[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 46 (Friday, March 10, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13270-13278]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04734]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2013-0615; FRL-9958-65-Region 6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico;
Albuquerque/Bernalillo County; New Source Review (NSR) Preconstruction
Permitting Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (the Act or CAA), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve portions
of revisions to the applicable New Source Review (NSR) State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for the City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo
County. Additionally, the EPA is proposing to conditionally approve the
provisions establishing accelerated review and technical permit
revisions. The EPA is proposing to approve the following: The
establishment of a new Minor NSR (MNSR) general construction permitting
program; changes to the MNSR Public Participation requirements; and the
addition of exemptions from MNSR permitting for inconsequential
emission sources and activities.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 10, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R06-
OAR-2013-0615, at www.regulations.gov or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please contact Aimee Wilson, (214) 665-
7596<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the EPA
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), and some may not be publicly available at either location
(e.g., CBI).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aimee Wilson,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To inspect the hard copy materials, please
schedule an appointment with Aimee Wilson or Mr. Bill Deese at 214-665-
7253.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

I. Background

    The Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) at section 110(a)(2)(C) requires
states to develop and submit to the EPA for approval into the SIP,
preconstruction review and permitting programs applicable to certain
new and modified stationary sources of air pollutants for attainment/
unclassifiable and nonattainment areas that cover both major and minor
new sources and modifications, collectively referred to as the NSR SIP.
The CAA NSR SIP program is composed of three separate

programs: Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), Nonattainment
New Source Review (NNSR), and Minor New Source Review (MNSR). The Minor
NSR SIP program addresses construction or modification activities that
do not emit, or have the potential to emit, beyond certain major
source/major modification thresholds and thus do not qualify as
``major'' and applies regardless of the designation of the area in
which a source is located. The EPA regulations governing the criteria
that states must satisfy for EPA approval of the NSR programs as part
of the SIP are contained in 40 CFR 51.160-51.166. Minor NSR regulations
are contained at 40 CFR 51.160-51.164.
    The SIP submittal under review in this action contains proposed
changes to each of the current SIP-approved sections contained in
20.11.41 of the New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) and includes the
proposed addition of seven new sections. All changes are identified in
Table 4 of this rulemaking. These changes are discussed in more detail
in the Technical Support Document (TSD) contained in the docket for
this action.

II. What did City of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County submit?

    Our proposed action today addresses the revisions to the City of
Albuquerque-Bernalillo County's (the ``County'') Minor NSR SIP which
were submitted to EPA on July 26, 2013 as well as the letters submitted
to the EPA dated April 21, 2016, July 5, 2016, September 19, 2016, and
December 20, 2016.

III. EPA's Evaluation

    The current County SIP includes the EPA approved Part 41 provisions
(see, 69 FR 78312, December 30, 2004), which form the basis of the
County's Minor NSR SIP program implemented by the City of Albuquerque
Environmental Health Department (the ``Department''). The following
sections of this proposed action and the accompanying TSD analyze the
proposed revisions to the Construction Permits regulation found in Part
41 to determine whether the submitted revisions and the Department's
letters dated April 21, 2016; July 5, 2016; September 19, 2016; and
December 20, 2016, as a whole, meet the requirements of the CAA and the
EPA's regulations, policy, and guidance for NSR permitting. As noted in
the TSD, the revisions made to 20.11.41 sections 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10,
11, 12, 18, 19, 20, 26, 27, and 29 NMAC are non-substantive, and thus
will not be analyzed in detail below. A line by line comparison of
these non-substantive submitted changes is found in the TSD in the
docket for this action.

a. What are the requirements for the EPA's evaluation of a
preconstruction permitting program SIP submittal?

    In addition to the preconstruction permitting program requirements
of section 110(a)(2), our evaluation must ensure that the submittal
complies with section 110(l) of the CAA before it can be approved into
the SIP. Section 110(l) states that the EPA shall not approve a
revision of the SIP if it would interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS), reasonable further progress, or any other applicable
requirement of the Act. Thus, under CAA section 110(l), the proposed
MNSR SIP revision must not interfere with attainment, reasonable
further progress, or any other applicable requirement of the Act. As
part of the 110(l) analysis, we have evaluated the proposed MNSR SIP
revisions for any potential interference with attainment and reasonable
further progress for all NAAQS pollutants. Bernalillo County is
designated attainment for all NAAQS pollutants.

b. Technical Review of Albuquerque/Bernalillo County's SIP Revisions
Submittals

    As detailed in the TSD, the July 26, 2013 SIP submittal meets the
completeness criteria established in 40 CFR 51, Appendix V. In addition
to the completeness review, the revisions contained in the SIP
submittal were evaluated against the applicable requirements contained
in the Act and 40 CFR 51.
    Section 2 of the County's submittal governs the scope of the Minor
NSR program. 40 CFR 51.160(e) requires that the plan identify the
``types and sizes of facilities, buildings, structures, or
installations which will be subject to review.'' The County's current
SIP requires stationary sources with emissions in excess of the limits
listed in this section to obtain a construction permit. In its
submittal, the County revised this section to include source or
activity based exemptions. The emissions from the new exemptions are
expected to be inconsequential, and these sources and activities have
historically been commenced and operated without coverage by an air
permit.
    As required by section 110(l) of the CAA, we analyzed the addition
of these exemptions to ensure that they do not interfere with any
applicable requirement for attainment of the NAAQS, reasonable further
progress (RFP), or any other CAA requirement. The Department has been
carrying out the Minor NSR program as revised since January 1, 2014.
Since then, there has been no indication that these exempted sources
have interfered with attainment, RFP, or any other requirement of the
Act. The EPA took into consideration the following factors when making
the decision to propose that the exemptions be approved into the SIP;
     Compliance with the 8-hour ozone standard has improved
county-wide with ozone pollutant concentrations trending downward since
the late 1980's. The 8-Hour and 1-Hour ozone trends are listed in Table
1: \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Table showing more data points is available in the Technical
Support Document for the proposed SIP approval.

