[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 246 (Thursday, December 22, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 93976-93979]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30793]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79582; File No. SR-NYSE-2016-70]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Amending Section 902.02 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual To Adopt a
Fee Cap Specific to Investment Management Entities and Their Eligible
Portfolio Companies

December 16, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on December 5, 2016, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''
or the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-
regulatory organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Section 902.02 of the NYSE Listed
Company Manual (the ``Manual'') to adopt a fee cap specific to
Investment Management Entities and their eligible portfolio companies.
The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
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 those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Section 902.02 of the Manual to
adopt a fee cap specific to Investment Management Entities and their
eligible portfolio companies.
    An Investment Management Entity for purposes of this provision
would be defined as a listed company which manages private investment
vehicles that are not registered under the Investment Company Act.
There are a small number of such companies listed on the NYSE that
engage in the business of managing such private equity funds. Through
these private equity funds, Investment Management Entities invest in
private companies. Investment Management Entities typically provide
significant managerial and advisory assistance to their portfolio
companies. An Investment Management Entity will frequently seek to exit
its funds' investment in a privately-held portfolio company by
conducting an initial public offering on behalf of that portfolio
company. The Investment Management Entity does not typically sell
shares in the IPO but, rather, shares not sold in the IPO are gradually
sold off over a period of years in the public market. While these
Investment Management Entities have control or influence over the
decision making of their portfolio companies in both their pre- and
post-public phases, the decision as to where to list is typically made
jointly by the portfolio company's senior management team and the
Investment Management Entity. The Exchange benefits from its ongoing

relationships with these Investment Management Entities (and members of
the management teams that had previously dealt with the Exchange) when
competing for the listing of their portfolio companies. In addition,
the Exchange benefits from the efficiencies in dealing with portfolio
companies that are benefiting from the guidance and experience of the
Investment Management Entities to which they are related.
    The Exchange incurs substantial costs in connection with its
marketing to companies choosing a listing venue for their IPO. In those
cases where the Exchange has a longstanding relationship with the
Investment Management Entity controlling a listing applicant, the
Exchange's costs of marketing to the prospect company are often much
lower than usual because of the Investment Management Entity's prior
experience with the NYSE. Typically, when pitching for the listing of a
company that is choosing a listing venue for its IPO, the Exchange
incurs significant expense, including the time spent by its CEO and
other senior management in preparing for and traveling to meetings with
the prospect company, travel costs, the cost of developing pitching
strategies, and the cost of producing marketing materials. In addition,
it has been the Exchange's experience that an Investment Management
Entity puts high-quality and experienced management teams in place at
its portfolio companies prior to listing and that the Investment
Management Entity continues to provide significant support to those
companies after listing. Consequently, those companies require lower
levels of support from the NYSE's business and Regulation groups to
assist them in navigating the initial and continued listing process and
the Exchange devotes significantly smaller staff resources to those
companies on average than to the typical newly-listed company that is
not controlled prior to listing by an Investment Management Entity.
    The Exchange believes that these cost savings attributable to its
relationship with an Investment Management Entity make it desirable and
reasonable to provide a reduction in continued listing fees to the
Investment Management Companies that are significant shareholders in
other listed companies, as well as to those portfolio companies that
have listed as a consequence of those relationships. The Exchange also
believes that the proposed fee reduction would provide an incentive to
Investment Management Entities to both remain listed themselves and to
list additional portfolio companies on the Exchange.
    Under Section 902.02, all listed companies are eligible to benefit
from limitations on most fees (including Listing Fees and Annual Fees)
(``Eligible Fees'') payable to the Exchange in a calendar year of
$500,000 (the ``Total Maximum Fee'').\4\ The Exchange proposes to amend
Section 902.02 to add a separate limitation on Eligible Fees applicable
only to Investment Management Entities and their eligible portfolio
companies (``Eligible Portfolio Companies''), with effect from the
calendar year commencing January 1, 2017 (the ``Investment Management
Entity Group Fee Discount''). An ``Eligible Portfolio Company'' of an
Investment Management Entity is a company in which the Investment
Management Entity has owned at least 20% of the common stock on a
continuous basis since prior to that company's initial listing. The
Investment Management Entity Group Fee Discount would be as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Total Maximum Fee cap, however, does not include the
following fees: (i) Listing Fees and Annual Fees for Investment
Company Units, streetTRACKS[supreg] Gold Shares, Currency Trust
Shares, and Commodity Trust Shares; (ii) Listing Fees and Annual
Fees for closed-end funds; (iii) Listing Fees for structured
products; and (iv) Annual Fees for structured products other than
retail debt securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     A 30% discount on all Eligible Fees of an Investment
Management Entity and each of its Eligible Portfolio Companies in any
year in which the Investment Management Entity has two Eligible
Portfolio Companies.
     a 50% discount on all Eligible Fees of an Investment
Management Entity and each of its Eligible Portfolio Companies in any
year in which the Investment Management Entity has three or more
Eligible Portfolio Companies.
    The Investment Management Entity Group Fee Discount would be
subject to a maximum aggregate discount of $500,000 for the Investment
Management Entity and each of its Eligible Portfolio Companies in any
given year (the ``Maximum Discount''). The Maximum Discount would be
shared among the Investment Management Entity and the Eligible
Portfolio Companies in direct proportion to their respective Eligible
Fees. In addition to benefiting from the Investment Management Entity
Group Fee Discount, the Investment Management Entity and each of the
Eligible Portfolio Companies would each continue to have its fees
capped by the applicable company's individual Total Maximum Fee of
$500,000.
    Below are two examples:
     An Investment Management Entity owes the Total Maximum Fee
of $500,000. The Investment Management Entity and its three Eligible
Portfolio Companies as a group owe an aggregate of $1.0 million in
Eligible Fees before application of the 50% discount. The aggregate 50%
discount for the group upon application of the Management Entity Group
Fee Discount would be $500,000. As the Investment Management Entity's
proportionate share of the aggregate fees owed by the group would be
50% ($500,000/$1.0 million), the Investment Management Entity would
receive a $250,000 discount (50% of the $500,000 maximum Investment
Management Entity Group Fee Discount), resulting in total Eligible Fees
for the Investment Management Entity in that year of $250,000 ($500,000
minus $250,000). The Eligible Portfolio Companies would share the
remaining $250,000 discount available under the Maximum Discount in
proportion to their respective Eligible Fee obligations for that
calendar year.
     An Investment Management Entity owes $400,000 in Eligible
Fees. The Investment Management Entity and its two Eligible Portfolio
Companies as a group owe an aggregate of $1.0 million in Eligible Fees
before application of the 30% discount. The aggregate 30% discount for
the group upon application of the Investment Management Entity Group
Fee Discount would be $300,000. As the Investment Management Entity's
proportionate share of the aggregate fees owed by the group would be
40% ($400,000/$1.0 million), the Investment Management Entity would
receive a $120,000 discount (40% of the $300,000 aggregate Investment
Management Entity Group Fee Discount), resulting in total Eligible Fees
for the Investment Management Entity in that year of $280,000 ($400,000
minus $120,000). The Eligible Portfolio Companies would share the
remaining $180,000 discount available under the Investment Management
Entity Group Fee Discount in proportion to the amounts of their
respective Eligible Fee obligations for that calendar year.
    In order to qualify for the Investment Management Entity Group Fee
Discount in any calendar year for itself and its Eligible Portfolio
Companies, an Investment Management Entity must submit satisfactory
proof to the Exchange no later than December 31 that it has met the
ownership requirements specified for the entire period between January
1 and September 30 of that year.
    In the event that a listed company qualifies as an Eligible
Portfolio

