[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 172 (Tuesday, September 6, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54993-54996]
[FR Doc No: 2011-22662]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0536; FRL-9459-9]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Placer
County Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of

revisions to the Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD)
portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern oxides of nitrogen (NOX) emissions from
biomass fuel-fired boilers. We are proposing action on a local rule
that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as
amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this
proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by October 6, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0536, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov is an
``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While
all documents in the docket are listed at http://www.regulations.gov,
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be
publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Idalia P[eacute]rez, EPA Region IX,
(415) 972-3248<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

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

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the dates
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Local agency                  Rule No.            Rule title             Amended        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAPCD................................             233  Biomass Boilers.........        12/10/09        05/07/10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 8, 2010, the submittal for PCAPCD Rule 233 was found to
meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which must
be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    We approved an earlier version of Rule 233 into the SIP on April
30, 1996 (61 FR 18959). PCAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-approved
version on October 11, 2007, CARB submitted it to us on March 7, 2008
and it was officially withdrawn on November 5, 2008.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    NOX helps produce ground-level ozone, smog and
particulate matter, which harm human health and the environment.
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit regulations that
control NOX emissions. Rule 233 regulates emissions of
NOX from biomass boilers and steam generators. EPA's
technical support document (TSD) has more information about this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193 of the Act). Section 172(c)(1) of the Act also requires
nonattainment areas to implement all reasonably available control
measures (RACM), including such reductions in emissions from existing
sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a
minimum, of reasonably available control technology (RACT), as
expeditiously as practicable. Additionally, ozone nonattainment areas
classified as moderate or above must require RACT for all major sources
of NOX (CAA section 182(b)(2) & (f); 40 CFR section
51.912(a)). Because PCAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area that
is classified as Severe-15 under both the 1-hr ozone and 8-hr ozone
standards (40 CFR section 81.305), submitted Rule 233 must fulfill RACT
requirements for NOX.
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate
enforceability and RACT requirements for Rule 233 included the
following:
    1. ``State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the
General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of
Title I; Proposed Rule,'' (the NOX Supplement), 57 FR 55620,
November 25, 1992.
    2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    4. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990''; 57
FR

13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
    5. Preamble, ``Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard--Phase 2,'' 70 FR 71612 (November 29,
2005).
    6. ``Determination of Reasonably Available Control Technology and
Best Available Retrofit Control Technology for Industrial,
Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process
Heaters'', CARB, July 18, 1991.
    7. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document--NOX
Emissions from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Boilers'', US
EPA, March 1994.
    8. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document--NOX
Emissions from Utility Boilers'', US EPA, March 1994.
    9. ``State Implementation Plans (SIPs): Policy Regarding Excess
Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup and Shutdown'', Memorandum from
Steven A. Herman, Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance, and Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation, September 20, 1999.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    Rule 233 improves the SIP by establishing more stringent emission
limits. We believe the rule is consistent with the applicable
requirements and guidance regarding enforceability and SIP revisions.
Rule provisions which do not meet the evaluation criteria are
summarized below and discussed further in the TSD.

C. What are the rule deficiencies?

    PCAPCD has not demonstrated that the NOX emission limits
for biomass boilers found in Section 301 implement RACT. The
NOX emission limits should be lowered to ensure
implementation of RACT. Alternatively, PCAPCD may submit additional
information to demonstrate that lower emission limits are not
reasonably achievable.

D. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule

    We do not currently have additional rule revisions that we
recommend for the next time the local agency modifies the rule.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing a limited approval of the submitted rule under
sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act. If finalized, this action
would incorporate the submitted rule into the SIP, including those
provisions identified as deficient. This approval is limited because
EPA is simultaneously proposing a limited disapproval of the rule under
section 110(k)(3). If this disapproval is finalized, sanctions will be
imposed under section 179 of the Act unless EPA approves subsequent SIP
revisions that correct the rule deficiencies within 18 months of the
disapproval. These sanctions would be imposed according to 40 CFR
52.31. A final disapproval would also trigger the 2-year clock for the
federal implementation plan (FIP) requirement under section 110(c).
Note that the submitted rule has been adopted by the PCAPCD, and EPA's
final limited disapproval would not prevent the local agency from
enforcing it. The limited disapproval also would not prevent any
portion of the rule from being incorporated by reference into the
federally enforceable SIP (see EPA memo regarding ``Processing of State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Submittals'' (July 9, 1992), available at:
http://www.epa.gov/nsr/ttnnsr01/gen/pdf/memo-s.pdf).
    We will accept comments from the public on the proposed limited
approval and limited disapproval for the next 30 days.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.''
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
    This rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities because SIP approvals or disapprovals under
section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create
any new requirements but simply approve or disapprove requirements that
the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the proposed Federal
SIP limited approval/limited disapproval does not create any new
requirements, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under
the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the limited approval/limited disapproval
action proposed does not include a Federal mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or
tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This
Federal action proposes to approve and disapprove pre-existing
requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new requirements.
Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
    Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces
Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the
Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include

regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
    This rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, because it
merely proposes to approve or disapprove a State rule implementing a
federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air
Act. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not
apply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
With Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. It
will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
    EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule
from tribal officials.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045, because it approves a
state rule implementing a Federal standard.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical.
    The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to
the use of VCS.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: August 19, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011-22662 Filed 9-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 166 (Wednesday, August 26, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 52586]
[FR Doc No: 2020-18730]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP10-22-000; CP16-18-000]

Magnum Gas Storage, LLC; Notice of Request for Extension of Time

    Take notice that on August 17, 2020, Magnum Gas Storage, LLC
(Magnum) requested that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) grant a four- and one-half-year extension of time, until
May 17, 2025, to construct and place into service the Magnum Gas
Storage Project facilities (Facilities) which were originally
authorized by the Commission on March 17, 2011 (Certificate Order) \1\
and subsequently amended by the Commission on November 17, 2016
(Amendment Order). \2\ The Amendment Order required Magnum to construct
and place the facilities in service by November 17, 2020. On April 23,
2020 the Commission issued an Order Vacating Certificate Authorization
in Part which vacated certificate authorization for two natural gas
storage caverns, one brine disposal pond, and other associated
facilities.\3\ Currently, the certificated facilities consist of two
natural gas storage caverns and associated wells; a 61.6-mile-long, 36-
inch-diameter natural gas pipeline header; gas compression and
dehydration facilities; one brine evaporation pond and associated water
supply and pumping facilities and various other above and below ground
piping, control and communications equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Magnum Gas Storage, LLC, 134 FERC ] 61,197 (2011).
    \2\ Magnum Gas Storage, LLC, 157 FERC ] 61,114 (2016).
    \3\ Magnum Gas Storage, LLC, 171 FERC ] 61,069 (2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Magnum has experienced delays in initiating construction of the
Facilities due to delays in permitting of the related state
jurisdictional facilities, changes in the overall project scope and
changing market conditions. As a result, construction of Magnum's
facilities has not yet begun. In its August 17, 2020 request, Magnum
explains that it is continuing to diligently develop the Magnum Gas
Storage Project and has secured the necessary permits for construction
and has secured substantial land, mineral and water rights associated
with construction of the Facilities. Magnum further explains that its
Facilities are directly adjacent to the site of the Intermountain Power
Project (IPP) which is converting its electric power plant from coal to
natural gas and the Advanced Clean Energy Storage (ACES) Project which
is developing renewable energy storage using hydrogen, compressed air,
large-scale flow batteries and solid oxide fuel cells, which will
require the use of natural gas in the conversion process for the
foreseeable future. Magnum states that it is uniquely positioned to
provide delivery and storage of natural gas in the vicinity of the ACES
and IPP Projects.
    This notice establishes a 15-calendar day intervention and comment
period deadline. Any person wishing to comment on Magnum's request for
an extension of time may do so. No reply comments or answers will be
considered. If you wish to obtain legal status by becoming a party to
the proceedings for this request, you should, on or before the comment
date stated below, file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act
(18 CFR 157.10).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Only motions to intervene from entities that were party to
the underlying proceeding will be accepted. Algonquin Gas
Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC ] 61,144, at P 39 (2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a matter of practice, the Commission itself generally acts on
requests for extensions of time to complete construction for Natural
Gas Act facilities when such requests are contested before order
issuance. For those extension requests that are contested,\5\ the
Commission will aim to issue an order acting on the request within 45
days.\6\ The Commission will address all arguments relating to whether
the applicant has demonstrated there is good cause to grant the
extension.\7\ The Commission will not consider arguments that re-
litigate the issuance of the certificate order, including whether the
Commission properly found the project to be in the public convenience
and necessity and whether the Commission's environmental analysis for
the certificate complied with the National Environmental Policy Act.\8\
At the time a pipeline requests an extension of time, orders on
certificates of public convenience and necessity are final and the
Commission will not re-litigate their issuance.\9\ The OEP Director, or
his or her designee, will act on all of those extension requests that
are uncontested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Contested proceedings are those where an intervenor disputes
any material issue of the filing. 18 CFR 385.2201(c)(1) (2019).
    \6\ Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC ] 61,144, at P 40
(2020).
    \7\ Id. at P 40.
    \8\ Similarly, the Commission will not re-litigate the issuance
of an NGA section 3 authorization, including whether a proposed
project is not inconsistent with the public interest and whether the
Commission's environmental analysis for the permit order complied
with NEPA.
    \9\ Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC ] 61,144, at P 40
(2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, The Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to Commission's Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and three copies of the protest or intervention to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 4, 2020.

