[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 230 (Friday, December 1, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 83939]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26440]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-11578-01-R3]

Delegation of Authority to the Commonwealth of Virginia To
Implement and Enforce Additional or Revised National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants and New Source Performance Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of delegation of authority.

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

SUMMARY: On October 24, 2023, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
sent the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia) a letter acknowledging
that Virginia's delegation of authority to implement and enforce the
National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) and
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) had been updated, as provided
for under previously approved delegation mechanisms. To inform
regulated facilities and the public, EPA is making available a copy of
EPA's letter to Virginia through this notice.

DATES: On October 24, 2023, EPA sent Virginia a letter acknowledging
that Virginia's delegation of authority to implement and enforce
certain Federal NSPS and NESHAPs had been updated.

ADDRESSES: Copies of documents pertaining to this action are available
for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air &
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,
1600 John F. Kennedy Blvd., Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029. Copies of
Virginia's submittal are also available at the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, 1111 East Main Street, Richmond, VA 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yongtian He, Permits Branch (3AD10),
Air & Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, Four Penn Center, 1600 JFK Boulevard, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Mr. He can also be
reached via electronic mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 16, 2023, Virginia notified EPA
that Virginia had updated its incorporation by reference of Federal
NSPS, NESHAP, and Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT) standards
to include many such standards, as they were published in final form in
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) dated July 1, 2022. On October
24, 2023, EPA sent Virginia a letter acknowledging that Virginia now
has the authority to implement and enforce the NSPS, NESHAP, and MACT
standards as specified by Virginia in its notice to EPA, as provided
for under previously approved automatic delegation mechanisms. All
notifications, applications, reports, and other correspondence required
pursuant to the delegated NSPS, NESHAP, and MACT must be submitted to
both EPA, Region III and to the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality, unless the delegated standard specifically provides that such
submittals may be sent to EPA or a delegated State. In such cases, the
submittals should be sent only to the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality. A copy of EPA's letter to Virginia follows:

``Michael G. Dowd, Director
Air Division
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 1105
Richmond, VA 23218

Dear Mr. Dowd:

    The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
previously delegated to the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia) the
authority to implement and enforce various federal New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS), National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), and National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories (MACT standards)
which are found at 40 CFR parts 60, 61 and 63, respectively. In
those actions, EPA also delegated to Virginia the authority to
implement and enforce any future federal NSPS, NESHAP or MACT
Standards on the condition that Virginia legally adopt the future
standards, make only allowed wording changes, and provide specified
notice to EPA.
    In a letter dated March 16, 2023, Virginia submitted to EPA
revised versions of Virginia's regulations which incorporate by
reference specified federal NSPS, NESHAP and MACT standards, as
those federal standards had been published in final form in the Code
of Federal Regulations dated July 1, 2022. Virginia committed to
enforcing the federal standards in conformance with the terms of
EPA's previous delegations of authority and made only allowed
wording changes.
    Virginia stated that it had submitted the revisions ``to retain
its authority to enforce the NSPSs and NESHAPs under the delegation
of authority granted by EPA on August 27, 1981 (46 FR 43300) and to
enforce the MACT standards under the delegation of authority granted
by EPA on January 26, 1999 (64 FR 3938) and January 8, 2002 (67 FR
825).''
    Virginia provided copies of its revised regulations which
specify the NSPS, NESHAP and MACT Standards which it had adopted by
reference. Virginia's revised regulations are entitled 9 VAC 5-50
``New and Modified Stationary Sources,'' and 9 VAC 5-60 ``Hazardous
Air Pollutant Sources.'' These revised regulations have an effective
date of March 15, 2023.
    Based on Virginia's submittal, EPA acknowledges that EPA's
delegations to Virginia of the authority to implement and enforce
EPA's NSPS, NESHAP, and MACT standards have been updated, as
provided for under the terms of EPA's previous delegation of
authority actions, to allow Virginia to implement and enforce the
federal NSPS, NESHAP and MACT standards which Virginia has adopted
by reference as specified in Virginia's revised regulations 9 VAC 5-
50 and 9 VAC 5-60, both effective on March 15, 2023.
    EPA appreciates Virginia's continuing NSPS, NESHAP and MACT
standards enforcement efforts, and also Virginia's decision to take
automatic delegation of additional or updated NSPS, NESHAP and MACT
standards by adopting them by reference.

Sincerely,
Cristina Fernandez, Director
Air and Radiation Division''

    This notice acknowledges the update of Virginia's delegation of
authority to implement and enforce NSPS, NESHAP, and MACT standards.

Cristina Fernandez,
Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2023-26440 Filed 11-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 201 (Friday, October 16, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65722-65727]
[FR Doc No: 2020-21329]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2018-0824; FRL-10014-79-Region 10]

Air Plan Approval; ID; 2015 Ozone NAAQS Interstate Transport
Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) requires each State
Implementation Plan (SIP) to contain adequate provisions prohibiting
emissions that will have certain adverse air quality effects in other
states. On September 26, 2018, the State of Idaho (Idaho or the State)
made a submission to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to
address these requirements for the 2015 8-hour ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The EPA is approving the submission as
meeting the requirement that each SIP contain adequate provisions to
prohibit emissions that will significantly contribute to nonattainment
or interfere with maintenance of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS in any
other state.

DATES: This action is effective on November 16, 2020.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR- 2018-0824. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the For
Further Information Contact section for additional availability
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Claudia Vaupel,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background Information

    On January 23, 2020, the EPA proposed to approve Idaho's September
26, 2018 submission as meeting the interstate transport requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS (84 FR

7854). Please refer to the January 23, 2020 notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for an explanation of the CAA requirements, a
detailed analysis of the submissions, and the EPA's proposed rationale
for approval. The public comment period for this NPRM ended on February
24, 2020.