Company of two or more Investment Management Entities, for purposes of
the Investment Management Entity Group Fee Discount, such company will
be treated as an Eligible Portfolio Company only of the Investment
Management Entity which has the largest equity interest in such
Eligible Portfolio Company. If two or more of such Investment
Management Entities own identical equity interests in such listed
company, such company will be treated as an Eligible Portfolio Company
of each of such Investment Management Entities.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Exchange Act,\5\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) \6\ of the Exchange Act, in particular,
in that it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges and is not designed to permit
unfair discrimination among its members and issuers and other persons
using its facilities. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act, in
particular in that it is designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is proposing to adopt fee discounts for listed
Investment Management Entities and their Eligible Portfolio Companies.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act in that it represents
an equitable allocation of fees and does not unfairly discriminate
among listed companies. In particular, the Exchange believes the
proposal represents an equitable allocation of fees and is not unfairly
discriminatory because the Exchange benefits from significant cost and
resource-utilization savings when listing portfolio companies of
Investment Management Entities as it does not have to engage in
significant marketing efforts as the decision makers at the Investment
Management Entity are very familiar with the Exchange. Typically when
pitching for the listing of a company that is choosing a listing venue
for its IPO, the Exchange incurs significant expense, including: The
time spent by its CEO and other senior management in preparing for and
traveling to meetings with the prospect company, travel costs, the cost
of developing pitching strategies, and the cost of producing marketing
materials. As the Exchange saves much of this expense when pitching to
a portfolio company of an Investment Management Entity with which the
Exchange has a deep relationship, the Exchange believes that it is
appropriate to share some of those savings with the Investment
Management Entity and its Eligible Portfolio Companies. In addition,
the Exchange typically has lower costs and resource utilization in
connection with the initial and continued listing of Eligible Portfolio
Companies than with other new listings, as the Exchange benefit from
dealing with the high-quality and experienced management teams
Investment Management Entities put in place at portfolio companies
prior to listing and the ongoing relationship those companies maintain
with staff at the Investment Management Entity who are experienced in
dealing with the NYSE. The Exchange also believes that the proposed
discount is reasonable in that it will create a reasonable commercial
incentive for Investment Management Entities and the management of
their portfolio companies to consider listing on the Exchange and to
remain listed.
    The Exchange believes that it is not unfairly discriminatory to
discount continued listing fees as a means of recognizing its cost
savings related to the listing of an Investment Management Company and
its Eligible Portfolio Companies. This is because a significant portion
of the Exchange's savings arise from the efficiencies it experiences on
an ongoing basis in dealing with Eligible Portfolio Companies for such
time as the Investment Management Entity retains a significant
investment and is thereby motivated to provide ongoing advice and
assistance. In addition, the Investment Management Entity will in all
cases already be listed on the Exchange and can therefore only share in
the benefits of any fee discount if it is provided on a continued
listing basis.
    The Exchange believes that the tiered discounts of 30% and 50% are
not unfairly discriminatory, as they are reasonably related to the cost
savings the Exchange benefits from when dealing with an Investment
Management Entity and its Eligible Portfolio Companies rather than an
individual listed company. In addition, it is not unfairly
discriminatory to provide a higher percentage discount when there are a
greater number of Eligible Portfolio Companies as there are economies
of scale in dealing with a larger group of related entities because the
incremental resources devoted by the Exchange in dealing with each
additional Eligible Portfolio Company tend to be less.
    The Exchange believes that, where a company is an Eligible
Portfolio Company of two or more Investment Management Entities, it is
not unfairly discriminatory to provide the Investment Management Entity
Group Fee Discount to the Investment Management Entity which has the
largest ownership interest in the company as it would typically play
the sole or lading leading role in advising the company. In the case
where two or more Investment Management Entities own identical equity
interests in a listed company, the Exchange believes it is not unfairly
discriminatory to treat such company as an Eligible Portfolio Company
of each of such Investment Management Entities, as all of them would
typically provide significant levels of assistance to the company.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act. The proposed rule
change is designed to reflect the cost savings the Exchange derives
from its relationship with listed Investment Management Entities whose
portfolio companies also list on the Exchange. The market for listing
services is extremely competitive. Each listing exchange has a
different fee schedule that applies to issuers seeking to list
securities on its exchange. Issuers have the option to list their
securities on these alternative venues based on the fees charged and
the value provided by each listing. Because issuers have a choice to
list their securities on a different national securities exchange, the
Exchange does not believe that the proposed fee change imposes a burden
on competition.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \7\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-
4 \8\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \9\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2016-70 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2016-70. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of 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-NYSE-2016-70,
and should be submitted on or before January 12, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

[FR Doc. 2016-30793 Filed 12-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 5, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 171)]
[Notices]
[Page 52351-52356]
[DOCID:fr05se06-57]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54378; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-032]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To
Revise The Nasdaq Capital Market Listing Requirements

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 28, 2006.
    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 August 23, 2006, 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. On August 28, 2006, Nasdaq filed
Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\3\ The

Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ In Amendment No. 1, Nasdaq makes clarifying changes to the
rule text in the Nasdaq Capital Market convertible debt listing
standards. Nasdaq also makes clarifying changes to the purpose
section regarding convertible debt, rights and warrants, and non-
Canadian foreign securities and American Depository Receipts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Nasdaq proposes to revise certain listing requirements applicable
to the Nasdaq Capital Market. The text of the proposed rule change is
below. Proposed new language is in italics; proposed deletions are in
[brackets].\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Changes are marked to the rule text that appears in the
electronic manual of Nasdaq found at http://www.complinet.com/nasdaq.
 These rules became effective on August 1, 2006, when Nasdaq

commenced operations as a national securities exchange for Nasdaq-
listed securities. The rule text incorporates changes made by
Amendment No. 1. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

4200. Definitions.

    (a) For purposes of the Rule 4000 Series, unless the context
requires otherwise:
    (1) No change.
    (2) [Reserved
    (3) Reserved
    (4)] ``Best efforts offering'' means an offering of securities by
members of a selling group under an agreement which imposes no
financial commitment on the members of such group to purchase any such
securities except as they may elect to do so.
    [(5) Reserved
    (6) ``Cash available for distribution'' means cash flow of a
limited partnership less amount set aside for restoration or creation
of reserves.]
    [(7)] (3) ``Cash flow'' means cash funds provided from limited
partnership operations, including lease payments on net leases from
builders and sellers, without deduction for depreciation, but after
deducting cash funds used to pay all other expenses, debt payments,
capital improvements and replacements.
    [(8)] (4) ``Consolidated Quotations Service'' (CQS) means the
consolidated quotation collection system for securities listed on an
exchange other than Nasdaq implementing SEC Rule 602.
    [(9)] (5) ``Country of Domicile'' means the country under whose
laws an issuer is organized or incorporated.
    (6) ``Covered security'' means a security described in Section
18(b) of the Securities Act of 1933.
    (7) Reserved
    (8) Reserved
    (9) Reserved
    (10)--(39) No change.
    (b)--(c) No change.
* * * * *

4310. Listing Requirements for Domestic and Canadian Securities

    To qualify for listing in Nasdaq, a security of a domestic or
Canadian issuer shall satisfy all applicable requirements contained in
paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) hereof. Issuers that meet these
requirements, but that are not listed on the Nasdaq Global Market, are
listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market.
    (a) No change.
    (b) No change.
    (c) In addition to the requirements contained in paragraph (a) and
(b) above, and unless otherwise indicated, a security shall satisfy the
following criteria for listing on Nasdaq:
    (1) No change
    (2)[(A)] For initial listing, the issuer shall have either:
    (A) (i) stockholders' equity of $5 million; and
    (ii) a market value of publicly held shares of $15 million; and
    (iii) an operating history of at least two years; or
    (B) [(ii)] (i) stockholders' equity of $4 million; and
    (ii) market value of listed securities of $50 million (currently
traded issuers must meet this requirement and the bid price requirement
under Rule 4310(c)(4) for 90 consecutive trading days prior to applying
for listing); [or] and
    (iii) a market value of publicly held shares of $15 million; or
    (C) [(iii)] (i) stockholders' equity of $4 million; and
    (ii) net income from continuing operations of $750,000 in the most
recently completed fiscal year or in two of the last three most
recently completed fiscal years; and
    (iii) a market value of publicly held shares of $5 million.
    [(B)] (3) For continued listing, the issuer shall maintain either:
    (A) [(i)] stockholders' equity of $2.5 million; or
    (B) [(ii)] market value of listed securities of $35 million; or
    (C) [(iii)] net income from continuing operations of $500,000 in
the most recently completed fiscal year or in two of the last three
most recently completed fiscal years.
    [(3) For initial listing, the issuer shall have an operating
history of at least one year or a market value of listed securities of
$50 million.]
    (4) No change.
    (5) (A) In the case of a convertible debt security, for initial
listing, there shall be a principal amount outstanding of at least $10
million.
    (B) In addition, for the initial listing of convertible debt, one
of the following conditions must be satisfied:
    (i) the issuer of the debt must have an equity security that is
listed on Nasdaq, the American Stock Exchange or the New York Stock
Exchange;
    (ii) an issuer whose equity security is listed on Nasdaq, the
American Stock Exchange or the New York Stock Exchange, directly or
indirectly owns a majority interest in, or is under common control
with, the issuer of the debt security, or has guaranteed the debt
security;
    (iii) a nationally recognized securities rating organization (an
``NRSRO'') has assigned a current rating to the debt security that is
no lower than an S&P Corporation ``B'' rating or equivalent rating by
another NRSRO; or,
    (iv) if no NRSRO has assigned a rating to the issue, an NRSRO has
currently assigned: (1) an investment grade rating to an immediately
senior issue; or (2) a rating that is no lower than an S&P Corporation
``B'' rating, or an equivalent rating by another NRSRO, to a pari passu
or junior issue.
    (C) For continued listing of a convertible debt security, there
shall be a principal amount outstanding of at least $5 million.
    (6)(A) In the case of common stock, for initial and continued
listing, there shall be at least 300 round lot holders of the security.
    (B) In the case of preferred stock and secondary classes of common
stock, for initial and continued listing, there shall be at least 100
round lot holders of the security, provided in each case that the
issuer's common stock or common stock equivalent equity security [is]
must be listed on [either] Nasdaq or [another national securities
exchange] be a covered security. In the event the issuer's common stock
or common stock equivalent security either is not listed on [either]
Nasdaq or [another national securities exchange] is not a covered
security, the preferred stock and/or secondary class of common stock
may be listed on Nasdaq so long as the security satisfies the listing
criteria for common stock.
    (C) No change.
    (7)(A) In the case of common stock, there shall be at least
1,000,000 publicly held shares for initial listing and 500,000 publicly
held shares for continued listing. For initial listing such shares
shall have a market value [of at least $5 million] as provided in the
applicable provision of Rule 4310(c)(2). For continued listing such
shares shall

have a market value of at least $1 million.
    (B) In the case of preferred stock and secondary classes of common
stock, there shall be at least 200,000 publicly held shares having a
market value of at least $[2] 3.5 million for initial listing and
100,000 publicly held shares having a market value of [$500,000] $1
million for continued listing. In addition, the issuer's common stock
or common stock equivalent security must be listed on [either] Nasdaq
or [another national securities exchange] be a covered security. In the
event the issuer's common stock or common stock equivalent security
either is not listed on [either] Nasdaq or [another national securities
exchange] is not a covered security, the preferred stock and/or
secondary class of common stock may be traded on Nasdaq so long as the
security satisfies the listing criteria for common stock.
    (C) Shares held directly or indirectly by any officer or director
of the issuer and by any person who is the beneficial owner of more
than 10 percent of the total shares outstanding are not considered to
be publicly held.
    (8) No change.
    (9)(A) In the case of rights and warrants, for initial listing
only, there shall be at least [100,000] 400,000 issued and the
underlying security [shall] must be listed on Nasdaq or [another
national securities exchange] be a covered security. For continued
listing, the underlying security must remain listed on Nasdaq or be a
covered security.
    (B) In the case of put warrants (that is, instruments that grant
the holder the right to sell to the issuing company a specified number
of shares of the Company's common stock, at a specified price until a
specified period of time), for initial listing only, there shall be at
least [100,000] 400,000 issued and the underlying security [shall] must
be listed on Nasdaq or [another national securities exchange] be a
covered security. For continued listing, the underlying security must
remain listed on Nasdaq or be a covered security.
    (C) No change.
    (10)-(30) No change.
    (d) No change.

