[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 232 (Monday, December 5, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 74316-74319]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26361]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0651; FRL-10268-02-R9]

Air Plan Approval; California; Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control
District; Stationary Source Permits

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve a revision to the Eastern Kern Air Pollution
Control District (EKAPCD or ``the District'') portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). In this action, we are approving one
rule submitted by the EKAPCD, governing the issuance of permits for
stationary sources, focusing on the preconstruction review and
permitting of major sources and major modifications under part D of
title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``the Act'').

DATES: This rule is effective on February 3, 2023 without further
notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by January 4, 2023. If
the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2022-0651 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be removed or edited from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI and
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a language other than English or if
you are a person with disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation
at no cost to you, please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Po-Chieh Ting, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
II. The EPA's Evaluation
    A. What is the background for this action?
    B. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
    C. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    D. What action is the EPA finalizing?
III. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this action including the dates
on which it was adopted by the District and submitted to the EPA by the
California

Air Resources Board (CARB or ``the State'').

                         Table 1--Submitted Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Rule No.            Rule title         Adopted      Submitted \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 210.1A...........  Major New and             8/4/22         10/5/22
                         Modified
                         Stationary
                         Source Review
                         (MNSR).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The submittal was transmitted to the EPA via a letter from CARB
  dated October 5, 2022.

    CARB's October 5, 2022 SIP submittal package meets the completeness
criteria in 40 CFR part 51, which must be met before formal EPA review.
The EPA's signed notice of proposed rulemaking for our action on this
submittal serves as the EPA's formal completeness determination for
this submittal.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ CARB's May 23, 2018 submittal of a previous version of
EKAPCD Rule 210.1A, which was determined to be complete on August
28, 2018, addressed the findings of failure to submit issued by the
EPA on February 3, 2017 and December 11, 2017 for the 2008 ozone
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) regarding
nonattainment new source review (NNSR) program requirements for the
District (82 FR 9158, 82 FR 58118). That finding of completeness
represented the EPA's determination that the deficiencies that
formed the basis for the findings of failure to submit for the 2008
ozone NAAQS had been corrected, and as a result, the related
application of the offset sanction and the running of the highway
sanction clock were permanently stopped. See 40 CFR 52.31(d)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    There is no previous version of EKAPCD Rule 210.1A in the
California SIP. There are other new source review (NSR) rules in the
California SIP that apply to the sources to which EKAPCD Rule 210.1A
applies, including Rule 210.1, ``Standard for Authority to Construct''.
Rule 210.1A is intended to satisfy current Federal nonattainment NSR
requirements applicable to ozone and PM10 and related
visibility program requirements. Other existing SIP-approved NSR rules
such as the SIP-approved version of Rule 210.1 will remain in the SIP
for the EKAPCD. Rule 210.1A provides that for purposes of its
implementation and enforcement, its provisions take precedence over the
provisions and requirements in other District rules and regulations
(see Subsection I.B, paragraph 2 of Rule 210.1A).

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    Rule 210.1A is intended to address the CAA's statutory and
regulatory requirements for nonattainment new source review (NNSR)
permit programs for major sources emitting nonattainment air pollutants
and their precursors located in the areas within the EKAPCD that are
designated nonattainment for one or more National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS).