II. Response to Comments

    The EPA received two sets of comments during the public comment
period. Both commenters disagreed with the EPA's interpretation of
Wisconsin v. EPA, 938 F.3d 303 (DC Cir. 2019) (Wisconsin v. EPA) as
limited to the attainment dates for Moderate or higher classifications
under CAA section 181, as well as the EPA's use of 2023 as the analytic
year to determine whether sources in Idaho will significantly
contribute to downwind nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of
the 2015 ozone NAAQS.\1\ One commenter argued that the EPA must
reevaluate Idaho's significant contribution or interference with
maintenance in alignment with the Marginal area attainment date. The
other commenter supported the EPA's proposed approval of Idaho's SIP
submission but argued that the EPA's approach to the treatment of
Marginal nonattainment areas is inconsistent with Wisconsin v. EPA and
is arbitrary and capricious. The commentator also disputed as arbitrary
and capricious guidance published by the EPA in August 2018 indicating
that, based on the EPA's analysis of its most recent modeling data, the
amount of upwind collective contribution captured using a 1 parts per
billion (ppb) contribution threshold is generally comparable, overall,
to the amount captured using a threshold equivalent to 1 percent of the
2015 ozone NAAQS.\2\ The following section summarizes the comments and
provides the EPA's responses to them. The full set of comments is
available in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The EPA used the 2023 as the analytic year because that year
aligns with the expected attainment year for Moderate ozone
nonattainment areas. The attainment date for nonattainment areas
classified as Moderate for the 2015 ozone NAAQS is August 3, 2024.
See CAA section 181(a); 40 CFR 51.1303; 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018).
    \2\ Analysis of Contribution Thresholds for Use in Clean Air Act
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) Interstate Transport State Implementation
Plan Submissions for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards, August 31, 2018, available in the docket for this action
or at https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/memo-and-supplemental-information-regarding-interstate-transport-sips-2015-ozone-naaqs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 1: Commenters asserted that the EPA's proposed action
improperly focuses on the Moderate attainment date (analytic year
2023), which commenters argued ignores the 2021 attainment year faced
by Marginal 2015 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas.\3\ These commenters
asserted that the EPA's decision to focus on the Moderate attainment
date, rather than the Marginal attainment date, contravenes the
statutory text, the U.S. District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit)
Court's decision in Wisconsin v. EPA, and is arbitrary and capricious.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The attainment date for nonattainment areas classified as
Marginal for the 2015 ozone NAAQS is August 3, 2021. See CAA section
181(a); 40 CFR 51.1303; 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter specifically avers that the distinction the EPA has
drawn between Marginal and Moderate areas is ``unlawful'' and that the
EPA relies on flawed assumptions in its interpretation of Wisconsin v.
EPA. Specifically, the commenter asserted that although the EPA
acknowledged the Wisconsin v. EPA decision in its proposal, the EPA
inappropriately claims that the ruling does not apply to Marginal
nonattainment areas because such areas do not have formal SIP planning
obligations and are presumed to rely on in-place emission control
measures to reach attainment. The commenter stated that the statute
prohibits upwind states from significantly contributing to
nonattainment, or interfering with maintenance, in any other state,
``regardless of the severity of the downwind state's nonattainment
classification.'' Moreover, the commenter stated that ``it would be
illogical for the statute to contemplate action to address significant
contribution to maintenance while disregarding contribution to marginal
areas, which have worse air quality.''
    In support of the commenter's assertion that the EPA must consider
Marginal nonattainment areas in 2021, the commenter argued that the
EPA's methodology for classifying nonattainment areas is inaccurate,
and therefore, the EPA cannot assume that Marginal nonattainment areas
will attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS within 3 years. The commenter argues
that because the EPA's ``percent-above-the-standard'' classification
approach was developed for the 1979 1-hour ozone standard, it ``will
skew toward a lower classification threshold (i.e., Marginal) at a much
greater rate'' and the ppb reductions needed to attain the NAAQS within
3 years of designation ``is extremely unlikely to occur when relying
solely on existing control programs.'' The commenter further asserts
that there are many Marginal nonattainment areas not likely to attain
the 2015 standard by the statutory deadline. These areas will then be
reclassified as Moderate nonattainment areas that will continue to
struggle to meet their obligations because, according to the
commentator, the EPA does not enforce the Good Neighbor provision.
    Another commenter also disagreed with the EPA's interpretation that
the different statutory requirements applying to Marginal and Moderate
ozone nonattainment areas provide a basis for aligning upwind Good
Neighbor obligations with the Moderate area attainment date. They
supported this argument by referring to the EPA's 2013 guidance for
infrastructure SIP submissions. The commenter asserted that ``EPA
incorrectly relies on data and analysis that was flatly rejected by the
Wisconsin v EPA court case.'' They further asserted that ``EPA must
reevaluate its decision for Idaho and must evaluate interstate
transport to marginal areas by their marginal attainment date of
2021.''
    Response 1: The commenters are referring to a D.C. Circuit court
decision addressing, in part, the issue of the relevant analytic year
for the purposes of evaluating interstate ozone transport under the
good neighbor provision, CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). On September
13, 2019, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision in Wisconsin v. EPA,
remanding the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Update \4\ to the
extent that Good Neighbor federal implementation plans in the CSAPR
Update did not fully eliminate upwind states' ``significant
contribution'' by the next applicable attainment date \5\ by which
downwind states must attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See 938 F.3d 303,
313. As explained in the proposal of this action, the EPA had
interpreted that holding as limited to the attainment dates for
Moderate or higher classifications under CAA section 181 on the basis
that Marginal nonattainment areas have reduced nonattainment SIP
planning requirements and other considerations. See, e.g., 85 FR 3874,
3877-3878 (January 23, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 81 FR 74504 (October 26, 2016).
    \5\ See CAA section 181(a); 40 CFR 51.1303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 19, 2020, the D.C. Circuit in Maryland v. EPA, applying the
Wisconsin decision, held that the EPA must assess the impacts of
interstate transport on air quality at the next downwind attainment
date, including Marginal area attainment dates, in evaluating the basis
for the EPA's denial of a petition under CAA section 126(b). 958 F.3d
at 1203-04. The EPA signed the NPRM proposing approval of