    Dated: August 20, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-18730 Filed 8-25-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 10 (Wednesday, January 15, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2291-2292]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00412]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0637; Airspace Docket No. 19-ANM-4]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Eagle County, CO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class D at the Eagle County Regional
Airport in Eagle, CO. It also amends the Class E airspace area
designated as a surface area. Additionally, it amends Class E airspace
by adding an area designated as an extension to the Class D and Class
E2 surface areas. Further, it amends the Class E airspace extending
from 700 feet above the surface of the earth. Lastly, it updates the
geographic coordinates of the airport to match the FAA's database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, March 26, 2020. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1
Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov//air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you
can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11D at NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Van Der Wal, Federal Aviation
Administration, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 2200
S 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend Class D and Class E airspace at Eagle County Regional
Airport, CO, to ensure the safety and management of Instrument Flight
Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (84 FR 54053; October 9, 2019) for Docket No. FAA-2019-0637 to
amend Class D and Class E airspace at Eagle County Regional Airport,
Eagle County, CO. Interested parties were invited to participate in
this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal
to the FAA. One comment was received in support of the airspace action.
    Class D, Class E2, Class E4, and Class E5 airspace designations are
published in paragraphs 5000, 6002, 6004 and 6005, respectively, of FAA
Order 7400.11D, dated August 8, 2018, and effective September 15, 2019,
which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document will be published subsequently in
the Order.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019. FAA Order 7400.11D is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11D lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 modifies Class D airspace at Eagle County Regional Airport, as
follows: That airspace extending upward from the surface to and
including 9,100 feet MSL within a 4.4-mile radius and extending from
the 4.4-mile radius to a 6.5-mile radius along a 199[deg] bearing
clockwise to a 277[deg] bearing and extending from the 4.4-mile radius
to a 6.5-mile radius along a 45[deg] bearing clockwise to a 103[deg]
bearing from the Eagle County Regional Airport. This Class D airspace
area is effective during the specific dates and times established in
advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.
    It also modifies the Class E airspace area designated as a surface
area as follows: That airspace extending upward from the surface within
a 4.4-mile radius and extending from the 4.4-mile radius to a 6.5-mile
radius along a 199[deg] bearing clockwise to a 277[deg] bearing and
extending from the 4.4-mile radius to a 6.5-mile radius along a 45[deg]
bearing clockwise to a 103[deg] bearing from the airport. This Class E
airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times
established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and
time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.
    Additionally, it modifies Class E airspace by adding an areas
designated as an extension to a Class D or Class E surface area as
follows: That airspace extending upward from the surface within 1.0
mile each side of the 079[deg] bearing extending from the 6.5-mile
radius to the 8.7-mile radius east of the Eagle County Regional
Airport.
    Further, it modifies the Class E airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface as the airports as follows: That airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within an 8.7-mile
radius of the airport,

and within 1.3 miles each side of a 079[deg] bearing, extending from
the 8.7-mile radius to 11.6 miles east of the Eagle County Regional
Airport.
    Lastly, this amendment updates the airport's geographic coordinates
to match the FAA's aeronautical database.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

     Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11D,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and
effective September 15, 2019, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ANM CO D Eagle, CO

Eagle County Regional Airport, CO
    (Lat. 39[deg]38'34'' N, long. 106[deg]54'57'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
9,100 feet MSL within a 4.4-mile radius, and extending from the 4.4-
mile radius to a 6.5-mile radius along the 199[deg] bearing, thence
clockwise to the 277[deg] bearing, and extending from the 4.4-mile
radius to a 6.5-mile radius along the 45[deg] bearing, thence
clockwise to the 103[deg] bearing from the Eagle County Regional
Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific
dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as a Surface Area.