                                               Table 1--Ozone Data
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Number          Number
                                                                  exceedances of  exceedances of     Number of
              Year                 Maximum 8-hr    Maximum 1-hr    8-hr std (for   1-hr std (for    monitors in
                                       value           value       all monitors    all monitors     Bernalillo
                                                                     combined)       combined)        County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000............................           0.084             0.1              10               0               7
2005............................           0.084           0.131               7               1               8
2010............................           0.078           0.094               1               0               7

2015............................           0.073           0.081               0               0               5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Compliance with the 8-hour CO standard has improved
county-wide with CO pollutant concentrations trending downward since
the late 1980's. The 8-Hour and 1-Hour CO trends are listed in Table 2:

                                           Table 2--CO Monitoring Data
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                                   Maximum 8-hr    Maximum 1-hr       Number          Number        monitors in
              Year                     value           value      exceedances of  exceedances of    Bernalillo
                                                                     8-hr std        1-hr std         County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1995............................             9.1              14               0               0               6
2000............................             4.3             9.2               0               0               6
2005............................             4.3             4.6               0               0               6
2010............................             3.1             3.5               0               0               5
2015............................             1.4             2.5               0               0               2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Compliance with the 1-hour NO2 standard has
improved county-wide with NO2 pollutant concentrations
trending downward since the late 1990's. The 1-Hour NO2
trends are listed in the Table 3:

                                                Table 3--NO2 Data
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Annual mean                      Number of
                                                   Maximum 1-hr   (maximum value      Number        monitors in
                      Year                             value        out of all      exceptional     Bernalillo
                                                                     monitors)        events          County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990............................................             118            17.7               0               1
1995............................................             124            17.6               0               2
2000............................................             135           17.23               0               2
2005............................................              57           15.74               0               3
2010............................................              81           12.07               0               1
2015............................................              48          11.074               0               1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 7 of the County's SIP provides definitions for the terms
used throughout 20.11.41 NMAC. The submitted revisions provide updated
definitions for several terms. The revisions either made the
definitions align more closely with those provided in 40 CFR 51.100 or
they were updated to match those that were approved by the EPA in the
most recent New Mexico Minor NSR SIP revision at 20.2.72 NMAC. We are
proposing to approve the majority of the definitions with the exception
of the following: ``conflict of interest'' listed in <IP_ADDRESS>.J,
``technical permit revision,'' listed in <IP_ADDRESS>.RR, and the
reference to technical permit revisions found in <IP_ADDRESS>.EE. We are
proposing to conditionally approve these definitions since they only
apply to sections <IP_ADDRESS> and <IP_ADDRESS>.B which we are also
proposing to conditionally approve in this action.
    Section 13 of the County's SIP contains the requirements for the
permit application that must be filed with the Department by any person
seeking a permit. The revisions include the addition of provisions
related to the changing, supplementing, or correcting a previously
submitted permit application and provisions detailing what must be
included before an application is considered complete. The revision
also establishes a new abbreviated public participation process in
<IP_ADDRESS>B that applies to technical permit revisions. This
abbreviated process does not meet the requirements for prominent
advertisement in the area affected as required by 40 CFR 51.161.
Rather, it allows the applicant to send notification letters to
neighborhood organization within half a mile of the source seeking the
technical permit revision. The County has committed to revising this
abbreviated process to include the necessary public notice requirements
as listed in 40 CFR 51.161. We are therefore proposing to conditionally
approve <IP_ADDRESS>.B.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Letter dated December 20, 2016 to Ron Curry, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 6, from Mary Lou Leonard, Director
Environmental Health Department, City of Albuquerque. Copy of this
letter and copies of all others referenced in this proposal are in
the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With the exception of the public participation process found in
<IP_ADDRESS>B., we are proposing to approve section 13 as it includes
more stringent requirements for permit applicants with respect to the
contents of permit applications that are not present in the current
SIP. We propose to find section 13 meets the applicable federal
requirements, including 40 CFR 51.160 which contains federal
requirements regarding information an owner or operator of a new or
modified source must submit to the State or local agency.

