[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 112 (Tuesday, June 11, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34903-34906]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13735]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0969; FRL-9821-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Ohio; 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan Revision; Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets for the Ohio Portion of the Wheeling Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA is approving the request by
Ohio to revise the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance air quality State
Implementation Plan (SIP) to replace motor vehicle emissions budgets
(budgets) for the Ohio portion of the Wheeling, West Virginia-Ohio area
with budgets developed using EPA's Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator
(MOVES) emissions model. Ohio submitted the SIP revision request to EPA
on December 7, 2012.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective August 12, 2013, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by July 11, 2013. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2012-0969, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2012-0969. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made 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 docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
We recommend that you telephone Anthony Maietta, Environmental
Protection Specialist, at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting the Region 5
office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Maietta, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What is EPA approving?
II. What is the background for this action?
    a. SIP Budgets and Transportation Conformity
    b. Prior Approval of Budgets
    c. The MOVES Emissions Model
    d. Submission of New Budgets Based on MOVES2010a
III. What are the criteria for approval?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the state's submittal?
    a. The Revised Inventories
    b. Approvability of the MOVES2010a-based Budgets
    c. Applicability of MOBILE6.2-based Budgets
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is EPA approving?

    EPA is approving new MOVES2010a-based budgets for the Ohio portion
of the Wheeling, West Virginia-Ohio 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance area
that will replace MOBILE-based budgets in the SIP. The Ohio portion of
the Wheeling, West Virginia-Ohio area was redesignated to attainment of
the 1997 8-hour ozone standard effective June 15, 2007 (72 FR 27644).
MOBILE6.2-based budgets for the Ohio portion of the area were approved
in that action. Upon the effective date of approval of the MOVES-based
budgets, they must then be used in future transportation conformity
analyses for the Ohio portion of the area as required by section 176(c)
of the CAA. See the official release of the MOVES2010 emissions model
(75 FR 9411-9414) for background, and section II. (c) below for
details.

II. What is the background for this action?

a. SIP Budgets and Transportation Conformity

    Under the CAA, states are required to submit control strategy SIP
revisions and maintenance plans for nonattainment and maintenance areas
for a given National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). These SIP
revisions and maintenance plans include budgets of on-road mobile
source emissions for criteria pollutants, including precursors.
Transportation plans and projects ``conform'' to (i.e., are consistent
with) the SIP when they will not cause or contribute to air quality
violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS.

b. Prior Approval of Budgets

    EPA previously approved MOBILE6.2-based volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) budgets for the Ohio
portion of the Wheeling, West Virginia-Ohio nonattainment area. The
area's ozone maintenance plan established 2009 and 2018 budgets that
demonstrated a reduction in emissions from the monitored attainment
year of 2004.

c. The MOVES Emissions Model

    The MOVES model is EPA's state of the art tool for estimating
highway emissions. EPA announced the release of MOVES2010 on March 2,
2010 (75 FR 9411). Use of the MOVES model is required for regional
emissions analyses for transportation conformity determinations outside
of California that begin after March 2, 2013.
    MOVES2010a was used to estimate emissions in the Ohio portion of
the Wheeling, West Virginia-Ohio area for the same milestone years as
the original budgets in the SIP. The Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency (OEPA) is revising the budgets using the latest planning
assumptions, including population and employment updates. In addition,
newer vehicle registration data has been used to update the age
distribution of the vehicle fleet. Updating the budgets with MOVES2010a
allows the area to continue to show conformity to the SIP in plans,
transportation improvement programs, and projects. The interagency
consultation group has had extensive consultation on the requirements
and need for new budgets.

d. Submission of New Budgets Based on MOVES2010a

    On December 7, 2012, OEPA submitted final budgets based on
MOVES2010a that cover the Ohio portion of the Wheeling area. Ohio
received no comments during the public review and comment period.
    The new MOVES2010a based budgets are for the years 2009 and 2018,
for both VOCs and NOX, and are detailed in table 3 of this
notice. Ohio has also provided emissions per sector, including mobile
emissions based on MOVES2010a, for the 2004 attainment year, the 2009
interim budget year, and the 2018 maintenance year. The emissions
reduction from all sectors between the years 2004 and 2018 is also
shown. Emissions per sector and the combined emissions reduction for
VOC and NOX for the Ohio portion of the Wheeling, West
Virginia-Ohio area are shown in tables 1 and 2. In tables 1 and 2, for
on-road emissions of both VOC and NOX for the years 2009 and
2018, a 25% safety margin has been applied.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The safety margin is applied by adding a certain percentage
of emissions, in tons per day, onto the MOVES-based on-road
emissions budgets. In this case, Ohio chose to add a 25% safety
margin to their budgets. The safety margin cannot exceed the
combined emissions reduction for the area.