4320. Listing Requirements for Non-Canadian Foreign Securities and
American Depositary Receipts

    To qualify for listing on Nasdaq, a security of a non-Canadian
foreign issuer, an American Depositary Receipt (ADR) or similar
security issued in respect of a security of a foreign issuer shall
satisfy the requirements of paragraphs (a), (b), and (e) of this Rule.
Issuers that meet these requirements, but that are not listed on the
Nasdaq Global Market, are listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market.
    (a)-(d) No change.
    (e) In addition to the requirements contained in paragraphs (a) and
(b), the security shall satisfy the criteria set out in this subsection
for listing on Nasdaq. In the case of ADRs, the underlying security
will be considered when determining the ADR's qualification for initial
or continued listing on Nasdaq.
    (1) No change.
    (2)(A) For initial listing, the issue shall meet the requirements
of Rule 4310(c)(2)(A), (B) or (C). [have a minimum bid price of $4 and
the issuer shall have:
    (i) stockholders' equity of U.S. $5 million;
    (ii) market value of listed securities of U.S. $50 million
(currently traded issuers must meet this requirement for 90 consecutive
trading days prior to applying for listing); or
    (iii) net income from continuing operations of U.S. $750,000 in the
most recently completed fiscal year or in two of the last three most
recently completed fiscal years.]
    (B) For continued listing, the issuer shall meet the requirements
of Rule 4310(c)(3)(A), (B) or (C). [maintain:
    (i) stockholders' equity of U.S. $2.5 million;
    (ii) market value of listed securities of U.S. $35 million; or
    (iii) net income from continuing operations of U.S. $500,000 in the
most recently completed fiscal year or in two of the last three most
recently completed fiscal years.]
    (C) No change.
    (D) No change.
    (E) No change.
    (3)(A) In the case of a convertible debt security, for initial
listing, there shall be a principal amount outstanding of at least $10
million.
    (B) In addition, for the initial listing of convertible debt, one
of the following conditions must be satisfied:
    (i) the issuer of the debt must have an equity security that is
listed on Nasdaq, the American Stock Exchange or the New York Stock
Exchange;
    (ii) an issuer whose equity security is listed on Nasdaq, the
American Stock Exchange or the New York Stock Exchange, directly or
indirectly owns a majority interest in, or is under common control
with, the issuer of the debt security, or has guaranteed the debt
security;
    (iii) a nationally recognized securities rating organization (an
``NRSRO'') has assigned a current rating to the debt security that is
no lower than an S&P Corporation ``B'' rating or equivalent rating by
another NRSRO; or,
    (iv) if no NRSRO has assigned a rating to the issue, an NRSRO has
currently assigned: (1) an investment grade rating to an immediately
senior issue; or (2) a rating that is no lower than an S&P Corporation
``B'' rating, or an equivalent rating by another NRSRO, to a pari passu
or junior issue.
    (C) For continued listing of a convertible debt security, there
shall be a principal amount outstanding of at least $5 million.
    (4)(A) [There] In the case of common stock, for initial and
continued listing, there shall be at least 300 round lot holders of the
security.
    (B) In the case of preferred stock and secondary classes of common
stock, for initial and continued listing, there shall be at least 100
round lot holders of the security, provided in each case that the
issuer's common stock or common stock equivalent equity security [is]
must be listed on [either] Nasdaq or [another national securities
exchange] be a covered security. In the event the issuer's common stock
or common stock equivalent security either is not listed on [either]
Nasdaq or [another national securities exchange] is not a covered
security, the preferred stock and/or secondary class of common stock
may be listed on Nasdaq so long as the security satisfies the listing
criteria for common stock.
    (C) No change.
    (5) There shall be at least 1,000,000 publicly held shares for
initial listing and 500,000 publicly held shares for continued listing.
For initial listing, such shares shall have a market value [of at least
$5 million] as provided in the applicable provision of Rule 4310(c)(2).
For continued listing, such shares shall have a market value of at
least $1 million. In the case of preferred stock and secondary classes
of common stock, there shall be at least 200,000 publicly held shares
having a market value of at least [$2] $3.5 million for initial listing
and 100,000 publicly held shares having a market value of [$500,000] $1
million for continued listing. In addition, the issuer's common stock
or common stock equivalent security security must be listed on either
Nasdaq or [another national securities exchange] be a covered security.
In the event the issuer's common stock or common stock equivalent
security either is not listed on [either] Nasdaq or [another national
securities exchange] is not a covered security, the preferred stock
and/or secondary class of common stock may be traded on Nasdaq so long
as the security satisfies the listing criteria for common stock. Shares
held directly or

indirectly by any officer or director of the issuer and by any person
who is the beneficial owner of more than 10 percent of the total shares
outstanding are not considered to be publicly held.
    (6) In the case of rights, warrants and ADRs for initial listing
only, at least [100,000] 400,000 shall be issued. Issuers of ADRs must
also meet the round lot holders and publicly held shares requirements
set forth in the applicable provisions of Rules 4310(c)(2), 4320(e)(4)
and 4320(e)(5) [subsections (4) and (5) above].
    (7) In the case of rights and warrants, for initial and continued
listing, the underlying security shall be listed on Nasdaq or [another
national securities exchange] be a covered security.
    (8)-(26) No change.
    (f) No change.
* * * * *

