[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 46 (Friday, March 8, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15011-15012]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05489]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9008-1]

Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements

Filed 02/25/2013 Through 03/01/2013
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/eisdata.html.

EIS No. 20130049, Draft EIS, BR, CA, Upper Truckee River and Marsh
Restoration Project, Comment Period Ends: 04/29/2013, Contact: Myrnie
Mayville<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20130050, Draft EIS, NPS, CA, Restoration of the Mariposa Grove
of Giant Sequoias, Comment Period Ends: 05/07/2013, Contact: Kimball
Koch<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20130051, Final EIS, USFS, WA, Pack and Saddle Stock Outfitter-
Guide Special Use Permit Issuance, Review Period Ends: 04/08/2013,
Contact: Jennifer Zbyszewski<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20130052, Draft EIS, BPA, ID, Hooper Springs Transmission
Project, Comment Period Ends: 04/22/2013, Contact: Tish Eaton 503-230-
3469.
EIS No. 20130053, Final EIS, DOE, TX, W.A. Parish Post-Combustion
CO2 Capture and Sequestration Project, Review Period Ends:
04/08/2013, Contact: James Ward<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20130054, Draft EIS, BLM, MT, Miles City Resource Management
Plan, Comment Period Ends: 06/05/2013, Contact: Mary Bloom 406- 233-
2852.
EIS No. 20130055, Final EIS, NPS, IA, Effigy Mounds National Monument
Final General Management Plan, Review Period Ends: 04/08/2013, Contact:
Jim Nepstad<PHONE_NUMBER>.

EIS No. 20130056, Draft Supplement, DOS, 00, Keystone XL Project,
Comment Period Ends: 04/22/2013, Contact: Genevieve Walker 202- 647-
9798.

Amended Notices

EIS No. 20120403, Draft EIS, FHWA, ID, US-95 Thorncreek Road to Moscow,
from Milepost 337.67 to Milepost 344.00, Latah County, ID, Comment
Period Ends: 03/25/2013, Contact: John A. Perry<PHONE_NUMBER> extension
116 Revision to FR Notice Published 01/04/2013; Extending Comment
Period to 03/25/2013.
EIS No. 20130015, Draft Supplement, FHWA, CA, Mid County Parkway, a new
Freeway from the City of Perris to the City of San Jacinto, Riverside
County, CA, Comment Period Ends: 04/10/2013, Contact: Larry Vinzant
916-498-5040 Revision to FR Notice Published 01/04/2013; Extending
Comment Period to 03/25/2013.
EIS No. 20130018, Final EIS, BIA, WA, Spokane Tribe of Indians West
Plains Casino and Mixed-Use Development Project, Approval of Gaming
Development and Management, Spokane County, WA, Review Period Ends: 05/
01/2013, Contact: Dr. B.J. Howerton<PHONE_NUMBER> Revision to FR Notice
Published 02/01/2013; Extending Comment Period from 03/04/2013 to 05/
01/2013.

    Dated: March 5, 2013.
Cliff Rader,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2013-05489 Filed 3-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 174 (Monday, September 11, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62293-62295]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19286]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2023-0219; FRL-8813-02-R3]

Air Plan Approval; Pennsylvania; Liberty Borough Area Second 10-
Year PM10 Limited Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving into
the Pennsylvania state implementation plan (SIP), a limited maintenance
plan (LMP) submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's Department
of Environmental Protection (PADEP or Commonwealth) on behalf of the
Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD). This plan addresses the
second 10-year maintenance period after redesignation for coarse
particulate matter, particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter
less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM10). A LMP
is used to meet the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) requirements for
formerly designated nonattainment areas that meet certain qualification
criteria. EPA has determined that ACHD's second maintenance plan meets
applicable CAA requirements.

DATES: This final rule is effective on October 11, 2023.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2023-0219. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through
www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Schmitt, Planning &
Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1600 John F Kennedy
Boulevard, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number is
(215) 814-5787. Ms. Schmitt can also be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On July 21, 2021, EPA received from PADEP, on behalf of ACHD, a
revision to the Commonwealth's SIP for the Liberty Borough area.\1\ The
SIP revision is a PM10 LMP for the Liberty Borough area and
fulfills the second 10-year planning requirement of CAA section 175A to
ensure the area is compliant with the 1987 24-hour PM10
national ambient air standard (NAAQS or standard) through 2033.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In its SIP submission, ACHD refers to the area at issue as
the Liberty-Clairton area. In this final rule document as well as in
the associated proposed rulemaking action, EPA refers to this area
as the Liberty Borough area to distinguish it from the Liberty-
Clairton fine particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment
area and to be consistent with what the Agency called the area in
our approval of the first 10-year maintenance plan and attainment
plan. See 63 FR 47493 (September 8, 1998) and 68 FR 53515 (September
11, 2003).
    \2\ The first 10-year maintenance period for the Liberty Borough
area ended in 2013 and the second 10-year maintenance plan, which is
the subject of this final rule document, extends through 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The LMP relies upon control measures contained in the first 10-year
maintenance plan and the determination that the Liberty Borough area
currently monitors PM10 levels well-below the
PM10 NAAQS. The Liberty Borough area has been meeting the
PM10 standard for many years and was redesignated to
attainment on September 11, 2003 (68 FR 53515) with an approved 10-year
PM10 maintenance plan.
    On July 12, 2023 (88 FR 44237), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM), approving the Commonwealth's July 2021
PM10 LMP SIP submittal. The reasons for our approval are
included in our July 2023 proposal and will not be restated here. The
public comment period for our proposed action closed on August 11,
2023. We received no public comments. Therefore, we are finalizing our
action as proposed.

II. Final Action

    In this final action, EPA is approving the second 10-year
PM10 LMP for the Liberty Borough area as a revision to the
Pennsylvania SIP, which the Agency received as a submittal on July 21,
2021. EPA's approval of the Liberty Borough area LMP satisfies CAA
section 175A requirements for the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS for the
second 10-year maintenance period for the Liberty Borough area.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 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 (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); and
     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 Clean Air Act.
    In addition, 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 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).
    Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean that
``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
    ACHD and PADEP did not evaluate environmental justice
considerations as part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable
implementing regulations neither prohibit nor require such an
evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and did not consider EJ
in this action. Due to the nature of the action being taken here, this
action is expected to have a neutral to positive impact on the air
quality of the affected area. Consideration of EJ is not required as
part of this action, and there is no information in the record
inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for people of color, low-income populations, and
Indigenous peoples.