    Section 14 of the County's SIP contains the public notice
requirements. Federal requirements for public participation for Minor
NSR programs can be found at 40 CFR 51.160 and 51.161. The revised
regulations allow the Department to publish its notice in a newspaper
of general circulation in Bernalillo County, whereas the current SIP
requires that it be published in a newspaper of general circulation in
the area closest to the location of the source seeking a permit. The
revision also shortens the comment period. Previously, commenters had
45 days to submit comments; under the new regulation they have 30 days
to comment on the permit application. The requirement to publish the
notice in a newspaper of general circulation in Bernalillo County meets
the requirement found in 40 CFR 51.161(b)(3) to publish a notice by
``prominent advertisement in the area affected.'' Though the revision
to <IP_ADDRESS> results in a reduction of the length of time the public
can comment on the permit application, it still meets federal
requirements since the new time period is equivalent to the federal
minimum requirement found in 40 CFR 51.161(b)(2).
    The revised provisions provide that only those who submit comments
during the 30-day comment period will be notified when the Department's
analysis is available. As clarified in the County's July 5, 2016
letter, those who wish to provide comments on the analysis will have 30
days to do so once it becomes available. The proposed revisions also
require a person to comment in writing on the permit application in
order to be allowed to comment on the Department's Analysis. We believe
that this is a minimal burden placed on the public to express written
interest on the permit application in order to have the opportunity to
comment on the Department's Analysis. This additional requirement does
not undermine federal public participation requirements, nor does it
interfere with any other requirement of the CAA. Therefore, we propose
approval of this revision into the SIP.
    In addition, the County has revised the language in
<IP_ADDRESS>(B)(8) NMAC which requires that public notices be
automatically sent to the Region 6 EPA office; the revised provision
now provides that public notices be sent to the EPA only if requested
by the EPA. 40 CFR 51.161(d) requires that a state send a copy of all
public notices to the EPA via the Regional Office, without qualifying
whether a request by the EPA is necessary. To ensure that all public
notices are received by the EPA pursuant to 40 CFR 51.161(d), Region 6
has formally requested copies of each public notice be provided to the
EPA.\3\ Therefore, the Department will provide a copy of all public
notices for construction permits to the EPA meeting the federal
requirement in 40 CFR 51.161(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Copies of public notices were requested via letter from Mr.
Jeffrey Robinson, Section Chief, Air Permits, EPA, Region 6 to Ms.
Mary Lou Leonard, Director, City of Albuquerque Environmental Health
Department on June 6, 2016. City of Albuquerque responded to EPA's
request via letter dated July 5, 2016 from Ms. Mary Lou Leonard,
Director, City of Albuquerque Environmental Health Department, to
Mr. Jeffrey Robinson, EPA, and agreed to provide copies of the
notices to EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 15 of the County's SIP contains the provisions governing
the public information hearing process. The proposed regulation
clarifies that the Department shall hold a public information hearing
(PIH) for a permit application if the Department determines there is
significant interest and a significant air quality issue. Section 15
requires the Department to hold a hearing, if needed, no fewer than 30
days before the deadline for the Department to make a final decision on
the permit application and to publish a public notice of the hearing no
fewer than 10 days before it occurs. This is a new requirement that is
not in the current SIP. The replacement regulation also clarifies that
the applicant is to present their permit proposal and answer questions
from the attendees. It also requires that the PIH is recorded and the
recording be included in the administrative record. There are no
federal requirements for Minor NSR permits to have an opportunity for a
hearing, therefore, the proposed section <IP_ADDRESS> is more stringent
than federal requirements and we are proposing its approval into the
SIP.
    Section 16 in the County's SIP governs the permit decisions
process. It specifies the numbers of days within which the Department
shall either grant, grant subject to conditions, or deny a permit or
permit revision after the Department deems a permit application
administratively complete. The revision reduces the number of days the
Department has to review the application from 180 days to 90 days. It
also reduces the days in which the Department must hold a hearing, if
one is required, from 90 days to 60 days. The Department provided
supplemental information to the EPA regarding the number of Minor NSR
permits that have been issued since the reduction in the amount of time
the Department has to review an application has been implemented. The
Department has been implementing this reduction in time for the
Department's review of Minor NSR permits for over 10 years. The
Department has issued approximately 892 new MNSR permits since January
20, 2000.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Historical new Minor NSR permit issuance data was provided
via letter dated April 21, 2016, from Isreal Tavarez, City of
Albuquerque, to Aimee Wilson, EPA, Region 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Bernalillo County is designated attainment for all NAAQS
pollutants, and the air quality trends provided in the section 2
analysis support that the air quality is improving in the county. The
reduction of time for the Department's review of Minor NSR permit
applications has therefore not interfered with attainment, reasonable
further progress, or any other applicable requirement of the Act and we
are proposing its approval into the SIP.
    Section 17 of the County's SIP provides the basis for which a
permit may be denied. The revision removes a provision that refers to
ambient air standards that are unique to the Air Board. There are no
standards that are unique to the Air Board, the County incorporates the
federal standards by reference.\5\ We are proposing to approve removal
of this provision from the current SIP. The proposed replacement
regulation includes a new provision at <IP_ADDRESS>.F. that allows the
Department to deny a permit application if the Department determines
that a conflict of interest existed or exists regarding an application
that was submitted during accelerated review as authorized by
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC. We are proposing to conditionally approve this
provision in <IP_ADDRESS>F. since it applies only to permits processed
through the accelerated review process established in <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC,
which we are also proposing for conditional approval. We are proposing
to approve the rest of section 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, <IP_ADDRESS>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 20 of the County's SIP provides the basis for which a
permit may be cancelled, suspended, or revoked. The proposed
replacement regulation includes a new provision that provides that a
violation of a requirement of the State Act, a board regulation, or a
condition of a permit that has been issued pursuant to 20.11.41 NMAC
may result in suspension or revocation of the permit. This provision
makes the SIP more stringent and we are proposing its approval into the
SIP.
    Section 21 of the County's submittal addresses the permittee's
obligation to notify the Department in various instances. This section
adds a new