IM-4803. Staff Review of Deficiency

    As provided in Rule 4803(a)(1)(A), the staff of the Listing
Department may accept a plan to regain compliance with respect to
quantitative deficiencies from standards that do not themselves provide
a compliance period. Such standards include:
    Rules [4310(c)(2)(B)(i) and (iii)] 4310(c)(3)(A) and 4310(c)(3)(C)
    Rule 4310(c)(6)
    Rule 4310(c)(7) (but only as to the number of publicly held shares,
and not as to such shares' market value)
    [Rules 4320(e)(2)(B)(i) and (iii)]
    Rule 4320(e)(2)(B)
    Rules 4320(e)(4) and (5) (but only as to the number of publicly
held shares, and not as to such shares' market value)
    Rules 4450(a)(1), (3), and (4)
    Rules 4450(b)(1)(B), (b)(2), and (b)(5), and
    Rules 4450(h)(1) and (4).
    In a case where an issuer fails to comply with the requirement of
Rules [4310(c)(2)(B)(iii), 4320(e)(2)(B)(iii),] 4310(c)(3)(C) or
4450(b)(1)(B), the Listing Department shall not accept a plan to
achieve compliance with those requirements in the future, since
compliance requires stated levels of net income or assets and revenues
during completed fiscal years and therefore can only be demonstrated
through audited financial statements. Similarly, an issuer may not
submit a plan relying on partial-year performance to demonstrate
compliance with these standards. An issuer cited for non-compliance
with these requirements may, however, submit a plan that demonstrates
current or near-term compliance with Rules [4310(c)(2)(B)(i),
4320(e)(2)(B)(i),] 4310(c)(3)(A) or 4450(a)(3) (i.e., the alternative
listing requirement relating to stockholders' equity), or Rules
[4310(c)(2)(B)(ii), 4320(e)(2)(B)(ii),] 4310(c)(3)(B) or 4450(b)(1)(A)
(i.e., the alternative listing requirement relating to market value of
listed securities).
* * * * *

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, as
amended, and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule
change, as amended. 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 proposes to increase the initial and continued listing
requirements applicable to companies seeking to list, or already
listed, on the Nasdaq Capital Market, as set forth in Rule 4310 (for
domestic and Canadian securities) and Rule 4320 (for non-Canadian
foreign securities and American Depositary Receipts).\5\ Nasdaq
believes that these changes will facilitate a finding by the Commission
that the listing standards for the Capital Market are substantially
similar to the listing standards applicable to securities listed on the
New York Stock Exchange, the American Stock Exchange, or the Nasdaq
Global Market. This finding is required before the Commission can
designate securities listed on the Capital Market as ``covered
securities,'' which are exempt from state regulation under Section 18
of the Securities Act of 1933 (``Securities Act'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Amendment No. 1, supra note 3.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 77r(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Primary Listing Standards

    The Exchange states that currently, a company can list on the
Capital Market by meeting a stockholders' equity, income or market
value of listed securities requirement, along with other applicable
listing standards. Nasdaq proposes to modify the income and market
value of listed securities components of these listing standards to
also require a minimum of $4 million in equity in each case. In
addition, for companies listing under the equity alternative, Nasdaq
proposes to require a two year operating history, instead of the one
year history currently required. Further, for companies listing under
the market value of listed securities and equity alternatives, Nasdaq
proposes to increase the market value of publicly held shares
requirement for initial listing from $5 million to $15 million.
Finally, Nasdaq proposes to clarify that all companies must have 300
round lot shareholders for continued listing of a primary class of
common stock.

Secondary Classes of Common Stock and Preferred Stock

    Nasdaq states that it currently permits the listing of secondary
classes of common stock and preferred stock on the Capital Market under
lower liquidity standards, when the primary class of common stock is
listed on Nasdaq or a national securities exchange. Nasdaq proposes to
increase the market value of publicly held shares requirement from $2
million to $3.5 million for initial listing and from $500,000 to $1
million for continued listing of these securities. In addition, Nasdaq
proposes to modify the listing standards so that the lower liquidity
standards are available only when a company's common stock or its
equivalent is listed on Nasdaq or is a ``covered security'' as defined
in Section 18 of the Securities Act. Finally, Nasdaq proposes to
clarify that companies must have 100 round lot shareholders for
continued listing under these listing standards.

Rights and Warrants

    Nasdaq proposes to increase the requirement for initial listing of
rights and warrants to require that there be 400,000 outstanding. In
addition, Nasdaq proposes to require that for initial and continued
listing, the security underlying a right or warrant must be listed on
Nasdaq or be a covered security.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Amendment No. 1, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Convertible Debt

    Nasdaq states that its rules currently permit the listing of
convertible debt on the Capital Market. Nasdaq proposes to modify those
rules, to require that for the initial listing of convertible debt
either that: (i) The issuer of the debt must have an equity security
that is listed on Nasdaq, the American Stock Exchange or the New York
Stock Exchange; (ii) an issuer whose equity security is listed on
Nasdaq, the American Stock Exchange or the New York Stock Exchange,
directly or indirectly owns a majority interest in, or is under common
control with, the

issuer of the debt security, or has guaranteed the debt security; (iii)
a nationally recognized securities rating organization (an ``NRSRO'')
has assigned a current rating to the debt security that is no lower
than an S&P Corporation ``B'' rating or equivalent rating by another
NRSRO; or, (iv) if no NRSRO has assigned a rating to the issue, an
NRSRO has currently assigned: (1) An investment grade rating to an
immediately senior issue; or (2) a rating that is no lower than an S&P
Corporation ``B'' rating, or an equivalent rating by another NRSRO, to
a pari passu or junior issue.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Amendment No. 1, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Other Changes

    Nasdaq also proposes to make technical and conforming changes to
the rules by adding a definition of ``covered security'' in Rule 4200,
deleting certain other definitions in Rule 4200 that have no current
applicability under Nasdaq rules, and adjusting cross references
contained in IM-4803.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Nasdaq notes that the references to Rule 4320 in the final
paragraph of IM-4803 have been deleted based on the new structure of
the rules. Nonetheless, the substance of this interpretive material
continues to apply to non-U.S. companies in the same manner that it
applies to domestic companies due to the cross reference to Rule
4310(c)(3) contained in Rule 4320(e)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation

    Nasdaq states that it recognizes that the proposed changes could
result in a security that currently meets all the listing requirements
becoming non-compliant. Therefore, Nasdaq proposes that the changes to
the continued listing requirements be made effective 30 days \10\ after
the proposed rule change is approved by the Commission. Nasdaq believes
that this period would provide currently-listed companies with adequate
time to comply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Amendment No. 1, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the case of companies applying for initial listing, Nasdaq
proposes that the new requirements be effective upon approval for
companies that apply after the date this proposed rule change is
submitted to the SEC. Nasdaq states that companies that had applied for
listing prior to the date this proposed rule change is submitted to the
SEC would be able to continue to qualify under the prior standards,
provided that they complete the listing process not later than 30 days
\11\ after the proposed rule change is approved by the Commission.
Companies that apply after the date this proposed rule change is
submitted to the SEC would be approved for listing based on the rules
in effect at the time of the approval. The Exchange believes that this
schedule provides notice to companies applying for listing that they
would be subject to higher standards upon approval of the rule, so such
companies would not be prejudiced, but recognizes that companies that
have previously applied did so in reliance on the prior listing
standards, and therefore provides them a reasonable period of time to
complete the listing process on that basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Amendment No. 1, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange states that these procedures are similar to those used
when the listing standards were revised in 1997 and 2001.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 38961 (August 22,
1997), 62 FR 45895 (Aug. 29, 1997) (approving SR-NASD-1997-16); and
44499 (June 29, 2001), 66 FR 35819 (July 9, 2001) (approving SR-
NASD-2001-14).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is
consistent with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act \13\ in general
and with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\14\ in particular. Section 6(b)(5)
requires that Nasdaq's rules be designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market, and to protect investors and the public
interest. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, as
amended, would raise the listing standards on the Nasdaq Capital
Market, which will help protect investors. Further, Nasdaq believes
that the proposed rule change will facilitate the Commission's review
of Nasdaq's petition to treat securities listed on the Capital Market
as covered securities under Section 18(b) of the Securities Act,\15\
which would remove an impediment to the mechanism of a free and open
market.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 77r(b).
    \16\ Petition to Amend Rule 146(b) to Designate Securities
Listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market as Covered Securities for the
Purpose of Section 18 of the Securities Act of 1933 (February 28,
2006) (designated as Commission File No. 4-513, available at: http://www.sec.gov/rules/petitions/petn4-513.pdf
).

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

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

    Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change, as amended,
will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding, or (ii) as to
which Nasdaq consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as amended, 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-2006-032 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-032. 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 inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of Nasdaq. 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-2006-032 and
should be submitted on or before September 26, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-14651 Filed 9-1-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 145 (Wednesday, July 29, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45067-45073]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18532]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0359; FRL-9929-97-OAR]
RIN 2060-AR95

Air Quality Designations for the 2006 24-hour Fine Particle
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS), 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and 1987 Annual Coarse
Particle (PM10) NAAQS; Technical Amendments to Inadvertent
Errors

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to its authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is promulgating this final action
to make technical amendments to address several minor, inadvertent and
nonsubstantive errors in the regulatory text establishing the air
quality designations for the 2006 24-hour fine particle
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and 1987 annual coarse particle
(PM10) NAAQS. Consistent with the EPA's interpretation of
the good cause exemption provisions outlined in the Administrative
Procedure Act, this action is being taken without notice and comment.
The states to which these amendments apply are New York and West
Virginia.

DATES: The effective date of these technical amendments is August 28,
2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general questions concerning this
action, please contact Andy Chang, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Air Quality Planning Division, C539-04,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

    The following is an outline of the preamble.

I. What is the good cause exemption, and why is the EPA using it?
II. What is the purpose of this action?
III. What are the technical amendments to inadvertent errors in
prior designations?
    A. Technical Amendments Concerning Designations for the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS
    B. Technical Amendments Concerning Designations for the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
    C. Technical Amendments Concerning Designations for the 1987
Annual PM10 NAAQS
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act
    L. Judicial Review

I. What is the good cause exemption, and why is the EPA using it?

    Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that
public notice and comment procedures are impracticable, unnecessary, or
contrary to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without
providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. The EPA has
determined that there is good cause for making this rule final without
prior proposal and opportunity for comment because such notice and
opportunity for comment is unnecessary. In this action, we are amending
40 CFR part 81, which contains the tables of area designations and
boundaries for each NAAQS. Notice

and comment is unnecessary because the corrections made in this
document were already the subject of prior notice and comment
rulemakings; this action merely makes corrections to the tables in
order to correctly align the information in the tables with those prior
rulemakings.

II. What is the purpose of this action?

    Whenever the EPA establishes a new NAAQS, section 107(d) of the CAA
requires the EPA to designate all areas of the country as meeting or
not meeting the new NAAQS, or as unclassifiable where available
information does not support a determination whether an area is meeting
the NAAQS. The area designations and boundaries for each NAAQS are set
forth in tables at 40 CFR part 81.
    This action makes technical amendments to minor, inadvertent and
nonsubstantive errors in the 40 CFR part 81 regulatory text concerning
the air quality designations for certain areas in two states for the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS, and 1987 annual PM10 NAAQS. The states to which these
technical amendments apply are New York and West Virginia.
    Documents related to the affected designations are available in the
following dockets: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0562 (2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS), Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0061 (1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS), and Public Docket No. A-92-22 (1987
annual PM10 NAAQS). All documents in the dockets except for
those for related to designations for the 1987 PM10 NAAQS,
i.e., Public Docket No. A-92-22, are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. All materials for Public Docket No. A-92-22
are located at the EPA Docket Center. In addition, the EPA has
established a Web site for these rulemakings at: http://www.epa.gov/pmdesignations/ and http://www.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/pindex.html. These Web sites include the EPA's final PM2.5
and PM10 designations, as well as state and tribal initial
recommendation letters, the EPA's modification letters, technical
support documents, responses to comments and other related technical
information.
    A discussion of these inadvertent errors and associated corrections
follows in the next section. The revisions to the regulatory text,
specifically as codified in 40 CFR part 81, are provided at the end of
this preamble.

