[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 134 (Friday, July 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 32592]
[FR Doc No: 2017-14776]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81112; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2017-31]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change To Adopt Rule 6900 To Establish the Procedures for Resolving
Potential Disputes Related to CAT Fees Charged to Industry Members

July 10, 2017.
    On May 16, 2017, NYSE MKT LLC. (``NYSE MKT'' or the ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'' or ``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to adopt Rule 6900 (Consolidated Audit Trail--Fee
Dispute Resolutions). The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on June 1, 2017.\3\ The Commission
received no comment letters on the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80782 (May 26, 2017), 82
FR 25379 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
Commission is extending this 45-day time period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that
it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change. The
proposed rule change would establish the procedures for resolving
potential disputes related to CAT Fees charged to Industry Members.
    Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\5\ designates August 30, 2017, as the date by which the Commission
should either approve or disapprove or institute proceedings to
determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change (File Number
SR-NYSEMKT-2017-31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2017-14776 Filed 7-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 150 (Tuesday, August 4, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47274-47278]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16874]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89422; File No. SR-BOX-2020-29]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fee
Schedule on the BOX Options Market LLC Facility To Amend Section IX.C
(Trading Floor Participant Fees) and Remove Section IX.D (Trading Floor
Booth Space Fee)

July 29, 2020.
    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 July 16, 2020, BOX Exchange LLC (``Exchange'') 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 the Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal effective upon filing
with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change to amend the Fee Schedule on
the BOX Options Market LLC (``BOX'') facility. The text of the proposed
rule change is available from the principal office of the Exchange, at
the Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the Exchange's
internet website at http://boxexchange.com.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to modify the Fee Schedule for trading on BOX
to amend Section IX.C. (Trading Floor Permit Fees). The Exchange
launched the BOX Trading Floor in August 2017 and established the
current Trading Floor Permit Fees in conjunction with the launch.\5\ In
February, the Exchange relocated the BOX Trading Floor to a larger
trading facility to accommodate increased interest in the Trading
Floor. Then, as a precautionary measure to prevent the potential spread
of COVID-19, the Exchange temporarily closed the Trading Floor on March
20, 2020. The Trading Floor reopened on Monday, May 4th, 2020 with
social distancing precautions and guidelines in place that have
impacted the space availability for Floor Participants. To encourage
efficient use of space, BOX believes it is appropriate to amend the
Floor Broker Trading Floor Permit Fees to assess fees based on the
space utilized by each firm rather than the number of registered