requirement for the permittee to notify the Department of the date a
portable source leaves or returns to the County. The permittee must
also notify the Department of any permit update or correction no more
than 60 days after the permittee knows or should have known about the
condition that requires updating or correction of the permit. In
addition, the permittee must submit an annual emissions inventory to
the Department as required by 20.11.47 NMAC. The revised section also
states the timeframes in which the required notifications must be
completed in a clearer manner than the current SIP. These revisions
assist in ensuring that sources are not engaging in acts that will
result in an exceedance of one of the NAAQS and in clarifying when each
notification must be provided to the Department. We are proposing to
approve this section into the SIP.
    The County wishes to remove the current section 22--Emergency
Permits from its current SIP. The July 26, 2013 SIP Submittal
renumbered section 22 to section 24. The County, in its technical
support document, and subsequently in its April 21, 2016 letter to the
EPA, declared the provisions to be ``local only'' provisions, thus
indicating an intention that they be removed from the SIP. The removal
of the provision will not interfere with any applicable requirements of
the CAA as it merely provided an avenue for permittees to obtain a
permit at an expedited rate in the event of an emergency. The removal
of such a provision will not interfere with any applicable requirement
of the Act. Sources operating under emergency permits remain subject to
federal enforcement.
    The proposed replacement regulation for section 22 clarifies the
performance testing requirements in the County. The proposed regulation
clarifies the following: The permittee is responsible for the testing
expenses, the permittee must submit a written report of the test
results within 30 days of the completion of the testing, and the
Department may require the permittee to repeat the testing or perform
additional testing as frequently as the Department requires to ensure
that the source demonstrates compliance with the permit. The revised
regulation assists in ensuring that sources are in compliance with, and
remain in compliance with, their permits. The revisions incorporate
more stringent requirements for performance testing than what is
currently in the SIP and we are proposing that these revisions be
approved into the SIP.
    Section 23 of the County's submittal addresses the temporary
relocation of portable stationary sources in the County. The submittal
adds clarifying language regarding the requirements applicants must
meet in order to relocate a permitted portable source without obtaining
a permit revision. It also includes the incorporation of additional
recordkeeping and notification requirements that must be met in order
for the portable source to relocate without undergoing a permit
revision and identifies any sources that are exempt from the
requirements listed in this section. Further, it requires that the
application for relocation be submitted at least 45 days prior to the
relocation date, that relocation applicants pay the fee required by
20.11.2 NMAC, and that applications include an EPA-approved air
dispersion model showing the proposed new location will comply with the
NAAQS and NMAAQS, include all information required by <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC
and be signed certifying accuracy. The EPA is proposing to approve
these revised provisions as they include more stringent requirements
for portable source relocation to meet before qualifying for an
exemption from preconstruction permitting. Section 23 meets the
applicable federal requirements and we are proposing its approval into
the SIP.
    Section 25 of the County's submittal addresses the requirements for
minor source modifications in nonattainment areas. The proposed
regulation removed the reference to the State of New Mexico non-methane
hydrocarbon standard in 20.11.44 NMAC, Emissions Trading, since the
format of the standard is outdated and its withdrawal from the SIP was
recommended by the EPA Region 6 office.\6\ We are proposing to approve
the removal of this reference. The proposed regulation also contains a
requirement that an existing source that is subject to nonattainment
permitting and is modifying shall demonstrate a net air quality benefit
of at least a 20% reduction in ambient impact for each applicable
contaminant. These revisions result in a more stringent SIP than
currently approved, therefore we find that they meet federal
requirements for SIP-approved permitting plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Letter dated February 21, 2007 from Jeff Robinson, EPA to
Neal Butt, Albuquerque Environmental Health Department.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 28 of the County's submittal addresses administrative and
technical permit revisions. The proposed replacement regulation
includes details on what constitutes administrative and technical
permit revisions, the requirements of the applicant when submitting an
administrative or technical permit revision, and how the Department
processes an administrative or technical permit revision. Each permit
revision type has specific review and permit issuance procedures,
applicable fees, and public notice requirements, as described below:
     Administrative permit revisions require that a form on the
revision be submitted by the applicant to the Department. Upon receipt
of the form, the Department determines whether the revision qualifies
as an administrative revision. Administrative revisions are limited to
administrative changes that do not have associated increases in
permitted emissions and do not result in a change to a permit term or
condition, such as: The correction of typographical errors, change in
administrative information (e.g., change in owner, facility address, or
contact phone number), the incorporation of the retirement of a
permitted source or the closing of a facility, or the incorporation of
NMAC exempted sources.\7\ Under this revision, administrative permit
revisions now require a certified written notification of the revision
be submitted by the applicant to the Department. Administrative
revisions become effective upon receipt of the notification by the
Department. The Department is not required to reissue the permit to
incorporate an Administrative permit revision. Administrative revisions
have applicable permit fees under <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC. These revisions are
not subject to the public notice requirements contained in either
section 13 or section 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The incorporation of the <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC exempted sources
into an existing permit is an administrative action and does not
change the exempt status of these sources. These <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC
exempt sources remain exempt from Minor NSR permitting requirements
and their incorporation into an existing permit does not result in
an increase in permitted emission rates or change a term or
condition of the existing permit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Technical permit revisions require that an application for
a revision be submitted by the applicant to the Department. Technical
permit revisions are used to accomplish changes that will not result in
a significant emissions increase that cannot be accomplished using the
administrative revisions provision in this section. The Department has
30 days after the receipt of a complete application to approve or deny
the permit revisions or inform the applicant that the request must be
submitted as a permit modification. This timeline for the Department's
action on the permit application may be extended if the Department
holds a public meeting in response to significant public interest
regarding the permit revision. The technical permit