III. What are the technical amendments to inadvertent errors in prior
designations?

A. Technical Amendments Concerning Designations for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS

    The EPA published its air quality designations for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS on November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688). In that
action, two areas in West Virginia were designated as nonattainment for
this NAAQS: Charleston, West Virginia (consisting of Kanawha County and
Putnam County) and the Steubenville-Weirton, Ohio-West Virginia area
(consisting of Brooke County and Hancock County in West Virginia and
Jefferson County in Ohio). The EPA finalized approval of West
Virginia's request to redesignate the Charleston, West Virginia area to
attainment on March 31, 2014 (79 FR 17884), and finalized approval of
West Virginia's request to redesignate the state's portion of the
Steubenville-Weirton area to attainment on March 18, 2014 (79 FR
15019). Both of these final actions correctly revised West Virginia's
entries in 40 CFR 81.349 to reflect that the areas are in attainment
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. However, a subsequent
rulemaking finalized in the Federal Register on June 2, 2014, by the
EPA titled, ``Identification of Nonattainment Classifications and
Deadlines for Submission of State Implementation Plan (SIP) Provisions
for the 1997 Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS) and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS'' (79 FR
31566) inadvertently and erroneously recodified the Charleston, West
Virginia area and the West Virginia portion of the Steubenville-
Weirton, Ohio-West Virginia area as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. In this rulemaking, the EPA is correcting the
40 CFR 81.349 table for West Virginia with respect to the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS to reflect that both areas within West Virginia
have been redesignated to attainment, consistent with our previous
March 18, 2014, and March 31, 2014, final rulemakings.

B. Technical Amendments Concerning Designations for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS

    The EPA published its air quality designations for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS on January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944). In this action,
two areas in West Virginia were designated as nonattainment for this
NAAQS: Charleston, West Virginia (consisting of Kanawha County and
Putnam County) and the Steubenville-Weirton, Ohio-West Virginia area
(consisting of Brooke County and Hancock County in West Virginia and
Jefferson County in Ohio). The EPA finalized approval of West
Virginia's request to redesignate the Charleston, West Virginia area to
attainment on March 31, 2014 (79 FR 17884), and finalized approval of
West Virginia's request to redesignate the state's portion of the
Steubenville-Weirton area to attainment on March 18, 2014 (79 FR
15019). Both of these final actions correctly revised West Virginia's
entries in 40 CFR 81.349 to reflect that the areas are in attainment
for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. However, a subsequent
rulemaking finalized in the Federal Register on June 2, 2014, by the
EPA titled, ``Identification of Nonattainment Classifications and
Deadlines for Submission of State Implementation Plan (SIP) Provisions
for the 1997 Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS) and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS'' (79 FR
31566) inadvertently and erroneously recodified the Charleston, West
Virginia area and the West Virginia portion of the Steubenville-
Weirton, Ohio-West Virginia area as nonattainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. In this rulemaking, the EPA is correcting the
40 CFR 81.349 table for West Virginia with respect to the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS to reflect that both areas within West Virginia
have been redesignated to attainment consistent with our previous March
18, 2014, and March 31, 2014, final rulemakings.

C. Technical Amendments Concerning Designations for the 1987 Annual
PM10 NAAQS

    The EPA redesignated New York County, New York as nonattainment for
the 1987 annual PM10 NAAQS on January 20, 1994 (58 FR
67334).\1\ However, the 40 CFR part 81 table for the state is unclear
as to which 1987 PM10 NAAQS the nonattainment designation
applies to, specifically because at the time of the January 20, 1994,
designation, there were two forms of the NAAQS. The 1987
PM10 NAAQS included an annual standard of 50 micrograms per
cubic meter (annual arithmetic mean averaged over 3 years) and a 24-
hour standard of 150 micrograms per cubic meter (not to be exceeded
more than once per year on average over a 3-year period). The 40 CFR
part 81 table for PM10 does not distinguish between the two
forms of the NAAQS, and therefore New York

County is codified as nonattainment for a non-specified, i.e.,
ambiguous form of the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This area was originally designated as unclassifiable for
the annual PM10 NAAQS by operation of law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA has confirmed that the Madison Avenue monitor in New York
County (Air Quality Systems (AQS) Site ID 36-061-0077) recorded
violations of the 1987 annual PM10 NAAQS and was the basis
for the county's nonattainment designation for this NAAQS. This monitor
continued to serve as the county's design value monitor until 1998; at
this time the monitor underwent modifications that made it no longer
valid for comparison to the NAAQS, i.e., it no longer met the siting
criteria for a Federal Reference Method (FRM) monitor. As a result,
decisions regarding PM10 air quality since 1998 have been
informed by ambient air quality data collected at other FRM monitoring
sites in New York County, including the Post Office site (AQS ID 36-
061-0062). None of the monitors in New York County have recorded
violations of the annual PM10 NAAQS since 1998, and no
violations of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS have ever been recorded
in the county. On December 2, 2013, the EPA finalized a clean data
determination in the Federal Register for New York County (78 FR
72032), which determined that even though the annual form of the 1987
PM10 NAAQS had been revoked on October 17, 2006 (71 FR
61144), ambient air quality data collected in New York County indicated
that this NAAQS had been attained. To clarify, New York County was
designated as nonattainment for the 1987 annual PM10 NAAQS
only; the area received a clean data determination from the EPA for the
1987 annual PM10 NAAQS; and the Agency has revoked the 1987
annual PM10 NAAQS. Therefore, the EPA is revising and
clarifying the table for the PM10 NAAQS for the state to
reflect the form of the standard, i.e., the annual PM10
NAAQS, for which New York County was designated as nonattainment, and
to reflect that that standard has been revoked.

IV. Environmental Justice Considerations

    When the EPA establishes a new NAAQS, section 107(d) of the CAA
requires the EPA to designate all areas of the country as meeting or
not meeting the new NAAQS, or as unclassifiable where available
information does not support a determination whether an area is meeting
the NAAQS. The area designations and boundaries for each NAAQS are set
forth in tables at 40 CFR part 81.This action makes technical
amendments to minor, inadvertent and nonsubstantive errors in the 40
CFR part 81 regulatory text concerning the air quality designations for
certain areas in two states for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and 1987 annual
PM10 NAAQS. The amendments apply to the states of New York
and West Virginia. This action continues to protect all those residing,
working, attending school or otherwise present in those areas
regardless of minority and economic status.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

    This action makes technical amendments to correct minor,
inadvertent and nonsubstantive errors in prior area designations. This
type of action is exempt from review under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

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). This action corrects minor,
inadvertent and nonsubstantive errors in prior area designations and
does not require any party to perform an information collection.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes
of assessing the impacts of this rule on small entities, small entity
is defined as: (1) A small business as defined by the Small Business
Administration's regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town,
school district or special district with a population of less than
50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
    Because the EPA has made a good cause finding that this action is
not subject to notice and comment requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute as indicated in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section above, it is not subject to the regulatory
flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action contains no federal mandate under the provisions of
Title II of the UMRA of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538 for state, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. The action does not impose an
enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments or the
private sector. Therefore, this action is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
    This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203
of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action
corrects minor, inadvertent and nonsubstantive errors in prior area
designations.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This action makes technical
amendments to correct minor, inadvertent and nonsubstantive errors in
prior area designations. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to
this action.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action only
makes technical amendments to correct minor, inadvertent and
nonsubstantive errors in prior area designations or redesignations.
None of these technical amendments has a substantial direct effect on
any tribal land; thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
action.