permits that each Participant has on the Trading Floor. The Exchange is
also proposing to remove or modify certain terminology in the Trading
Floor Permit Fees section to clarify how these fees are assessed, and
better reflect how space on the Trading Floor is used by each
Participant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81504 (August 30,
2017), 82 FR 42195 (September 6, 2017) (SR-BOX-2017-28).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Exchange proposes to rename Section IX.C. (Trading Floor
Permit Fees) to Trading Floor Participant Fees.\6\ The Exchange
believes that this will clarify that the fees in this section are
assessed on the Participant firms and not the registered permit holders
that are employed at each firm. The Exchange then proposes to change
the language both subsections (a) and (b) from Participant to ``firm''
to clarify that these fees are assessed on each firm registered to
conduct trading on the BOX Trading Floor; rather than the registered
trading permit holders approved to trade on behalf of these
Participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange notes that the Trading Floor Participants apply
in addition to the Participant Fees outlined in Section IX. A
(Initiation Fee) and B (Participant Fees).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange then proposes to modify the language in this section
to clarify how space on the Trading Floor is used. The two types of
Floor Participant firms--Floor Brokers and Floor Market Makers--have
different business needs and preferences on the Trading Floor. Floor
Broker firms utilize space adjacent to the Crowd Area (``booth space'')
akin to private office space where employees of the same firm
communicate with customers, receive orders, and coordinate covering the
Trading Floor to announce such orders into the Crowd Area.\7\ A Floor
Broker firm has at least one desk, and may combine multiple, contiguous
desks into a single booth space adjacent to the Crowd Area. By
contrast, Floor Market Making firms operate at the point of sale, which
necessitates that their floor space be integrated in the Crowd Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See BOX Rule 100(a)(67). The term ``Trading Floor'' or
``Options Floor'' means the physical trading floor of the Exchange
located in Chicago. The Trading Floor shall consist of one ``Crowd
Area'' or ``Pit'' where all option classes will be located. The
Crowd Area or Pit shall be marked with specific visible boundaries
on the Trading Floor, as determined by the Exchange. A Floor Broker
must open outcry an order in the Crowd Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Floor Market Makers
    The Exchange first proposes to replace the reference to ``booth
space'' with ``podium'' to more accurately reflect the type of space
used by the Floor Market Making firms on the BOX Trading Floor. The
Exchange notes that this terminology change will not impact the space
currently used by Floor Market Makers; rather it is designed to clarify
the differences in how space is used by Floor Market Makers compared to
the manner in which space is used by Floor Brokers. A podium is the
term used within the industry for the Floor Market Maker work space
located in the middle of the Crowd Area, while a booth space is the
terminology used for the work space adjacent to the Crowd Area where
the Floor Broker firms are located. The Exchange notes that all Market
Maker podiums on the BOX Trading Floor are the same size.
    The Exchange currently charges each Floor Market Making firm $5,500
per month for one booth space and three registered permits on the BOX
Trading Floor. Along with replacing the term ``booth space'' with
``podium,'' the Exchange proposes to remove the references to three
registered permits as the Exchange will no longer assess fees based on
the number of registered permits on the Floor. Instead, the Exchange
proposes to add language that states the firm will be entitled to an
unlimited amount of registered trading permits. Registered trading
permits are given to persons employed by or associated with a Floor
Broker or Floor Market Maker who are eligible to effect transactions on
the Trading Floor as a Floor Market Maker or Floor Broker.\8\ The
Exchange notes that under the proposal a Market Maker will now be able
to register an unlimited amount of trading permits for access to the
BOX Trading Floor. Each podium will continue to be limited to one
registered trading permit holder actively trading at any given time, as
is currently the case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Registered Trading Permit holders are not assessed a Badge
Fee. Badge Fees are assessed on persons employed by or associated
with a Participant that are not registered to effect transaction on
the BOX Trading Floor (see BOX Rule 7630).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange proposes to add language to charge Floor
Market Makers who wish to have any additional podiums in the Crowd Area
$1,500 per podium per month. The Exchange notes that this is the same
fee currently assessed on Floor Market Makers who wish to have
additional space on the Trading Floor, under current Section IX.D.
(Trading Floor Booth Space Fee) which the Exchange plans to remove
under this proposal. A Market Maker may elect to have more than one
podium to increase their trading opportunities on the BOX Trading
Floor. As stated above, a Market Maker podium is limited to one
registered trading permit holder actively trading at any given time.
Therefore, if the Market Maker would like to have two registered
trading permit holders actively trading at any given time, they are
required to have two podiums on the BOX Trading Floor.
    The Exchange believes that the changes proposed above will have no
impact to Floor Marker Maker fees. Each Floor Market Maker currently
has one podium on the BOX Trading Floor, and would continue to be
charged $5,500 per month for their space. Instead, the proposal now
permits an unlimited number of trading permit holders although each
podium will continue to accommodate only one trading permit holder at
any given time.
Floor Brokers
    The Exchange currently charges each Floor Broker firm $500 per
month for three registered permits \9\ and one booth space on the
Trading Floor. The Exchange proposes to remove the references to three
registered permits as the Exchange will no longer assess fees based on
the number of registered trading permits on the Floor. Instead, the
Exchange proposes to add language that states the firm will be entitled
to an unlimited amount of registered trading permits. The Exchange
notes that under the proposal a Floor Broker will now be able to
register an unlimited amount of trading permits for access to the BOX
Trading Floor; however each desk will be limited to one registered
trading permit holder actively trading at any given time.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Id.
    \10\ The Exchange notes that prior to the closure of the Floor
in March 2020, Floor Brokers were allowed more than one registered
trading permit holder at each desk. However; since reopening the
Trading Floor in May 2020 Floor Brokers have been limited to one
registered trading permit holder per desk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange then proposes to establish a flat Floor Broker Trading
Floor Participant Fee of $5,000 per month as well as a $5,000 Trading
Floor Credit that will be applied if a Floor Broker firm executes a
trade on 50% or more of trading days in a given month. For example, for
June 2020, in order to avail themselves of the Trading Floor Credit, a
Floor Broker must execute a trade on the BOX Trading Floor on at least
11 days of June (22 trading days in June 2020). The Exchange believes
this fee/credit structure will encourage Floor Broker firms to more
actively participate on the BOX Trading Floor as well as encourage the
efficient use of Floor Space. The Exchange believes that most, if not
all, of the current Floor Brokers will easily meet this threshold based
on trading activity for the six weeks prior to the closure of the BOX
Trading Floor on March 20, 2020 and therefore will

