[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 131 (Monday, July 11, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41061-41064]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14538]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2022-0145; FRL-9844-02-R4]

Air Plan Approval; Alabama; NOX SIP Call

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted
by the State of Alabama, through the Alabama Department of
Environmental Management (ADEM), in a letter dated October 18, 2021.
The revision includes corrections to deficiencies to Alabama's
regulation titled ``NOX Budget Program Monitoring and
Reporting'' (AL NOX SIP Call Monitoring Rule), which EPA
previously conditionally approved into the SIP. Specifically, the AL
NOX SIP Call Monitoring Rule establishes monitoring and
reporting requirements for units subject to the nitrogen oxides
(NOX) SIP Call, including alternative monitoring options for
certain sources of NOX. EPA is also taking final action to
convert the conditional approval to a full approval. In addition, EPA
is approving other minor changes into the SIP.

DATES: This rule is effective August 10, 2022.

ADDRESSES: All documents in the docket are listed on the
www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some
information may not be publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not
placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air
Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch,
Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Scofield, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is
(404) 562-9034. Mr. Scofield can also be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), also
called the good neighbor provision, states are required to address the
interstate transport of air pollution. Specifically, the good neighbor
provision requires that each state's implementation plan contain
adequate provisions to prohibit air pollutant emissions from within the
state that will significantly contribute to nonattainment of the
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), or that will interfere
with maintenance of the NAAQS, in any other state.
    On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA finalized the ``Finding of
Significant Contribution and Rulemaking for Certain States in the Ozone
Transport Assessment Group Region for Purposes of Reducing Regional
Transport of Ozone'' (NOX SIP Call). The NOX SIP
Call required eastern states, including Alabama, to submit SIPs that
prohibit excessive emissions of ozone season NOX by
implementing statewide emissions budgets.\1\ The NOX SIP
Call addressed the good neighbor provision for the 1979 ozone NAAQS and
was designed to mitigate the impact of transported NOX
emissions, one of the precursors of ozone.\2\ EPA developed the
NOX Budget Trading Program, an allowance trading program
that states could adopt to meet their obligations under the
NOX SIP Call. This trading program allowed the following
sources to participate in a regional cap and trade program: generally,
electricity generating units (EGUs) with capacity greater than 25
megawatts (MW); and large industrial non-EGUs, such as boilers and
combustion turbines, with a rated heat input greater than 250 million
British thermal units per hour (MMBtu/hr). The NOX SIP Call
also identified potential reductions from cement kilns and stationary
internal combustion engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 63 FR 57356 (October 27, 1998).
    \2\ As originally promulgated, the NOX SIP Call also
addressed good neighbor obligations under the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, but EPA subsequently stayed and later rescinded the rule's
provisions with respect to that standard. See 65 FR 56245 (September
18, 2000); 84 FR 8422 (March 8, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To comply with the NOX SIP Call requirements, in 2001,
ADEM submitted a revision to add new rule sections to the SIP-approved
version of Alabama Administrative Code Chapter 335-3-1, General
Provisions, and Chapter 335-3-8, Control of Nitrogen Oxides Emissions.
EPA approved the revision as compliant with Phase I of the
NOX SIP Call in 2001. See 66 FR 36919 (July 16, 2001). The
approved revision required EGUs and large non-EGUs in the State to
participate in the NOX Budget Trading Program beginning in
2004. In 2005, Alabama submitted, and EPA approved, a SIP revision to
address additional emissions reductions required for the NOX
SIP Call under Phase II. See 70 FR 76694 (December 28, 2005).
    In 2005, EPA published the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which
required several eastern states, including Alabama, to submit SIPs that
prohibited emissions consistent with revised ozone season
NOX budgets (as well as annual budgets for NOX
and sulfur dioxide). See 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005); see also 71 FR
25328 (April 28, 2006). CAIR addressed the good neighbor provision for
the 1997 ozone NAAQS and 1997 fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) NAAQS and was designed to mitigate the impact of
transported NOX emissions with respect to ozone and
PM2.5. CAIR established several trading programs that EPA
implemented through Federal implementation plans (FIPs) for EGUs
greater than 25 MW in each affected state, but not large non-EGUs;
states could submit SIPs to replace the FIPs that achieved the required
emission reductions from EGUs and/or other types of sources.\3\ When
the CAIR trading program for ozone season NOX was
implemented beginning in 2009, EPA discontinued administration of the
NOX Budget Trading Program; however, the requirements of the
NOX SIP Call continued to apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ CAIR had separate trading programs for annual sulfur dioxide
(SO2) emissions, seasonal NOX emissions, and
annual NOX emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 1, 2007 (72 FR 55659), EPA approved revisions to
Alabama's SIP that incorporated requirements for CAIR. Consistent with
CAIR's requirements, EPA approved a SIP revision in which Alabama
regulations: (1) sunset its NOX Budget Trading

