[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 197 (Tuesday, October 13, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61472-61474]
[FR Doc No: 2015-25850]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2006-0040]

SGS North America, Inc.: Application for Expansion of Recognition

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA announces the application of SGS North
America, Inc. for expansion of its scope of recognition as a Nationally
Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) and presents the Agency's
preliminary finding to grant the application. Additionally, OSHA
proposes incorporating one new test standard to the NRTL Program's list
of appropriate test standards.

DATES: Submit comments, information, and documents in response to this
notice, or requests for an extension of time to make a submission, on
or before October 28, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments by any of the following methods:
    1. Electronically: Submit comments and attachments electronically
at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
Follow the instructions online for making electronic submissions.
    2. Facsimile: If submissions, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, commenters may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at
(202) 693-1648.
    3. Regular or express mail, hand delivery, or messenger (courier)
service: Submit comments, requests, and any attachments to the OSHA
Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2006-0040, Technical Data Center, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-2625,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY number: (877) 889-
5627). Note that security procedures may result in significant delays
in receiving comments and other written materials by regular mail.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about security
procedures concerning delivery of materials by express mail, hand
delivery, or messenger service. The hours of operation for the OSHA
Docket Office are 8:15 a.m.-4:45 p.m., e.t.
    4. Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and
the OSHA docket number OSHA-2006-0040. OSHA places comments and other
materials, including any personal information, in the public docket
without revision, and these materials will be available online at
http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, the Agency cautions commenters
about submitting statements they do not want made available to the
public, or submitting comments that contain personal information
(either about themselves or others) such as Social Security numbers,
birth dates, and medical data.
    5. Docket: To read or download submissions or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; however,

some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available
to read or download through the Web site. All submissions, including
copyrighted material, are available for inspection at the OSHA Docket
Office. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for assistance in locating
docket submissions.
    6. Extension of comment period: Submit requests for an extension of
the comment period on or before October 28, 2015 to the Office of
Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, Directorate of
Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210, or by fax to (202) 693-
1644.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
    Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue
NW., Room N-3647, Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    General and technical information: Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson,
Director, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities,
Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210; phone:
(202) 693-2110 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Notice of the Application for Expansion

    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is providing
notice that SGS North America, Inc. (SGS), is applying for expansion of
its current recognition as an NRTL. SGS requests the addition of five
(5) recognized testing and certification sites, and fourteen (14)
additional test standards to its NRTL scope of recognition.
    OSHA recognition of an NRTL signifies that the organization meets
the requirements specified in Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations,
Section 1910.7 (29 CFR 1910.7). Recognition is an acknowledgment that
the organization can perform independent safety testing and
certification of the specific products covered within its scope of
recognition and is not a delegation or grant of government authority.
Recognition enables employers to use products approved by the NRTL to
meet OSHA standards that require product testing and certification.
    The Agency processes applications by an NRTL for initial
recognition and for an expansion or renewal of this recognition,
following requirements in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7. This appendix
requires that the Agency publish two notices in the Federal Register in
processing an application. In the first notice, OSHA announces the
application and provides its preliminary finding. In the second notice,
the Agency provides its final decision on the application. These
notices set forth the NRTL's scope of recognition or modifications of
that scope. OSHA maintains an informational Web page for each NRTL,
including SGS, which details the NRTL's scope of recognition. These
pages are available from the OSHA Web site at http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html.
    Each NRTL's scope of recognition has three elements: (1) The type
of products the NRTL may test, with each type specified by its
applicable test standard; (2) the recognized site(s) that has/have the
technical capability to perform the product testing and product-
certification activities for test standards within the NRTL's scope;
and (3) the supplemental program(s) that the NRTL may use. Each of
these elements allows the NRTL to rely on other parties to perform
activities necessary for product testing and certification.
    SGS currently has one facility (site) recognized by OSHA for
product testing and certification, with its headquarters located at:
SGS North America, Inc., 620 Old Peachtree Road, Suwanee, Georgia
30024. A complete list of SGS sites recognized by OSHA is available at
https://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/sgs.html.