only be charged for the space that each Floor Broker utilizes on the
Trading Floor under the proposed Desk Fee as described below.
    Finally, the Exchange proposes to establish a $350 per month desk
fee for Floor Brokers within their booth space, as well as specify that
a Floor Broker must have at least one desk. Depending on their business
model a Floor Broker may opt to have only one desk in its booth space,
or opt for a larger footprint on the Floor and combine several desks
into the booth space adjacent to the Crowd Area. The Exchange believes
charging per desk will offer flexibility to Floor Broker firms to
customize the precise amount of floor space needed, while ensuring that
Floor Brokers are charged equitably for the floor space they utilize.
    The Exchange believes these proposed changes will result in Floor
Brokers being charged appropriately for their space on the BOX Trading
Floor. Prior to the closure of the BOX Floor in March 2020, Floor
Brokers had from one to six permit holders actively trading in their
booth space on the BOX Floor at any given time. Under the current fee
structure, a Floor Broker firm with one active trading permit holder
occupying a booth space on the BOX Trading Floor was charged $500 per
month, a Floor Broker firm with four active trading permit holders was
charged $1000 per month, and a Floor Broker firm with six active
trading permit holders was charged $1000 per month. Under the proposed
fee structure, assuming that none of the Floor Brokers change their
practices, these same Floor Brokers would be charged between $350 and
$2,100 per month.
    Specifically, a Floor Broker firm with one active trading permit
holder occupying one desk would now be charged a Trading Floor
Participant Fee of $5,000 per month (with the opportunity to earn a
$5,000 per month Trading Floor Credit for a net Trading Floor
Participant Fee of $0.00) and $350 per month Desk Fee. Therefore the
firm's monthly anticipated Trading Floor Participant Fee would drop
from $500 per month to $350 per month (assuming they qualify for the
Trading Floor Credit).
    The Floor Broker with four active trading permit holders would be
charged $1000 per month under the current fee schedule ($500 for the
first three registered trading permits and an additional $500 for the
one registered trading permit). Under the proposed changes that same
Floor Broker firm would be charged a Trading Floor Participant Fee of
$5,000 per month with the opportunity to earn a $5,000 per month
Trading Floor Credit, as well $1,400 per month for the four desks the
Floor Broker occupies within its booth space. Therefore the firm's
monthly anticipated Trading Floor Participant Fee would rise from $1000
per month to $1400 per month (assuming they qualify for the Trading
Floor Credit).
    In comparison, the Floor Broker firm with the largest presence
would be charged $1000 per month for its six active trading permit
holders ($500 for the first three registered trading permits and an
additional $500 for the additional three registered trading permits).
Under the proposed changes that same Floor Broker firm would be charged
a Trading Floor Participant Fee of $5,000 per month with the
opportunity to earn a $5,000 per month Trading Floor Credit, as well
$2,100 per month for the six desks the Floor Broker occupies within its
booth space. This firm would see the largest increase in its Trading
Floor Participant Fees, which would rise from $1,000 per month to
$2,100 per month.
    Lastly, the Exchange proposes to delete Section IX.D, Trading Floor
Booth Space Fee. With the changes proposed above that will charge
Participants based on space utilization, the Exchange believes that a
separate Trading Floor Booth Space Fee is no longer appropriate.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act, in general, and Section
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ in particular, in that it provides
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among BOX Participants and other persons using its facilities
and does not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers
or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    First, the Exchange believes the proposal to remove or modify
certain terminology in the Section IX.C. of the BOX Fee Schedule
(Trading Floor Participant Fees) is reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory. The changes proposed are meant to clarify how
these fees are assessed and better reflect how space on the Trading
Floor is used by each Participant; which will alleviate potential
confusion and result in a Fee Schedule that is clearer and easier to
follow, thereby removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of
a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general,
protecting investors and the public interest. The Exchange also
believes the proposed changes are reasonable as they do not impact the
fees assessed on Trading Floor Participants.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the Floor Market
Maker Participant Fees are reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory. As stated above, the changes proposed will have no
impact to Floor Market Maker fees. Instead, the proposed change to
include one podium--instead of one booth space--in the Floor Market
Maker Trading Floor Participant Fee is reasonable and appropriate as it
better reflects the Floor Market Maker's use of space on the BOX
Trading Floor. Further, the change to remove references to three
registered permits is reasonable as the Floor Market Makers will
continue to be limited to one active registered trading permit on each
podium at any given time. Finally, the Exchange believes the proposed
additional podium fee of $1,500 per month is reasonable as the Exchange
previously assessed a $1,500 per month Trading Floor Booth Space
Fee.\12\ The proposed changes to the Floor Market Maker Participant
Fees are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as they apply
equally to all Floor Market Makers on the BOX Trading Floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Exchange notes that this is in line with a similar fee
charged at another exchange with a physical trading floor. See Cboe
Exchange Inc. (``Cboe'') Fee Schedule. Cboe charges a $1,250 per
month fee for a Non-Standard Booth Rental plus $1.70 per square
foot, determined based on the size of the booth. At Cboe, the term
``non-standard booth'' generally refers to space on the trading
floor on the Exchange that is set off from a trading crowd, which
may be rented for whatever support, office, back-office, or any
other business-related activities for which Cboe members may choose
to use. The Exchange notes that the ``non-standard booth'' at Cboe
is similar to the proposed Trading Floor Booth discussed herein, as
the additional podium is a general space on the trading floor. See
Securities Exchange Release No. 78741 (August 31, 2017), 81 FR 61727
(SR-CBOE-2016-063).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed changes to the Floor Broker
Participant Fees are reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory. The purpose of these changes is to structure Floor
Broker Participant fees so that these firms are charged for the space
they utilize and are incentivized to use their space efficiently. Floor
Brokers utilize their booth space, which could be comprised of one desk
or multiple desks, as private office space, out of which they
communicate with customers, take orders, and coordinate covering the
Trading Floor to announce such orders into the Crowd Area. Thus, the
Exchange believes the proposed changes to how it will charge Floor
Brokers for space utilized is reasonable and equitable because it is
designed to