Program requirements, and (2) incorporated CAIR annual and ozone season
NOX state trading programs. See 72 FR 55659. Participation
of EGUs in the CAIR ozone season NOX trading program
addressed the State's obligation under the NOX SIP Call for
those units, and Alabama also chose to require non-EGUs subject to the
NOX SIP Call to participate in the same CAIR trading
program. In this manner, Alabama's CAIR rules incorporated into the SIP
addressed the State's obligations under the NOX SIP Call
with respect to both EGUs and non-EGUs.
    The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit (D.C. Circuit) initially vacated CAIR in 2008, but ultimately
remanded the rule to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental
benefits provided by CAIR. See North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896,
modified on rehearing, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008). The ruling
allowed CAIR to remain in effect temporarily until a replacement rule
consistent with the court's opinion was developed. While EPA worked on
developing a replacement rule, the CAIR program continued to be
implemented with the NOX annual and ozone season trading
programs beginning in 2009 and the SO2 annual trading
program beginning in 2010.
    Following the D.C. Circuit's remand of CAIR, EPA promulgated the
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) to replace CAIR and address good
neighbor obligations for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 76 FR
48208 (August 8, 2011). Through FIPs, CSAPR required EGUs in eastern
states, including Alabama, to meet annual and ozone season
NOX emission budgets and annual SO2 emission
budgets implemented through new trading programs. Implementation of
CSAPR began on January 1, 2015.\4\ CSAPR also contained provisions that
would sunset CAIR-related obligations on a schedule coordinated with
the implementation of the CSAPR compliance requirements. Participation
by a state's EGUs in the CSAPR trading program for ozone season
NOX generally addressed the state's obligation under the
NOX SIP Call for EGUs. CSAPR did not initially contain
provisions allowing states to incorporate large non-EGUs into that
trading program to meet the requirements of the NOX SIP Call
for non-EGUs. EPA also stopped administering CAIR trading programs with
respect to emissions occurring after December 31, 2014.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 79 FR 71663 (December 3, 2014).
    \5\ See 79 FR 71663 (December 3, 2014) and 81 FR 13275 (March
14, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To comply with CSAPR, Alabama adopted SO2 and
NOX CSAPR trading program rules, including budgets, in ADEM
Administrative Code Chapters 335-3-5 and 335-3-8. On August 31, 2016,
EPA approved Alabama's CSAPR annual SO2 and annual
NOX trading program rules into the SIP.\6\ See 81 FR 59869.
Because EPA stopped administering the CAIR trading programs after 2014,
the approved CAIR rules in Alabama's SIP have not been implemented for
several years. Furthermore, ADEM repealed all CAIR and CAIR-related
regulations from Alabama Administrative Code Chapters 335-3-1, 335-3-5,
and 335-3-8 on December 9, 2011.\7\ Even though the CAIR programs were
not being implemented in Alabama, ozone season NOX emissions
have remained well below the NOX SIP Call budget levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In the 2016 action, EPA did not act on the portion of
Alabama's SIP submittal intended to replace Alabama units'
obligations to participate in CSAPR's Federal trading program for
ozone-season NOX emissions.
    \7\ Although CAIR-related regulations were repealed from ADEM
Administrative Code on December 11, 2011, the repeal of the
regulations was not effective until February 20, 2015. EPA removed
the repealed regulations from the SIP, effective August 6, 2021. See
86 FR 35610 (July 7, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After litigation that reached the Supreme Court, the D.C. Circuit
generally upheld CSAPR but remanded several state budgets to EPA for
reconsideration. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118,
129-30 (D.C. Cir. 2015). EPA addressed the remanded ozone season
NOX budgets in the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update for
the 2008 Ozone NAAQS (CSAPR Update), which also partially addressed
eastern states' good neighbor obligations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See
81 FR 74504 (October 26, 2016). The air quality modeling for the CSAPR
Update demonstrated that Alabama contributes significantly to
nonattainment and/or interferes with maintenance of the 2008 ozone
NAAQS in other states. The CSAPR Update reestablished an option for
most states to meet their ongoing obligations for non-EGUs under the
NOX SIP Call by including the units in the CSAPR Update
trading program.
    The CSAPR Update trading program replaced the original CSAPR
trading program for ozone season NOX for most covered
states. On October 6, 2017, EPA approved Alabama's CSAPR Update ozone
season NOX trading program rules for EGUs into Alabama's
SIP.\8\ See 82 FR 46674.\9\ Alabama's EGUs participate in the CSAPR
Update trading program, generally also addressing the state's
obligations under the NOX SIP Call for EGUs. However,
Alabama elected not to include its large non-EGUs in the CSAPR Update
ozone season trading program. Because Alabama's large non-EGUs no
longer participate in any CSAPR or CSAPR Update trading program for
ozone season NOX emissions, the NOX SIP Call
regulations at 40 CFR 51.121(r)(2), as well as anti-backsliding
provisions at 40 CFR 51.905(f) and 40 CFR 51.1105(e), require these
non-EGUs to maintain compliance with NOX SIP Call
requirements in some other way.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ This action approved CSAPR and CSAPR Update-related
provisions of Alabama SIP submissions dated October 26, 2015, and
May 19, 2017.
    \9\ In subsequent litigation, the D.C. Circuit upheld the CSAPR
Update in virtually all respects but remanded it because it was
partial in nature and did not fully eliminate upwind states'
significant contribution to nonattainment or interference with
maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS by ``the relevant downwind
attainment deadlines'' in the CAA. Wisconsin v. EPA, 938 F.3d 303,
313-15 (D.C. Cir. 2019). To address the remand, in 2021 EPA issued
the Revised CSAPR Update, in which the Agency determined (among
other things) that the requirements established for Alabama in the
CSAPR Update did in fact constitute a full remedy for the State's
good neighbor obligations with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 86
FR 23054, 23054 (April. 30, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under 40 CFR 51.121(f)(2) of the NOX SIP Call
regulations, where a state's implementation plan contains control
measures for EGUs and large non-EGU boilers and combustion turbines,
the SIP must contain enforceable limits on the ozone season
NOX mass emissions from these sources. In addition, under 40
CFR 51.121(i)(4) of the NOX SIP Call regulations as
originally promulgated, the SIP also had to require these sources to
monitor emissions according to the provisions of 40 CFR part 75, which
generally entails the use of continuous emission monitoring systems
(CEMS). Alabama triggered these requirements by including control
measures in its SIP for these types of sources, and the requirements
have remained in effect despite the discontinuation of the
NOX Budget Trading Program after the 2008 ozone season.
    On March 8, 2019, EPA revised some of the regulations that were
originally promulgated in 1998 to implement the NOX SIP
Call.\10\ The revision gave states covered by the NOX SIP
Call greater flexibility concerning the form of the NOX
emissions monitoring requirements that the states must include in their
SIPs