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

    The 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 action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because it does not establish an environmental standard
intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (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 (NTTAA)

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA of 1995, Public Law 104-113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS) in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impracticable. VCS are
technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to provide Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, explanations when the
agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS. This action
does not involve technical standards. Therefore, the EPA did not
consider the use of any VCS.

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

    Executive Order 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 U.S.
    The EPA has determined that this rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This action makes technical amendments to correct minor,
inadvertent, nonsubstantive errors in the designations for certain
areas. The results are also contained in section IV titled,
``Environmental Justice Considerations'' of this preamble.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. However, section 808 allows the issuing agency to make a rule
effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes
a good cause finding that notice and public procedure is impracticable,
unnecessary or contrary to the public interest. This determination must
be supported by a brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As stated
previously, the EPA had made such a good cause finding, including the
reasons therefore, and established an effective date of August 28,
2015. These technical amendments to inadvertent errors do not
constitute a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

L. Judicial Review

    In the final actions designating areas for the PM10
NAAQS, the EPA determined that the actions were ``nationally
applicable'' within the meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1). Likewise, the
EPA also determined that the final action identifying nonattainment
classifications and deadlines for SIP provisions for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS was
nationally applicable. Because this action is making corrections to
those nationally applicable rules, we are determining that this action
is also nationally applicable within the meaning of section 307(b)(1).
Thus, petitions for review of this final action must be filed in the
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Section
307(b)(1) requires such petitions to be filed within 60 days from the
date the final action is published in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: July 21, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR part 81 is
amended as follows:

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

0
2. Section 81.333 is amended by revising the table titled ``New York--
PM-10'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.333  New York.

* * * * *

                                                 New York--PM-10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Designation                             Classification
        Designated area        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Date                 Type                Date                 Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New York County...............         1/20/94  Nonattainment \1\......         1/20/94  Moderate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\This designation applied only to the annual form of the PM10 NAAQS. The annual PM10 NAAQS was revoked for all
  areas of the state on October 17, 2006.

* * * * *

0
3. Section 81.349 is amended by revising the tables titled ``West
Virginia--1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS''

and ``West Virginia--2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS'' to read as
follows:

Sec.  81.349  West Virginia.

* * * * *

                                                         West Virginia--1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
                                                                 [Primary and secondary]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Designation                                            Classification
          Designated area \a\          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Date \1\                        Type                              Date \2\                     Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charleston, WV:
    Kanawha County....................         3/31/14  Attainment.
    Putnam County.....................         3/31/14  Attainment.
Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY-OH:
    Cabell County.....................        12/28/12  Attainment.
    Mason County (part)...............        12/28/12  Attainment.
        Graham Tax District...........
    Wayne County......................        12/28/12  Attainment.
Martinsburg, WV-Hagerstown, MD:
    Berkeley County...................        11/25/14  Attainment.
Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH:
    Pleasants County (part)...........         9/12/13  Attainment.
        Tax District of Grant.........
    Wood County.......................         9/12/13  Attainment.
Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV:
    Brooke County.....................         3/18/14  Attainment.
    Hancock County....................         3/18/14  Attainment.
Wheeling, WV-OH:
    Marshall County...................         9/30/13  Attainment.
    Ohio County.......................         9/30/13  Attainment.
Rest of State:
    Barbour County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Boone County......................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Braxton County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Calhoun County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Clay County.......................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Doddridge County..................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Fayette County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Gilmer County.....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Grant County......................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Greenbrier County.................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Hampshire County..................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Hardy County......................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Harrison County...................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Jackson County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Jefferson County..................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Lewis County......................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Lincoln County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Logan County......................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    McDowell County...................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Marion County.....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Mason County (remainder)..........  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Mercer County.....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Mineral County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Mingo County......................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Monongalia County.................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Monroe County.....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Morgan County.....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Nicholas County...................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Pendleton County..................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Pleasants County (remainder)......  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Pocahontas County.................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Preston County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Raleigh County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Randolph County...................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Ritchie County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Roane County......................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Summers County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Taylor County.....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Tucker County.....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Tyler County......................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Upshur County.....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Webster County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Wetzel County.....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Wirt County.......................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.

    Wyoming County....................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ This date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *

                                     West Virginia--2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Designation                            Classification
                                --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Designated area \a\                                                              Date
                                    Date \1\                     Type                   \2\          Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charleston, WV:
    Kanawha County.............         3/31/14  Attainment.
    Putnam County..............         3/31/14  Attainment.
Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV:
    Brooke County..............         3/18/14  Attainment.
    Hancock County.............         3/18/14  Attainment.
Rest of State:
    Barbour County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Berkeley County............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Boone County...............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Braxton County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Cabell County..............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Calhoun County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Clay County................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Doddridge County...........  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Fayette County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Gilmer County..............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Grant County...............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Greenbrier County..........  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Hampshire County...........  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Hardy County...............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Harrison County............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Jackson County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Jefferson County...........  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Lewis County...............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Lincoln County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Logan County...............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    McDowell County............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Marion County..............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Marshall County............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Mason County...............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Mercer County..............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Mineral County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Mingo County...............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Monongalia County..........  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Monroe County..............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Morgan County..............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Nicholas County............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Ohio County................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Pendleton County...........  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Pleasants County...........  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Pocahontas County..........  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Preston County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Raleigh County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Randolph County............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Ritchie County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Roane County...............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Summers County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Taylor County..............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Tucker County..............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Tyler County...............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Upshur County..............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Wayne County...............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.

    Webster County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Wetzel County..............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Wirt County................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Wood County................  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Wyoming County.............  ..............  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is 30 days after November 13, 2009, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ This date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-18532 Filed 7-28-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 183 (Friday, September 24, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 53100]
[FR Doc No: 2021-20714]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4545-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Seminole Tribe of Florida; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major
Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Seminole Tribe of Florida (FEMA-4545-DR), dated May 8, 2020,
and related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued August 5, 2021.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
dated May 8, 2020 for the Seminole Tribe of Florida is hereby amended
to include the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    All areas within the Seminole Tribe of Florida are eligible for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

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

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-20714 Filed 9-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P