II. The EPA's Evaluation

A. What is the background for this action?

    Because parts of the eastern portion of Kern County (Eastern Kern)
are Federal ozone and PM10 nonattainment areas, the CAA
requires the District to have a SIP-approved NNSR program for new and
modified major sources located in the ozone and PM10
nonattainment areas that are under its jurisdiction. Most recently, the
designation of the Eastern Kern area as a Federal ozone nonattainment
area for the 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS triggered the requirement for
the District to develop and submit an updated NNSR program to the EPA
for SIP approval. The District's NNSR program must address NNSR
requirements for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2015
ozone NAAQS, and the 1987 p.m.10 NAAQS.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The relevant nonattainment designation and classification
history for the area is provided in our Technical Support Document,
which can be found in the docket for this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the District is designated and classified as Severe
nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the District's NNSR
program must satisfy the NNSR requirements applicable to Severe ozone
nonattainment areas. Submission of an NNSR program that satisfies the
requirements of the Act and the EPA's regulations for Severe ozone
nonattainment areas would also satisfy the NNSR program requirements
for lower classifications including the Serious and Moderate NNSR
program requirements applicable to the District based on its
designation and classification for the 2015 and 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, respectively. The District's NNSR program must also satisfy the
NNSR requirements applicable to Serious PM10 nonattainment
areas.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ We are not currently evaluating whether Rule 210.1A would
satisfy the Federal requirements for NNSR programs for areas with a
higher ozone nonattainment classification, nor are we evaluating
whether this rule would satisfy the Federal requirements for NNSR
programs applicable to areas designated nonattainment for other
NAAQS pollutants. If, in the future, the District were to be
designated nonattainment for a NAAQS pollutant other than ozone and
PM10, the requirements of 40 CFR part 51, Appendix S
would govern NNSR permitting for that pollutant upon the effective
date of such designation for purposes of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, to implement CAA section 169A, 40 CFR 51.307(b)
requires that NNSR programs provide for review of any major stationary
source or major modification that may have an impact on visibility in
any mandatory Class I Federal area.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Such sources are required to perform a visibility impact
analysis consistent with the provisions of 40 CFR 51.307(a) and 40
CFR 51.166 (o), (p)(1) through (2) and (q). See 40 CFR 51.307(c). 40
CFR 51.307(d) also provides for states to require monitoring of
visibility in any Federal Class I area near the proposed new major
stationary source or major modification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?

    The EPA reviewed Rule 210.1A for compliance with CAA requirements
for: (1) stationary source preconstruction permitting programs as set
forth in CAA part D, including CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), 172(c)(5),
173, 182, and 189; (2) the review and modification of major sources in
accordance with 40 CFR 51.160-51.165 as applicable in Severe ozone and
Serious PM10 nonattainment areas; (3) the review of new
major stationary sources or major modifications in a designated
nonattainment area that may have an impact on visibility in any
mandatory Class I Federal area in accordance with 40 CFR 51.307; (4)
SIPs in general as set forth in CAA sections 110(a)(2), including
110(a)(2)(A) and 110(a)(2)(E)(i); \6\ and (5) SIP revisions as set
forth in CAA section 110(l) \7\ and 193.\8\ Our review evaluated the

submittal for compliance with the NNSR requirements applicable to
nonattainment areas designated Severe for ozone and Serious for
PM10, and ensured that the submittal addressed the NNSR
requirements for the 1997, 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS as well as the
1987 PM10 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that regulations submitted
to the EPA for SIP approval be clear and legally enforceable, and
CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) requires that states have adequate
personnel, funding, and authority under State law to carry out their
proposed SIP revisions.
    \7\ CAA section 110(l) requires SIP revisions to be subject to
reasonable notice and public hearing prior to adoption and submittal
by states to the EPA and prohibits the EPA from approving any SIP
revision that would interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other
applicable requirement of the CAA.
    \8\ CAA section 193 prohibits the modification of any SIP-
approved control requirement in effect before November 15, 1990 in a
nonattainment area, unless the modification ensures equivalent or
greater emission reductions of the relevant pollutants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    With respect to procedural requirements, CAA sections 110(a)(2) and
110(l) require that revisions to a SIP be adopted by the State after
reasonable notice and public hearing. Based on our review of the public
process documentation included in the October 5, 2022 submittal of Rule
210.1A, we find that the District has provided sufficient evidence of
public notice, opportunity for comment and a public hearing prior to
adoption and submittal of the rule to the EPA.
    With respect to the substantive requirements found in CAA sections
110(a)(2)(C), 172(c)(5), 173, 182, 189 and 40 CFR 51.160-51.165, we
have evaluated Rule 210.1A in accordance with the applicable CAA and
regulatory requirements that apply to NNSR permit programs under part D
of title I of the Act for all relevant NAAQS, including the 1997, 2008
and 2015 ozone NAAQS as well as the 1987 p.m.10 NAAQS. We
find that Rule 210.1A satisfies these requirements as it applies to
sources subject to NNSR permit program requirements for ozone
nonattainment areas classified as Severe \9\ and for PM10
nonattainment areas classified as Serious. We have also determined that
this rule satisfies the related visibility requirements in 40 CFR
51.307. In addition, we have determined that Rule 210.1A satisfies the
requirement in CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) that regulations submitted to
the EPA for SIP approval be clear and legally enforceable and have
determined in accordance with CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) that the
District has adequate personnel, funding, and authority under State law
to carry out these SIP revisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ As discussed above, an NNSR program that satisfies the
requirements of the Act and the EPA's regulations for Severe ozone
nonattainment areas also satisfies the NNSR program requirements for
lower classifications, including the Serious and Moderate NNSR
program requirements applicable to the District based on its
designation and classification for the 2015 and 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the additional substantive requirements of CAA sections
110(l) and 193, our action will result in a more stringent SIP, while
not relaxing any existing provision contained in the SIP. We have
concluded that our action would comply with section 110(l) because our
approval of Rule 210.1A will not interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or
any other CAA applicable requirement. In addition, our approval of Rule
210.1A will not relax any pre-November 15, 1990 requirement in the SIP,
and therefore changes to the SIP resulting from this action ensure
greater or equivalent emission reductions of the nonattainment
pollutants and their precursors in the District; accordingly, we have
concluded that our action is consistent with the requirements of CAA
section 193.
    Our Technical Support Document, which can be found in the docket
for this rule, contains a more detailed discussion of our analysis of
Rule 210.1A.