Idaho's good neighbor SIP prior to the D.C. Circuit's decision in
Maryland. This decision also came after the close of the comment period
on our proposed approval of Idaho's SIP submittal. However, this
decision bears directly on our consideration of these comments. In
accordance with the Maryland decision, the Agency now, in taking this
final action approving the Idaho SIP, will consider 2021 \6\ to be the
relevant analytic year for the purposes of determining whether sources
in Idaho will significantly contribute to downwind nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS in any other
states.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The attainment date for nonattainment areas classified as
Marginal for the 2015 ozone NAAQS is August 3, 2021. See CAA section
181(a); 40 CFR 51.1303; 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018).
    \7\ The EPA notes that the court in Maryland did not have
occasion to evaluate circumstances in which the EPA may determine
that an upwind linkage to a downwind air quality problem exists at
steps 1 and 2 of the four-step Good Neighbor framework by a
particular attainment date, but for reasons of impossibility or
profound uncertainty the Agency is unable to mandate upwind
pollution controls by that date. See 938 F.3d at 319-320. The D.C.
Circuit noted in Wisconsin that upon a sufficient showing, these
circumstances may warrant a certain degree of flexibility in
effectuating the implementation of the Good Neighbor provision. Id.
Such circumstances are not at issue in the present action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The points raised by the commenters to dispute the EPA's proposal
to use 2023 as the analytic year are now moot because after the
decision in Maryland v. EPA, the EPA is using 2021 as the analytic year
in this final action. The EPA need not address commentator's claim that
the 2015 ozone NAAQS designations were done incorrectly. This issue is
beyond the scope of this action. As acknowledged by the commentator,
they have previously raised this issue in comments on a different
action, and the EPA responded to those comments in that context.\8\
Regardless, the rulemaking to evaluate Idaho's September 26, 2018, good
neighbor SIP submission is not the appropriate forum to contest the
2015 ozone NAAQS area designations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See ``Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for Ozone: Nonattainment Area Classifications
Approach,'' 83 FR 10376, 10379 (March 9, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Idaho's September 26, 2018 SIP submission includes an interstate
ozone transport analysis for the Good Neighbor provision that relied on
the modeling information provided in the EPA's March 2018
memorandum,\9\ which used 2023 as the analytic year (corresponding with
the 2024 Moderate area attainment date).\10\ The State concluded that
it has no emissions reduction obligations for purposes of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) on the basis that its emissions are not linked to
any nonattainment or maintenance receptors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Information on the Interstate Transport State Implementation
Plan Submissions for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), March 27,
2018, available in the docket for this action or at https://www.epa.gov/interstate-air-pollution-transport/memos-and-notices-regarding-interstate-air-pollution-transport.
    \10\ The year 2023 was used as the analytic year because that
year aligns with the expected attainment year for Moderate ozone
nonattainment areas. The attainment date for nonattainment areas
classified as Moderate for the 2015 ozone NAAQS is August 3, 2024.
See CAA section 181(a); 40 CFR 51.1303; 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Relying in part on the same data that informed its analysis of the
year 2023, the EPA finds it reasonable to conclude that the impacts
from emissions from sources in Idaho will not exceed a contribution
threshold of 1 percent of the 2015 ozone NAAQS to any downwind
nonattainment and maintenance sites in 2021. This finding is a
sufficient basis for the EPA to conclude that Idaho is not linked to
any downwind receptors at step 2 of the four-step interstate transport
framework.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Thus, it is not necessary for the EPA to proceed to
evaluate whether the State's infrastructure SIP submission may also
be approvable using an alternative contribution threshold of 1 ppb.
Analysis of Contribution Thresholds for Use in Clean Air Act Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) Interstate Transport State Implementation Plan
Submissions for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards, August 31, 2018, available in the docket for this action
or at https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/memo-and-supplemental-information-regarding-interstate-transport-sips-2015-ozone-naaqs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the contribution modeling included in the March 2018
memorandum, the EPA concludes that Idaho's largest impact on any
downwind nonattainment or maintenance receptors in 2023 are 0.18 ppb
and 0.19 ppb, respectively.\12\ These values are both far less than 1
percent of the 2015 ozone NAAQS (0.70 ppb). In response to the Maryland
decision, using the best available information (including the same data
that informed the EPA's 2023 modeling) to analyze Idaho's air quality
impacts in the year 2021, the EPA finds it reasonable to conclude that
Idaho's impact on any potential downwind nonattainment and maintenance
receptor in 2021 would be similar to those projected in 2023, and
likewise well below 1 percent of the 2015 ozone NAAQS, as detailed in
the methodology described in the following paragraphs. Therefore, the
EPA finds that Idaho's September 26, 2018 infrastructure SIP submission
satisfies the State's Good Neighbor obligations for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The EPA's analysis indicates that Idaho will have a 0.18
ppb impact at the nonattainment receptor in Douglas County, Colorado
(Site ID 80350004), which has a 2023 projected average design value
of 71.1 ppb, and a 2023 projected maximum design value of 73.2 ppb.
The EPA's analysis further indicates that Idaho will have a 0.19 ppb
impact at the maintenance receptor in Arapahoe County, Colorado
(Site ID 80050002), which has a projected 2023 average design value
below the 2015 ozone NAAQS (69.3 ppb), and a 2023 projected maximum
design value above the NAAQS (71.3 ppb). See the March 2018
memorandum, attachment C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's analysis of receptors and contributions in 2021 relies in
part on the 2023 modeling used in the NPRM of this action, the results
of which were included with the March 2018 memorandum. These data are
the most recent published applicable modeling data available at the
time of this final action. To estimate Idaho's maximum contribution to
a nonattainment or maintenance receptor in 2021, the EPA developed an
interpolation analysis that evaluates available modeling, monitoring,
and emissions data to assess air quality in this year. In general, this
analysis utilizes 2019 measured design values \13\ and 2023 modeled
design values to estimate design values at each monitoring site in
2021. Specifically, 2021 average and maximum design values were
calculated by straight-line linear interpolation between the 2019
measured data and the 2023 modeled data. The EPA believes that the
linear interpolation methodology using measured data and 2023 model
projections provides a technically sound basis for estimation of ozone
design values in 2021 in part because of the relatively short two-year
span between 2021 and 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The 2019 design values at each monitoring site nationwide
are available at https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA calculated ozone contributions in 2021 by applying the
following two-step process. First, the contributions (in ppb) from each
state to each monitoring site in 2023 were converted to a fractional
portion of the 2023 average design value by dividing the contribution
by the 2023 design value. In the second step, the resulting
contribution fractions were multiplied by the estimated 2021 average
design value to produce 2021 contributions from each state to each
monitoring site.14 15
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Note that the method used here for calculating
contributions in 2021 is similar to the method used by the EPA to
calculate the 2023 contributions from 2023 air quality modeling.
    \15\ Design values for 2019, 2021, and 2023 along with the
contributions in 2021 and 2023 are provided in a file in the docket
for this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2021 design values and contributions were examined to determine
if Idaho contributes at or above 1 percent of the 2015 ozone