  Table 1--Total VOC Emissions With MOVES2010a Mobile Emissions in the Ohio Portion of Wheeling, West Virginia-
                                        Ohio Area (Belmont County, Ohio)
                                                 [Tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Combined
                                                                                emissions
                 Sector                    2004 Attainment    2009 Interim    2018 Maintenance  reduction (2004-
                                                                                2018)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................              0.20              0.15              0.21
Area....................................              4.03              3.85              3.86
On-road Mobile..........................              5.04              4.70              2.15
Non-road Mobile.........................              0.93              0.81              0.61
                                         ------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................             10.20              9.51              6.83              3.37
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 2--Total NOX Emissions With MOVES2010a Mobile Emissions in the Ohio portion of Wheeling West Virginia-Ohio
                                            area (Belmont County, OH)
                                                 [Tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Combined
                                                                                emissions
                 Sector                    2004 Attainment    2009 Interim    2018 Maintenance  reduction (2004-
                                                                                2018)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................             28.69             21.04             18.93
Area....................................              0.29              0.36              0.38
On-road Mobile..........................             13.98             13.30              5.18
Non-road Mobile.........................              2.89              2.54              1.91
                                         ------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................             45.85             37.24             26.40             19.46
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Belmont-Ohio Marshall Regional Council Metropolitan Planning
Organization has added a safety margin that is only a portion of the
attainment margin available for NOX and VOCs to the budgets
for 2009 and 2018. As shown in tables 1 and 2, the submittal
demonstrates how the area's emissions decline from the attainment year
of 2004 to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
    No additional control measures were needed to maintain the 1997
ozone standard in the Wheeling, West Virginia-Ohio area. Further,
Ohio's submittal contains an approach where Ohio and West Virginia
maintain conformity with separate budgets for their respective portions
of the area. The net result of these approaches will be a total
emissions level for the Wheeling area that is expected to provide for
the area's continued attainment. An appropriate safety margin for
NOX and VOCs was established by the interagency consultation
group, which consists of representatives from the

Federal Highway Administration, OEPA, Ohio Department of
Transportation, and EPA. The submitted budgets for the Ohio portion of
the Wheeling, West Virginia-Ohio area are shown in table 3 below.

III. What are the criteria for approval?

    EPA requires that revisions to existing SIPs and budgets continue
to meet applicable requirements (e.g., reasonable further progress,
attainment, or maintenance). The SIP must also meet any applicable SIP
requirements under CAA section 110. In addition, adequacy criteria
found at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) must be satisfied before EPA can find
submitted budgets adequate and approve them for conformity purposes.
    Areas can revise their budgets and inventories using MOVES without
revising their entire SIP if (1) the SIP continues to meet applicable
requirements when the previous motor vehicle emissions inventories are
replaced with MOVES base year and milestone, attainment, or maintenance
year inventories, and (2) the state can document that growth and
control strategy assumptions for non-motor vehicle sources continue to
be valid and any minor updates do not change the overall conclusions of
the SIP. For more information, see EPA's latest ``Policy Guidance on
the Use of MOVES2010 for SIP Development, Transportation Conformity,
and Other Purposes'' (April 2012), available online at: www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy.htm#models. Ohio's December 7,
2012, submittal meets this requirement as described in the next
section.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of the state's submittal?

a. The Revised Inventories

    The December 7, 2012, SIP revision request for the Ohio portion of
the Wheeling, West Virginia-Ohio 1997 ozone maintenance plan seeks to
revise only the on-road mobile source inventories. OEPA has certified
that the control strategies remain the same as in the original SIP, and
that no other control strategies are necessary. OEPA also finds that
growth and control strategy assumptions for non-mobile sources (i.e.,
area, non-road, and point) have not changed significantly from the
original submittal. This is supported by the monitoring data for the
Wheeling area, which continues to monitor attainment for the 1997 8-
hour ozone standard.
    OEPA's submittal affirms that the total emissions in the revised
SIP (which includes MOVES2010a emissions from mobile sources) as shown
in tables 1 and 2 demonstrate that emissions in the Wheeling, Ohio area
continue to decline and remain below the attainment levels.
    Ohio has submitted MOVES2010a-based budgets for the Wheeling, Ohio
area that are clearly identified in the submittal. The budgets are
displayed in table 3.