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    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).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    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 November 13, 2023. 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 finalizing the second 10-year maintenance plan for
the Liberty Borough PM10 area 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, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

Adam Ortiz,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, 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 NN--Pennsylvania

0
2. In Sec.  52.2020, the table in paragraph (copyright)(1) is amended
by revising the entry for ``PM10 Maintenance Plan'' to read
as follows:
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
   Name of non-regulatory  SIP          Applicable         submittal     EPA approval date        Additional
             revision                geographic area         date                                explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
PM10 Maintenance Plan............  Allegheny County--          9/14/02  9/11/03, 68 FR       52.2063(c)(215).
                                    Clairton PM10                        53515.
                                    nonattainment area.
                                                               7/21/21  9/11/23, [Insert     Limited maintenance
                                                                         Federal Register     plan covering the
                                                                         Citation].           second 10-year
                                                                                period through
                                                                                2023.
                                                                                ``Allegheny
                                                                                County'' is the
                                                                                designated name
                                                                                for this area
                                                                                under 40 CFR
                                                                                81.339, but it has
                                                                                also been referred
                                                                                to as the
                                                                                ``Liberty Borough
                                                                                area'' in numerous
                                                                                regulatory
                                                                                actions.

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

* * * * *

0
3. Section 52.2059 is amended by adding paragraph (z) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.2059  Control strategy: Particulate matter.

* * * * *
    (z) EPA approves the limited maintenance plan for the second 10-
year maintenance period for the PM10 Liberty Borough area in
Allegheny County.

[FR Doc. 2023-19286 Filed 9-8-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: June 12, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 114)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 33304-33311]
[DOCID:fr12jn08-14]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0488; FRL-8578-1]
RIN 2060-AM54

Protection of the Stratospheric Ozone: Alternatives for the Motor
Vehicle Air Conditioning Sector Under the Significant New Alternatives
Policy (SNAP) Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Clean Air Act provides for the review of alternatives to
ozone-depleting substances and the approval of substitutes that do not
present a risk more significant than other alternatives that are
available. Under that authority, the Significant New Alternatives
Policy (SNAP) program, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
expanding the list of acceptable substitutes for ozone-depleting
substances (ODS). The substitute addressed in this final rule (i.e., R-
152a) is for the motor vehicle air conditioning (MVAC) end-use within
the refrigeration and air-conditioning sector. This substitute does not
pose significantly more risk than other substitutes that are available
in this end use. Additionally, this substitute is a non ozone-depleting
gas and consequently does not contribute to stratospheric ozone
depletion.

DATES: This final rule is effective on August 11, 2008.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0488. All documents in the docket are listed on the
http://www.regulations.gov Web site. 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, 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 http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy from the EPA Air and Radiation
Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC. This Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone
number for the Air and Radiation Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Thundiyil, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Office of Air and Radiation, MC 6205J,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 343-2363; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final action provides motor vehicle
manufacturers and their suppliers an additional refrigerant option for
motor vehicle air conditioning systems. The refrigerant substitute
discussed in this action (i.e., R-152a) is non ozone-depleting. Members
of the MVAC manufacturing and MVAC service industries have all been
actively engaged in the development of this rulemaking and are
developing prototype systems with the use conditions defined in this
rulemaking.
    This final action helps harmonize U.S. MVAC alternatives with
European Union (EU) MVAC alternatives. The EU has banned the use of R-
134a, the predominant MVAC refrigerant in the U.S and the EU, in new
cars beginning in 2011. By 2020, cars sold in the EU may have to
include the new alternative in this action. In response, U.S. original
equipment manufacturers are developing MVAC systems using R-152a and
other alternative refrigerants for the European market and for possible
U.S. sale as well.
    EPA is deferring final rulemaking on R-744 (carbon dioxide). EPA is
currently continuing to consider further several issues with respect to
this regulatory action.

Table of Contents

I. Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program Authority
    A. Rulemaking
    B. Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable Substitutes
    C. Petition Process
    D. 90-day Notification
    E. Outreach
    F. Clearinghouse
II. SNAP Listing Decisions
III. Summary of Acceptability Determinations
IV. Summary of the Proposal
V. R-152a Exposure
VI. Final Rule Discussion
VII. Response to Comments
    A. Servicing
    B. Army/EPA Assessment
    C. Risk Mitigation Strategies
    D. Industry Standards
    E. Use Conditions
VIII. Final Rule Summary
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Congressional Review Act

I. Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program Authority

    Section 612 of the Clean Air Act (the Act) authorizes EPA to
develop a program for evaluating alternatives to ozone-depleting
substances. EPA refers to this program as the Significant New
Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. The major provisions of section 612
are:

A. Rulemaking

    Section 612(c) requires EPA to promulgate rules making it unlawful
to replace any class I (e.g., chlorofluorocarbon, halon, carbon
tetrachloride, methyl chloroform,

methyl bromide, and hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II (e.g.,
hydrochlorofluorocarbon) substance with any substitute that the
Administrator determines may present adverse effects to human health or
the environment where the Administrator has identified an alternative
that (1) reduces the overall risk to human health and the environment,
and (2) is currently or potentially available.

B. Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable Substitutes

    Section 612(c) also requires EPA to publish a list of the
substitutes unacceptable for specific uses and to publish a
corresponding list of acceptable alternatives for specific uses.

C. Petition Process

    Section 612(d) grants the right to any person to petition EPA to
add a substance to, or delete a substance from the lists published in
accordance with section 612(c). The Agency has 90 days to grant or deny
a petition. Where the Agency grants the petition, EPA must publish the
revised lists within an additional six months.

D. 90-day Notification

    Section 612(e) directs EPA to require any person who produces a
chemical substitute for a class I substance to notify the Agency not
less than 90 days before new or existing chemicals are introduced into
interstate commerce for significant new uses as substitutes for a class
I substance. The producer must also provide the Agency with the
producer's unpublished health and safety studies on such substitutes.

E. Outreach

    Section 612(b)(1) states that the Administrator shall seek to
maximize the use of federal research facilities and resources to assist
users of class I and II substances in identifying and developing
alternatives to the use of such substances in key commercial
applications.

F. Clearinghouse

    Section 612(b)(4) requires the Agency to set up a public
clearinghouse of alternative chemicals, product substitutes, and
alternative manufacturing processes that are available for products and
manufacturing processes which use class I and II substances.
    On March 18, 1994, EPA published the original rulemaking (59 FR
13044) which described the process for administering the SNAP program
and issued EPA's first acceptability lists for substitutes in the major
industrial use sectors. These sectors include: Refrigeration and air-
conditioning; foam blowing; solvents cleaning; fire suppression and
explosion protection; sterilants; aerosols; adhesives, coatings and
inks; and tobacco expansion. These sectors compose the principal
industrial sectors that historically consumed the largest volumes of
ozone-depleting substances.
    For the purposes of SNAP, the Agency defines a ``substitute'' as
``any chemical, product substitute, or alternative manufacturing
process, whether existing or new, intended for use as a replacement for
a class I or class II compound'' 40 CFR 82.172. Anyone who produces a
substitute must provide the Agency with health and safety studies on
the substitute at least 90 days before introducing it into interstate
commerce for significant new use as an alternative. This requirement
applies to substitute manufacturers, but may include importers,
formulators, or end-users, when they are responsible for introducing a
substitute into commerce.
    A complete chronology of SNAP decisions and the appropriate Federal
Register citations are available at EPA's Stratospheric Ozone World
Wide Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/chron.html. This
information is also available from the Air Docket (see Addresses
section above for contact information).