NAAQS threshold (0.70 ppb) to a downwind nonattainment or maintenance
receptor. The data indicate that the highest contribution in 2021 from
Idaho to a downwind receptor is 0.49 ppb to the nonattainment receptor
site 490353006 in Salt Lake County, Utah. Based on this analysis, the
EPA finds it reasonable to conclude that Idaho will contribute less
than 1 percent of the 2015 ozone NAAQS to any potential nonattainment
or maintenance receptors in 2021.
    The EPA also analyzed ozone precursor emissions trends in Idaho to
support the findings from the air quality analysis. In evaluating
emissions trends, we focused on state-wide emissions of nitrogen oxides
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in
Idaho.16 17 Emissions from mobile sources, electricity
generating units (EGUs), industrial facilities, gasoline vapors, and
chemical solvents are some of the major anthropogenic sources of ozone
precursors. This evaluation looks at both past emissions trends, as
well as projected trends.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ This is because ground-level ozone is not emitted directly
into the air but is a secondary air pollutant created by chemical
reactions between ozone precursors, chiefly NOX and non-
methane VOCs, in the presence of sunlight.
    \17\ 81 FR 74504, 74513-14. (October 26, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As shown in Table 1 of this preamble, between 2011 and 2017, annual
total NOX and VOC emissions have declined, by 19 percent and
8 percent, respectively. The projected reductions are a result of ``on
the books'' and ``on the way'' regulations that will continue to
decrease NOX and VOC emissions in Idaho, as indicated by our
2023 projected emissions. The large decrease in NOX
emissions between 2017 emissions and projected 2023 emissions in Idaho
are primarily driven by reductions in emissions from onroad and nonroad
vehicles. The EPA projects that the downward trend in both VOC and
NOX emissions from 2011 through 2017 will continue at a
steady rate to 2023 and further into the future due to the replacement
of higher emissions vehicles with lower emitting vehicles as a result
of several mobile source control programs.\18\ This downward trend in
emissions in Idaho adds support to the air quality analysis presented
previously, which indicates that the impact of emissions from sources
in Idaho to ozone in downwind states will continue to decline and
remain below 1 percent of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Tier 3 Standards (March 2014), the Light-Duty Greenhouse
Gas Rule (March 2013), Heavy (and Medium)-Duty Greenhouse Gas Rule
(August 2011), the Renewable Fuel Standard (February 2010), the
Light Duty Greenhouse Gas Rule (April 2010), the Corporate-Average
Fuel Economy standards for 2008-2011 (April 2010), the 2007 Onroad
Heavy-Duty Rule (February 2009), and the Final Mobile Source Air
Toxics Rule (MSAT2) (February 2007).