reflect the differing business needs of each Floor Broker while
offering the firm some flexibility in setting up their booth space
consistent with their particular business models/commercial
preferences.
    Next, the Exchange believes the proposed change to increase the
Floor Broker Trading Floor Participant Fee from $500 to $5,000 is
reasonable and appropriate as the proposed fee is comparable to other
Floor Broker Participant Fees at another exchange with a trading
floor.\13\ Further, the Exchange notes that the purpose of this change,
coupled with the Floor Broker Trading Floor Credit discussed above, is
to incentivize Floor Participants to actively trade on the BOX Trading
Floor and ensure the efficient use of space on the BOX Trading Floor.
The Exchange believes that most, if not all, of the current Floor
Brokers will easily meet this threshold based on previous trading
activity and thus have a net Floor Broker Trading Floor Participant Fee
of $0.00 in addition to any applicable desk fee. BOX believes that
increasing the Floor Broker Trading Floor Participant Fee, coupled with
the Floor Broker Trading Floor Credit--which may offset the Floor
Broker Trading Floor Participant Fee entirely (notwithstanding any
applicable desk fees)--will incentivize Floor Participants to actively
trade on the BOX Trading Floor, and further, makes certain that BOX
resources are not spent supporting a firm who is not actively trading
on the BOX Trading Floor but is taking up valuable space. The Exchange
believes that the proposed increase is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because it applies to all Floor Brokers on the BOX
Trading Floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Nasdaq Phlx Fee Schedule. On Phlx, Floor Brokers are
assessed a $4,000 per month flat fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed Floor Broker Trading Floor
Credit is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory. Floor
Brokers play a critical role in bringing liquidity to the BOX Trading
Floor by acting as an agent on behalf of their retail and institutional
customers. As discussed above, the purpose of the credit is to
incentivize Floor Brokers to actively trade on the Exchange for a
certain number of days in a given month which in turn maximizes the
efficient use of space on the BOX Trading Floor. Orders brought to the
Trading Floor by Floor Brokers benefit all Floor Participants by
providing more trading opportunities, which attracts Market Makers,
Customers and other market participants. An increase in activity, in
turn, facilities tighter spreads, which may result in corresponding
increase in order flow from all market participants. The Exchange notes
that another exchange offers Floor Brokers a rebate on their Floor
Broker Permit Fee.\14\ The Exchange believes that the proposed change
is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as all Floor Brokers on
the BOX Trading Floor are eligible to receive the Floor Broker Trading
Floor Credit. Further, the Exchange believes it is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to offer a Trading Floor Credit to Floor
Brokers and not Floor Market Makers. As discussed above, Floor Brokers
act as the agent on behalf of their retail and institutional customers
to bring order flow to the BOX Trading Floor. Floor Market Makers then
benefit from the access they have to interact with orders which are
made available in open outcry on the Trading Floor. Further, in order
to obtain the Trading Floor Credit, Floor Brokers must actively trade
on 50% or more of the trading days in a given month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ On Cboe, Floor Broker Trading Permit Fees will be eligible
for rebates based on the average customer (``C'') open-outcry
contracts executed per day (``ADV'') over the course of a calendar
month in all underlying symbols. The tiered rebates on Cboe are as
follows: 0 to 99,999 ADV is 0% reduced from the Permit Fee; 100,000
to 174,999 is 15% reduced from the Permit Fee; and greater than
174,999 is 25% reduced from the Permit Fee. For example, on Cboe, a
Floor Broker with 1 permit pays a $7,500 monthly Permit Fee. If that