 Table 3--Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MOVES) for the Ohio Portion of
      the Wheeling, West Virginia-Ohio Area (Belmont County, Ohio)
                             [Tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Year                           2009         2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC...........................................         4.70         2.15
NOX...........................................        13.30         5.18
------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Approvability of the MOVES2010a-Based Budgets

    EPA is approving the MOVES2010a-based budgets submitted by Ohio for
use in determining transportation conformity in the Wheeling, Ohio 1997
ozone maintenance area. EPA evaluated the MOVES-based budgets submitted
on December 7, 2012, using the adequacy criteria found in 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4) and our in-depth evaluation of the state's submittal and
SIP requirements.
    Before submitting the revised budgets, OEPA has shown that it
followed all necessary conformity procedures. The budgets are clearly
identified and precisely quantified in the submittal. The budgets, when
considered with other emissions sources, are consistent with continued
maintenance of the 1997 ozone standard. The budgets are clearly related
to the emissions inventory and control measures in the SIP. The changes
from the previous budgets are clearly explained with the change in the
model from MOBILE6.2 to MOVES2010a and the revised and updated planning
assumptions. The inputs to the model are detailed in the appendix to
the submittal. EPA has reviewed the inputs to the MOVES2010a modeling
and participated in the consultation process. The Federal Highway
Administration and the Ohio Department of Transportation have taken a
lead role in working with the Belmont-Ohio-Marshall Transportation
Study to provide accurate, timely information and inputs to the
MOVES2010a model run. The state has documented that growth and control
strategy assumptions for non-motor vehicle sources (i.e. area, non-
road, and point) continue to be valid and any minor updates do not
change the overall conclusions of the SIP.
    Ohio's submission confirms that the SIP continues to demonstrate
maintenance of the 1997 ozone standard because the total emissions in
the revised SIP (including MOVES2010a emissions for mobile sources)
continue to decrease from the attainment year to the final year of the
maintenance plan, as shown in tables 1 and 2 above. The budgets include
an appropriate margin of safety while still maintaining total emissions
below the attainment level.
    Based on our review of the SIP and the new budgets provided, EPA
has determined that the SIP will continue to meet the requirements if
the motor vehicle emissions inventories are replaced with MOVES2010a-
based inventories.

c. Applicability of MOBILE6.2-Based Budgets

    Upon the effective date of the approval of the revised budgets, the
state's existing MOBILE6.2-based budgets will no longer be applicable
for transportation conformity purposes.

V. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving, as a SIP revision, the replacement MOVES2010-
based budgets for the Ohio portion of the Wheeling, West Virginia-Ohio
1997 ozone maintenance plan, as submitted on December 7, 2012. We are
publishing this action without prior proposal because we view this as a
noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse comments. However,
in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register publication, we
are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to
approve the state plan if relevant adverse written comments are filed.
This rule will be effective August 12, 2013 without further notice
unless we receive relevant adverse written comments by July 11, 2013.
If we receive such comments, we will withdraw this action before the
effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will withdraw
the final action. All public comments received will then be addressed
in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed action. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA
receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this
rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the
rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not
the subject of an adverse comment. If we do not receive any

comments, this action will be effective August 12, 2013.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by August 12, 2013. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: May 28, 2013.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

0
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (ff)(15) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.1885  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (ff) * * *
    (15) Approval--On December 7, 2012, Ohio submitted a request to
revise the approved MOBILE6.2 motor vehicle emission budgets (budgets)
in the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Ohio portion of the
Wheeling area. The budgets are being revised with budgets developed
with the MOVES2010a model. The 2009 motor vehicle emissions budgets for
the Ohio portion of the Wheeling area are 4.70 tpd VOC and 13.30 tpd
NOX. The 2018 motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Ohio
portion of the Wheeling area are 2.15 tpd VOC and 5.18 tpd
NOX.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-13735 Filed 6-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 18, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 242)]
[Notices]
[Page 71680]
[DOCID:fr18de07-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP07-208-000]