D. What action is the EPA finalizing?

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is approving
the submitted rule because we believe it fulfills all relevant
requirements. We have concluded that our approval of the submitted rule
would comply with the relevant provisions of CAA sections 110(a)(2),
110(l), 172(c)(5), 173, 182, 189 and 193, 40 CFR 51.160-51.165, and 40
CFR 51.307. Our action will be codified through revisions to 40 CFR
52.220a (Identification of plan--in part). In conjunction with the
EPA's SIP approval of the District's visibility provisions for sources
subject to the NNSR program as meeting the relevant requirements of 40
CFR 51.307, this action also revises the regulatory provision at 40 CFR
52.281(d) concerning the applicability of the visibility Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP) at 40 CFR 52.28 as it pertains to California,
to provide that this FIP does not apply to sources subject to review
under the District's SIP-approved NNSR program.

III. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?

    The EPA is publishing this rule without a prior proposed rule
because we view this as a noncontroversial action and we anticipate no
adverse comment as the submitted rule fulfills all applicable
regulatory requirements and is generally consistent with very similar
NNSR rules that the EPA has approved into the California SIP recently
for other California air districts, for which the EPA received no
public comments. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of this
issue of the Federal Register, we are publishing a separate document
that will serve as the EPA's proposed rule to approve the rule
submitted by the EKAPCD if adverse comment is received on this direct
final rule. We will not institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
For further information about commenting on this rule, see the
ADDRESSES section of this document.
    If the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this
direct final rule will not take effect. We would address all public
comments in any subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule.
    If we do not receive timely adverse comment, the direct final
approval will be effective without further notice on February 3, 2023,
as discussed above. This will incorporate the rule into the federally
enforceable SIP.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of EKAPCD
Rule 210.1A, Major New and Modified Stationary Source Review (MNSR),
adopted on August 4, 2022, which regulates the issuance of permits for
stationary sources. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, this
document available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov
and in hard copy at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Act. Accordingly, this
action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3,
2017) regulatory

action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
     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.
    The State did not evaluate environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal. There is no information in the record
inconsistent with the stated goals of Executive Order 12898 (59 FR
7629, February 16, 1994) of achieving environmental justice for people
of color, low-income populations, and indigenous peoples.
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 3, 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, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: November 28, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(590) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan-in part.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (590) The following new regulation was submitted on October 5, 2022
by the Governor's designee as an attachment to a letter dated October
5, 2022.
    (i) Incorporation by reference. (A) Eastern Kern Air Pollution
Control District.
    (1) Rule 210.1A, Major New and Modified Stationary Source Review
(MNSR), adopted on August 4, 2022.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (B) [Reserved]
    (ii) [Reserved]
* * * * *

0
3. Section 52.281 is amended by revising paragraphs (d)(1) through (6)
and adding paragraph (d)(7) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.281  Visibility protection.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) Monterey County Air Pollution Control District.
    (2) Sacramento County Air Pollution Control District.
    (3) Calaveras County Air Pollution Control District.
    (4) Mariposa County Air Pollution Control District.
    (5) Northern Sierra Air Pollution Control District.
    (6) San Diego County Air Pollution Control District.
    (7) Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-26361 Filed 12-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 66437]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21094]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER23-2895-000]