II. General Background on the Application

    SGS submitted an application, dated October 1, 2014 (OSHA-2006-
0040, Exhibit 15-1 SGS Expansion Application), to expand its
recognition to include the addition of five recognized testing and
certification sites located at: SGS-CSTC Standards Technical Services
Co., Ltd. Guangzhou Branch, 198 Kezhu Road, Scientech Park Guangzhou
Economic & Technology Development District, Guangzhou, Guangdong,
China, 510663; SGS-CSTC Standards Technical Services Co., Ltd. Shunde
Branch, 198 Kezhu Road, Scientech Park Building 1, European Industrial
Park, No. 1, Shunde South Road, Wusha, Daliang, Shunde District,
Foshan, Guangdong, China; SGS-CSTC Standards Technical Services Co.,
Ltd Ningbo Branch, 1-5/F., West of Building 4, Lingyun Industry Park,
No. 1177, Lingyun Road, Ningbo National Hi-Tech Zone, Ningbo, Zhejiang,
China; SGS-CSTC Standards Services Co., Ltd. Shenzhen Branch, No. 1
Workshop, M-10, Middle Section, Science & Technology Park, Nan Shan
District, Shenzhen, China 518057; SGS-CSTC Standards Technical Services
(Shanghai) Co., Ltd., No 588 West Jindu Road, Xinqiao Town, Songjiang
District 201612, Shanghai, China. SGS's application also requested the
addition of fourteen additional test standards to its scope of
recognition. OSHA staff performed an on-site review of SGS's testing
facilities on June 15, 2015 at SGS Shanghai, June 18, 2015 at SGS
Ningbo, June 22, 2015 at SGS Shenzhen, June 24, 2015 at the two SGS
Guangdong locations (Guangzhou and Shunde) in which the assessors found
some nonconformances with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7. SGS
addressed these issues sufficiently, and OSHA staff preliminarily
determined that OSHA should grant the application.
    Table 1 below lists the appropriate test standards found in SGS's
application for expansion for testing and certification of products
under the NRTL Program. One of these test standards, UL 60335-2-24, is
new to the NRTL Program, and OSHA preliminarily determined that it is
an ``appropriate test standard'' within the meaning of 29 CFR
1910.7(c).

  Table 1--Proposed List of Appropriate Test Standards for Inclusion in
                     SGS's NRTL Scope of Recognition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Test standard                     Test standard title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 60745-2-18.............................  Hand-Held Motor-Operated
                                             Electric Tools--Safety--
                                             Part 2-18: Particular
                                             Requirements for Strapping
                                             Tools.
UL 60745-2-19.............................  Hand-Held Motor-Operated
                                             Electric Tools--Safety--
                                             Part 2-19: Particular
                                             Requirements for Jointers.
UL 60745-2-20.............................  Hand-Held Motor-Operated
                                             Electric Tools--Safety--
                                             Part 2-20: Particular
                                             Requirements for Band Saws.
UL 60745-2-21.............................  Hand-Held Motor-Operated
                                             Electric Tools--Safety--
                                             Part 2-21: Particular
                                             Requirements for Drain
                                             Cleaners.
UL 60745-2-22.............................  Hand-Held Motor-Operated
                                             Electric Tools--Safety--
                                             Part 2-22: Particular
                                             Requirements for Cut-Off
                                             Machines.
UL 60950-1................................  Information Technology
                                             Equipment Safety--Part 1:
                                             General Requirements.

UL 60950-22...............................  Information Technology
                                             Equipment Safety--Part 22:
                                             Equipment to be Installed
                                             Outdoors.
UL 60335-2-24 *...........................  Safety Requirements for
                                             Household and Similar
                                             Electrical Appliances, Part
                                             2: Refrigerating
                                             Appliances, Ice-Cream
                                             Appliances, and Ice-Makers.
UL 60335-2-40.............................  Safety of Household and
                                             Similar Electrical
                                             Appliances, Part 2:
                                             Particular Requirements for
                                             Electrical Heat Pumps, Air-
                                             Conditioners and
                                             Dehumidifiers.
UL 60335-2-3..............................  Standard for Safety of
                                             Household and Similar
                                             Electrical Appliances, Part
                                             2: Particular Requirements
                                             for Electric Irons.
UL 60335-2-8..............................  Standard for Safety for
                                             Household and Similar
                                             Electrical Appliances, Part
                                             2: Shaver, Hair Clipper and
                                             Similar Appliances.
UL 1778...................................  Uninterruptable Power
                                             Systems.
UL 2089...................................  Vehicle Battery Adapters.
UL 1993...................................  Self-Ballasted Lamps and
                                             Lamp Adapters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Test standard new to the NRTL Program.