                                  Table 1--Annual Emissions of NOX and VOC From Anthropogenic Emission Sources in Idaho
                                                                         [Tons]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Projected
                                                      2011         2012         2013         2014         2015         2016         2017         2023
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX.............................................           90           87           84           82           78           76           73           49
VOC.............................................           90           89           88           87           86           84           82           63
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the EPA proposed in the NPRM to find that emissions
from Idaho will not significantly contribute to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS at the Fort Hall
Reservation in southeast Idaho in 2023.\19\ The EPA has reassessed air
quality impacts of emissions sources in Idaho on the Fort Hall
Reservation for 2021 and continues to believe Idaho will not
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance
of the 2015 ozone NAAQS at the Fort Hall Reservation. As discussed in
the proposal of this action, the EPA's modeling in the March 2018
memorandum did not identify receptors in Idaho in 2023. Additionally,
the ozone monitoring sites in Idaho are projected to remain below the
current standard in 2023. The Idaho Falls area monitoring site (Site ID
160230101), which is nearest to the Fort Hall Reservation, had a 2014-
2016 design value of 60 ppb and the EPA's modeling projects a 2023
maximum design value of 60.2 ppb and a 2023 average design value of
59.6 ppb, both below the 70 ppb standard.\20\ The Boise area monitoring
site with the highest 2023 projected ozone concentrations (Site ID
160010017) had a 2014-2016 design value of 67 ppb and the EPA's
modeling projects a 2023 maximum design value of 59.8 ppb and a 2023
average design value of 59.4 ppb. Because each of these monitoring
sites were both attaining in 2016 and are projected to attain in 2023,
and given the downward annual NOX and VOC emissions trends
identified in the Table 1 of this preamble, the EPA therefore finds it
reasonable to conclude that emissions from Idaho will not significantly
contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2015
ozone NAAQS at the Fort Hall Reservation in 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ On January 19, 2017, the EPA determined that the Shoshone-
Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall Reservation were eligible for
treatment in the same manner as a state for CAA sections
110(a)(2)(D) and 126. The EPA's determination is available in the
docket for this action. See also https://www.epa.gov/tribal/tribes-approved-treatment-state-tas.
    \20\ The EPA previously provided the 2023 projected ozone design
values at individual monitoring sites nationwide. Supplemental
Information on the Interstate Transport State Implementation Plan
Submissions for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), October
27, 2017, available in the docket for this action or at https://www.epa.gov/interstate-air-pollution-transport/memos-and-notices-regarding-interstate-air-pollution-transport. For data for the Idaho
monitors, see page A-10 of attachment A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thus, the EPA concludes that the air quality and emission analyses
indicate that emissions from Idaho will not significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS in
any other state, including the Fort Hall Reservation, in 2021.
Therefore, the EPA concludes that Idaho's infrastructure SIP submission
satisfies the State's Good Neighbor obligations for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.
    Comment 2: One commenter disagreed with the EPA's 1 ppb alternate
contribution threshold for determining significant contributions. The
commenter's reasoning was that ``a 1 ppb threshold would be a departure
from the EPA's precedent of using 1 percent of the ozone NAAQS as the
screening threshold'' and that this reversal of the EPA's
``longstanding practice without adequate explanation is arbitrary,
capricious and unreasonable.'' The commenter asserts that ``reducing
the amount of total upwind contribution that is required to be
addressed in an upwind state's state or federal implementation plan
will necessarily increase the amount of ozone that a downwind state
will be required to address on its own,'' shifting responsibility for
reductions from upwind states to downwind states and

further impeding the ability of downwind states to attain the NAAQS.
    Response 2: It is unnecessary for the EPA to determine whether it
may be appropriate to approve a state's use of an alternative 1 ppb
threshold for the purposes of this action. The EPA's proposal, and this
final action, are based on a finding that Idaho will not contribute
above one percent of the 2015 ozone NAAQS (0.70 ppb) at any projected
nonattainment or maintenance receptor in 2021. Therefore, there is no
need to evaluate any potential higher contribution threshold, as
discussed in the August 2018 memorandum, in the present final action.

III. Final Action

    The EPA is approving Idaho's September 26, 2018 submission as
meeting CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) interstate transport
requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735; October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821; January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339; February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255; August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885; April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355; May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629; February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the
rule does not have tribal implications and it will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249; November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 15, 2020 Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. See CAA section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: September 22, 2020.
Christopher Hladick,
Regional Administrator, Region10.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR part 52 is
amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart N--Idaho

0
2. In Sec.  52.670, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an
entry at the end of the table for ``Interstate Transport Requirements
for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.670  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                    EPA-Approved Idaho Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Applicable  geographic       State
      Name of SIP provision        or nonattainment area  submittal date   EPA approval date       Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Interstate Transport              State-wide............       9/26/2018  10/16/20, [Insert   This action
 Requirements for the 2015 Ozone                                           Federal Register    addresses CAA
 NAAQS.                                                                    citation].          110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I
                                                                                ).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2020-21329 Filed 10-15-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 112 (Monday, June 12, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37986-37988]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11845]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Parts 200, 229, 249, 270, 274 and 275

[Release No. 33-11197; 34-97621; IA-6316; IC-34932]

Technical Amendments to Commission Rules and Forms

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendments.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is
adopting technical amendments to various rules and forms under the
Securities Act of 1933 (``Securities Act''), the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act''), and the Investment Company Act of 1940
(``Investment Company Act''), as well as to the rule setting forth
undertakings that certain registrants must include in their
registration statements, and to the general authority provision
corresponding to Commission rules under the Investment Advisers Act of
1940 (``Investment Advisers Act''). These revisions make changes to
correct errors that are technical in nature, including typographical
errors and erroneous cross-references in various Commission rules and
forms.