Hardin Solar Energy II LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Hardin Solar Energy II LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene, or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is October 11, 2023.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: September 21, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-21094 Filed 9-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 95 (Friday, May 16, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 28433]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11415]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0345]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Harlem River, New York, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Amtrak Spuyten Duyvil Bridge across
the Harlem River at mile 7.9, at New York City, New York. The deviation
is necessary to facilitate repairs to the miter rails at the bridge.
This temporary deviation authorizes the bridge to remain in the closed
position for seven hours.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 11 p.m. on June 6, 2014 through
6 a.m. on June 7, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, USCG-2014-0345 is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH''. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Joe Arca, Project Officer, First
Coast Guard District, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket, call
Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-
9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Amtrak Spuyten Duyvil Bridge across the
Harlem River at mile 7.9, at New York City, New York, has a vertical
clearance in the closed position of 5 feet at mean high water and 9
feet at mean low water. The existing drawbridge operation regulations
are listed at 33 CFR 117.789(d). The waterway users are seasonal
recreational vessels and commercial vessels of various sizes.
    The owner of the bridge, Amtrak, requested a temporary deviation
from the operating schedule to facilitate replacement of the miter
rails at the bridge.
    Under this temporary deviation the Amtrak Spuyten Duyvil Bridge may
remain in the closed position from 11 p.m. on June 6, 2014 through 6
a.m. on June 7, 2014. Vessels that can pass under the bridge in the
closed position may do so at any time. There are no alternate routes
for vessel traffic. The bridge could be opened in an emergency
situation.
    The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through
our Local and Broadcast Notice to Mariners of the change in operating
schedule for the bridge so that vessels can arrange their transits to
minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: May 6, 2014.
C.J. Bisignano,
Supervisory Bridge Management Specialist, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2014-11415 Filed 5-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76684-76685]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30047]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71063; File No. SR-CBOE-2013-116]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fees Schedule

December 12, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on December 9, 2013, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') 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
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's
Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule with regard to the
quoting bandwidth allowance for Market-Makers. The Fees Schedule states
that the bandwidth allowance for a Market-Maker Trading Permit is
equivalent to a maximum of 31,200,000 quotes over the course of a
trading day. However, in reaching the 31,200,000 quotes number, CBOE
only took into account the normal trading hours for equity options
(8:30 a.m.-3:00 p.m. (all times herein are Central)) and erroneously
failed to account for the fact that index and ETP options trading is
open until 3:15 p.m. (an extra 15 minutes). Therefore, the Exchange's
quoting bandwidth allowance for index and ETP options is actually
greater than the 31,200,000 quotes listed in the Fees Schedule. In
order to account for this error, the Exchange proposes to amend the
Fees Schedule to delete the 31,200,000 number and replace it with
32,400,000 (which accounts for the extra 15 minutes).
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\3\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \4\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, 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. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \5\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that amending the Fees Schedule to more
accurately reflect the Market-Maker Trading Permit quoting bandwidth
allowance (taking into account the extra fifteen minutes that index and
ETP options are traded) shall alleviate confusion, thereby removing
impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open market
and a national market system. The proposed change applies equally to
all Market-Maker Trading Permits.

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

    CBOE 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 Act. The Exchange does not believe
that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intramarket
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because the proposed change is merely making a
correction. Further, the new 32,400,000 quotes amount applies to all
Market-Maker Trading Permits. The Exchange does not believe that the
proposed rule change will impose any burden on intermarket competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act because the proposed change is merely a correction, not a
competitive change, and only applies to trading on CBOE.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:

    A. Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest;
    B. impose any significant burden on competition; and
    C. become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was
filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \6\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \7\ thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is 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 will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-CBOE-2013-116 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2013-116. 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-CBOE-2013-116,
and should be submitted on or before January 8, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-30047 Filed 12-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 221 (Friday, November 17, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80348-80349]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25378]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98905; File No. SR-ISE-2023-11]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Order Approving a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Short Term Option Series Program To
Permit the Listing of Two Wednesday Expirations for Options on Certain
Exchange Traded Products

November 13, 2023.