II. SNAP Listing Decisions

    The Agency has identified four possible decision categories for
substitutes: Acceptable; acceptable subject to use conditions;
acceptable subject to narrowed use limits; and unacceptable. Use
conditions and narrowed use limits are both considered ``use
restrictions'' and are explained below. Substitutes that are deemed
acceptable with no use restrictions (no use conditions or narrowed use
limits) can be used for all applications within the relevant sector
end-use. Substitutes that are acceptable subject to use restrictions
may be used only in accordance with those restrictions. It is illegal
to replace an ozone depleting substance (ODS) with a substitute listed
as unacceptable.
    After reviewing a substitute, the Agency may make a determination
that a substitute is acceptable only if certain conditions of use are
met to minimize risks to human health and the environment. We describe
such substitutes as ``acceptable subject to use conditions.'' If you
use these substitutes without meeting the associated use conditions,
you use these substitutes in an unacceptable manner and you could be
subject to enforcement for violation of section 612 of the Clean Air
Act.
    For some substitutes, the Agency may permit a narrowed range of use
within a sector. For example, we may limit the use of a substitute to
certain end-uses or specific applications within an industry sector or
may require a user to demonstrate that no other acceptable end uses are
available for their specific application. We describe these substitutes
as ``acceptable subject to narrowed use limits.'' If you use a
substitute that is acceptable subject to narrowed use limits, but use
it in applications and end-uses which are not consistent with the
narrowed use limit, you are using these substitutes in an unacceptable
manner and you could be subject to enforcement for violation of section
612 of the Clean Air Act.
    The Agency publishes its SNAP program decisions in the Federal
Register. For those substitutes that are deemed acceptable subject to
use restrictions (use conditions and/or narrowed use limits), or for
substitutes deemed unacceptable, we first publish these decisions as
proposals to allow the public opportunity to comment, and we publish
final decisions as final rulemakings.
    In contrast, we publish substitutes that are deemed acceptable with
no restrictions in ``notices of acceptability,'' rather than as
proposed and final rules. As described in the rule implementing the
SNAP program (59 FR 13044), we do not believe that rulemaking
procedures are necessary to list alternatives that are acceptable
without restrictions because such listings neither impose any sanction
nor prevent anyone from using a substitute.
    Many SNAP listings include ``Comments'' or ``Further Information.''
These statements provide additional information on substitutes that we
determine are unacceptable, acceptable subject to narrowed use limits,
or acceptable subject to use conditions. Since this additional
information is not part of the regulatory decision, these statements
are not binding for use of the substitute under the SNAP program.
However, regulatory requirements listed in this column are binding
under other programs. The further information does not necessarily
include all other legal obligations pertaining to the use of the
substitute. However, we encourage users of substitutes to apply all
statements in the ``Comments'' column in their use of these
substitutes. In many instances, the information simply refers to sound
operating practices that have already been identified in existing
industry standards. Thus, many of the comments, if adopted, would not
require the

affected industry to make significant changes in existing operating
practices.

III. Summary of Acceptability Determinations

    EPA has determined that R-152a (hydrofluorocarbon (HFC)-152a) is an
acceptable refrigerant substitute (will now be referred to as
``refrigerant'') with use conditions for MVAC systems, as a replacement
for CFC-12 in new MVAC systems. This determination applies to MVAC
systems in newly manufactured vehicles only. EPA proposed to find R-
152a as an acceptable substitute for CFC-12 in new MVAC systems on
September 21, 2006 at 71 FR 55140 in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(referred to hereinafter as ``the proposal'' or NPRM).

IV. Summary of the Proposal

    In the September 2006 NPRM, the Agency proposed that new R-152a
motor vehicle air conditioning systems be listed as acceptable with the
use condition that systems must be designed to avoid occupant exposure
to concentrations above 3.7% for more than 15 seconds in the passenger
cabin free space, even in the event of a leak. The proposal noted that
the addition of a squib valve/directed release system is one effective
strategy for mitigating risk of R-152a systems and that other
mitigation strategies may also prove effective.
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed requiring prominent labeling of R-152a
MVAC systems with a warning such as ``CAUTION SYSTEM CONTAINS FLAMMABLE
R-152a REFRIGERANT--TO BE SERVICED ONLY BY QUALIFIED PERSONNEL.''
Consistent with SAE J639 Standard, this label should be mounted in the
engine compartment on a component that is not normally replaced and
where it can be easily seen. This label should include refrigerant
identification information and indicate the refrigerant is flammable.
Additionally, the NPRM noted that the original equipment manufacturer
(OEM) should conduct and maintain records of failure mode and effects
analysis (FMEA) tests they perform to ensure that MVAC systems are safe
and are designed with sufficient risk mitigation devices to ensure that
occupants are not exposed to levels of R-152a above 3.7% for more than
15 seconds.

V. R-152a Exposure

    The American Industrial Hygienists Association (AIHA) Workplace
Environmental Exposure Limit (WEEL) (8 hour time weighted average) for
R-152a is 1,000 ppm (0.1% v/v), the highest occupational exposure limit
allowed under standard industrial hygiene practices for any industrial
chemical. The toxicity profile of R-152a is comparable to R-12 and its
most prevalent substitute, R-134a. The lowest observed adverse effect
level for R-152a toxicity (15%) is above the level of flammability
concern, discussed below, so protecting against flammable
concentrations protects against potentially toxic conditions as well.
    A wide range of concentrations has been reported for R-152a
flammability where the gas poses a risk of ignition and fire (3.7%-20%
by volume in air). Different test conditions, impurities and the
measurement approach can all contribute to the range of flammable
concentrations of R-152a. The lower flammability limit (LFL) for R-152a
has been tested by many laboratories using different testing protocols
with results ranging from 3.7% to 4.2%. EPA selected the lowest
reported LFL to assess the potential for passenger exposure and predict
localized pockets of refrigerant concentrations within the passenger
compartment. This selection increases confidence that the substitute is
regulated in a manner that is protective of the general population.

