upon states to
submit SIPs that provide for the implementation, maintenance and
enforcement of a new or revised NAAQS within 3 years following the
promulgation of that NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific
requirements that states must meet in these SIP submissions, as
applicable. The EPA refers to this type of SIP submission as the
``infrastructure'' SIP because the SIP ensures that states can
implement, maintain and enforce the air standards. Within these
requirements, section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) contains requirements to address
interstate transport of NAAQS pollutants. A SIP revision submitted for
this sub-section is referred to as an ``interstate transport SIP.'' In
turn, section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires that such a plan contain
adequate provisions to prohibit emissions from the state that will
contribute significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in any other
state (``prong 1'') or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in any
other state (``prong 2''). Interstate transport prongs 1 and 2, also
called the ``good neighbor'' provisions, are the requirements relevant
to this findings notice.
    Pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(1)(B), the EPA must determine no
later than 6 months after the date by which a state is required to
submit a SIP whether a state has made a submission that meets the
minimum completeness criteria established in CAA section 110(k)(1)(A).
The EPA refers to the determination that a state has not submitted a
SIP submission that meets the minimum completeness criteria as a
``finding of failure to submit.'' If the EPA finds a state has failed
to submit a SIP to meet its statutory obligation to address
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), pursuant to section 110(c)(1) the EPA has not only
the authority, but the obligation, to promulgate a FIP within 2 years
to address the CAA requirement. This finding therefore starts a 2-year
clock for promulgation by the EPA of a FIP, in accordance with CAA
section 110(c)(1), unless prior to such promulgation the state submits,
and the EPA approves, a submittal from the state to meet the
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). The EPA notes this

action does not start a mandatory sanctions clock pursuant to CAA
section 179 because this finding of failure to submit does not pertain
to a part D plan for nonattainment areas required under CAA section
110(a)(2)(I) or a SIP call pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5).
    On March 12, 2008, the EPA strengthened the NAAQS for ozone. The
EPA revised the 8-hour primary ozone standard from 0.08 parts per
millions (ppm) to 0.075 ppm. The EPA also revised the secondary 8-hour
standard to the level of 0.075 ppm making it identical to the revised
primary standard. Infrastructure SIPs addressing the revised standard,
including the interstate transport requirements, were due March 12,
2011.
    On October 17, 2014, New Jersey submitted a multi-pollutant
infrastructure SIP revision for 2008 Ozone, 2010 Sulfur Dioxide, 2010
Nitrogen Dioxide, 2008 Lead, 2011 Carbon Monoxide, and the 2012
PM2.5 (Fine Particles) NAAQS. New Jersey addressed the
``good neighbor'' provision for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS in their
submission.
    On July 13, 2015, the EPA published a rule \1\ finding that 24
states failed to submit complete SIPs that addressed the ``good
neighbor'' provision for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 39961, (July
13, 2015). The finding action triggered a 2-year clock for the EPA to
issue FIPs to address the ``good neighbor'' requirements for those
states by August 12, 2017. Prior to issuance of the finding action, New
Jersey made a submission addressing the ``good neighbor'' provision for
the 2008 Ozone NAAQS on October 17, 2014; therefore, the state was not
included in the EPA's July 2015 finding notice. Following New Jersey's
submittal of their infrastructure SIP and the EPA's July 2015 finding
notice, the EPA proposed a rule on November 16, 2015 \2\ to address the
``good neighbor'' requirements for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS. The rule
proposed to promulgate FIPs in 23 eastern states, including New Jersey,
to reduce interstate ozone transport as to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The
EPA proposed to issue final FIPs only for those states that either
failed to submit a SIP or for which the EPA disapproved a state's SIP
addressing the ``good neighbor'' provision by the date the rule was
finalized. The EPA expects to finalize the rule and respective FIPs, as
applicable, later this year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 80 FR 39961 (July 13, 2015) (effective August 12, 2015).
    \2\ See ``Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008
Ozone NAAQS; Proposed Rules,'' 80 FR 75706 (December 3, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a letter to the EPA dated March 30, 2016, New Jersey withdrew
from EPA's consideration the ``good neighbor'' portion of its multi-
pollutant infrastructure SIP as it relates to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. New
Jersey stated that it was withdrawing that portion of its submission
``in order not to delay the EPA's ability to implement the FIP on those
upwind states that are significantly contributing to ozone levels in
New Jersey and the other states within [New Jersey's] shared ozone
nonattainment area.'' New Jersey stated that its decision to withdraw
was based on a desire that EPA would ``fully implement the FIP''
proposed in 2016, and that it ``reserve[d] the right to resubmit'' the
language of its original submission. The full letter can be found in
the docket for this rulemaking.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Letter from Bob Martin, Commissioner, New Jersey Department
of Environmental Protection to Judith Enck, Regional Administrator,
U.S. EPA Region II, March 30, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the basis of New Jersey's March 30, 2016 withdrawal letter, New
Jersey does not have a complete pending submittal addressing the ``good
neighbor'' provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA is therefore
making a finding that New Jersey has failed to submit a SIP revision to
address the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) as to the
2008 ozone NAAQS.

II. Final Action

    This action reflects the EPA's determination with respect to the
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for New Jersey, as discussed in section I of this findings
notice. The EPA is making a finding of failure to submit for New Jersey
for the interstate transport requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This finding starts
a 2-year clock for promulgation by the EPA of a FIP after the effective
date of this final rule, in accordance with section 110(c)(1), unless
prior to such promulgation that New Jersey submits, and the EPA
approves, a submittal that meets the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) as to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This finding of failure
to submit does not impose sanctions, and does not set deadlines for
imposing sanctions as described in section 179, because it does not
pertain to the elements of a CAA title I, part D plan for nonattainment
areas as required under section 110(a)(2)(I), and because this action
is not a SIP call pursuant to section 110(k)(5).

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the Paperwork Reduction Act. This final rule does not establish any new
information collection requirement apart from that already required by
law.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    This action is not subject to the RFA. The RFA applies only to
rules subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other statute.
This rule is not subject to notice and comment requirements because the
agency has invoked the APA ``good cause'' exemption under 5 U.S.C.
553(b).

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action implements mandates specifically and
explicitly set forth in the CAA under section 110(a) without the
exercise of any policy discretion by the EPA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This rule responds to the requirement in the CAA
for states to submit SIPs under section 110(a) to address CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. No tribe is subject to the
requirement to submit an implementation plan under section 110(a)
within 3 years of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Thus,

Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental
health risk or safety risk.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income
or indigenous populations because it does not affect the level of
protection provided to human health or the environment.
    This notice is making a procedural finding that New Jersey has
failed to submit a SIP to address CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA did not conduct an environmental analysis
for this rule because this rule would not directly affect the air
emissions of particular sources. Because this rule will not directly
affect the air emissions of particular sources, it does not affect the
level of protection provided to human health or the environment.
Therefore, this action will not have potential disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-
income or indigenous populations.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. The CRA allows the issuing agency to make a rule
effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes
a good cause finding that notice and comment rulemaking procedures are
impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest (5 U.S.C.
808(2)). The EPA has made a good cause finding for this rule as
discussed in the Supplementary Information section of this final rule,
including the basis for that finding.

L. Judicial Review

    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 August 15, 2016.
    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 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, and Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: June 2, 2016.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2016-14180 Filed 6-14-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P