Rockies Express Pipeline LLC; Notice of Technical Conference

December 11, 2007.
    On December 19, 2007, staff of the Office of Energy Projects (OEP)
will hold a technical conference concerning issues raised by Rockies
Express Pipeline LLC (Rockies Express) with two environmental
recommendations in the draft Environmental Impact Statement for the REX
East Project. In particular, the two environmental recommendations deal
with the co-location of the proposed Rockies Express right-of-way with
the existing Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Company right-of-way and the
centering of the Rockies Express pipeline within the permanent right-
of-way.
    The technical conference will be held on Wednesday, December 19 at
10 a.m. (EST), in Room 3M-3 at the Commission Headquarters in
Washington, DC.
    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.
    Information concerning any changes to the above may be obtained
from the Commission's Office of External Affairs at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
toll free at 1-866-208-FERC (208-3372).

 Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-24421 Filed 12-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: March 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 59)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 15902-15904]
[DOCID:fr26mr08-21]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0173]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Longwood Events Wedding Fireworks Display, Boston
Harbor, Boston, MA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
the Longwood Events Wedding Fireworks display to be held on March 29,
2008 in Boston, Massachusetts. The zone temporarily closes all waters
of Boston Harbor within a four hundred (400) yard radius of the
fireworks launch site located in Boston Harbor at approximate position
42[deg]21'42'' N, 071[deg]2'36'' W. The safety zone is necessary to
protect the maritime public from the potential hazards posed by a
fireworks display. Entry into this zone is prohibited during the
closure period unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Boston,
Massachusetts.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8:45 p.m. through 9:45 p.m. on March
29, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2008-0173 and are available online
at www.regulations.gov. They are also available for inspection or
copying two locations: the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, and the Sector
Boston, Prevention Department, 427 Commercial Street, Boston, MA 02109
between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call Chief Petty Officer Eldridge McFadden, Waterways
Management Division at<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you have questions on viewing
the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing an NPRM, because the logistics with
respect to the fireworks presentation were not determined with
sufficient time to draft and publish an NPRM. Any delay encountered in
this regulation's effective date would be contrary to the public
interest since the safety zone is needed to prevent traffic from
transiting a portion of Boston Harbor during the fireworks display and
to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters. For the same
reasons, 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.

Background and Purpose

    Atlas Pyrovision is conducting a fireworks display on behalf of a
wedding coordinated by Longwood Events. This rule establishes a
temporary safety zone on the waters of Boston Harbor within a four
hundred (400) yard radius of the fireworks launch site located in
Boston harbor at approximate position 42[deg]21'42'' N, 071[deg]2'36''
W. This safety zone is necessary to protect the life and property of
the maritime public from the potential dangers posed by this event. The
zone will protect the public by prohibiting entry into or movement
within the proscribed portion of Boston Harbor during the fireworks
display. Marine traffic may transit safely outside of the zone during
the effective period. The Captain of the Port does not anticipate any
negative impact on vessel traffic due to this event. Public
notifications will be made prior to and during the effective period via
safety marine information broadcasts and Local Notice to Mariners.

Discussion of Rule

    This rule is effective from 8:45 p.m. through 9:45 p.m. on March
29, 2008. Marine traffic may transit safely outside of the safety zone
in the majority of Boston Harbor during the event. Given the limited
time-frame of the effective period of the zone and the time of the
event, the Captain of the Port anticipates minimal negative impact on
vessel

traffic due to this event. Public notifications will be made prior to
and during the effective period via Local Notice to Mariners and marine
information broadcasts.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. Although this
rule will prevent traffic from transiting a portion of Boston Harbor
during the fireworks display, the effect of this rule will not be
significant for several reasons: Vessels will be excluded from the
safety zone for less than one hour, vessels, although excluded from the
zone, will have sufficient navigable water to safely maneuver in the
waters surrounding the zone; and advance notifications will be made to
the local maritime community by marine information broadcasts and Local
Notice to Mariners.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. 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.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in a portion of Boston Harbor from 8:45 p.m. through 9:45
p.m. on March 29, 2008. This safety zone will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the
reason described under the Regulatory Evaluation section.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    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.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