VI. Final Rule Discussion

    This section summarizes the final rule and describes any
differences between the NPRM and the final rule.
    As proposed in the NPRM, in this final rule, EPA finds R-152a
acceptable in new motor vehicle air conditioning systems with the use
condition that systems must be designed to avoid occupant exposure to
concentrations of R-152a above 3.7% in the passenger cabin free space
for more than 15 seconds, even in the event of a leak.
    EPA requires prominent labeling of R-152a MVAC systems with a
warning such as ``CAUTION SYSTEM CONTAINS FLAMMABLE R-152a
REFRIGERANT--TO BE SERVICED ONLY BY QUALIFIED PERSONNEL.'' Consistent
with SAE J639 Standard, this label must be mounted in the engine
compartment on a component that is not normally replaced and where it
can be easily seen. This label will include refrigerant identification
information and indicate the refrigerant is flammable. In the final
rule, EPA has added a reference to the new SAE J2773 Refrigerant
Guidelines for Safety and Risk Analysis for Use in Mobile Air
Conditioning Systems standard.
    As proposed, we recommend that additional training for MVAC service
technicians be provided and that OEMs conduct and keep on file FMEA on
R-152a systems to ensure that MVAC systems are safe and are designed
with sufficient risk mitigation devices to ensure that occupants are
not exposed to R-152a concentrations above 3.7% for more than 15
seconds in the passenger cabin free space.
    During the public comment period, the U.S. Army Research,
Development and Engineering Command (RDECOM) submitted a revised risk
analysis of R-152a MVAC systems (Docket Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-
0488-0025, now referred to as the Army/EPA assessment. For details, see
Response to Comments section below). Based on their revised assessment,
we have modified the effective squib valve activation time from the
proposed level of 10 seconds to 3 seconds. This revision alters the EPA
list of potential risk mitigation strategies, but does not impact this
final rule's regulatory text.

VII. Response to Comments

    EPA requested and received comments on the use conditions and the
risk mitigation strategies described in the proposal, as well as on
other related issues. This section summarizes public comment to the
proposal and describes how comments have been addressed in this final
rule. The public comments have been grouped by topic.

A. Servicing

    One commenter indicated Clean Air Act Section 609-certified,
independent MVAC service technicians should be consulted before the
rule is issued. In response, EPA contacted the National Institute for
Automotive Service Excellence (ASE), who represents independent MVAC
service technicians. ASE indicated they did not see any servicing
issues in the proposal that would impact MVAC service technicians, but
awaits EPA's follow-on rulemaking under section 609 of the Clean Air
Act that will address refrigerant recovery and recycling requirements
for R-152a MVAC systems.
    One commenter said risks associated with MVAC service should be
considered. EPA has considered risks associated with MVAC service and
finds that MVAC service technicians already deal with issues of high
pressure, flammability and toxic materials. We do not believe the
addition of R-152a with use conditions to the list of acceptable
substitutes for new MVAC systems will result in any greater risks to
service technicians and that technician training will alleviate risks
to service personnel. Another commenter indicated additional training
for MVAC service technicians should not be required since service
technicians already deal with

the issues associated with R-152a. Section 609 technician certification
is outside the scope of today's section 612 rulemaking; however, EPA
agrees that additional training for MVAC service technicians is not
necessary since technicians already deal with flammability issues. EPA
has not added additional training requirements, but recommends
additional training on servicing for R-152a MVACs as needed in
accordance with industry recommendations.
    One commenter requested more information on why EPA is not finding
R-152a acceptable as a substitute in retrofitted systems. The SNAP
submission did not seek acceptability for retrofit purposes. EPA's
proposed action only addressed the uses specified in the SNAP
submission, which did not request EPA to find R-152a acceptable in
retrofitted MVAC systems.
    This rulemaking applies to OEMs and not MVAC service shops. A
separate rulemaking under section 609 of the Clean Air Act will be
issued to specify new equipment and practices (if any) required in the
servicing of MVAC systems using the new alternative.

B. Army/EPA Assessment

    The Army and EPA collaborated to conduct the assessment relied upon
in the NPRM to assess the risks associated with R-152a in MVAC systems.
EPA received comment on the NPRM, and specifically, the assessment,
from the Army RDECOM. The Army noted that the amount of R-152a
originally modeled to enter the passenger compartment as a result of a
sudden system discharge was significantly less than the amount that
will be used in MVAC systems because of an incorrect design assumption.
The Army corrected this inadvertent error and submitted a revised
analysis (Docket Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0488-0025). An
unmitigated discharge of R-152a, in full recirculation mode, results in
a R-152a concentration above the lower flammability limit for more than
60 minutes. The Army comment also indicated a 3 second, not a 10 second
squib valve as originally thought, would be needed to ensure that R-
152a can be used safely in new MVAC systems. Informed with this new
data, EPA still finds that R-152a has risks comparable to R-134a if
this rule's use conditions are observed, but consistent with the Army's
analysis, if a squib valve is used, a 3 second, not 10 second squib
valve will meet the rule's conditions. The revised Army/EPA assessment
is the analysis document the EPA refers to throughout today's action.
    In reviewing the methodology used by the Army/EPA assessment, one
commenter pointed out that cars are not hermetically sealed. The EPA
agrees; the Army/EPA assessment does not assume a hermetically sealed
passenger compartment.
    EPA requested comment on the potential effects of these
alternatives on children but received no comment; however, as a matter
of EPA policy, we have evaluated the environmental health or safety
effects of the refrigerants on children. The results of this evaluation
are contained in the Army/EPA assessment. EPA believes that children do
not suffer a disproportionate effect from R-152a in new MVAC systems.
The exposure limits and acceptability listings in this rule apply to
car occupants, and in particular car service technicians. We expect
adults are more likely to be present than children in MVAC service
shops and children and adults would be equally impacted by flammability
concerns in the passenger compartment, thus, the refrigerant does not
put children at risk disproportionately.

C. Risk Mitigation Strategies

    The use conditions in this final rule specify concentration limits
for R-152a in vehicle passenger compartments. EPA leaves the choice of
technical solutions that will meet these concentration limits to the
OEMs. EPA agrees with one commenter who noted that effective risk
mitigation strategies can be active or passive.
    One commenter indicated a secondary loop should be required for R-
152a system to minimize flammability risk. The EPA does not intend to
limit technological innovation by requiring a specific risk mitigation
strategy, but it does recognize that a secondary loop R-152a system can
meet the regulatory conditions. Two commenters indicated a 10 second
squib valve is not sufficient to ensure that R-152a concentrations will
not exceed 3.7% for 15 seconds. Again, the final rule does not
prescribe a specific technological requirement; however, it should be
noted EPA has modified the final rule consistent with the U.S. Army/EPA
assessment revision that a 3 second squib valve would be required to
ensure that an accidental discharge of R-152a system would prevent
passenger compartment concentration of 3.7% for 15 seconds.
    One commenter asked EPA to consider modifying the R-152a use
condition from a concentration performance standard to one that
specifies that the evaporator reaches residual evaporator pressure
within 15 seconds of leak detection. EPA has considered this option.
The commenter's suggested standard would not eliminate the potential
for a flammable concentration of R-152a in the passenger compartment
for an extended amount of time, i.e., more than 15 seconds. EPA finds
its original proposal to be a technically feasible use condition that
is more protective of possible flammable situations than the
commenter's suggestion.