for certain emissions sources. The revision amended 40 CFR 51.121(i)(4)
to make part 75 monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting optional, such
that SIPs may establish alternative monitoring requirements for
NOX SIP Call budget units that meet the general requirements
of 40 CFR 51.121(f)(1) and (i)(1). Under the updated provision, a
state's implementation plan still needs to include some form of
emissions monitoring requirements for these types of sources,
consistent with the NOX SIP Call's general enforceability
and monitoring requirements at 40 CFR 51.121(f)(1) and (i)(1),
respectively, but states are no longer required to satisfy these
general NOX SIP Call requirements specifically through the
adoption of 40 CFR part 75 monitoring requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See ``Emissions Monitoring Provisions in State
Implementation Plans Required Under the NOX SIP Call,''
84 FR 8422 (March 8, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Through a letter to EPA, dated February 27, 2020, ADEM provided a
SIP revision to incorporate changes to Alabama's Administrative Code,
Chapter 335-3-8, to include Rule 335-3-8-.71, NOX Budget Program, and
Rule 335-3-8-.72, NOX Budget Program Monitoring and Reporting, to
maintain the State's compliance with the Federal NOX SIP
Call regulations at 40 CFR 51.121 and 51.122, and to provide
alternative monitoring options for certain large non-EGUs.
Subsequently, on September 15, 2020, ADEM sent a letter requesting that
EPA conditionally approve Rule 335-3-8-.72 and committing to provide a
SIP revision to EPA by July 7, 2022, to address a deficiency related to
misplacement of stack testing requirements within Rule 335-3-
8-.72(1).\11\ Based on the State's commitment to submit a SIP revision
addressing the identified deficiency, EPA conditionally approved the
February 27, 2020, submission on July 7, 2021. See 86 FR 35610.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ These stack testing requirements were mistakenly added to
335-3-8-.72(1)(c), which allows sources to fulfill NOX
SIP call monitoring requirements by operating a NOX CEMS
outside of part 75 requirements, instead of 335-3-8-.72(1)(d), which
uses emissions factors.
    \12\ In the same action, EPA approved removal of the CAIR
trading program, removal of the NOX Budget Trading
Program rules, and the State's renumbering of the existing
regulation titled ``New Combustion Sources'' from Rule 335-3-8-.14
to Rule 335-3-8-.05.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with EPA's conditional approval and ADEM's
commitment, the State submitted a SIP revision on October 18, 2021.\13\
The submission corrects the deficiency in Rule 335-3-8-.72(1) and
requests EPA to convert the previous conditional approval into a full
approval. As proposed through a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
published on May 16, 2022, EPA is approving the October 18, 2021,
revision to the Alabama SIP and converting the conditional approval to
a full approval of ADEM's Rule 335-3-8-.72. For a comprehensive
discussion of EPA's analysis and rationale for approving the State's
submittal, please refer to EPA's May 16, 2022, NPRM. See 87 FR 29707
(May 16, 2022). Comments on the May 16, 2022, NPRM were due on or
before June 15, 2022. EPA received one comment on that proposal, and it
supports EPA's proposed action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ EPA notes that the submission was received by the Regional
Office on October 20, 2021. However, for clarity, this document
refers to the letter date of October 18, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with the requirements of 1
CFR 51.5, and as discussed in Section I of this preamble, EPA is
finalizing the incorporation by reference of Alabama's Administrative
Code Rule 335-3-8-.72, NOX Budget Program Monitoring and
Reporting, which establishes emission monitoring requirements for units
subject to the NOX SIP call, state effective December 13,
2021. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials
generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4
Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).
Therefore, the revised materials as stated above, have been approved by
EPA for inclusion in the State implementation plan, have been
incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally
enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective
date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be
incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in
the next update to the SIP compilation.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