III. Preliminary Finding on the Application

    1. SGS submitted an acceptable application for expansion of its
scope of recognition. OSHA's review of the application file and its
detailed on-site assessments indicate that SGS can meet the
requirements prescribed by 29 CFR 1910.7 for expanding its recognition
to include the addition of five sites and these fourteen test standards
for NRTL testing and certification. This preliminary finding does not
constitute an interim or temporary approval of SGS's application.
    2. The UL 60335-2-24 standard is an appropriate test standard, and
OSHA proposes to include this test standard in the NRTL Program's list
of appropriate test standards.
    OSHA welcomes public comment as to whether SGS meets the
requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7 for expansion of its recognition as an
NRTL. OSHA also seeks comments as to whether or not the UL 60335-2-24
test standard is an appropriate test standard under the NRTL Program.
Comments should consist of pertinent written documents and exhibits.
Commenters needing more time to comment must submit a request in
writing, stating the reasons for the request. Commenters must submit
the written request for an extension by the due date for comments. OSHA
will limit any extension to 10 days unless the requester justifies a
longer period. OSHA may deny a request for an extension if it is not
adequately justified. To obtain or review copies of the exhibits
identified in this notice, as well as comments submitted to the docket,
contact the Docket Office, Room N-2625, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, at the above address. These
materials also are available online at http://www.regulations.gov under
Docket No. OSHA-2006-0040.
    OSHA staff will review all comments to the docket submitted in a
timely manner and, after addressing the issues raised by these
comments, will recommend to the Assistant Secretary for Occupational
Safety and Health whether to grant SGS's application for expansion of
its scope of recognition. The Assistant Secretary will make the final
decision on granting the application. In making this decision, the
Assistant Secretary may undertake other proceedings prescribed in
Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7.
    OSHA will incorporate into its informational Web pages the
modifications OSHA decides to make to its current list of NRTL test
standards, as well as any changes to an NRTL's scope of recognition.
Access to these Web pages is available at http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html.
    OSHA will publish a public notice of this final decision in the
Federal Register.

Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210, authorized the preparation of this notice.
Accordingly, the Agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C.
657(g)(2), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912, Jan. 25,
2012), and 29 CFR 1910.7.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on October 6, 2015.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2015-25850 Filed 10-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 160 (Monday, August 23, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47046-47049]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17312]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0438; FRL-8773-01-Region 9]

Limited Approval and Limited Disapproval of California Air
Quality Implementation Plan Revisions; Amador Air District; Stationary
Source Permits

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing a
limited approval and limited disapproval of a revision to the Amador
Air District's (AAD or ``District'') portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision governs the District's
issuance of permits for stationary sources, and focuses on the
preconstruction review and permitting of major sources and major
modifications under part D of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA or
``the Act''). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to
follow with a final action.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 22, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2021-0438 at http://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the
disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions
(audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The
written comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public
comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need

assistance in a language other than English or if you are a person with
disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you,
please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amber Batchelder, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105; by phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. What is the background for this proposal?
    B. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
    C. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    D. What are the rule deficiencies?
    E. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
    F. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal, including the
date on which it was adopted by the District and the date on which it
was submitted to the EPA by the California Air Resources Board (CARB or
``the State''). The AAD is the air pollution control agency for Amador
County in California.

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Local agency                  Rule No.            Rule title             Adopted      Submitted \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AAD...................................             400  NSR Requirements for New        08/20/19        11/05/19
                                                         and Modified Major
                                                         Sources in
                                                         Nonattainment Areas.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The submittal was transmitted to the EPA via a letter from CARB dated October 31, 2019.

    On May 5, 2020, the submittal for AAD Rule 400 was deemed by
operation of law to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51
Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    There are no previous versions of Rule 400 in the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    Rule 400 is intended to address the CAA's statutory and regulatory
requirements for Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) permit programs
for major sources emitting nonattainment air pollutants and their
precursors.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. What is the background for this proposal?

    The EPA's April 2004 designation of Amador County as a
nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) triggered the requirement for the AAD to
develop and submit an NNSR program to the EPA for SIP approval.\2\
Although the EPA revoked the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS effective April 6,
2015,\3\ the NNSR requirements applicable to Amador County based on its
designation and classification for the revoked 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
remain applicable in order to prevent future emissions from new and
modified major stationary sources from increasing beyond the levels
allowed, based on the area's prior designation and classification for
the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Thus, because Amador County was designated and
classified as Moderate nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
the District's NNSR program must satisfy the NNSR requirements
applicable to Moderate ozone nonattainment areas, including the offset
ratios identified in CAA section 182(b)(5).\4\ Amador County is also
designated and classified as Marginal nonattainment for the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS and, therefore, subject to the NNSR requirements applicable
to Marginal ozone nonattainment areas.\5\ Submission of an NNSR program
that satisfies the requirements of the Act and the EPA's regulations
for Moderate ozone nonattainment areas, however, would satisfy the NNSR
program requirements for Marginal ozone nonattainment areas.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ CAA section 172(b) and 40 CFR 51.914.
    \3\ 80 FR 12264, 12265 (March 6, 2015).
    \4\ The EPA's determination that the Amador County area had
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date suspended the requirements to submit those SIP elements related
to attainment of these NAAQS for so long as the area continues to
attain but did not suspend the requirement to submit an NNSR
program. 40 CFR 51.918; see also 77 FR 71551, 71553-71554 (Dec. 3,
2012) (noting that the EPA's attainment determination does not
redesignate the area to attainment or relax control requirements).
    \5\ 40 CFR 51.1314.
    \6\ The NNSR requirements applicable to Moderate ozone
nonattainment areas are identical to those that apply to Marginal
ozone nonattainment areas, except that Moderate nonattainment areas
are subject to a more stringent offset ratio than Marginal
nonattainment areas. CAA sections 182(a)(2)(C) (requiring permit
programs consistent with CAA sections 172(c)(5) and 173 for ozone
nonattainment areas), 182(a)(4) (establishing 1.1 to 1 offset ratio
for Marginal nonattainment areas), and 182(b)(5) (establishing 1.15
to 1 offset ratio for Moderate nonattainment areas) and 40 CFR
51.165.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additional information regarding the District's nonattainment
status for each pollutant is included in our Technical Support Document
(TSD), which may be found in the docket for this rule.

B. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?

    The EPA reviewed Rule 400 for compliance with CAA requirements for:
(1) Stationary source preconstruction permitting programs as set forth
in CAA part D, including CAA sections 172(c)(5) and 173; (2) the review
and modification of major sources in accordance with 40 CFR 51.160-
51.165 as applicable in Moderate ozone nonattainment areas; (3) the
review of new major stationary sources or major modifications in a
designated nonattainment area that may have an impact on visibility in
any mandatory Class I Federal Area in accordance with 40 CFR 51.307;
(4) SIPs in general as set forth in CAA section 110(a)(2), including
110(a)(2)(A) and 110(a)(2)(E)(i); \7\ and (5) SIP revisions as set
forth in CAA section 110(l) \8\ and 193.\9\ Our review evaluated the

submittal for compliance with the NNSR requirements applicable to
Moderate ozone nonattainment areas, and ensured that the submittal
addressed the NNSR requirements for the 1997 and 2015 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that regulations submitted
to the EPA for SIP approval be clear and legally enforceable, and
CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) requires that states have adequate
personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out their
proposed SIP revisions.
    \8\ Per CAA section 110(l), SIP revisions are subject to
reasonable notice and public hearing prior to adoption and submittal
by states to the EPA. Additionally, CAA section 110(l) prohibits the
EPA from approving any SIP revision that would interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress, or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.
    \9\ CAA section 193 prohibits the modification of any SIP-
approved control requirement in effect before November 15, 1990 in a
nonattainment area unless the modification ensures equivalent or
greater emission reductions of the relevant pollutants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    With respect to procedural requirements, CAA sections 110(a)(2) and
110(l) require that revisions to a SIP be adopted by the state after
reasonable notice and public hearing. Based on our review of the public
process documentation included in the November 5, 2019 submittal of
Rule 400, we find that the AAD has provided sufficient evidence of
public notice, opportunity for comment and a public hearing prior to
adoption and submittal of these rules to the EPA.
    With respect to the substantive requirements found in CAA sections
172(c)(5) and 173, and 40 CFR 51.160-51.165, we have evaluated Rule 400
in accordance with the applicable CAA and regulatory requirements that
apply to NNSR permit programs under part D of title I of the Act for
all relevant ozone NAAQS, including the 2015 ozone NAAQS. With the
exceptions noted below in Section II.D, we find that Rule 400 satisfies
these requirements as they apply to sources subject to the NNSR permit
program requirements applicable to Moderate ozone nonattainment areas.
We have also determined that this rule satisfies the related visibility
requirements in 40 CFR 51.307. In addition, we have determined that
Rule 400 satisfies the requirement in CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) that
regulations submitted to the EPA for SIP approval be clear and legally
enforceable, and have determined that the submittal demonstrates, in
accordance with CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(i), that the District has
adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out
these proposed SIP revisions.
    Regarding the additional substantive requirements of CAA sections
110(l) and 193, our action will result in a more stringent SIP, while
not relaxing any existing provision contained in the SIP. We have
concluded that our action would comply with section 110(l) because our
limited approval of Rule 400 will not interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or
any other CAA applicable requirement. In addition, our limited approval
of Rule 400 will not relax any pre-November 15, 1990 requirement in the
SIP, and therefore changes to the SIP resulting from this action ensure
greater or equivalent emission reductions of ozone and its precursors
in the District. Accordingly, we have concluded that our action is
consistent with the requirements of CAA section 193.