Floor Broker executes more than 174,999 ADV in a given month, the
Floor Broker Permit Fee will be discounted by 25%. In total, that
Floor Broker would be charged $5,625 ($7,500-($7,500 x 0.25)) for
the Floor Broker Trading Permit. BOX is not proposing a volume based
rebate. Under this proposal, BOX is simply seeking for a Floor
Broker to execute a trade on 50% of the calendar days in a given
month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange recognizes the value that Floor Brokers bring to the
Trading Floor elsewhere in its Fee Schedule. For example, the Exchange
has in place certain fee caps and rebates to the benefit of Floor
Brokers, in order to incentivize Floor Brokers to continue bringing
their customer order flow to the Floor.\15\ As such, the Exchange
believes that offering Floor Brokers the potential to earn a credit to
offset their Trading Floor Participant Fee is reasonable and
appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Specifically, the Exchange currently offers Floor Brokers
fee caps on manual transaction fees of $75,000 per month; QOO Order
Rebates of $0.075 and $0.05 exclusively for Floor Brokers depending
on the type of order executed on the Trading Floor; and finally the
Strategy QOO Order Fee Cap and Rebate which allows Floor Brokers the
opportunity to receive a $500 rebate for presenting certain Strategy
QOO Orders to the Trading Floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed Floor Broker Desk Fee is
reasonable and appropriate as similar fees are assessed at other
exchanges with physical trading floors.\16\ Further, the Exchange
believes that the proposed Floor Broker Desk Fee more equitably
allocates fees on the BOX Trading Floor. Prior to the COVID-19 social
distancing precautions and guidelines that impacted the space
availability on the Floor, Floor Brokers were assessed fees based on
the number of registered trading permits on the BOX Floor. With the
current space constraints the Exchange believes it is more equitable to
instead assess fees on the space utilized by each Floor Broker. Under
the proposed structure a Floor Broker firm utilizing only one desk
would be charged less than a Floor Broker firm utilizing three desks.
The Floor Broker Desk Fee is also intended to fairly allocate costs
related to providing Floor Brokers the space necessary to conduct
business on the BOX Trading Floor. Finally, the Exchange believes the
proposed Floor Broker Desk Fee is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory as such fee will be applied to all Floor Brokers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The Phlx assessed a similar fee to the one proposed. In
2011, Phlx charged a flat $300 per month fee for Trading/
Administrative Booth paid by floor brokers and clearing firms. See
SR-Phlx-2011-181 at http://nasdaqphlx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQPHLX/pdf/phlx-filings/2011/SR-Phlx-2011-181.pdf. In 2013, Phlx eliminated
the Trading/Administrative Booth Fees but increased the Floor
Facility Fee and assessed this fee to Clerks, Inactive Nominees and
Floor Brokers in addition to the previously charged ROTs and
individual Specialists. As such, the Exchange believes that the
proposed Floor Broker Desk Fee is reasonable and appropriate as a
similar fee (Floor Facility Fee) currently exists to cover similar
costs on Phlx. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69672 (May
30, 2013), 78 FR 33873 (June 5, 2013) (SR-Phlx-2013-58). See Phlx
Fee Schedule Options 7, Section 9A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, the Exchange believes the proposed change to delete
references to Trading Floor Booth Space Fee is reasonable and
appropriate. With the changes proposed above that will charge
Participants based on space utilization, this section is no longer
necessary.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe
that the proposed rule changes will impose any burden on intramarket
competition because the proposed changes adjust the Trading Floor
Permit Fees to instead assess fees based on the space utilized by both
Floor Market Makers and Floor Brokers. The Exchange believes that the
proposed fees will encourage fair and efficient use of the BOX Trading
Floor.