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 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.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD

which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. Under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of
the Instruction, an ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are not required for this rule
because it concerns an emergency situation of less than 1 week in
duration.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

0
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: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add temporary Sec.  165.T01-0173 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-0173  Safety Zone: Longwood Events Wedding Fireworks
Display, Boston Harbor, Boston, MA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone:
    All waters of Boston Harbor, from surface to bottom, within a four
hundred (400) yard radius of the fireworks launch site located in
Boston Harbor at approximate position 42[deg]21'42'' N, 071[deg]2'36''
W.
    (b) Effective Date. This rule is effective from 8:45 p.m. through
9:45 p.m. on March 29, 2008.
    (c) Definitions. (1) 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 Captain of the Port
(COTP).
    (2) [Reserved]
    (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
section 165.23 of this part, entry into or movement within this zone by
any person or vessel is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of
the Port (COTP), Boston 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 by calling the Sector Boston Command Center at 617-
223-5761. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the
safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP
or the COTP's designated representative.

    Dated: March 12, 2008.
Gail P. Kulisch,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector Boston.
 [FR Doc. E8-6149 Filed 3-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

            DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                    OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

                             WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on September 27, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKETS OST-1998-3419

________________________________________________________________________
_____________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of   American Airlines, Inc.  filed  9/21/04 for:

XX  Allocation of one additional, weekly U.S.-Japan combination
frequency to increase American’s Dallas/Ft. Worth-Tokyo service from
twelve weekly roundtrips to thirteen.

.

Applicant rep:  Carl B. Nelson<PHONE_NUMBER>  DOT Analyst: Gerald
Caolo<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The frequency allocation was granted:   September 27, 2004, and will
remain in effect indefinitely, provided that American continues to hold
the necessary underlying authority to serve the Dallas/Ft. Worth-Tokyo
market.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		    Office of International Aviation

XX   The frequency allocation granted is consistent with the 1998
Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Japan.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  	XX  Holder’s
certificates of public convenience and necessity

___________________________________________

Conditions:  Consistent with our standard practice, the frequency
allocation granted is subject to the condition that if the frequency is
not used for a period of 90 days, the allocation will expire
automatically and the frequency will revert to the Department for
reallocation.  The 90-day dormancy period will begin on November 1,
2004, the date American proposes to inaugurate operations with this
frequency.

Remarks:  We acted on this application without awaiting expiration of
the 15-day answer period with the consent of all parties served.

________________________________________________________________________
______________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR §
385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date of
issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and the
filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this order is available on the World Wide Web
at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_ aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_ aviation.asp

 PAGE   3

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 113 (Thursday, June 12, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33793-33794]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13695]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72344; File No. SR-NSCC-2014-07]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Implement a
New Scorecard Feature to the Mutual Fund Profile Service

June 6, 2014.
    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
May 30, 2014, National Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the clearing agency. 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. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change consists of amendments to the Rules &
Procedures (``Rules'') of NSCC to implement a new scorecard feature to
its Mutual Fund Profile Service, as more fully described below.