revision becomes effective upon written approval from the Department,
and the Department is required to file the technical permit revision
with the existing permit. Permit actions that qualify as technical
revisions are required to follow the public notice requirements of
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, and fees under <IP_ADDRESS>. Permit actions that
qualify as technical revisions are exempt from the public notice
requirements provided for in <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.
    Federal Minor NSR Program requirements generally require a 30-day
public review for all sources that are subject to Minor NSR; however,
these requirements also allow a state to identify the types and sizes
of facilities, buildings, structures, or installations, which will
require full preconstruction review by justifying the basis for the
state's determination of the proper scope of its program.\8\
Importantly, our decision to approve a state's scope of its Minor NSR
program must consider the individual air quality concerns of each
jurisdiction, and therefore will vary from state to state. The EPA
recognizes a state's ability to tailor the scope of its Minor NSR
program as necessary to achieve and maintain the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For example, under the federal Tribal NSR regulations, EPA
did not require permits for sources with emissions below ``de
minimis'' levels, and for sources in ``insignificant source
categories''. 76 FR at 38755. In sum, under these Tribal NSR
regulations, some sources are not required to obtain permits, and
have no public notice requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The revised SIP rule is more stringent than the current SIP with
respect to requiring written notification of the administrative
revision be submitted by the applicant to the Department. The
administrative permit revisions do not have any associated increases in
permitted emissions and are truly inconsequential in nature. As these
administrative revisions have no associated increases in emissions, we
find that they will not interfere with any provision of the CAA or EPA
regulations as required by section 110(l) of the CAA.
    The Department began issuing technical permit revisions when the
revised 20.11.41 NMAC, Construction Permits, became effective on
January 1, 2014. Since 2014, the Department has issued 13 technical
permit revisions in the County. The Department's implementation of the
permit revision program, which allows for reduced public notice for
administrative and technical revisions, has not resulted in a measured
exceedance of the NAAQS and has not shown any interference with
reasonable further progress.\9\ Furthermore, a review of the technical
permit revisions issued since 2014 shows that the total annual
increases in permitted emissions is less than 1 ton per year for all
NAAQS pollutants. In fact, most of the pollutants show no change or an
overall decrease in annual emissions as a result of the technical
permit revisions issued since 2014. This is consistent with our
expectation that the permit revisions and associated public notice
requirements will not have adverse impacts on air quality that
interfere with attainment or reasonable further progress or any other
applicable requirement of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Permit revisions data provided via letter dated April 21,
2016, from Isreal Tavarez, PE, Environmental Health Manager,
Environmental Health Department, City of Albuquerque to Aimee
Wilson, Air Permitting, EPA, Region 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, since the technical permit provision potentially allows
permittees to conduct changes that may potentially result in up to a
one pound per hour increase of a NAAQS pollutant or NMAAQS pollutant,
the County is required to follow the public notice requirements
provided in 40 CFR 51.161, which requires that the County provide ``a
notice by prominent advertisement in the area affected.'' As written,
permittees seeking a technical permit revision are required to provide
public notice by sending a letter to designated representatives of
recognized neighborhood organizations and associations within one-half
mile of the source requesting the modification. This does not meet the
federal notice requirements specified in 40 CFR 51.161. The one-half
mile radius is not sufficient to constitute a ``prominent
advertisement'' in the ``area affected.'' The increase in emissions
allowed under this provision has the potential to affect an area
greater than one-half of a mile. Additionally, there is no way to
ensure that all of the individuals living in areas that could be
potentially affected by this increase are members of, or represented
by, the recognized neighborhood organizations or associations which are
required to be notified. For these reasons, we are proposing to
conditionally approve the technical permit provision established in
Section 28 under CAA section 110(k)(4). The County has committed to
making the required changes to the public participation component of
this provision within one year from the date this conditional approval
becomes final.
    Section 29 of the County's submittal addresses permit modification.
The SIP previously defined ``Modification or To Modify'' in section
<IP_ADDRESS>(H). The submittal adds a new section entitled ``Permit
Modification'' at <IP_ADDRESS> which explains that all proposed
modifications must comply with all requirements of 20.11.41. Permit
modifications must follow the same permitting procedures and meet the
same permitting requirements as those required for newly issued Minor
NSR permits. We find that the proposed revision clarifies the permit
modification process and meets the federal requirements for SIP-
approved permitting plans.
    Section 30 of the County's submittal addresses permit reopening,
revision, and reissuance. The revision gives the Department the
authority to reopen, revise, or reissue a permit if any mistakes are
found, additional requirements of the CAA or State act are found to
apply, the reopening is necessary to ensure compliance with federal or
state requirements, or the permittee failed to disclose a material fact
to the Department. This revision ensures that the Department has the
authority to prevent violations of the CAA in the event that any of the
aforementioned events occur. Permit reopening, revision, and reissuance
under section <IP_ADDRESS> would be initiated by the County and is not a
permitting mechanism that the permittee can initiate. Therefore, we
find that these revisions to section 30 will not affect the ability of
the section, or Part 41 overall, to meet the federal requirements for
SIP-approved permitting plans.
    Section 31 of the County's submittal creates a new type of permit,
a general construction permit, in the County's Minor NSR Program. A
general construction permit developed by the Department must cover
numerous similar sources. Sources allowed to register for coverage
under a general permit must be homogenous in terms of operations,
processes and emissions, subject to the same or substantially similar
requirements, and not subject to case-by-case standards or
requirements. As required in <IP_ADDRESS>(B)(3)(a) NMAC, a general
construction permit developed by the Department must describe the
sources that qualify to register under the general permit. This
requirement satisfies the federal requirement 40 CFR 51.160(e) which
provides that the SIP must identify the types and sizes of facilities
that will be subject to review. Section 31 states that this provision
does not apply to major modifications or sources as defined by 20.11.60
NMAC. The Department further clarified in its letter dated April 21,
2016, that permits developed and issued under the general permits
programs will not be issued to sources that are defined as major under
federal rules and regulations.