D. Industry Standards

    Commenters indicated that SAE is developing standards for safety
and servicing of alternative refrigerant MVAC systems. EPA notes that
both the text of the SNAP regulatory conditions issued here, and
additional information in the ``Comments'' column of the regulation
reference the relevant SAE technical standards to promote consistency
with established industry practices. Specifically, the rule use
conditions reference the SAE J639 standard, Safety Standards for Motor
Vehicle Refrigerant Vapor Compressions Systems Industry and SAE J2773,
Refrigerant Guidelines for Safety and Risk Analysis for Use in Mobile
Air Conditioning Systems. The ``Comments'' column references SAE J1739,
Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in Design (Design FMEA) and
Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in Manufacturing and
Assembly Processes (Process FMEA) and Effects Analysis for Machinery
(Machinery FMEA). SAE is also developing a standard for the measurement
of R-152a in the passenger compartment that can be used to verify if a
MVAC system design meets the requirements of this rulemaking.

E. Use Conditions

    Two commenters indicated the need for clarity on whether the use
conditions apply when the ignition is off as well as when the ignition
is on. In response, the Agency clarified in the regulatory text that
the use conditions apply only when the ignition is on.
    One commenter stated that a vehicle crash could be so severe that
the MVAC system evaporator could be damaged and possibly, reduce a risk
mitigation system's effectiveness. The commenter proposed the inclusion
of an evaporator crush resistance standard in this action. The final
regulation requires that engineering strategies and/or devices shall be
incorporated into the system such that ``foreseeable leaks'' into the
passenger compartment do not result in elevated concentrations. While
EPA understands that it is possible that a severe accident could damage
an evaporator, we believe that in such case,

the damage to the car would be so severe as to result in inflow of
ambient air, thus negating any risk associated with potentially
elevated R-152a concentration.
    Other use conditions already established in Appendix D to subpart G
of 40 CFR Part 82, Subpart G, Appendix D are applicable to all
substitute refrigerants in MVAC systems (e.g. unique fittings and
labels).

VIII. Final Rule Summary

    EPA finds R-152a acceptable with use conditions for new motor
vehicle air conditioning (MVAC) systems. New R-152a systems must be
designed to avoid occupant exposure to concentrations of R-152a above
3.7% in the passenger cabin free space for more than 15 seconds, even
in the event of a leak.
    EPA requires prominent labeling of R-152a MVAC systems with a
warning such as ``CAUTION SYSTEM CONTAINS FLAMMABLE R-152a
REFRIGERANT--TO BE SERVICED ONLY BY QUALIFIED PERSONNEL.'' Consistent
with SAE J639 Standard, this label will be mounted in the engine
compartment on a component that is not normally replaced and where it
can be easily seen. This label will include refrigerant identification
information and indicate that the refrigerant is flammable.
    Additionally, the final rule recommends additional training for
MVAC service technicians and that OEMs conduct and keep on file R-152a
systems FMEA to ensure that MVAC systems are safe and are designed with
sufficient risk mitigation devices to ensure that occupants are not
exposed to R-152a concentrations above 3.7% for more than 15 seconds in
the passenger cabin free space.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR 51735; October 4, 1993) this
action is a ``significant regulatory action.'' Accordingly, EPA
submitted this action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review under Executive Order 12866 and any changes made in response to
OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket for this action.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
Today's action is an Agency determination. It contains no new
requirements for reporting. The only new recordkeeping requirement
involves customary business practice. Today's rule requires minimal
record-keeping of studies done to ensure that MVAC systems using R-152a
meet the requirements set forth in this rule. Because it is customary
business practice that OEMs conduct and keep on file Failure Mode and
Effect Analysis (FMEA) on any potentially hazardous part or system, we
believe this requirement will not impose an additional paperwork
burden. However, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
previously approved the information collection requirements contained
in the existing regulations in subpart G of 40 CFR part 82 under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and
has assigned OMB control numbers 2060-0226. The OMB control numbers for
EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; for NAICS code 336111 (Automobile manufacturing), it is <1000
employees; for NAICS code 336391 (Motor Vehicle Air-Conditioning
Manufacturing), it is <750 employees; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school
district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and
(3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on
small entities, EPA certifies that this action will not have a
significant adverse economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This final rule will not impose any new requirements on small
entities and is expected to relieve burden for some small entities.
    OEMs are not mandated to move to R-152a MVAC systems. EPA is simply
listing R-152a as an acceptable alternative with use conditions in new
MVAC systems. This rule allows the use of this alternative to ozone
depleting substances in the MVAC sector and outlines the conditions
necessary for safe use. By approving this refrigerant under SNAP, EPA
provides additional choice to the automotive industry which, if
adopted, would reduce the impact of MVACs on the global environment.
This rulemaking does not mandate the use of R-152a as a refrigerant in
new MVACs.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
    EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. Today's rule does not affect State, local,

or tribal governments. The enforceable requirements of today's rule
related to integrating risk mitigation devices and documenting the
safety of alternative MVAC systems affect only a small number of OEMs.
This action provides additional technical options allowing greater
flexibility for industry in designing consumer products. The impact of
this rule on the private sector will be less than $100 million per
year. Thus, today's rule is not subject to the requirements of sections
202 and 205 of the UMRA. EPA has determined that this rule contains no
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This regulation applies directly to facilities that
use these substances and not to governmental entities. This rule does
not mandate a switch to R-152a and the limited direct economic impact
on entities from this rulemaking is less than $100 million annually.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
    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, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This regulation applies directly to
facilities that use these substances and not to governmental entities.
Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

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

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This final rule does not have
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. It does not
significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal
governments, because this regulation applies directly to facilities
that use these substances and not to governmental entities. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

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

    Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This final rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental
health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. The exposure limits and
acceptability listings in this rule apply to car occupants, and in
particular car drivers and service technicians. We expect adults are
more likely to be present than children in MVAC service shops and
children and adults would be equally impacted by flammability concerns
in the passenger compartment, thus, the refrigerant does not put
children at risk disproportionately. As a matter of EPA policy,
however, we have evaluated the environmental health or safety effects
of the refrigerants on children. The results of this evaluation are
contained in ``Risk Analysis for Alternative Refrigerant in Motor
Vehicle Air Conditioning.''
    During the public comment period, the public was invited to submit
or identify peer-reviewed studies and data, of which the agency may not
be aware, that assess the potential effects of these alternatives on
children and the Agency received no comments addressing this issue.