    EPA is taking final action to approve Alabama's October 18, 2021,
submission, which revises Alabama Rule 335-3-8-.72, NOX
Budget Program Monitoring and Reporting, to correct the stack testing
requirement by moving it from 335-3-8-.72(1)(c) to 335-3-8-.72(1)(d)
and correct language in 335-3-8-.72(d) to refer to NOX mass
emissions. In addition, EPA is taking final action to convert the July
7, 2021, conditional approval of Alabama Rule 335-3-8-.72 to a full
approval.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 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. 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 Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     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 (Public Law 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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9,

2000), nor will it 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 September 9, 2022. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: June 30, 2022.
Daniel Blackman,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart B--Alabama

Sec.  52.49   [Removed and Reserved]

0
2. Remove and reserve Sec.  52.49.

0
3. In Sec.  52.50(c), amend the table by revising the entry for
``Section 335-3-8-.72'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.50   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                        EPA-Approved Alabama Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
          State citation              Title/subject     effective date   EPA approval date       Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 335-3-8-.72..............  NOX Budget Program       12/13/2021  7/11/2022, [Insert
                                    Monitoring and                       citation of
                                    Reporting.                           publication].

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-14538 Filed 7-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 97 (Monday, May 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23477-23479]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10312]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80690; File No. SR-MIAX-2017-21]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend MIAX Options Rules 301, Just and
Equitable Principles of Trade; Rule 308, Exemptions From Position
Limits; Rule 404, Series of Option Contracts Open for Trading; Rule
514, Priority of Quotes and Orders; Rule 1325, Telemarketing; and Rule
1400, Definitions