D. What are the rule deficiencies?

    The EPA identified five deficiencies in Rule 400. First, Section
4.5 of Rule 400 allows for the District to approve interprecursor
trading (IPT) of ozone precursors to satisfy emission offset
requirements, provided certain conditions are satisfied. However, on
January 29, 2021, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in Sierra Club v.
EPA, 984 F.3d 1055, issued a decision holding that the CAA does not
allow IPT for ozone precursors and vacating the provisions in the EPA's
NNSR regulations allowing IPT for ozone precursors. In light of the
Court's decision, the provision in Section 4.5 allowing for IPT for
ozone precursors is no longer permissible. Second, Section 9.1(b)(iii)
of Rule 400 fails to reference Section 7.4 (Relaxation in Enforceable
Limitations). This apparent typographical error creates a deficiency in
Section 9.1(b)(iii) of the rule, because it suggests that the source
and the District need not adhere to the General requirements for
establishing Plant-wide Applicability Limitations (PALs) in Section
9.4, which are required by 40 CFR 51.165(f)(4). Third, due to an
apparent typographical error, Section 9.5 of the rule does not require
the District to implement the public participation provisions of
Section 8 for purposes of processing a request for a PAL to be
established, renewed or increased in accordance with 40 CFR
51.165(f)(5). Therefore, the provisions of Section 9.5 are deficient.
This error also causes a related deficiency in Sections 9.4(a)(ii),
9.8(b)(iii), 9.10(a), and 9.11(c), because these rule sections cross-
reference Section 9.5, which refers to the wrong section of the rule
for public participation requirements. Fourth, Section 9.10(d)(i)
references Section 9.5 when it should reference Section 9.6. This error
appears typographical in nature. However, this error creates a
deficiency because it does not provide the correct reference for how to
perform the emissions level calculation in accordance with 40 CFR
51.165(f)(10)(iv)(A). Fifth, Section 9.12(a)(iii) includes a reference
to Section 7.12 of the rule (which does not exist), instead of Section
9.12. This apparent typographical error creates a deficiency in Section
9.12(a)(iii), because it does not include the requirement to comply
with the provisions of Section 9.12 in accordance with 40 CFR
51.165(f)(12)(i)(C).
    Our TSD, which can be found in the docket for this rule, contains a
more detailed discussion of our analysis of Rule 400.

E. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule

    The TSD also includes recommendations for additional clarifying
revisions to consider for adoption when the AAD next modifies Rule 400.

F. Proposed Action and Public Comment

    As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, the EPA
is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of the
submitted rule because it fulfills most of the relevant CAA
requirements, and strengthens the SIP, but also contains five
deficiencies. We have concluded that our limited approval of the
submitted rule would comply with the relevant provisions of CAA
sections 110(a)(2), 110(l), 172(c)(5), 173, and 193, 40 CFR 51.160-
51.165, and 40 CFR 51.307.
    If we finalize this action as proposed, our action will be codified
through revisions to 40 CFR 52.220a (Identification of plan--in part).
This action would incorporate the submitted rule into the SIP,
including those provisions identified as deficient. This approval is
limited because the EPA is simultaneously proposing a limited
disapproval of the rule under CAA section 110(k)(3).
    If finalized as proposed, our limited disapproval action would
trigger an obligation on the EPA to promulgate a Federal Implementation
Plan (FIP) unless the State corrects the deficiencies, and the EPA
approves the related plan revisions, within two years of the final
action. Additionally, because the deficiencies relate to NNSR
requirements under part D of title I of the Act, the offset sanction in
CAA section 179(b)(2) would apply in Amador County 18 months after the
effective date of a final limited disapproval, and the highway funding
sanctions in CAA section 179(b)(1) would apply in the area six months
after the offset sanction is imposed. Section 179 sanctions will not be
imposed under the CAA if the State submits, and we approve, prior to
the implementation of the sanctions, a SIP revision that corrects the
deficiencies that we identify in our final action. The EPA intends to
work with the District to correct the deficiencies in a timely manner.

    We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until
September 22, 2021.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the AAD rule described in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA
has made, and will continue to make, these materials available through
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the EPA Region IX Office
(please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at http://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

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 (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA because this action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities beyond those
imposed by state law.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (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. This action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to
state, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will
result from this action.

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: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because the SIP is not approved to apply on any
Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks 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 impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law.

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 (NTTAA)

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be
inconsistent with the CAA.

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

    The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: August 9, 2021.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2021-17312 Filed 8-20-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 11 (Thursday, January 16, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2640-2641]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00328]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31290; Amdt. No. 3886]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These
regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised
criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace
System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities,
adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These
changes are designed to provide for the safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective January 16, 2020. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of January 16, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the
affected airport is located;
    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free
of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center online at nfdc.faa.gov
to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP
copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service
Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedures
and Airspace Group, Flight Technologies and Procedures Division, Flight
Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration. Mailing Address:
FAA Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, Flight Procedures and Airspace
Group, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Registry Bldg. 29, Room 104,
Oklahoma City, OK 73169. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (NFDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20.
The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained on FAA form documents is
unnecessary.
    This amendment provides the affected CFR sections, and specifies
the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective
dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the
procedure and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for part 97
of this final rule.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the
transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this
amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP
and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as modified by FDC permanent NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, as modified by FDC
permanent NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the
criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument
Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs and Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific
conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in
this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an
emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to
published aeronautical charts.
    The circumstances that created the need for these SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP amendments require making them effective in less than
30 days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these
SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find
that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making these
SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 27, 2019.
Rick Domingo,
Executive Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal regulations, Part 97, (14 CFR part 97), is amended by
amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and Takeoff Minimums
and ODPs, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

     Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113,
40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:
    By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31 RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, Identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        AIRAC date            State             City               Airport          FDC No.      FDC date                      Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-Jan-20................  CA           San Diego/El Cajon.  Gillespie Field....       9/3264     11/20/19  This NOTAM, published in Docket No. 31287,
                                                                                Amdt No. 3883, TL 20-03 84 FR 70419), is
                                                                                hereby rescinded in its entirety.
30-Jan-20................  MT           Twin Bridges.......  Twin Bridges.......       9/3989     11/20/19  This NOTAM, published in Docket No. 31287,
                                                                                Amdt No. 3883, TL 20-03 84 FR 70419), is
                                                                                hereby rescinded in its entirety.
30-Jan-20................  MT           Twin Bridges.......  Twin Bridges.......       9/3990     11/20/19  This NOTAM, published in Docket No. 31287,
                                                                                Amdt No. 3883, TL 20-03 84 FR 70419), is
                                                                                hereby rescinded in its entirety.
30-Jan-20................  OR           Baker City.........  Baker City Muni....       9/8453     11/26/19  This NOTAM, published in Docket No. 31287,
                                                                                Amdt No. 3883, TL 20-03 84 FR 70419), is
                                                                                hereby rescinded in its entirety.
30-Jan-20................  FL           Orlando............  Orlando Sanford           9/0518     12/16/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 9L, Amdt 3A.
                                                              Intl.
30-Jan-20................  TN           Memphis............  Memphis Intl.......       9/2470     12/11/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 36C, Amdt 1C.
30-Jan-20................  TN           Memphis............  Memphis Intl.......       9/2471     12/11/19  ILS OR LOC RWY 36C, CAT II/III, Amdt 3C.
30-Jan-20................  GA           Canon..............  Franklin County....       9/2488     12/11/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Orig-A.
30-Jan-20................  GA           Canon..............  Franklin County....       9/2489     12/11/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Orig-B.
30-Jan-20................  TX           Waco...............  TSTC Waco..........       9/4364     12/16/19  ILS OR LOC RWY 17L, Amdt 13C.
30-Jan-20................  FL           Orlando............  Orlando Sanford           9/5078     12/16/19  ILS OR LOC RWY 9R, Amdt 1A.
                                                              Intl.
30-Jan-20................  FL           Orlando............  Orlando Sanford           9/5580     12/16/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 9R, Amdt 1A.
                                                              Intl.
30-Jan-20................  FL           Punta Gorda........  Punta Gorda........       9/5776     12/18/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Amdt 1.
30-Jan-20................  MD           Frederick..........  Frederick Muni.....       9/5839     12/18/19  Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4.
30-Jan-20................  NY           Ithaca.............  Ithaca Tompkins           9/6370     12/13/19  RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 14, Orig-A.
                                                              Rgnl.
30-Jan-20................  NY           Ithaca.............  Ithaca Tompkins           9/6371     12/13/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig-B.
                                                              Rgnl.
30-Jan-20................  OR           Baker City.........  Baker City Muni....       9/6461     12/17/19  VOR-A, Amdt 1B.
30-Jan-20................  OH           Urbana.............  Grimes Field.......       9/7303     12/16/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 2, Amdt 1B.
30-Jan-20................  OH           Urbana.............  Grimes Field.......       9/7305     12/16/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 20, Amdt 1A.
30-Jan-20................  NY           New York...........  John F. Kennedy           9/7735     12/17/19  VOR RWY 31L, Orig.
                                                              Intl.
30-Jan-20................  WI           Ephraim............  Ephraim-Gibraltar..       9/7917     12/17/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Orig-A.
30-Jan-20................  WI           Ephraim............  Ephraim-Gibraltar..       9/7918     12/17/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig-A.
30-Jan-20................  CA           Atwater............  Castle.............       9/8184     12/17/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Amdt 1.
30-Jan-20................  OH           Wilmington.........  Wilmington Air Park       9/8203     12/18/19  ILS OR LOC RWY 22L, ILS RWY 22L (CAT II),
                                                                                Orig-B.
30-Jan-20................  OH           Wilmington.........  Wilmington Air Park       9/8212     12/18/19  ILS OR LOC RWY 4L, Amdt 4C.
30-Jan-20................  OH           Wilmington.........  Wilmington Air Park       9/8213     12/18/19  ILS OR LOC RWY 4R, Orig-B.
30-Jan-20................  OH           Wilmington.........  Wilmington Air Park       9/8217     12/18/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 22R, Orig-B.
30-Jan-20................  OH           Wilmington.........  Wilmington Air Park       9/8219     12/18/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 4L, Orig-B.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2020-00328 Filed 1-15-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 98 (Monday, May 21, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23515-23517]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10707]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83240; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2018-014]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related
to Fees for Use on Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.