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

    This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)) because it is not likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. This action would
impact manufacturing and repair alternative MVAC systems. Preliminary
information indicates that these new systems are more energy efficient
than currently available systems in some climates. Therefore, we
conclude that this rule is not likely to have any adverse effects on
energy supply, distribution or use.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    As noted in the proposed rule, Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law
104-113, Section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use
voluntary consensus standards in regulatory activities unless to do so
would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through
OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus standards. This rulemaking involves
technical standards. EPA has decided to use the SAE most recent
versions of J639, J1739 and J2773. These standards can be obtained from
http://www.sae.org/technical/standards/. These standards address safety
and reliability issues concerning alternative refrigerant MVAC systems.

J. Congressional Review Act

    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 rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will be effective August 11,
2008.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

    Environmental protection, Motor vehicle air-conditioning, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Stratospheric ozone layer.

    Dated: June 5, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is amended as
follows:

PART 82--PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE

0
1. The authority citation for part 82 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671-7671q.

Subpart G--Significant New Alternatives Policy Program

0
2. Appendix B to Subpart G is amended as follows:
0
a. In the first table by adding one new entry to the end of the table.
0
b. In the table titled ``Refrigerants--Unacceptable Substitutes'' by
revising the entry for ``CFC-12 Motor Vehicle Air Conditioners
(Retrofit and New Equipment/NIKs)''.

Appendix B to Subpart G of Part 82--Substitutes Subject to Use
Restrictions and Unacceptable Substitutes

                               Refrigerants--Acceptable Subject to use Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Application                Substitute           Decision           Conditions           Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
CFC-12 Automobile Motor Vehicle   R-152a as a         Acceptable subject  Engineering         Additional
 Air Conditioning (New equipment   substitute for      to use conditions.  strategies and/or   training for
 only).                            CFC-12.                                 devices shall be    service
                                                                           incorporated into   technicians
                                                                           the system such     recommended.
                                                                           that foreseeable   Manufacturers
                                                                           leaks into the      should conduct
                                                                           passenger           and keep on file
                                                                           compartment do      failure mode and
                                                                           not result in R-    Effect Analysis
                                                                           152a                (FMEA) on the
                                                                           concentrations of   MVAC as stated in
                                                                           3.7% v/v or above   SAE J1739.
                                                                           in any part of
                                                                           the free space\1\
                                                                           inside the
                                                                           passenger
                                                                           compartment for
                                                                           more than 15
                                                                           seconds when the
                                                                           car ignition is
                                                                           on.
                                                                          Manufacturers must
                                                                           adhere to all the
                                                                           safety
                                                                           requirements
                                                                           listed in the
                                                                           Society of
                                                                           Automotive
                                                                           Engineers (SAE)
                                                                           Standard J639,
                                                                           including unique
                                                                           fittings and a
                                                                           flammable
                                                                           refrigerant
                                                                           warning label as
                                                                           well as SAE
                                                                           Standard J2773.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Free space is defined as the space inside the passenger compartment excluding the space enclosed by the
  ducting in the HVAC module.

                                     Refrigerants--Unacceptable Substitutes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               End-use                        Substitute                Decision                 Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
CFC-12 Motor Vehicle Air Conditioners  R-405A.................  Unacceptable...........  R-405A contains R-c318,
 (Retrofit and New Equipment/NIKs).                                                       a PFC, which has an
                                                                                extremely high GWP and
                                                                                lifetime. Other
                                                                                Substitutes exist
                                                                                which do not contain
                                                                                PFCs.
                                       Hydrocarbon Blend B....  Unacceptable...........  Flammability is a
                                                                                serious concern. Data
                                                                                have not been
                                                                                submitted to
                                                                                demonstrate it can be
                                                                                used safely in this
                                                                                end-use.
                                       Flammable Substitutes,   Unacceptable...........  The risks associated
                                        other than R-152a.                                with using flammable
                                                                                substitutes (except R-
                                                                                152a) in this end-use
                                                                                have not been
                                                                                addressed by a risk
                                                                                assessment. R-152a may
                                                                                be used with the use
                                                                                conditions in Appendix
                                                                                B to this subpart.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. E8-13086 Filed 6-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 120 (Friday, June 25, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 33699]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13601]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL21-78-000]

PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Institution of Section 206
Proceeding and Refund Effective Date

    On June 17, 2021, the Commission issued an order in Docket No.
EL21-78-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16
U.S.C. 824e, instituting an investigation into whether PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.'s Open Access Transmission Tariff and the
Amended and Restated Operating Agreement are unjust, unreasonable,
unduly discriminatory, or preferential, or otherwise unlawful. PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C., 175 FERC ] 61,231 (2021).
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL21-78-000, established
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.
    Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket No. EL21-78-
000 must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as
appropriate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, in
accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214 (2020), within 21 days of the date of
issuance of the order.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFile'' link at
http://www.ferc.gov. In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a
paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be
addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    Dated: June 21, 2021.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-13601 Filed 6-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 16, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55366-55370]
[FR Doc No: 2019-22484]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87265; File No. SR-CBOE-2019-083]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating
To Amend Its Financial Incentive Programs for Global Trading Hours Lead
Market-Makers