May 16, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on May 15, 2017, Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``MIAX Options'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule change as
described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared
by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend Exchange Rule 301, Just
and Equitable Principles of Trade; Rule 308, Exemptions from Position
Limits; Rule 404, Series of Option Contracts Open for Trading; Rule
514, Priority of Quotes and Orders; Rule 1325, Telemarketing; and Rule
1400, Definitions.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings, at MIAX's
principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rules 301.02,
308(a)(7)(vi), 308(b)(6),404.02(d), 514(e)(2), 1325(n)(20), and 1400(l)
to make minor non-substantive corrective changes.
    First, the Exchange propose to amend Exchange Rule 301, Just and
Equitable Principles of Trade, Interpretations and Policies .02, to
convert the numerical list item identifiers to alphabetical identifiers
to properly conform to the hierarchical heading scheme used throughout
the Exchange's rulebook. Additionally, there are two alphabetical
identifiers, ``A'' and ``B'', located further in the paragraph which
must be converted to numerical identifiers ``1'' and ``2''
respectively, to align to the hierarchical heading scheme of the
Exchange's Rulebook. Therefore, the Exchange proposes to replace the
numerical identifiers with alphabetical identifiers located in the
beginning of the paragraph, and to then in turn replace the
alphabetical identifiers with numerical identifiers for the references
which occur later in the paragraph.
    Second, the Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 308,
Exemptions from Position Limits, to correct an incorrect cross
reference. Exchange Rule 308(a)(7)(vi) states that a ``Member on its
own behalf or on behalf of a designated aggregation unit pursuant to
Rule 308(a)(iv) shall also report . . . ''. The reference to paragraph
(a)(iv) of Rule 308 is incorrect as 308(a)(7)(iv) is the correct
section, which is titled Effect on Aggregation of Account Positions.
Therefore, the Exchange proposes to replace the reference to paragraph
(a)(iv) with (a)(7)(iv). Additionally, the Exchange proposes to amend
paragraph (b)(6) of Rule 308 to replace the alphabetical list
identifiers (``A'' through ``D'') with romanette identifiers ``i''
through ``iv'' respectively, to align to the hierarchical heading
scheme of the Exchange's Rulebook.
    Third, the Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 404, Series of
Option Contracts Open for Trading, Interpretations and Policies .02,
Short Term Option Series Program, to correct a typographical error in
paragraph (d). The fourth sentence in the paragraph begins, ``Market
makers,'' whereas ``makers'' should be capitalized. Therefore, the
Exchange proposes to amend the rule to replace the term ``Market
makers'' with ``Market Makers.''
    Fourth, the Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 514, Priority
of Quotes and Orders, to correct an invalid cross reference in
paragraph (e)(2) of the Rule. Exchange Rule 514(e)(2) describes
``Market Maker non-priority quotes, (as described in Rule
517(b)(1)(ii)) and Market Maker orders in both assigned and non-
assigned classes.'' The reference to paragraph 517(b)(1)(ii) is
incorrect as 517(b)(1)(ii) describes the Priority Quote Width Standard,
whereas 517(b)(1)(iii) describes Non-Priority Quotes. Therefore, the
Exchange proposes to replace the reference to 517(b)(1)(ii) with
517(b)(1)(iii).
    Fifth, the Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 1325,
Telemarketing, to correct a typographical error in paragraph (n)
subsection (20) where the word telemarketer is incorrectly spelled
``telelmarketer.''
    Lastly, the Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 1400,
Definitions, to make a minor non-substantive correction to paragraph
(l). Exchange Rule 1400(l) provides the definition of the OPRA Plan as,
``the plan filed with the SEC pursuant to Section 11Aa(1)(C)(iii) of
the Exchange Act, approved by the SEC and declared effective as of
January 22, 1976, as from time to time amended.'' The reference to
11Aa(1)(C)(iii) is incorrect as the correct citation format is
11A(a)(1)(C)(iii). Therefore, the Exchange propose to replace
11Aa(1)(C)(iii) with 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii).
2. Statutory Basis
    MIAX believes that its proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act \3\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \4\ in particular, in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule changes promote just and
equitable principles of trade and removes impediments to and perfects
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system
because the proposed rule change corrects errors in the hierarchical
heading scheme to provide uniformity in the Exchange's rulebook;
corrects incorrect cross references; and corrects minor typographical
errors. The Exchange notes that the proposed changes do not alter the
application of each rule. As such, the proposed amendments would foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities and would remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and national exchange system.
In particular, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes
will provide greater clarity to Members \5\ and the public regarding
the Exchange's Rules. It is in the public interest for rules to be
accurate and concise so as to eliminate the potential for confusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``Member'' means an individual or organization
approved to exercise the trading rights associated with a Trading
Permit. Members are deemed ``members'' under the Exchange Act. See
Exchange Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change
will have no impact on competition as it is not designed to address any
competitive issues but rather to add additional clarity to existing
rules and to remedy minor non-substantive issues in the text of various
rules identified in this proposal.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on intermarket competition as the Rules apply equally
to all Exchange Members.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \6\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \7\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-MIAX-2017-21 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-MIAX-2017-21. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2017-21 and should be
submitted on or before June 12, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-10312 Filed 5-19-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 102 (Friday, May 28, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28710-28713]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11193]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 51 and 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2021-0267; FRL-10024-01-Region 8]

Clean Air Act New Source Review Operating Permit Program; Notice
of Transfer of Permits to Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is granting Wyoming Department of Environmental
Quality's (WDEQ) August 21, 2020 request to transfer to the State
administrative authority over two existing federal permits that were
issued by the EPA on June 26, 1973 under the federal new source review
(NSR) permitting program. In addition, the EPA is agreeing with WDEQ's
analysis in its August 21, 2020 letter demonstrating that the current
Wyoming regulations still meet the requirements of the federal

NSR permitting program. This action transfers the 1973 federally issued
permits to Wyoming. The EPA is taking this action in accordance with
the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the Code of Federal Regulations NSR program
requirements. This is a direct final action because the action is
deemed noncontroversial.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 27, 2021 without further notice,
unless the EPA receives adverse written comments on or before June 28,
2021. If adverse comments are received, the EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this rule
will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2021-0267. 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
electronically in www.regulations.gov. To reduce the risk of COVID-19
transmission, for this action we do not plan to offer hard copy review
of the docket. Please email or call the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section if you need to make alternative
arrangements for access to the docket.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Law, Air and Radiation
Division, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8ARD-PM, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202-1129,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' mean the EPA.

I. Why is EPA using a direct final rule?

    The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this action as noncontroversial and anticipates no adverse
comments. However, in the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal
Register publication, the EPA is publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal to grant WDEQ's request to transfer to the
State administrative authority over two federal permits if the EPA
receives adverse comments. This rule will be effective on July 27, 2021
without further notice unless we receive adverse comments by June 28,
2021. If the EPA receives adverse comments, the EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that
this direct final rule will not take effect. The EPA will address all
public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule.
The EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any
parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.