May 15, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on May 1, 2018, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change effective upon
filing with the Commission. 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable
to Members \5\ and non-Members of the Exchange pursuant to EDGX Rules
15.1(a) and (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or
dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See
Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at www.markets.cboe.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 parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule applicable to its
equities trading platform (``EDGX Equities'') to (i) eliminate Mega
Tier 2, (ii) eliminate the Step-Up Tier, (iii) modify Tape B Tier 1 and
eliminate Tape B Tier 2 and (iv) increase the fee for orders that yield
fee code D, effective May 1, 2018.
    The Exchange first proposes to eliminate Mega Tier 2. Mega Tier 2
currently provides Members a rebate of $0.0032 per share where a Member
(i) adds or routes a combined ADV \6\ greater than or equal to
4,000,000 shares prior to 9:30 a.m. or after 4:00 p.m. and (ii) adds an
ADV greater than or equal to 0.65% of the TCV,\7\ including during both
market hours and pre and post-trading hours. The Exchange no longer
wishes to maintain this tier level. As such, the Exchange proposes to
eliminate Mega Tier 2 and rename Mega Tier 3 accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ADV means average daily volume calculated as the number of
shares added to, removed from, or routed by, the Exchange, or any
combination or subset thereof, per day. ADV is calculated on a
monthly basis. See Exchange's fee schedule.
    \7\ TCV means total consolidated volume calculated as the volume
reported by all exchanges and trade reporting facilities to a
consolidated transaction reporting plan for the month for which the
fees apply. See Exchange's fee schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange next proposes to eliminate the Step-Up Tier, which
provides a $0.0032 per share rebate where a Member (i) adds an ADV
greater than or equal to 0.40% of the TCV and (ii) has a Step-Up Add
TCV from January 2017 greater than or equal to 0.10%. The Exchange no
longer wishes to maintain this tier level and therefore proposes to
delete it.
    The Exchange also proposes to modify Tape B Tier 1. Currently, for
orders that yield fee codes B and 4, the Exchange provides a rebate of
$0.0020 per share for orders that add liquidity for securities at or
above $1.00, and a rebate of $0.00003 per share for orders that add
liquidity for securities below $1.00. Pursuant to Tape B Volume Tier 1,
a Member will receive an enhanced rebate of $0.0027 where a Member adds
an ADV greater than or equal to 0.02% of the TCV in Tape B Securities.
The Exchange proposes to increase the ADV requirement to greater than
or equal to 0.03% of the TCV in Tape B securities. The Exchange
believes the proposed change to the Tape B Volume Tier 1 criteria will
encourage the entry of additional orders to the Exchange. The Exchange
also no longer desires to maintain Tape B Volume Tier 2 and therefore
proposes to delete it.
    Lastly, the Exchange proposes to increase the fee for orders
yielding fee code D, which results from an order routed to the New York
Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') or routed using the RDOT routing strategy.
Particularly, NYSE recently implemented certain pricing changes related
to Tapes B and C securities, including adopting a per tape fee of
$0.00280 per share to remove liquidity from the Exchange for member

organizations with an Adding ADV of at least 50,000 shares for that
respective Tape.\8\ Based on the changes in pricing at NYSE, the
Exchange is proposing to increase its fee for orders executed at NYSE
that yield fee code D from $0.00275 to $0.00280.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See NYSE Trader Update, NYSE--Fees for Trading Tapes B and C
securities, dated April 2, 2018, available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse/NYSE_Fee_Change_BandC_April2018.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes are consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\9\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\10\ in particular, as it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its Members and other persons using its
facilities. The Exchange also notes that it operates in a highly-
competitive market in which market participants can readily direct
order flow to competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular
venue to be excessive or incentives to be insufficient. The proposed
rule changes reflect a competitive pricing structure designed to
incentivize market participants to direct their order flow to the
Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposal to eliminate the Mega Tier
2, Step-Up Tier and Tape B Tier 2 is reasonable, fair, and equitable
because the current tiers are not providing the desired result of
incentivizing Members to increase their participation in EDGX Equities.
Therefore, eliminating these tiers will have a negligible effect on
order flow and market behavior. The Exchange believes the proposed
changes are not unfairly discriminatory because they will apply equally
to all Members.
    The Exchange next notes that volume-based discounts such as those
currently maintained on the Exchange have been widely adopted by
exchanges and are equitable and non-discriminatory because they are
open to all Members on an equal basis and provide additional benefits
or discounts that are reasonably related to the value of an exchange's
market quality associated with higher levels of market activity, such
as higher levels of liquidity provision and/or growth patterns, and
introduction of higher volumes of orders into the price and volume
discovery processes. While the proposed modification to the existing
Tape B Volume Tier 1 makes such tier slightly more difficult to attain,
it is intended to incentivize Members to send additional volume to the
Exchange in an effort to qualify or continue to qualify for the
enhanced rebate made available by the tier. As such, the Exchange also
believes that the proposed changes are reasonable. The Exchange notes
that increased volume on the Exchange provides greater trading
opportunities for all market participants.
    The Exchange lastly believes the proposed increase to orders
yielding fee code D is reasonable because it reflects a pass-through of
the pricing increase by NYSE noted above. The Exchange further believes
the proposed fee change is equitable and non-discriminatory because it
applies uniformly to all Members.