* * * * *

ANM CO E2 Eagle, CO

Eagle County Regional Airport, CO
    (Lat. 39[deg]38'34'' N, long. 106[deg]54'57'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 4.4-
mile radius, and extending from the 4.4-mile radius to a 6.5-mile
radius along the 199[deg] bearing, thence clockwise to the 277[deg]
bearing, and extending from the 4.4-mile radius to a 6.5-mile radius
along the 45[deg] bearing, thence clockwise to the 103[deg] bearing
from the Eagle County Regional Airport. This Class E airspace area
is effective during the specific dates and times established in
advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to
a Class D or Class E.

* * * * *

ANM CO E4 Eagle, CO

Eagle County Regional Airport, CO
    (Lat. 39[deg]38'34'' N, long. 106[deg]54'57'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 1.0 mile
each side of the 079[deg] bearing, extending from the 6.5-mile
radius to the 8.7-mile radius east of the Eagle County Regional
Airport.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ANM CO E5 Eagle, CO

Eagle County Regional Airport, CO
    (Lat. 39[deg]38'34'' N, long. 106[deg]54'57'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within an 8.7-mile radius of the airport, and within 1.3 miles each
side of a 079[deg] bearing, extending from the 8.7-mile radius to
11.6 miles east of the Eagle County Regional Airport.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on January 8, 2020.
Byron Chew,
Group Manager, Western Service Center Operations Support Group.
[FR Doc. 2020-00412 Filed 1-14-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 77)]
[Notices]
[Page 21069-21071]
[DOCID:fr22ap10-125]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61926; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2010-049]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Modify Fees for Members Using the NASDAQ Market Center

April 16, 2010.
    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 April 13, 2010, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed
rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items
have been prepared by NASDAQ. Pursuant to

Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ NASDAQ has designated this proposal as establishing or
changing a due, fee, or other charge, which renders the proposed rule
change effective upon filing. The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASDAQ proposes to modify pricing for NASDAQ members using the
NASDAQ Market Center. NASDAQ will implement the proposed change on
April 15, 2010. The text of the proposed rule change is available at
http://nasdaqomx.cchwallstreet.com/, at NASDAQ's principal office, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, NASDAQ 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. NASDAQ 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
    NASDAQ is proposing to modify its fees for orders that execute at
prices below $1. Currently, NASDAQ charges 0.3% (30 basis points) of
the total dollar value of the execution to members accessing liquidity,
and provides a rebate of 0.2% (20 basis points) of the total dollar
value to members providing liquidity. Through this filing, NASDAQ will
reduce the fee to access liquidity to 0.2% (20 basis points) of the
total dollar value and the rebate for providing liquidity to 0.1% (10
basis points) of the total dollar value. The change is a competitive
response to several other transaction venues that have made mid-April
changes to fees for securities priced under $1.\5\ The new fees are
consistent with the limitations of Regulation NMS, SEC Rule 610(c), for
securities with a price of less than $1. NASDAQ's fee for routing
securities priced below $1 remains unchanged at 0.3% (30 basis points)
of the total dollar value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See http://apps.nyse.com/commdata/pub19b4.nsf/docs/
50B8C6B6842FEA1E85257700006A989D/$FILE/NYSEArca-2010-26.pdf (NYSE
Arca); http://www.nsx.com/resources/content/5/1/documents/SR-NSX-
2010-04.pdf (National Stock Exchange); http://www.ise.com/assets/
documents/OptionsExchange/legal/proposed_rule_changes/2010/SR-ISE-
2010-29$Proposed_Rule_Change_Relating_to_Direct_Edge%20_ECN_
Fee_Change_for_ISE_Members$20100405.pdf (Direct Edge).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\6\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among
members and issuers and other persons using any facility or system
which NASDAQ operates or controls. The impact of the price changes upon
the net fees paid by a particular market participant will depend upon a
number of variables, including the relative availability of liquidity
on NASDAQ and other venues, the prices of the market participant's
quotes and orders relative to the national best bid and offer (i.e.,
its propensity to add or remove liquidity), and the types of securities
that it trades. NASDAQ believes that the proposed changes are
reasonable and equitable in that they apply uniformly to all similarly
situated members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. Because the market
for order execution and routing is extremely competitive, members may
readily direct orders to NASDAQ's competitors if they object to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \8\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\9\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if
it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(ii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2010-049 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2010-049. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 on
official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies
of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal offices 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-NASDAQ-2010-049, and should
be submitted on or before May 13, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-9281 Filed 4-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P