    The submitted regulation specifically requires that a general
permit include monitoring, record keeping and reporting (MRR)
requirements appropriate to the source and sufficient to ensure
compliance with the general construction permit, ensuring that the
provision will be enforceable as required by 40 CFR 51.160(a). The
general permit also must contain sufficient terms and conditions to
ensure that all sources operating under a general permit will meet all
applicable requirements under the Federal Clean Air Act, e.g., NSPS,
NESHAPS, and MACT, and all requirements of the SIP. Sources operating
under general permits are not allowed to cause or contribute to air
contaminant levels in excess of any National or New Mexico Ambient Air
Quality Standard. The provision clearly identifies the category of
sources that qualify for coverage and provides that a source notifies
the Department of its coverage under the program by submitting a
complete application to register. The Department shall grant
registration to a source only if it submits a complete application and
meets the terms and conditions of the general permit. This provision
meets all applicable federal requirements and will not interfere with
any provision in the CAA or in the EPA regulations.
    Section 32 of the County's submittal seeks to establish an
accelerated review process. The accelerated review process allows the
County to utilize contractors to perform technical review and the
drafting of permits provided the applicant and contractor meet certain
obligations. The permit applicant has to pay both an accelerated review
processing fee and a permit review fee. The County still retains the
authority to review the draft permit and ensure that it meets all of
the necessary requirements before it is proposed as a draft permit. The
permit however does not go through the same public notice procedures as
other permits as outlined in <IP_ADDRESS>.B. NMAC and does not meet the
minimum requirements of 40 CFR 51.161(b)(1). 40 CFR 51.161 requires
that the state or local agency make public the permittee's application
and the state or agency's analysis of that application. Section 32 does
not require that the application or analysis be posted in a public
place. The County has stated that it inadvertently excluded this
requirement, and that it is their practice to make the application and
analysis available in accordance with 40 CFR 51.161. We are proposing
to conditionally approve this section under 110(k)(4). The County has
committed to updating this section within one year of this rule
becoming final to reflect its practice of making these documents
publicly available.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Letter dated December 20, 2016 to Ron Curry, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 6, from Mary Lou Leonard, Director
Environmental Health Department, City of Albuquerque.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Proposed Action

    We are proposing to approve the revisions to the City of
Albuquerque--Bernalillo County Minor NSR program submitted on July 26,
2013, as supplemented on April 21, 2016; July 5, 2016; September 19,
2016; and December 20, 2016, that update the regulations to be
consistent with federal requirements for Minor NSR permitting, remove a
provision that refers to ambient air standards that are unique to the
Air Board that no longer exist, and the reference to the State of New
Mexico non-methane hydrocarbon standard in 20.11.44 NMAC, Emissions
Trading. The EPA has made the preliminary determination that the
revisions are approvable because the submitted rules are adopted and
submitted in accordance with the CAA and are consistent with the laws
and regulations for Minor NSR permitting.
    We are proposing to conditionally approve the provisions submitted
on July 26, 2013, as supplemented on April 21, 2016; July 5, 2016;
September 19, 2016; and December 20, 2016, that establish the
accelerated permitting procedures. Additionally, the EPA is proposing
to conditionally approve the definition of ``conflict of interest'' at
20.11.410.7(J) NMAC, permit denial as it relates to conflict of
interest at <IP_ADDRESS>(F) NMAC, and Accelerated Review at <IP_ADDRESS>
NMAC, as adopted on July 10, 2013 and submitted on July 26, 2013. We
are also proposing to conditionally approve the technical permit
revision procedures established in section 28.
    Table 4 summarizes the changes made to the County's SIP that are
contained in the SIP revisions submitted on July 26, 2013, as
supplemented on April 21, 2016; July 5, 2016; September 19, 2016; and
December 20, 2016. A summary of the EPA's evaluation of each section
and the basis for this action is discussed in Section III of this
preamble.

                              Table 4--Summary of the SIP Submittal in This Action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          Submittal
               Section                              Title                   dates           Proposed action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       20.11.41 NMAC--Construction Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC......................  Issuing Agency................      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC......................  Scope.........................      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC......................  Statutory Authority...........      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC......................  Duration......................      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC......................  Effective Date................      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC......................  Objective.....................      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC......................  Definitions...................      07/26/2013  Approved except for the
                                                                                following which we are
                                                                                conditionally approving:
                                                                                <IP_ADDRESS>.J.,
                                                                                20.11.41.RR, and the
                                                                                reference to technical
                                                                                permit revisions in
                                                                                20.11.41.EE.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC......................  Variances.....................      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC......................  Savings Clause................      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Severability..................      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Documents.....................      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Fees for Permit Application...      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Application for Permit........      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Public Participation..........      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Public Information Hearing....      07/26/2013  Approval.

<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Permit Decision and Air Board       07/26/2013  Approval.
                                        Hearing on the Merits.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Basis for Permit Denial.......      07/26/2013  Approved except for
                                                                                <IP_ADDRESS>.F.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Applicants' Additional Legal        07/26/2013  Approval.
                                        Responsibilities.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Permit Conditions.............      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Permit Cancellations,               07/26/2013  Approval.
                                        Suspension, or Revocation.
<IP_ADDRESS>NMAC......................  Permittee's Obligations to          07/26/2013  Approval.
                                        Inform the Department and
                                        Deliver an Annual Emissions
                                        Inventory.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Performance Testing...........      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Temporary Relocation of             07/26/2013  Approval.
                                        Portable Stationary Sources.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Emergency Permits.............      07/26/2013  Removed.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Nonattainment Area                  07/26/2013  Approval.
                                        Requirements.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Compliance Certification......      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Enforcement...................      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Administrative and Technical        07/26/2013  Approval for
                                        Permit Revisions.                               Administrative Revisions/
                                                                                Conditional Approval for
                                                                                Technical Permit
                                                                                Revisions.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Permit Modification...........      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Permit Reopening, Revision and      07/26/2013  Approval.
                                        Reissuance.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  General Construction Permits..      07/26/2013  Approval.
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC.....................  Accelerated Review of               07/26/2013  Conditional Approval.
                                        Application.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:

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

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

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA. There is no burden imposed under the PRA because this action
does not contain any information collection activities.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

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

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

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. There are no requirements or responsibilities
added or removed from Indian Tribal Governments. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this action. 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 proposed rule does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law