DATES: This rule is effective June 12, 2023, except for the amendment
to 17 CFR 200.30-5 at instruction 2, which is effective July 2, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Quinn Kane, Senior Counsel, or Amanda
Hollander Wagner, Senior Special Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, Investment
Company Regulation Office, Division of Investment Management, at the
Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission is amending the following
rules and forms:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Commission reference                 CFR citation (17 CFR)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation S-K:
  Item 512................................  Sec.   229.512.
Securities Act and Investment Company Act:
 \1\
  Form N-2................................  Sec.  Sec.   239.14 and
                                             274.11a-1.
  Form N-14...............................  Sec.   239.23.
Investment Company Act:
  Rule 12d1-1.............................  Sec.   270.12d1-1.
  Rule 12d1-3.............................  Sec.   270.12d1-3.
  Rule 27i-1..............................  Sec.   270.27i-1.
  Rule 30-5...............................  Sec.   200.30-5.
Exchange Act: \2\
  Form 13F................................  Sec.   249.325.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The amendments make technical changes to various Commission rules
and forms. Some of the amendments update or correct cross-references to
other rules or provisions. The amendments to Rule 12d1-1 and Rule 12d1-
3 under the Investment Company Act update cross-references to former
National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) rules that have been
superseded by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) rules.
The amendment to Form 13F corrects an erroneous cross-reference
resulting from recent amendments to the form, which became effective on
January 3, 2023.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.; 15 U.S.C. 80a et seq.
    \2\ See Electronic Submission of Applications for Orders under
the Advisers Act and the Investment Company Act, Confidential
Treatment Requests for Filings on Form 13F, and Form ADV-NR;
Amendments to Form 13F, Investment Company Act Release No. 34635
(June 23, 2022) [87 FR 38943 (June 30, 2022)]. Special Instruction
11 to Form 13F erroneously states that the Information Table should
be presented ``in accordance with the column instructions provided
in Special Instructions 11.b.i through 12.b.viii.'' (emphasis
added). This error is the result of Special Instruction 2 being
deleted, causing a renumbering of the ensuing instructions. The
Commission is therefore adopting an amendment to update the Special
Instruction to provide an accurate cross-reference consistent with
the Commission's statement that this Instruction would cross
reference ``. . . the column instructions provided in Special
Instructions 11.b.i through 11b.viii.'' (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other amendments are intended to make technical updates to
instructions associated with certain form requirements, and to make
typographical and other corrections to inadvertent errors or omissions,
including removing outdated references in rules and forms. The
amendments related to Instruction 3.D to the Calculation of Filing Fee
Tables and Related Disclosure in Item 25 of Form N-2 and Item 16 of N-
14 make typographical corrections designed to make the instructions
consistent with a simplified construction that was incorporated in
parallel instructions to other forms as part of a recent Commission
rulemaking.\3\ Other amendments to Form N-2 and Item 512 of Regulation
S-K modify references that have in recent years been rendered
obsolete.\4\ The amendment to Rule 27i-1 under the Investment Company
Act restores language in the rule text that was inadvertently removed
when this rule was renumbered in a recent rulemaking, in light of the
renumbering of section 27(c) of the Investment Company Act to section
27(i) enacted by the National Securities Market Improvement Act of
1996.\5\ The corrections to Rule 30-5 under the Investment Company Act
are designed to conform the rule to the standard paragraph numbering
structure for Commission rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Filing Fee Disclosure and Payment Methods Modernization,
Investment Company Act Release No. 34396 (Oct. 13, 2021) [86 FR
70166 (Dec. 9, 2021)] (``2021 Fee Tagging Release''). In this
rulemaking the Commission amended a number of fee-bearing forms,
schedules, statements, and related rules to require each filing fee
table and accompanying disclosure to include all required
information for fee calculation in a structured format.
Specifically, we are correcting language in an example to the above-
referenced instruction that currently refers to a pre-effective
amendment to the filing of the Form N-2 on 2/15/20X1 by changing
this language to instead refer to a pre-effective amendment to the
Form N-2 filed on 2/15/20X1.
    \4\ Item 34.3.a.(2) of Form N-2 currently contains an exception
to a requirement for filers to furnish certain undertakings to
reflect fundamental changes to information provided in registration
statements for changes in the price and volume of an offering that
deviates by no more than 20% from the maximum aggregate offering
price set forth in the Calculation of Registration Fee table. This
table was removed pursuant to the 2021 Fee Tagging Release and was
replaced with the Calculation of Filing Fee tables, filed as an
exhibit to the fund's effective registration exhibit. Item
34.3.a.(2) should have therefore been amended at that time to
instead refer to the Calculation of Filing Fee tables, which set
forth the maximum aggregate offering price upon which this exception
is contingent. Accordingly, we are amending Item 34.3.a(2) in this
release in order to correct this erroneous reference. We are making
corresponding amendments to Item 512(a)(1)(ii) of Regulation S-K,
which the undertaking in Item 34.3.a mirrors, for the same reasons.
    \5\ See Updated Disclosure Requirements and Summary Prospectus
for Variable Annuity and Variable Life Insurance Contracts,
Investment Company Act Release No. 33814 (Mar. 11, 2020) [85 FR
25964 (May 1, 2020)] at 26110.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, the Commission is removing an erroneously included general
authority provision for 17 CFR part 275, which contains Commission
rules under the Investment Advisers Act.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ This authority provision was added in conjunction with a
rule 211h-1 under the Advisers Act, which the Commission had
proposed but did not adopt. See Form CRS Relationship Summary;
Amendments to Form ADV, Exchange Act Release No. 86032 (June 5,
2019) [84 FR 33492 July 12, 2019] at n. 1198.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects

17 CFR Part 200

    Administrative practice and procedure, Organization and functions
(Government agencies).

17 CFR Part 229

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.

17 CFR Part 249, 270 and 274

    Investment companies, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Securities.

17 CFR Part 275

    Investment advisers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Statutory Authority

    We are adopting these technical amendments under the authority set

forth in Section 19(a) of the Securities Act, Section 38(a) of the
Investment Company Act, Section 211(a) of the Investment Advisers Act,
and Section 23 of the Securities Exchange Act.