October 9, 2019.
    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 October 2, 2019, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe
Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to amend its financial incentive programs for Global Trading Hours Lead
Market-Makers. The text of the proposed rule change is provided in
Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    In 2016, the Exchange's parent company, Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
(formerly named CBOE Holdings, Inc.) (``Cboe Global''), which is also
the parent company of Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (``C2''), acquired Cboe
EDGA Exchange, Inc. (``EDGA''), Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX'' or
``EDGX Options''), Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'' or ``BZX
Options''), and Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (``BYX'' and, together with
Cboe Options, C2, EDGX, EDGA, and BZX, the ``Cboe Affiliated
Exchanges''). Cboe Options intends to migrate its trading platform to
the same system used by the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges, and also migrate
its current billing system to a new billing system, on October 7, 2019
(the ``migration''). As part of the migration to the new billing
system, the Exchange is seeking to simplify and harmonize certain
programs and billing processes, including its financial incentive
programs for Lead Market-Makers (``LMMs'') in VIX and SPX (including
SPXW) during Global Trading Hours (``GTH''). Accordingly, the Exchange
proposes to amend its GTH LMM financial programs, effective October 1,
2019.
Background
    By way of background, pursuant to Footnote 38 of the Fees Schedule,
a LMM in SPX will receive a rebate for that month in the amount of a
pro-rata share of a compensation pool equal to $30,000 times the number
of LMMs in that class (or pro-rated amount if an appointment begins
after the first trading day of the month or ends prior to the last
trading day of the month) if the LMM: (1) Provides continuous
electronic quotes in at least the lesser of 99% of the non-adjusted
series or 100% of the non-adjusted series minus one call-put pair in an
GTH allocated class (excluding intraday add-on series on the day during
which such series are added for trading) during GTH in a given month;
(2) enters opening quotes within five minutes of the initiation of an
opening rotation in any series that is not open due to the lack of a
quote, provided that the LMM will not be required to enter opening
quotes in more than the same percentage of series set forth in clause
(1) for at least 90% of the trading days during GTH in a given month;
and (3) satisfies the following time-weighted average quote widths and
bid/ask sizes for each moneyness category: (A) Out of the money options
(``OTM''), average quote width of $0.90 or less and average bid/ask
size of 15 contracts or greater; (B) at the money options (``ATM''),
average quote width of $3.00 or less and bid/ask size of 10 contracts
or greater; and (C) in the money options (``ITM''), average quote width
of $10.00 or less and bid/ask size of 5 contracts or greater.
    Also pursuant to Footnote 38 of the Fees Schedule, a LMM in VIX
options during GTH will receive a rebate for that month in the amount
of a pro-rata share of a compensation pool equal to $20,000 times the
number of LMMs in that class (or pro-rated if an appointment begins
after the first trading day of the month or ends prior to the last
trading day of the month) if the LMM: (1) Provides continuous
electronic quotes in at least the lesser of 99% of the non-adjusted
series or 100% of the non-adjusted series minus one call-put pair in an
GTH allocated class (excluding intra-day add-on series on the day
during which such series are added for trading) and (2) enters opening
quotes within five minutes of the initiation of an opening rotation in
any series that is not open due to the lack of a quote, provided that
the LMM will not be required to enter opening quotes in more than the
same percentage of series set forth in clause (1) for at least 90% of
the trading days during GTH in a given month.
    GTH LMMs are not currently obligated to satisfy the heightened
quoting standards described in the Fees Schedule. Rather, the LMMs are
eligible to receive a rebate if they satisfy the heightened standards,
which the Exchange believes encourage LMMs to provide liquidity during
GTH. Additionally, the Exchange may consider other exceptions to this
quoting standard based on demonstrated legal or regulatory requirements
or other mitigating circumstances.
Proposed Change
    The Exchange now wishes to simplify its billing processes and
harmonize its LMM incentive programs. To that end, the Exchange
proposes to eliminate Footnote [sic] amend the above-mentioned
incentive programs to align with the heightened quoting standard format
currently required under the MSCI LMM Program.\3\ By way of background,
any Market-Maker that is appointed as a LMM in MSCI EAFE Index
(``MXEA'') options and/or MSCI Emerging Markets Index (``MXEF'')
(``MSCI LMM'') and meets the heightened quoting standard described
below, receives $20,000 per month/per product.\4\ Specifically, the LMM
will receive the $20,000 per month/per class if it provides continuous
electronic quotes that meet or exceed the following heightened quoting
standards in at least 90% of the MXEA and/or MXEF series 80% of the
time in a given month:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In amending the programs, the Exchange proposes to eliminate
Footnote 38 in its entirety and replace it with separate tables
describing the GTH SPX LMM program and the GTH VIX LMM program.
    \4\ MSCI LMMs serve as MSCI LMMs during the RTH session only.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Premium                         Expiring        Near term       Mid term        Long term
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     7 days or     8 days to 60   61 days to 270    271 days or
                                                       less            days            days           greater
                      Level                      ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Width   Size    Width   Size    Width   Size    Width   Size
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$0-$5.00........................................   $3.00       5   $1.50      20   $2.50      15   $5.00      10
$5.01-$15.00....................................    6.00       3    3.00      15    5.00      10   10.00       7
$15.01-$50.00...................................   15.00       2    7.50      10   10.00       7   20.00       5
$50.01-$100.00..................................   25.00       1   15.00       7   20.00       5   30.00       3
$100.01-$200.00.................................   40.00       1   25.00       3   35.00       3   48.00       2
Greater Than $200.01............................   60.00       1   40.00       1   50.00       1   72.00       1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange may also consider other exceptions to this quoting
standard based on demonstrated legal or regulatory requirements or
other mitigating circumstances. Like GTH LMMs, for purposes of the
financial