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

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

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

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

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

    The EPA believes that this action is not subject to Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it does not establish an
environmental health or safety standard. This action proposes to
approve state permitting provisions that are consistent with the CAA
and disapprove state permitting

provisions that are inconsistent with the CAA.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: February 6, 2017.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2017-04734 Filed 3-9-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32-34]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26070]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2020-0691]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Super Bowl LV; Hillsborough Bay and River, Tampa, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a temporary safety
zone on certain waters of Garrison Channel, Seddon Channel Turning
Basin, and the Hillsborough River, in the vicinity of downtown Tampa,
Florida during the Super Bowl LV celebrations from January 29, 2021,
through February 7, 2021. The safety zone is necessary to protect the
public and Super Bowl event

personnel from the hazards associated with potential vessel traffic
within the area of the safety zone. All persons and vessels would be
required to transit through the safety zone at a steady speed and may
not slow down, stop or anchor except in the case of unforeseen
mechanical failure or other emergency unless given prior authorization
from the Captain of the Port. Any person or vessel forced to slow or
stop in the established zone must immediately notify the Captain of the
Port Tampa via VHF channel 16. We invite your comments on this proposed
rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before February 3, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2020-0691 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Marine Science Technician First
Class Michael D. Shackleford, Sector St. Petersburg Prevention
Department, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On September 22, 2020, the Maritime Subcommittee for Super Bowl LV
notified the Coast Guard that during the Super bowl LV event
celebrations there will be several planned Super Bowl-related events
throughout the waterfront areas of Tampa, FL. These events will occur
at various times from January 29, 2021 through February 7, 2021. These
events could lead to large gatherings of persons and vessels in
waterways around the Tampa area. The Captain of the Port St. Petersburg
(COTP) has determined that the potential hazards associated with
persons and vessel congestion within the proposed safety zone during
these events is a safety concern.
    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels
and persons and the navigable waters within the safety zone before,
during, and after the scheduled events. The Coast Guard is proposing
this rulemaking under the authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP Saint Petersburg is proposing a safety zone from January
29, 2021, through February 7, 2021. The safety zone would cover certain
navigable waters of Garrison Channel, Seddon Channel Turning Basin, and
the Hillsborough River, in the vicinity of downtown Tampa, Florida. The
duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of persons,
vessels, and navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled
events. All persons and vessels would be required to transit through
the safety zone at a steady speed and may not slow down, stop or anchor
except in the case of unforeseen mechanical failure or other emergency
unless given prior authorization from the COTP. Any person or vessel
forced to slow or stop in the established zone must immediately notify
the Captain of the Port Tampa via VHF channel 16.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, scope and duration of the safety zone. The rule will impact
only a small designated area of Garrison Channel, Seddon Channel
Turning Basin, and the Hillsborough River in the vicinity of downtown
Tampa, Florida, and vessel traffic will be able to safely operate in
the area with minimal restrictions, hence the safety zone is limited in
size and location. Vessels will be able to transit through the safety
zone at a steady speed, making it limited in scope. The safety zone
will be in effect for ten days, making it limited in duration. The
Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM
Channel 16 about the safety zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on
the

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety
zone lasting 10 days that would restrict certain aspects of navigation
on certain waters in the vicinity of Tampa, Florida within the safety
zone. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction
Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket.
For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking System
of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is
proposing to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T07-0691 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-0691   Safety Zone; Super Bowl LV, Hillsborough Bay and
River, Tampa, FL.

    (a) Location. The following regulated area is a safety zone: All
waters of Hillsborough River south of the N. Boulevard Bridge, Seddon
Channel Turning Basin, and Garrison Channel in the vicinity of
downtown, Tampa, Florida.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port St. Petersburg in the enforcement of the regulated
area.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are required to
transit through the safety zone at a steady speed and may not slow
down, stop or anchor except in the case of unforeseen mechanical
failure or other emergency unless given prior authorization from the
Captain of the Port. Any person or vessel forced to slow or stop in the
established zone must immediately notify the Captain of the Port Tampa
via VHF channel 16.
    (2) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by
Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene
designated representatives.
    (d) Enforcement period. This rule will be enforced daily from
January 29, 2021, through February 7, 2021.

    Dated: November 19, 2020.
Matthew A. Thompson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port St. Petersburg.
[FR Doc. 2020-26070 Filed 12-31-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 31 (Thursday, February 18, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 10127]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03318]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4522-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Maine; Amendment No. 2 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 Maine (FEMA-4522-DR), dated April 4, 2020, and related
determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on January 14, 2021.

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 Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Paul F. Ford,
of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for
this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of W. Russell Webster as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    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.

Robert J. Fenton,
Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-03318 Filed 2-17-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 79 (Monday, April 25, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24293-24294]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08706]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2021-0109; FRL-9788-01-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Reinforced Plastic Composites
Production (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), NESHAP for Reinforced Plastic
Composites Production (EPA ICR Number 1976.10, OMB Control Number 2060-
0509), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a
proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
April 30, 2022. Public comments were previously requested, via the
Federal Register, on April 13, 2021, during a 60-day comment period.
This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A
fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated
burden and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before May 25, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2021-0109, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method)
or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
Code 2821T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460. EPA's
policy is that all comments received will be included in the public
docket without change including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to
be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
    Submit written comments and recommendations to OMB for the proposed
information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Muntasir Ali, Sector Policies and
Program Division (D243-05), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
https://www.regulations.gov, or in person, at the EPA Docket Center,
WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington,
DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For
additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for the regulations (40 CFR part 63, subpart WWWW)
apply to both existing facilities and new facilities with reinforced
plastic composites (RPC) production operations and processes. In
general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications,
performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the
affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and
records are