Text of Amendments

    For reasons set forth in the preamble, title 17, chapter II of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 200--ORGANIZATION; CONDUCT AND ETHICS; AND INFORMATION
REQUESTS

0
1. The authority for part 200 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552, 552a, 552b, and 557; 11 U.S.C. 901 and
1109(a); 15 U.S.C. 77c, 77e, 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77o, 77q, 77s, 77u,
77z-3, 77ggg(a), 77hhh, 77sss, 77uuu, 78b, 78c(b), 78d, 78d-1, 78d-
2, 78e, 78f, 78g, 78h, 78i, 78k, 78k-1, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o, 78o-4,
78q, 78q-1, 78w, 78t-1, 78u, 78w, 78ll(d), 78mm, 78eee, 80a-8, 80a-
20, 80a-24, 80a-29, 80a-37, 80a-41, 80a-44(a), 80a-44(b), 80b-3,
80b-4, 80b-5, 80b-9, 80b-10(a), 80b-11, 7202, and 7211 et seq.; 29
U.S.C. 794; 44 U.S.C. 3506 and 3507; Reorganization Plan No. 10 of
1950 (15 U.S.C. 78d nt); sec. 8G, Pub. L. 95-452, 92 Stat. 1101 (5
U.S.C. App.); sec. 913, Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376, 1827; sec.
3(a), Pub. L. 114-185, 130 Stat. 538; E.O. 11222, 30 FR 6469, 3 CFR,
1964-1965 Comp., p. 36; E.O. 12356, 47 FR 14874, 3 CFR, 1982 Comp.,
p. 166; E.O. 12600, 52 FR 23781, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 235;
Information Security Oversight Office Directive No. 1, 47 FR 27836;
and 5 CFR 735.104 and 5 CFR parts 2634 and 2635, unless otherwise
noted.

Subpart A--Organization and Program Management

Sec.  200.30-5  [Amended]

0
2. Effective July 2, 2024, amend Sec.  200.30-5 by redesignating the
paragraphs in the ``Old paragraph'' column as the paragraphs in the
``New paragraph'' column in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Old paragraph                        New paragraph
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b-1).....................................  (c)
(b-2).....................................  (c)(3)
(b-2)(1...................................  (c)(3)(i)
(b-2)(2)..................................  (c)(3)(ii)
(b-3).....................................  (c)(4)
(b-3)(1)..................................  (c)(4)(i)
(b-3)(2)..................................  (c)(4)(ii)
(b-4).....................................  (c)(5)
(b-4)(1)..................................  (c)(5)(i)
(b-5).....................................  (c)(6)
(b-5)(1)..................................  (c)(6)(i)
(b-5)(2)..................................  (c)(6)(ii)
(c).......................................  (d)
(c-1).....................................  (e)
(d).......................................  (f)
(e).......................................  (g)
(f).......................................  (h)
(g).......................................  (i)
(h).......................................  (j)
(i).......................................  (k)
(j).......................................  (l)
(k).......................................  (m)
(l).......................................  (n)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 229--STANDARD INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILING FORMS UNDER SECURITIES
ACT OF 1933, SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND ENERGY POLICY AND
CONSERVATION ACT OF 1975--REGULATION S-K

0
3. The authority citation for part 229 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 77e, 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77k, 77s, 77z-2,
77z-3, 77aa(25), 77aa(26), 77ddd, 77eee, 77ggg, 77hhh, 77iii, 77jjj,
77nnn, 77sss, 78c, 78i, 78j, 78j-3, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78n-1, 78o, 78u-
5, 78w, 78ll, 78 mm, 80a-8, 80a-9, 80a-20, 80a-29, 80a-30, 80a-
31(c), 80a-37, 80a-38(a), 80a-39, 80b-11 and 7201 et seq.; 18 U.S.C.
1350; sec. 953(b), Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1904 (2010); and sec.
102(c), Pub. L. 112-106, 126 Stat. 310 (2012).

0
4. Effective June 12, 2023, amend Sec.  229.512 by revising the last
sentence of paragraph (a)(1)(ii) to read as follows:

Sec.  229.512  (Item 512) Undertakings.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) * * * Notwithstanding the foregoing, any increase or decrease
in volume of securities offered (if the total dollar value of
securities offered would not exceed that which was registered) and any
deviation from the low or high end of the estimated maximum offering
range may be reflected in the form of prospectus filed with the
Commission pursuant to Rule 424(b) (Sec.  230.424(b) of this chapter)
if, in the aggregate, the changes in volume and price represent no more
than 20% change in the maximum aggregate offering price set forth in
the ``Calculation of Filing Fee Tables'' or ``Calculation of
Registration Fee'' table, as applicable, in the effective registration
statement.
* * * * *

PART 249--FORMS, SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

0
5. The general authority for part 249 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 78a et seq. and 7201 et seq.; 12 U.S.C.
5461 et seq.; 18 U.S.C. 1350; Sec. 953(b) Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat.
1904; Sec. 102(a)(3) Pub. L. 112-106, 126 Stat. 309 (2012), Sec. 107
Pub. L. 112-106, 126 Stat. 313 (2012), Sec. 72001 Pub. L. 114-94,
129 Stat. 1312 (2015), and secs. 2 and 3 Pub. L. 116-222, 134 Stat.
1063 (2020), unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *

    Note:  The amendment to Form 13F will not appear in the Code of
Federal Regulations.

0
6. Effective June 12, 2023, amend Form 13F (referenced in Sec.
249.325) by revising Special Instruction 11 by replacing ``12b.viii''
with ``11.b.viii.''

PART 270--RULES AND REGULATIONS, INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940

0
7. The authority for part 270 continues to read, in part, as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq., 80a-34(d), 80a-37, 80a-39,
and Pub. L. 111-203, sec. 939A, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010), unless
otherwise noted.
* * * * *
    Section 270. 22c-1 also issued under secs. 6(c), 22(c), and
38(a) (15 U.S.C. 80a-6(c), 80a22(c), and 80a-37(a)).
* * * * *

Sec.  270.12d1-1  [Amended]

0
8. Effective June 12. 2023, amend Sec.  270.12d1-1(b)(1) by:
0
a. Removing ``rule 2830(b)(8) of the Conduct Rules of the NASD'' and
adding in its place ``FINRA Rule 2341(b)(8)''; and
0
b. Removing ``rule 2830(b)(9) of the Conduct Rules of the NASD'' and
adding in its place ``FINRA Rule 2341(b)(9)''.