II. Background

    On April 30, 1971, the EPA Administrator promulgated national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for several pollutants.\1\ The
EPA's action triggered requirements for states to adopt and submit
plans to the EPA providing for the implementation, maintenance and
enforcement of those NAAQS within their state borders.\2\ The EPA also
promulgated regulations prescribing the requirements for the
preparation, adoption and submittal of state plans.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 36 FR 8186.
    \2\ See 42 U.S.C. 7410.
    \3\ See 36 FR at 15486 (Aug. 14, 1971), 20513 (Oct. 23, 1971),
and 25233 (Dec. 30, 1971).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 26, 1972, Wyoming submitted its state implementation
plan (SIP) to the EPA, followed by plan supplements on March 28 and May
3, 1972. On May 31, 1972, the EPA approved parts of Wyoming's SIP and
disapproved other parts. The EPA found that Wyoming did not demonstrate
that it had the legal authority to carry out its SIP as required under
40 CFR 51.11(a)(4)(1972) \4\ to prevent the construction of new sources
and the modification of existing sources, and that Wyoming did not
include legally enforceable procedures to prevent the construction of a
new source or modification of an existing source under 40 CFR
51.18(1972),\5\ Review of New Sources and Modifications. On September
22, 1972, the EPA added paragraph (b) to 40 CFR 52.2625(1972) \6\ to
provide for federal review of new sources and modifications of sources
in Wyoming.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Part 51 has since been revised and 40 CFR 51.11(a)(4)(1972)
has been deleted. See https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=d5a8b4c159130810aa406765662e57a9&mc=true&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40cfr51_main_02.tpl for current version. See the docket for
the 1972 CFR version of this provision.
    \5\ Part 51 ha since been revised and 40 CFR 51.18 (1972) has
been deleted. See https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=d5a8b4c159130810aa406765662e57a9&mc=true&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40cfr51_main_02.tpl for current version. See the docket for
the 1972 CFR version of this provision.
    \6\ Part 52 has since been revised and 40 CFR 52.2625(1972) has
been deleted. See https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=3d6071d443b4700a12af6eb2b751a68c&mc=true&node=se40.5.52_12625&rgn=div8 for the current version. See the docket for the 1972 CFR
version of this provision.
    \7\ 37 FR 19806.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 26, 1973, the EPA approved two trona (trisodium
hydrogendicarbonate dihydrate) plant facility expansion applications
and issued permits under 40 CFR 52.2625(b)(1972), each bearing the same
permit number of ``8A-EE.'' One permit was originally issued to Allied
Chemical Corporation and is now held by TATA Chemicals Soda Ash
Partners, and the other permit was originally issued to FMC Corporation
and is now held by Genesis Alkali Wyoming, LP.
    On June 10, 1975, the EPA approved Wyoming's NSR regulations
finding that Wyoming's NSR regulations satisfied the requirements of 40
CFR 51.18 for direct sources.8 9 In the 1975 Federal
Register document, the EPA also withdrew the federal NSR program under
40 CFR 52.2625(b)(1972). The 1975 federal rulemaking was silent on the
existing federal permits issued under the now superseded federal NSR
program for Wyoming under 40 CFR 52.2625(b)(1972).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 40 FR 24726.
    \9\ The EPA did not find that Wyoming's new source review
procedures for indirect sources met the requirements of 40 CFR
51.18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In an August 21, 2020 letter, WDEQ requested the EPA transfer to
the State administrative authority over two existing federal permits
that were issued by the EPA on June 26, 1973 under the federal NSR
permitting program.10 11 In its letter, as well as in
Wyoming's 1975 approved SIP, WDEQ outlined how its stationary source
permitting rules in Chapter 6, section 2 of the Wyoming Air Quality
Rules and Regulations provide WDEQ with the authority to administer air
permits, including the two 8A-EE permits originally issued by the EPA.
Specifically, the provisions of Chapter 6, section 2 satisfy all the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.18 for federally approved permit programs as
the EPA previously determined in order to have granted Wyoming
authority for implementation of the NSR program. WDEQ has authority to
issue permits and impose conditions in those permits in order to ensure
the maintenance or attainment of national and state ambient air quality
standards. In addition, WDEQ also has authority to enforce these
permits under Wyoming Statutes Annotated 35-11-901.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Letter dated August 21, 2020, from Nancy E. Vehr, Director,
Wyoming Air Quality Division, WDEQ, to Carl Daly, Acting Director,
Air and Radiation Division, EPA, Region 8, Subject: ``Permits 8A-EE
issued on July 26, 1973 to Allied Chemical Corporation and to FMC
Corporation.''
    \11\ 40 CFR 52.2625(b) (1972).