benefit, MSCI LMM(s) are not be obligated to satisfy the heightened
quoting standard shown above. Rather, the MSCI LMM(s) only receive the
financial benefit if they satisfy the abovementioned heightened quoting
standard. If a MSCI LMM does not meet the heightened quoting standard,
then it simply will not receive the financial benefit for that month.
Additionally, MSCI LMM(s), like GTH LMMs must still comply with the
continuous quoting obligation and other obligations of Market-Makers
and LMMs described in Cboe Options Rules.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See e.g., Cboe Options Rule 8.7 and Rule 8.15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange first proposes to amend the GTH SPX LMM program.
First, the Exchange proposes to separate the available rebate and
quoting standard for SPX and SPXW. More specifically, the Exchange
proposes to provide that if the LMM meets the heightened quoting
standard described below for SPX, the LMM will receive a pro-rata share
of a compensation pool for SPX equal to 15,000 times the number of LMMs
appointment in SPX and if the LMM meets the heightened quoting standard
described below for SPXW, the LMM will receive an additional pro-rata
share of a compensation pool for SPXW equal to $15,000 times the number
of LMMs in that class (for a total of $30,000 per month for meeting the
standard for both SPX and SPXW).\6\ The Exchange next proposes to amend
the heighted quoting standard to provide that in order to receive the
rebates under the program, the SPX LMM(s) must provide continuous
electronic quotes that meet or exceed the following heightened quoting
standards in at least 99% of each of SPX and SPXW series 90% of the
time in a given month during GTH:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange proposes to continue to include in the Fees
Schedule an example of how the compensation pools work.
Specifically, the Exchange will provide the following example: if
two LMMs are appointed in SPX a compensation pool will be
established each month for (i) SPX totaling $30,000 and (ii) SPXW
totaling $30,000. If each LMM meets the heightened continuous
quoting standard in SPX and SPXW during a month, each will receive
$30,000. If only one LMM meets the heightened continuous quoting
standard in SPX and SPXW during a month, that LMM would receive
$60,000 and the other one would receive nothing.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Premium                         Expiring        Near term       Mid term        Long term
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     7 days or     8 days to 60   61 days to 270    271 days or
                                                       less            days            days           greater
                      Level                      ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Width   Size    Width   Size    Width   Size    Width   Size
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$0-$5.00........................................   $0.50      10   $0.40      25   $0.60      15   $1.00      10
$5.01-$15.00....................................    2.00       7    1.60      18    2.40      11    4.00       7
$15.01-$50.00...................................    5.00       5    4.00      13    6.00       8   10.00       5
$50.01-$100.00..................................   10.00       3    8.00       8   12.00       5   20.00       3
$100.01-$200.00.................................   20.00       2   16.00       5   24.00       3   40.00       2
Greater Than $200.00............................   30.00       1   24.00       3   36.00       1   60.00       1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to similarly amend the GTH VIX LMM
program. The Exchange first notes that it will maintain the current
compensation pool and continue to provide that if a GTH VIX LMM meets
the proposed heightened quoting standard described below, it will
receive a pro-rata share of a compensation pool for VIX equal to
$20,000 times the number of LMMs in that class (or pro-rated amount if
an appointment begins after the first trading day of the month or ends
prior to the last trading day of the month) for that month.\7\ In order
for an LMM to receive the rebate of $20,000 per month, the Exchange
proposes to provide that the LMM(s) must provide continuous electronic
quotes that meet or exceed the following heightened quoting standards
in at least 99% of the VIX series 90% of the time in a given month: \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange proposes to continue to include in the Fees
Schedule an example of how the compensation pools work.
Specifically, the Exchange will provide the following example: If
two LMMs are appointed in VIX a compensation pool will be
established each month totaling $40,000. If each LMM meets the
heightened continuous quoting standard in VIX during a month, each
will receive $20,000. If only one LMM meets the heightened
continuous quoting standard in VIX during a month, that LMM would
receive $40,000 and the other one would receive nothing.
    \8\ For the month of October 2019, the Exchange proposes to
apply the heightened quoting standard from October 7 to October 31,
in light of the migration of the Exchange's billing system.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Premium                         Expiring        Near term       Mid term        Long term
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     7 days or     8 days to 60   61 days to 270    271 days or
                                                       less            days            days           greater
                      Level                      ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Width   Size    Width   Size    Width   Size    Width   Size
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$0-$3.00........................................   $0.50      25   $0.40      50   $0.50      25   $1.00      10
$3.01-$5.00.....................................    0.75      15    0.60      30    0.75      15    1.50       7
$5.01-$10.00....................................   $1.00      10    0.80      20    1.00      10    2.00       5
$10.01-$30.00...................................    3.00       5    1.00      10    3.00       5    5.00       3
$30.01-$30.00...................................    5.00       3    3.00       5    5.00       3    7.00       2
Greater Than $100.00............................   10.00       1    5.00       1   10.00       1   12.00       1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed rebates provided under the GTH
LMM programs, as amended, continues to encourage GTH LMMs to provide
significant liquidity in SPX, SPXW and VIX options during GTH, just as
the standards and rebate under the current MSCI financial incentive
program similarly incentivizes MSCI LMMs to provide significant
liquidity in MSCI products. Additionally, the Exchange notes that both
GTH LMMs and MSCI LMMs may need to undertake expenses to be able to
quote at a significantly heightened standard in these classes, such as
purchase more logical connectivity based on their increased capacity
needs. The Exchange notes that

the proposed amendments to the GTH LMM program provides a harmonized
approach to financial incentive programs for LMMs. The programs, as
proposed, continue to offer financial benefits for meeting heightened
quoting standards.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\9\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \10\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
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 regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\11\ which requires that Exchange rules
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its Trading Permit Holders and other persons using
its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Exchange believes the proposed changes to the GTH LMM
financial benefit programs are reasonable as the Exchange believes the
proposed amendments provide for a simpler and more streamlined
heightened quoting standard, is easier to administer on the new billing
platform and provides harmonization across LMM financial benefit
programs (e.g., conforms with the format of the MSCI LMM program). The
Exchange also believes the proposed amended rebates are reasonable as
the proposed rebates are similar to the rebates offered currently.
Particularly, the Exchange proposes to maintain the current
compensation pools and rebate amounts, with the only change being that
SPX and SPXW will have separate compensation pools. (i.e., GTH SPX LMMs
are currently eligible for a compensation pool equal to $30,000 times
the number of LMMs in SPX, and post-migration they will be eligible for
two compensation pools, one for SPX at $15,000 times the number of LMMs
in SPX and another for SPXW at $15,000 times the number of LMMs in
SPX). The Exchange also believes the GTH LMM financial incentive
programs are reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because the Exchange wants to ensure it continues incentivizing the
LMMs to provide liquid and active markets in these products during GTH.
The Exchange believes it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
to only offer this financial incentive to the GTH LMMs because it
benefits all market participants trading SPX, SPXW and VIX during GTH
to encourage the LMMs to satisfy the heightened quoting standards,
which may increase liquidity and provide more trading opportunities and
tighter spreads. Indeed, the Exchange notes that the GTH LMMs provide a
crucial role in providing quotes and the opportunity for market
participants to trade during GTH, which can lead to increased volume,
thereby providing a robust market. The Exchange also notes that the GTH
LMM may have added costs each month that it needs to undertake in order
to satisfy that heightened quoting standard (e.g., having to purchase
additional logical connectivity).
    The Exchange ultimately wishes to ensure a GTH LMM is adequately
incentivized to provide liquid and active markets in SPX, SPXW and VIX
during GTH to encourage liquidity. The Exchange believes that the
program, even as amended, will continue to encourage increased quoting
to add liquidity in SPX, SPXW and VIX products, thereby protecting
investors and the public interest. Additionally, if a GTH LMM does not
satisfy the heightened quoting standards for the duration of the
required time, then it simply will not receive the offered per class
payment for that month.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition that are not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not
believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on
intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because it applies uniformly to
similarly situated GTH LMMs, which market participants play a crucial
role in providing active and liquid markets during GTH. The Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden
on intermarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because SPX, SPXW and VIX
options are proprietary products that will only be traded on Cboe
Options. To the extent that the proposed changes make Cboe Options a
more attractive marketplace for market participants at other exchanges,
such market participants are welcome to become Cboe Options market
participants.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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 \12\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \13\
thereunder. 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 will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2019-083 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-CBOE-2019-083. 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 offices 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-CBOE-2019-083, and should be submitted
on or before November 6, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-22484 Filed 10-15-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 229 (Thursday, November 30, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 83570]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26282]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4730-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2023-0001]

Alaska; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Alaska (FEMA-4730-DR), dated August 23, 2023, and
related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued October 30, 2023.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Alaska is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of August 23, 2023.

    The Kusilvak Census Area and Yupiit Regional Educational
Attendance Area for Individual Assistance.
    The Iditarod Regional Educational Attendance Area and Yukon-
Koyukuk Census Area for Public Assistance.

    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.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-26282 Filed 11-29-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P