Sec.  270.12d1-3  [Amended]

0
9. Effective June 12, 2023, amend Sec.  270.12d1-3 by:
0
a. Removing ``rule 2830 of the Conduct Rules of the NASD'' and adding
in its place ``FINRA Rule 2341'' in paragraph (a); and
0
b. Removing ``rule 2830(b) of the Conduct Rules of the NASD'' and
adding in its place ``FINRA Rule 2341(b)'' in paragraph (b).

Sec.  270.27i-1  [Amended]

0
10. Effective June 12, 2023, amend Sec.  270.27i-1 by adding to the end
of the sentence the phrase ``with respect to such contracts under which
payments are being made based upon life contingencies''.

PART 274--FORMS PRESCRIBED UNDER THE INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940

0
11. The general authority for part 274 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s, 78c(b), 78l, 78m,
78n, 78o(d), 80a-8, 80a-24, 80a-26, 80a-29, and 80a-37, unless
otherwise noted.
* * * * *

    Note:  The text of Form N-2 does not, and these amendments will
not, appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

0
12. Effective June 12, 2023, amend Form N-2 (referenced in Sec. Sec.
239.14 and 274.11a-1) by:
0
a. Revising Instruction 3.D to Item 25 (``Fee Offset Source Submission
Identification Example'') by removing the phrase ``the pre-effective
amendment to the filing of the Form N-2 (333-123456) on 2/15/20X1 in
relation to the payment of $5,000 . . .'' in the sixth bullet point of
the instruction and replacing it with ``the pre-effective amendment to
the Form N-2 (333-123456) filed on 2/15/20X1 in relation to the payment
of $5,000 . . .'';
0
b. Revising the second sentence of Item 34.3.a.(2) to read as follows:
``Notwithstanding the foregoing, any increase or decrease in volume of
securities offered (if the total dollar value of securities offered
would not exceed that which was registered) and any deviation from the
low or high end of the estimated maximum offering range may be
reflected in the form of prospectus filed with the Commission pursuant
to Rule 424(b) if, in the aggregate, the changes in volume and price
represent no more than 20% change in the maximum aggregate offering
price set forth in the ``Calculation of Filing Fee Tables'' in the
effective registration statement.''.

    Note: The text of Form N-14 does not, and these amendments will
not, appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

0
13. Effective June 12, 2023, amend Form N-14 (referenced in Sec.
239.23) by revising Instruction 3.D to Item 16 (``Fee Offset Source
Submission Identification Example'') by removing the phrase ``the pre-
effective amendment to the filing of the Form N-2 (333-123456) on 2/15/
20X1 in relation to the payment of $5,000 . . .'' in the sixth bullet
point of the instruction and replacing it with ``the pre-effective
amendment to the Form N-2 (333-123456) filed on 2/15/20X1 in relation
to the payment of $5,000 . . .''

PART 275--RULES AND REGULATIONS, INVESTMENT ADVISERS ACT OF 1940

0
14. The general authority for part 275 continues to read as follows and
the sectional authority for Sec.  275.211h-1 is removed.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 80b-2(a)(11)(G), 80b-2(a)(11)(H), 80b-
2(a)(17), 80b-3, 80b-4, 80b-4a, 80b-6(4), 80b-6a, and 80b-11, unless
otherwise noted.
* * * * *

    Dated: May 31, 2023.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-11845 Filed 6-9-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 208 (Friday, October 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54113-54115]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23386]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2007-D-0369]

Product-Specific Guidance; Revised Draft Guidance for Industry on
Sucralfate; Reopening of Comment Period

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability; reopening of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is
reopening the comment period for a

revised draft product-specific guidance on Sucralfate that appeared in
a notice of availability, published in the Federal Register of October
20, 2017. In that notice, FDA requested comments on the revised draft
guidance for industry on Sucralfate, as well as comments on other
product-specific guidances. FDA is reopening the comment period for the
Draft Guidance on Sucralfate (revised October 2017) to facilitate
submission of comments pertaining to this draft guidance following an
FDA response to two citizen petitions. The petition response suggests
that the petitioners submit to the docket comments relating to the
guidance.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by December 26, 2018 to ensure that the Agency considers your
comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final
version of the guidance.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as
follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2007-D-0369 for ``Product-Specific Guidance; Revised Draft Guidance
for Industry on Sucralfate; Reopening of Comment Period.'' Received
comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted
as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to
the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave.,
Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one
self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your
requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the draft guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Xiaoqiu Tang, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 75, Rm. 4730, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-5850.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of October 20, 2017 (82 FR 48826), FDA
published a notice of availability with a 60-day comment period to
request comments on the revised draft guidance for industry on
Sucralfate, as well as comments on other product-specific guidances.
This draft guidance includes recommendations pertaining to abbreviated
new drug applications seeking approval of sucralfate oral suspension
products, 1 gram/10 milliliters.
    The comment period for all draft guidances identified in that
notice ended on December 19, 2017.
    On December 18, 2017, FDA received a citizen petition from Haynes
and Boone, LLP (Docket No. FDA-2017-P-6922), requesting that FDA deny
approval to any abbreviated new drug application for a sucralfate oral
suspension drug product that relies on patient-based clinical endpoint
studies to establish bioequivalence with the reference listed drug. On
March 28, 2018, FDA received a citizen petition from Vertice Pharma
(Docket No. FDA-2018-P-1310) requesting specific changes to the
recommendations made in the ``Draft Guidance on Sucralfate'' (revised
October 2017), available at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM573202.pdf.
    FDA denied both petitions in a joint response dated May 17, 2018.
However, given the interest in this guidance, FDA is reopening the
comment period until December 26, 2018. The Agency believes that an
additional 60 days will allow adequate time for interested persons to
submit comments without compromising the timely publication of the
final version of the guidance.

II. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance
at either https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or
https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: October 22, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-23386 Filed 10-25-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P