If this result is achieved, the proposed fees may increase both inter-
market and intra-market competition by incenting off-Floor participants
to direct their orders to the Exchange, which would enhance the quality
of quoting and may increase the volume of contracts traded on the
Exchange.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed change will impair
the ability of any market participants or competing order execution
venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.
Further, the proposed Floor Fees would be applied to all similarly
situated participants (i.e., Floor Brokers and Floor Market Makers),
and, as such, the proposed change would not impose a disparate burden
on competition either among or between classes of market participants.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Exchange Act \17\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\18\ because it establishes or changes a due, or fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BOX-2020-29 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-BOX-2020-29. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2020-29, and should be submitted on
or before August 25, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-16874 Filed 8-3-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 57 (Monday, March 27, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15135-15137]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05998]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0988]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Detroit River (Trenton Channel),
Grosse Ile, MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is modifying the operating schedule of the
Grosse Ile Toll Bridge (Bridge Road) at mile 8.8, over Trenton Channel
at Grosse Ile, MI by adding permanent winter hours to the current
regulation for the waterway. A review of the current regulation was
requested by the Grosse Ile Bridge Company, the owner of the Grosse Ile
Toll Bridge (Bridge Road).

DATES: This rule is effective April 26, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type [USCG-
2016-0988]. In the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Lee D. Soule, Bridge Management Specialist, Ninth
Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
E.O. Executive order
FR Federal Register
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking
Pub. L. Public Law
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On December 16, 2016, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled, Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Detroit River
(Trenton Channel), Grosse Ile, MI, in the Federal Register (81 FR
91086). We did not receive any comments on this proposed rule.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under the authority of 33
U.S.C. 499. The Grosse Ile Toll Bridge (Bridge Road) at mile 8.8, over
Trenton Channel at Grosse Ile, MI is a center swing highway bridge that
provides a vertical clearance of 10 feet and a horizontal clearance of
126 feet. The bridge provides a crossing between the mainland and
Grosse Ile, an island in the Detroit River. The current regulation for
Trenton Channel drawbridges (33 CFR 117.631) includes the operating
schedules for the Grosse Ile Toll Bridge (Bridge Road) at mile 8.8 and
the Wayne County Highway Bridge (Grosse Ile Parkway) Bridge at mile
5.6, both at Grosse Ile, MI. Only the Wayne County Highway Bridge
currently has a permanent winter operating schedule that requires 12-
hours advance notice from vessels to obtain a bridge opening from
December 15 through March 15 each year. A review of the current
operating schedule and regulation was requested by the Grosse Ile
Bridge Company, owner of the Grosse Ile Toll Bridge (Bridge Road), to
allow a permanent winter operating schedule that matches the Wayne
County Highway Bridge.
    Over the past two winter seasons, the commercial vessel traffic has
been reduced significantly and waterway use through Grosse Ile Toll
Bridge is equivalent to the volume and type of traffic that passes
through the Wayne County Highway Bridge that has had permanent winter
hours for approximately 10 years. Mariners will still be able to
request bridge openings with 12-hours advance notice during times of
light traffic volume on the river due to ice formation that typically
prevents most vessel navigation in the channel from December 15 through
March 15 each year. Additionally, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard
District, has granted annual authorization to the owner/operator of the
Grosse Ile Toll Bridge to assume the same schedule during the past 10
years under authority granted in 33 CFR 117.35.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    The Coast Guard provided a 30 day comment period in the Federal
Register and solicited comments through the Ninth Coast Guard Local
Notice to Mariners for the same 30 days and we did not receive any
comments.
    The Coast Guard is modifying the operating schedule of the Grosse
Ile Toll Bridge (Bridge Road) at mile 8.8, over Trenton Channel at
Grosse Ile, MI by adding permanent winter hours and 12-hours advance
notice requirement to the current regulation for the drawbridge. This
rule will make the current regulation easier to understand by aligning
the winter operating schedules and requirements for both drawbridges
over the waterway from December 15 through March 15 each year. At all
times both drawbridges over Trenton Channel will be required to open as
soon as possible for public vessels of the United States, State or
local government vessels used for public safety, and vessels in
distress.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that
vessels can still transit the bridge given advanced notice during the
winter when ice typically prevents vessels from transiting the waterway
and vessel traffic is at its lowest. Changing the current regulation
will align drawbridge operating schedules throughout the waterway
harmonizing the regulation and making it easier to understand for the
mariners.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard did not receive any comments from the Small
Business Administration on this rule. The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. While some owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit the bridge may be small
entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A above this final rule
would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or
operator because the bridge will open with advance notice.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the

Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a
determination that this action is one of a category of actions which do
not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule simply promulgates the operating regulations or
procedures for drawbridges. This action is categorically excluded from
further review, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the
Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. In Sec.  117.631, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  117.631   Detroit River (Trenton Channel).