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, NSCC 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. NSCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B
and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    In 1996, NSCC launched its Mutual Fund Profile Service
(``MFPS''),\3\ providing participating members with an automated method
of transmitting and receiving information pertaining to funds and other
pooled investment vehicles through a centralized and standard facility.
Such funds and other pooled investment vehicles are collectively
referred to herein as ``Funds''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See, Release No. 34-37171 (May 8, 1996), 61 FR 24343 (May
14, 1996) (SR-NSCC-1996-04).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1998, NSCC implemented three new databases as part of MFPS, (i)
the participant profile database, (ii) the security issue profile
database and (iii) the distribution declaration information profile
database.\4\ Through these three databases, MFPS offers the Funds
industry a centralized repository for prospectus and operational
information relating to Fund securities, Fund distributions and Fund
processing capabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See, Release No. 34-40614 (October 28, 1998), 63 FR 59615
(November 4, 1998) (SR-NSCC-1998-09).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ``security issue profile database'' contains Fund information,
including, but not limited to, security ID number, security name, fee
structure, investment objectives, breakpoint schedule data and blue sky
eligibility (collectively, ``Security Issue Data'').\5\ Participating
members using the security issue profile database are either data
providers or data receivers. Data providers populate the security issue
profile database with their applicable Security Issue Data and are
generally the Funds themselves, their principal underwriters or,
otherwise, entities authorized to process transactions on behalf of the
Funds (collectively, ``Data Providers''). Data receivers retrieve such
populated Security Issue Data for use and are generally the
distribution partners to the Funds (collectively, ``Data Receivers'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, Release No. 34-59321 (January 30, 2009), 74 FR 6933
(February 11. 2009) (SR-NSCC-2008-08).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Over the last several months, some Data Receivers have noted that
Security Issue Data, on occasion, does not match the associated
information set forth in the applicable Data Provider's public filings.
Such variances and other noted potential discrepancies (collectively,
``Discrepancies'') have caused certain Data Receivers to express
concerns about Security Issue Data reliability. As a result, Data
Receivers have requested NSCC's assistance in creating a mechanism for
encouraging more reliable Security Issue Data within the security issue
profile database.
    To address these concerns, NSCC proposes to amend Rule 52.D of its
Rules & Procedures to implement a new feature in the security issue
profile database--a scorecard--that would be distributed to MFPS
members on a regularly scheduled basis, as determined by the
Corporation. The scorecards will set forth (i) the numerical score
issued to each applicable Data Provider and (ii) the combined average
numerical score of all Data Providers. The various types of Discrepancy
categories and number of identified Discrepancies within each category
will form the basis from which the individual Data Provider's score and
the combined average scores of all Data Providers will be calculated.
    Each Data Provider's scorecard will contain (i) the individual,
numerical score issued to it, (ii) the number of identified
Discrepancies within each category attributable to such Data Provider
and (iii) the combined average numerical score of all Data Providers.
Data Providers will not see the individual, numerical scores issued to
other Data Providers nor the identified Discrepancies of other Data
Providers. A Data Provider that has no identified Discrepancies with
respect to its Security Issue Data, or that otherwise addresses all of
its identified Discrepancies, will be issued a perfect score as
reflected on its scorecard, while a Data Provider that fails to take
action with respect to its identified Discrepancies will have its
individual score reduced. As new Discrepancies are identified to the
Data Provider or the Data Provider reviews and addresses identified
Discrepancies, its individual score will be recalculated on a regularly
scheduled basis. The industry average score will recalculate according
to the same schedule as well.
    Scorecards distributed to Data Receivers will contain (i) the
individual, numerical score issued to each Data Provider participant,
(ii) the number of identified Discrepancies within each category
attributable to each such Data Provider and (iii) the combined average
numerical score of all Data Providers. The Data Receivers' scorecards
will recalculate according to the same schedule as the Data Providers'
scorecards.
    Because the scores are based solely on action or inaction of Data
Providers, the rule, as amended, will provide that the Corporation
makes no representation or warranty with respect to the value or
usefulness of any score or scorecard, nor will the Corporation be
subject to any

damages or liabilities whatsoever with respect to any person's use of
or reliance upon any score or scorecard. In addition, because the
scorecards are intended solely for members' use and are not intended to
be made public, the rule, as amended, will state that all information
contained in the scorecards is copyrighted and any form of copying,
other than for each NSCC member's personal reference, without the
express written permission of the Corporation, is prohibited, and
further distribution or redistribution of the scorecard or any
information contained therein by any means or in any manner is strictly
prohibited.
2. Statutory Basis
    NSCC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
``Act''), specifically Section 17A(b)(3)(F),\6\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to NSCC. The proposed new feature
encourages accuracy and consistency of communications with respect to
information about securities. Accordingly, NSCC believes that the
proposed rule change fosters cooperation and coordination with persons
engaged in the clearance and settlement of securities transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    NSCC does not believe that the proposed rule change will have any
impact, or impose any burden, on competition. As stated above, the
proposed change adds a scorecard feature to facilitate accurate
securities information exchange, which will benefit all participating
members equally and should have no effect on competition within or
without NSCC.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not yet
been solicited or received. NSCC will notify the Commission of any
written comments received by NSCC.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be 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-NSCC-2014-07 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-NSCC-2014-07. 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 NSCC and on
NSCC's Web site (http://www.dtcc.com). 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-NSCC-2014-07 and should be submitted on
or before July 3, 2014.

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

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-13695 Filed 6-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P