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

III. EPA Evaluation

    In its August 21, 2020 letter, WDEQ requested that EPA formally
transfer authority to WDEQ for the two July 26, 1973 permits issued
under the federal NSR program at 40 CFR 52.2625(b)(1972) based upon the
EPA's 1975 approval of Wyoming's NSR program and deletion of the
federal NSR program as well as a demonstration that Wyoming's current
regulations still meet the requirements of a federally approved permit
program as required under 40 CFR 51.11(a)(4) and 51.18. WDEQ's request
for the transfer of the federally-issued permits under 40 CFR
52.2625(b)(1972) to Wyoming includes the request to transfer the
authority to conduct general administration of these existing permits,
authority to process and issue any and all subsequent permit actions
relating to such permits (e.g. modifications, amendments, or revisions
of any nature) and authority to enforce such permits.
    In its August 21, 2020 letter, WDEQ provided that Wyoming's
stationary source permitting rules contained within its SIP including
Chapter 6, section 2 of the Wyoming Air Quality Rules and Regulations,
provide WDEQ the authority to administer all permits, including the two
8A-EE permits originally issued by the EPA. Chapter 6, section 2 of the
Wyoming Air Quality Rules and Regulations authorizes WDEQ to issue
permits and impose conditions in those permits in order to ensure the
maintenance or attainment of national and state ambient air quality
standards which the EPA approved in 1975.\12\ WDEQ has authority to
enforce these permits under Wyoming Statutes Annotated 35-11-901. This
is in keeping with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.18 which requires
state programs to have the ability to impose permit conditions to
maintain the national and state ambient air quality standards. We agree
with the State's findings that Chapter 6, section 2 continues to
satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 51.18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 40 FR 24726 (June 10, 1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, Wyoming asserts that Wyoming's Chapter 6, section
2(c)(ii) requirements satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 51.11(a)(4)
and 51.18(a). Wyoming's Chapter 6, section 2(c)(ii) states that ``[n]o
approval to construct or modify will be granted unless the applicant
shows, to the satisfaction of the Administrator of the Division of Air
Quality that . . . the proposed facility will not prevent the
attainment or maintenance of any ambient air quality standard.'' Under
40 CFR 51.18(a), plans are required to set forth legally enforceable
procedures to be used to implement the provisions of 40 CFR
51.11(a)(4). 40 CFR 51.11(a)(4) provides that the permitting entity
must have the authority to ``[p]revent construction, modification, or
operation of any stationary source at any location where emissions from
such source will prevent the attainment or maintenance of a national
standard.'' Since Wyoming's SIP sets forth legally enforceable
procedures to implement the authority to ``[p]revent construction,
modification, or operation of any stationary source at any location
where emissions from such source will prevent the attainment or
maintenance of a national standard,'' we agree with the State's
findings that Chapter 6, section 2 continues to satisfy the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.11(a)(4) and 51.18(a).
    Wyoming also states that Chapter 6, section 2(b)(i) of the Wyoming
Air Quality Rules and Regulations is analogous to 40 CFR 51.18(b) which
requires plans to contain provisions that require applicants to submit
information on the nature and amounts of emissions, locations, design,
construction and operation of such sources as may be necessary to
permit the state agency to make the determination referred to in 40 CFR
51.18(a). We agree with the State's findings that Chapter 6, Section 2
continues to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 51.18(b).
    Wyoming also provides in their August 21, 2020 letter that Chapter
6, section 2(c)(ii) of the Wyoming Air Quality Rules and Regulations
meets the requirements of 40 CFR 51.18(c) requiring state permitting
agencies to have the authority to deny approval of construction of new
sources or modification of existing sources that would result in
interference with the attainment of maintenance of national standards.
Chapter 6, section 2(c)(ii) of the Wyoming Air Quality Rules and
Regulations states that approval will not be granted unless the
applicant demonstrates the construction or modification will not
prevent attainment or maintenance of national standards. We agree with
the State's findings that Chapter 6, section 2 continues to satisfy the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.18(c).
    Lastly, Wyoming states that Chapter 6, section 2(l) of the Wyoming
Air Quality Standards and Regulations meets the requirements of 40 CFR
51.18(d) which states that an approval or any construction of
modification must not affect the responsibility of the applicant to
comply with applicable portions of the control strategy. Wyoming's
Chapter 6, section 2(l) of the Wyoming Air Quality Standards and
Regulations, states that ``[a]pproval to construct or modify shall not
relieve any owner or operator of the responsibility to comply with all
local, state, and federal rules and regulations.'' We agree with the
State's findings that Chapter 6, section 2 continues to satisfy the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.18(d).
    Pursuant to the criteria under section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) of the Clean
Air Act, we have determined that WDEQ has the authority, personnel and
funding to implement the NSR program for direct sources within Wyoming
for existing EPA-issued permits under 40 CFR 52.2625(b)(1972). This is
based upon the EPA's June 10, 1975 approval of Wyoming Air Quality
Standards and Regulations, (1974) whereby the EPA approved Wyoming's
NSR program for direct sources and deleted EPA's federal NSR program
under Sec.  52.2625(b) (1972).\13\ In our 1975 rulemaking, we
determined that Wyoming's regulations met the requirement that
Wyoming's SIP include procedures to assure that the construction or
modification of new or existing stationary sources would not interfere
with the attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS as required under 40
CFR 51.18. In addition, we have determined that Wyoming has
demonstrated that its SIP and Chapter 6, section 2 of the Wyoming Air
Quality Rules and Regulations provide WDEQ the authority to administer
all permits, including the two permits issued by the EPA under 40 CFR
52.2625(b)(1972) on July 26, 1973.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 40 FR 24726.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Final Action

    Based on our finding that WDEQ has met the criteria under section
110(a)(2)(E)(i) of the CAA and that WDEQ has the authority, personnel
and funding to implement the NSR program within Wyoming for existing
EPA-issued permits under 40 CFR 52.2625(b)(1972), the two EPA-issued
permits, both numbered 8A-EE, will be transferred to Wyoming upon the
effective date of this rule.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a state NSR
program submittal that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing NSR program submittals, the EPA's role is to approve
state choices, provided they meet the criteria of the CAA and the
criteria, standards and procedures defined in 40 CFR parts 51 and 52.