essential in determining compliance, and are required of all affected
facilities subject to NESHAP.
    Form Numbers: 5900-566.
    Respondents/affected entities: Owners and operators of reinforced
plastic composites production operations and processes.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart WWWW).
    Estimated number of respondents: 448 (total).
    Frequency of response: Monthly, semiannually, annually.
    Total estimated burden: 38,600 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $4,570,000 (per year), which includes $0 for
annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: The increase in burden from the most-
recently approved ICR is due to an increase in adjustment(s). The
adjustment increase in burden from the most-recently approved ICR is
due to a change in regulatory requirements stemming from the 2020 RTR
ICR (EPA ICR No. 1976.09) and the incorporation of its burden into the
currently-approved ICR. Items added include burden for work practice
requirements and time to record information. Work practice requirements
have had a significant impact on the burden since facilities are
complying with the current regulations through pollution prevention
measures rather than add-on control devices. The time to complete
semiannual compliance reports and time to train personnel have also
been adjusted. Reporting emissions exceedances or no emissions
exceedances is included in the semiannual compliance reports, and the
time to train personnel was adjusted to represent facilities of any
size. In addition, capital/startup and operation and maintenance costs
have decreased from the previous ICR. It is estimated no new facilities
will be subject to the rule and that existing facilities are complying
with the rule using compliant materials instead of add-on control
devices.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-08706 Filed 4-22-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: May 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 104)]
[Notices]
[Page 30905-30906]
[DOCID:fr31my06-74]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-363-000]

Sabine Pipe Line LLC; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas
Tariff

May 24, 2006.
    Take notice that on May 19, 2006, Sabine Pipe Line LLC (Sabine)
tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No.
1, the tariff sheets listed on Attachment A to the filing, with a
proposed effective date of June 19, 2006.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that

document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-8341 Filed 5-30-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 40 (Thursday, March 2, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12380-12381]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04030]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80101; File No. SR-ISEGemini-2017-05]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE Gemini, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Related to a Delay
of Implementation for the Block Order Mechanism

February 24, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on February 16, 2017, ISE Gemini, LLC (``ISE Gemini'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to delay the implementation of the Block
Order Mechanism \3\ functionality on ISE Gemini.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Block-size orders are orders for fifty (50) contracts or
more. The Block Order Mechanism is a process by which a Member can
obtain liquidity for the execution of block-size orders pursuant to
Rule 716(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at www.ise.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange recently filed a proposed rule change to amend Rule
716, Block Order Mechanism, along with other rules to reflect the ISE
Gemini technology migration to a Nasdaq, Inc. (``Nasdaq'') supported
architecture.\4\ The Exchange noted in the rule change to amend Rule
716 that it intends to begin implementation of the proposed rule
changes in Q1 2017.\5\ The migration will be on a symbol by symbol
basis, and the Exchange will issue an alert to members in the form of
an Options Trader Alert to provide notification of the symbols that
will migrate and the relevant dates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80011 (February 10,
2017), 82 FR 10927 (SR-ISEGemini-2016-17) (Order Approving Proposed
Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, To Amend Various
Rules in Connection With a System Migration to Nasdaq INET
Technology).
    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At this time, the Exchange proposes to delay the implementation of
the Block Order Mechanism functionality in ISE Gemini Rule 716(c). The
Exchange proposes to no longer offer the functionality as of a date
prior to February 27, 2017. The Exchange will notify Members of the
exact date the functionality will no longer be available by issuing a
Market Information Circular. The Exchange proposes to launch this
functionality prior to June 1, 2017 and will notify Members of the
exact implementation date by issuing a Market Information Circular. The
Facilitation Mechanism in ISE Gemini Rule 716(d) and the Solicited
Order Mechanism in ISE Gemini Rule 716(e) will be available and are
unaffected by this rule change.
    The Exchange desires to rollout this functionality at a later date
to allow additional time to build out and test this feature on the new
INET platform. The Exchange is staging the replatform to provide
maximum benefit to its Members while also ensuring a successful
rollout. This delay will provide the Exchange additional time to
implement this functionality. The Exchange notes that no market
participant would be impacted by the delay in implementation as no
participants currently utilize this feature on ISE Gemini.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\6\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest
for the reasons stated below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that delaying the implementation of the Block
Order Mechanism functionality on ISE Gemini is consistent with the Act
because the Exchange desires to rollout this functionality at a later
date to allow additional time to build out this feature and test on the
new INET platform. The Exchange is staging the replatform to provide
maximum benefit to its Members while also ensuring a successful
rollout. This delay will provide the Exchange additional time to
implement this functionality. There is no impact to market participants
as a result of this delay as no participants currently utilize this
feature on ISE Gemini. The Exchange will provide notice to Members to
ensure clarity about the delay of implementation of this functionality.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe
that the proposed rule change will impact the intense competition that
exists in the options market. No market participant will be impacted by
the delay of implementation of this functionality as no participants
currently utilize this feature on ISE Gemini. The Exchange plans to
offer the functionality after a short period of delay.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on

which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may
designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii)
of the Act \8\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \10\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \11\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
The Exchange represents that waiver of the operative delay would
provide the Exchange additional time to implement the Block Order
Mechanism functionality and ensure that it is properly functioning
prior to implementation on INET. The Commission notes that the Exchange
represents that there will be no impact to market participants as a
result of the proposed delay in implementation because no participants
currently utilize the Block Order Mechanism on the Exchange.
Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and
designates the proposal operative upon filing.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \12\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ISEGemini-2017-05 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-ISEGemini-2017-05. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISEGemini-2017-05 and should
be submitted on or before March 23, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-04030 Filed 3-1-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P