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

    The Exchange believes the proposed amendments to its fee schedule
would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
does not believe that the proposed changes represent a significant
departure from previous pricing offered by the Exchange or pricing
offered by the Exchange's competitors. Members may opt to disfavor the
Exchange's pricing if they believe that alternatives offer them better
value. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed
change will impair the ability of Members or competing venues to
maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from Members or other interested
parties.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\12\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend
such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2018-014 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-CboeEDGX-2018-014. 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 website (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 website 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. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2018-014 and should be
submitted on or before June 11, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-10707 Filed 5-18-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 126)]
[Notices]
[Page 36082-36083]
[DOCID:fr02jy07-101]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55950; File No. SR-BSE-2007-09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order
Approving a Proposed Rule Change as Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto
Relating to Appointment of Market Makers

June 25, 2007.

I. Introduction

    On February 20, 2007, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to grant the authority for the Exchange to approve
Market Maker appointments instead of the Board or a committee
designated by the Board and to provide a process for those Market
Makers who wish to withdraw from trading an option issue within their
appointment. The Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change on May 11, 2007. The proposed rule change, as amended, was
published for comment in the Federal Register on May 23, 2007.\3\ The
Commission received no comments on the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55774 (May 16,
2007), 72 FR 29019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposes to amend Section 4 (Appointment of Market
Makers) of Chapter VI of the BOX Rules to grant the authority for the
Exchange to approve Market Maker appointments instead of the Board or
committee designated by the Board, as the rule currently states. This
proposed change would allow the regulatory staff of the Exchange to
approve Market Maker appointments. According to the Exchange, the BSE
regulatory staff is more accessible than the Board and this change
would help with the expediency of the Market Marker allocation approval
process.
    The Exchange also has proposed to add a provision to establish a
process for those Market Makers who wish to withdraw from trading an
option issue within their appointment.\4\ A Market Maker may withdraw
from an appointment as long as the Market Maker provides BOX with three
business days written notice of its intent to withdraw from an
appointment. If such written notice is not provided to BOX, then the
Market Maker may be subject to formal disciplinary action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Proposed Section 4, subparagraph (i), Chapter VI of the
BOX Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange \5\ and, in particular, the requirements of Section
6 of the Act.\6\ Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposal
is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in that the proposal
has been designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
and to protect investors and the public interest. The Commission
believes the proposal to grant the Exchange the authority to approve
Market Maker appointments, instead of the Board, should help make the
Market Marker allocation approval process more efficient, thereby
potentially increasing liquidity on the Exchange. The proposal also
provides transparency to the Exchange's process governing Market Makers
who wish to

withdraw from trading an option issue within their appointment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\8\ that the proposed rule change (SR-BSE-2007-09), as modified by
Amendment No. 1, is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-12675 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 131 (Monday, July 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 40354]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16629]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13316-001]

Mesa de Los Carros Hydro, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On April 3, 2012, Mesa De Los Carros Hydro, LLC filed an
application, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act (FPA),
proposing to study the feasibility of the Mesa De Los Carros Pumped
Storage Project to be located in San Miguel County, New Mexico. The
proposed project would be closed loop and would not be built on an
existing body of water.
    The proposed project would consist of: (1) An upper earthen dam
with a height of 88 feet and a length of 11,880 feet; (2) an upper
reservoir with a surface area of 276 acres, a capacity of 10,394 acre-
feet, and a maximum pool elevation of 6,900 feet msl; (3) a lower
earthen dam with a height of 110 feet and a length of 9,662 feet; (4) a
lower reservoir with a surface area of 396 acres, a capacity of 11,652
acre-feet, and a maximum pool elevation of 5,560 feet msl; (5) a 29-
foot-diameter, 9,000-foot-long steel penstock; (6) a powerhouse
containing 4 generating units with a total installed capacity of 1,154
MW; (7) a 19.5-mile-long, 500 kV transmission line and; (8) appurtenant
facilities. The proposed project would have an annual production of
4,214 GWh which would be sold to a local utility.
    Applicant Contact: Brent L. Smith, Symbiotics, LLC, 811 SW Naito
Parkway Ste. 120, Portland, OR 97204<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Shana Murray<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-13316) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: June 29, 2012.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-16629 Filed 7-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P