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 Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because it is not a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866;
     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 action 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. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
    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 Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 27, 2021. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 51

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Nitrogen oxides, Opacity, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Sulfur oxides,
Transportation, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: May 20, 2021.
Debra H. Thomas,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2021-11193 Filed 5-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: June 12, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 114)]
[Notices]
[Page 33486-33487]
[DOCID:fr12jn08-118]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0074; Notice 1]

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision
of Inconsequential Noncompliance

    Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Goodyear), has determined that
certain passenger car tires manufactured during the week of January 7,
2008 did not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
(FMVSS) No. 139 New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Goodyear
has filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule
at 49 CFR part 556), Goodyear has petitioned for an exemption from the
notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the
basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety.
    This notice of receipt of Goodyear's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
    Affected are 18 P235/55R18 99V Goodyear Eagle RS-A passenger car
tires manufactured in its Lawton, Oklahoma plant during the week of
January 7, 2008.
    Paragraph S5.5.1(a) of FMVSS No. 139 requires:

    S5.5.1 Tire identification number. (a) Tires manufactured before
September 1, 2009. Each tire must be labeled with the tire
identification number required by 49 CFR part 574 on a sidewall of
the tire. Except for retreaded tires, either the tire identification
number or a partial tire identification number, containing all
characters in the tire identification number, except for the date
code and, at the discretion of the manufacturer, any optional code,
must be labeled on the other sidewall of the tire.

    Goodyear explains that due to a mold labeling error the labeling
information on the subject tires incorrectly states ``NOT FOR SALE'' on
the intended inboard sidewall instead of the partial tire
identification number (TIN) ``M60Y LNER.'' Therefore, it is Goodyear's
belief that the subject tires are not in compliance with the tire
labeling requirement found in S5.5.1(a) of FMVSS No. 139.
    Goodyear makes the argument that this noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety because the tires meet or
exceed all other applicable FMVSS performance standards, and that the
tires were designed, manufactured and tested to the standards and
regulations as applicable and they meet all regulatory performance test
requirements.
    Goodyear also explains its belief that the Tire Identification
Number (TIN) and the partial TIN are used to properly identify tires
that are involved in a safety campaign. Goodyear stated its belief that
the full TIN is molded on the intended outboard sidewall of these tires
and consumers could be directed to have both sidewalls inspected for
the TIN if any safety campaign would be required for these tires in the
future. Goodyear compared this situation to that of any tire involved
in a safety campaign that required the 4-digit week and year code to
determine if it were involved.
    Goodyear also stated that it has corrected the problem that caused
these

errors so that they will not be repeated in future production.
    In summation, Goodyear states that it believes that because the
noncompliances are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety that no
corrective action is warranted.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance.
    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and
notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted by
any of the following methods:
    a. By mail addressed to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
    b. By hand delivery to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Section is open on
weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except Federal Holidays.
    c. Electronically: by logging onto the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) Web site at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the
online instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be faxed
to 1-202-493-2251.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that your comments were received, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that
all comments received will be posted without change to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy
Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65
FR 19477-78).
    You may view documents submitted to a docket at the address and
times given above. You may also view the documents on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for
accessing the dockets available at that Web site.
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
    Comment closing date: July 14, 2008.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: Delegations of authority at
CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: June 6, 2008.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. E8-13176 Filed 6-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: October 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 205)]
[Notices]
[Page 65501-65502]
[DOCID:fr25oc10-82]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1941-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

Minnesota; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Minnesota (FEMA-1941-DR), dated October 13,
2010, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: October 13, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated October 13, 2010, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Minnesota resulting from severe storms and flooding beginning on
September 22, 2010, and continuing, is of sufficient severity and
magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.
5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such
a major disaster exists in the State of Minnesota.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. Direct
Federal assistance is authorized.

Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance is
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75
percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Lawrence Sommers, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major
disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Minnesota have been designated
as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Blue Earth, Cottonwood, Dodge, Faribault, Freeborn, Goodhue,
Jackson, Lincoln, Lyon, Martin, Mower, Murray, Olmsted, Pipestone,
Rice, Rock, Steele, Wabasha, Waseca, Watonwan, and Winona Counties
for Public Assistance.
    All counties within the State of Minnesota are eligible to apply
for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-26847 Filed 10-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P