    (a) The draw of the Grosse Ile Toll Bridge (Bridge Road), mile 8.8,
at Grosse Ile, shall operate as follows:
    (1) From March 16 through December 14--
    (i) Between the hours of 7 a.m. and 11 p.m., seven days a week and
holidays, the draw need open only from three minutes before to three
minutes after the hour and half-hour for pleasure craft; for commercial
vessels, during this period of time, the draw shall open on signal as
soon as possible.
    (ii) Between the hours of 11 p.m. and 7 a.m., the draw shall open
on signal for pleasure craft and commercial vessels.
    (2) From December 15 through March 15, no bridge tenders are
required to be on duty at the bridge and the bridge shall open on
signal if at least a twelve-hour advance notice is given.
* * * * *

    Dated: March 10, 2017.
J.E. Ryan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-05998 Filed 3-24-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 81 (Thursday, April 27, 2023)]
[Unknown Section]
[Pages 25498-25501]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08485]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2022-0295; FRL-10162-04-R5]

Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Revisions to Part 1 and 2 Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
revisions to Michigan Air Pollution Control Rules Part 1 Definitions,
and Part 2 Air Use Approval for inclusion in the Michigan State
Implementation Plan (SIP). Additionally, EPA is removing rules from the
SIP that are part of Michigan's title V Renewable Operating Permit
program, and rules that have been moved to other sections of the
Michigan Administrative Code and approved into the Michigan SIP.

DATES: This final rule is effective on May 30, 2023.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2022-0295. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
through www.regulations.gov or at the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays and facility
closures due to COVID-19. We recommend that you telephone Constantine
Blathras at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Constantine Blathras, Environmental
Engineer, Air Permits Section, Air Programs Branch (AR18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

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

I. Background

    On September 27, 2022, EPA proposed approval via a direct final
rulemaking (87 FR 58471) of the Michigan SIP revisions submitted on
March 8, 2022. During the public comment period, EPA received an
adverse comment on the Michigan rule revisions to R 336.1285 ``Permit
to install exemptions; miscellaneous'' and R 336.1291, ``Permit to
install exemptions; emission units with ``de minimis'' emissions'',
which included two new exemptions from the permitting for small
sources. On November 14, 2022 (87 FR 68634), EPA withdrew the direct
final rule. EPA is approving the following revisions to the Michigan
rule revision which did not

receive adverse comment. We do not consider the comments received to be
germane or relevant to EPA's proposal to approve Michigan's Part 1 and
Part 2 rules as described below, and therefore not adverse to this
action. EPA will respond to the comments received on R 336.1285 and R
336.1291 and take further action on that portion of the Michigan SIP
revision at a later date.
    EPA is approving revisions to Michigan's Part 1. Definitions, and
Part 2. Air Use Approval for inclusion in the Michigan SIP. The
following Michigan Air Pollution Control Rules are being added or
revised: R 336.1101(q), R 336.1103(aa), R 336.1201a, R 336.1202-1203, R
336.1206-1207, R 336.1209, R 336.1214a, R 336.1219(1), R 336.1240-1241,
R 336.1278.
    The Part 1 definition revisions include new or revised definitions
for the following, R 336.1101(q) ``Aqueous based parts washer'', and R
336.1103(aa) ``cold cleaner''.
    The Part 2 modifications consist of wording changes made to help
clarify the air use approval rules, and to update references and
terminology. EPA is not approving at this time the two new exemptions
from the permitting program for small sources found in R 336.1285 and R
336.1291. EPA will address the comments received on rules R 336.1285
and R 336.1291 at a later date.
    EPA is removing the Michigan Air Pollution Control Rules R 336.1212
``Administratively complete applications; insignificant activities;
streamlining applicable requirements; emissions reporting and fee
calculations'', R 336.1216 ``Modifications to renewable operating
permits'', R 336.1219(2) ``Amendments for change of ownership or
operational control'', R 336.1220 (rescinded), and R 336.1299
(rescinded) from the Michigan SIP.
    The rescinded rules have been moved to other sections in the
Michigan Administrative Code where they have already been approved into
the Michigan SIP and rescinded from the original Part 2 location. This
action completes the transition process for these rescinded rules.
    The other Part 2 rules removed from the Michigan SIP by this action
do not address the requirements related to attainment and maintenance
of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) under section 110
of the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA has determined that these rules were
erroneously incorporated into the SIP. These rules instead address the
requirements under title V of the CAA for operating permit programs.
EPA fully approved Michigan's title V Renewable Operating Permit
Program on November 10, 2003 (68 FR 63735), to implement its program.
Since these rules do not address the requirements related to attainment
and maintenance of the NAAQS under Section 110 of the CAA and have been
approved as part of the title V program approval, EPA will remove them
from this section of the Michigan SIP.
    EPA proposed to rescind rule R 336.1220 in a February 6, 2013 (78
FR 8485), action (in addition to approval of revisions to Michigan
rules in Parts 1 and 19). EPA did not receive any comments on that
proposal and published a final action on December 16, 2013 (78 FR
76064).
    As part of the SIP revision request, Michigan submitted a 110(l)
demonstration for each of the proposed revisions to the SIP. Section
110(l) of the CAA governs the submittal of SIP revisions as part of
Attachment E of its submittal. It states that each revision to an
implementation plan submitted by a State under this chapter shall be
adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public hearing. The
Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the revision
would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning the
attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined by 7501 of the
title), or any other applicable requirement of the chapter. The 110(l)
demonstration in the SIP revision request adequately addresses this
requirement for each rule revision being approved in this action, and
the revisions should cause minimal to no impact on the emissions of any
source, will have no effect on Michigan's NAAQS attainment status, or
any backsliding on achieved improvements. The revision for the removed
and rescinded rules pertain to the Michigan title V renewable operating
permit program which has already been approved.

II. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving revisions to Michigan's Part 1 and Part 2
regulations. Specifically, EPA is approving revisions to Michigan Air
Pollution Control Rules R 336.1101, R 336.1103, R 336.1201a, R
336.1202, R 336.1203, R 336.1206, R 336.1207, R 336.1209, R 336.1214a,
R 336.1219, R 336.1240, R 336.1241, R 336.1278, effective December 20,
2016. EPA is also removing Michigan Air Pollution Control Rules R
336.1212, R 336.1216, and R 336.1299 from the SIP.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Michigan
Regulations described in Section I of this preamble and set forth in
the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 below. EPA has made, and will continue
to make, these documents generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information). Therefore, these materials have
been approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated
by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable
under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the
final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by
reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also in this document, as described in Section I of this preamble
and the proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below, EPA is
proposing to remove provisions of the EPA-Approved Michigan Regulations
from the Michigan SIP, which is incorporated by reference in accordance
with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely

affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 26, 2023. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: April 17, 2023.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.

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

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  52.1170, the table in paragraph (c) is amended:
0
a. Under ``Part 1. General Provisions'' by revising the entries for R
336.1101 and R 336.1103; and
0
b. Under ``Part 2. Air Use Approval'' by:
0
i. Revising the entries for R 336.1201a, R 336.1202, R 336.1203, R
336.1206, R 336.1207, and R 336.1209;
0
ii. Removing the entry for R 336.1212;
0
iii. Adding the entry for R 336.1214a in numerical order;
0
iv. Removing the entry for R 336.1216;
0
v. Revising the entries for R 336.1219, R 336.1240, R 336.1241, and R
336.1278; and
0
vi. Removing the entry for R 336.1299.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  52.1170  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                        EPA-Approved Michigan Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        State
    Michigan citation               Title          effective date     EPA approval date           Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Part 1. General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R 336.1101...............  Definitions; A........      12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT      All except for (a)
                                                                    FEDERAL REGISTER        Act and (h) Air
                                                                    CITATION].              pollution.

                                                  * * * * * * *
R 336.1103...............  Definitions; C........      12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT
                                                                    FEDERAL REGISTER
                                                                    CITATION].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Part 2. Air Use Approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
R 336.1201a..............  General permits to          12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT
                            install.                                FEDERAL REGISTER
                                                                    CITATION].
R 336.1202...............  Waivers of approval...      12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT
                                                                    FEDERAL REGISTER
                                                                    CITATION].
R 336.1203...............  Information required..      12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT
                                                                    FEDERAL REGISTER
                                                                    CITATION].

                                                  * * * * * * *
R 336.1206...............  Processing of               12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT
                            applications for                        FEDERAL REGISTER
                            permits to install.                     CITATION].
R 336.1207...............  Denial of permits to        12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT
                            install.                                FEDERAL REGISTER
                                                                    CITATION].
R 336.1209...............  Use of old permits to       12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT
                            limit potential to                      FEDERAL REGISTER
                            emit.                                   CITATION].
R 336.1214a..............  Consolidation of            12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT
                            permits to install                      FEDERAL REGISTER
                            within renewable                        CITATION].
                            operating permit.
R 336.1219...............  Amendments for change       12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT
                            of ownership or                         FEDERAL REGISTER
                            operational control.                    CITATION].
R 336.1240...............  Required air quality        12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT
                            models.                                 FEDERAL REGISTER
                                                                    CITATION].
R 336.1241...............  Air quality modeling        12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT
                            demonstration                           FEDERAL REGISTER
                            requirements.                           CITATION].
R 336.1278...............  Exclusion from              12/20/2016  4/27/2023, [INSERT
                            exemption.                              FEDERAL REGISTER
                                                                    CITATION].

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-08485 Filed 4-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P