I. Introduction

    On May 31, 2023, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend the
Exchange's short term option series program (``Short Term Option Series
Program'') in Supplementary Material .03 of Options 4, Section 5
(Series of Options Contracts Open for Trading). The proposed rule
change was published for comment in the Federal Register on June 20,
2023.\3\ On August 2, 2023, the Commission designated a longer period
within which to act on the proposed rule change.\4\ On September 15,
2023, the Commission instituted proceedings to determine whether to
approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97719 (June 13,
2023), 88 FR 39876 (``Notice'').
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 98040, 88 FR 53569
(August 8, 2023) (designating September 18, 2023, as the date by
which the Commission shall either approve, disapprove, or institute
proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be
disapproved).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 98409, 88 FR 65208
(September 21, 2023). Comments on the proposed rule change are
available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-ise-2023-11/srise202311.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This order approves the proposed rule change.

II. Description of the Proposal 6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For a full description of the proposal, refer to the Notice,
supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the Exchange may open for trading series of options on
certain symbols that expire at the close of business on each of the
next two Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, respectively,
that are business days and are not business days in which monthly
options series or Quarterly Options Series expire (``Short Term Option
Daily Expirations'').\7\ The Exchange proposes to expand the Short Term
Option Series Program \8\ to permit the listing of two Wednesday
expirations for options on the United States Oil Fund, LP, United
States Natural Gas Fund, LP, SPDR Gold Shares, iShares Silver Trust,
and iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (collectively, ``Wednesday ETP
Expirations'').\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Supplementary Material .03 to Options 4, Section 5.
Currently, the Exchange may list no more than a total of two Monday
and Wednesday expirations on the iShares Russell 2000 ETF (``IWM'')
and no more than a total of two Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and
Thursday expirations on the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (``SPY'') and the
Invesco QQQ Trust (``QQQ''). See Table 1, Supplementary Material .03
to Options 4, Section 5.
    \8\ Options 1, Section 1(a)(49) provides that a Short Term
Option Series means a series in an option class that is approved for
listing and trading on the Exchange in which the series is opened
for trading on any Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday or Friday
that is a business day and that expires on the Monday, Tuesday,
Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday of the following business week that
is a business day, or, in the case of a series that is listed on a
Friday and expires on a Monday, is listed one business week and one
business day prior to that expiration. If a Tuesday, Wednesday,
Thursday or Friday is not a business day, the series may be opened
(or shall expire) on the first business day immediately prior to
that Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday or Friday. For a series listed
pursuant to this section for Monday expiration, if a Monday is not a
business day, the series shall expire on the first business day
immediately following that Monday.
    \9\ The United States Oil Fund, LP, United States Natural Gas
Fund, LP, SPDR Gold Shares, iShares Silver Trust, and iShares 20+
Year Treasury Bond ETF are referred to collectively as the ``ETPs.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the Exchange, the Wednesday ETP Expirations would be
similar to the existing Short Term Option Daily Expirations in that the
Exchange may open for trading on any Tuesday or Wednesday that is a
business day (beyond the current week) \10\ series of options on the
ETPs that expire on any Wednesday of the month that is a business day
and is not a Wednesday in which Quarterly Options Series expire.\11\
And like Short Term Option Daily Expirations, in the event that
Wednesday ETP Expirations would expire on a Wednesday, and that
Wednesday is the same day that a Quarterly Options Series expires, the
Exchange would skip that week's listing and instead list the following
week; the two weeks would therefore not be consecutive. Options on each
of the ETPs with Friday expirations would continue to have a total of
five Short Term Option Expiration Dates, provided those Friday
expirations are not Fridays in which monthly options series or
Quarterly Options Series expire. The interval between strike prices for
the proposed Wednesday ETP Expirations would be the same as those for
the current Short Term Option Series for Friday expirations applicable
to the Short Term Option Series Program.\12\ As is the case with other
equity options series listed pursuant to the Short Term Option Series
Program, the Wednesday ETP Expirations series would be P.M.-settled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange proposes to clarify the rule text in
Supplementary Material .03 to Options 4, Section 5 to specify that
it can list two Short Term Option Expiration Dates beyond the
current week for each Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday
expiration. Consistent with the current operation of the rule, the
Exchange states that if it adds a Wednesday expiration (``Wednesday
Expiration'') on a Tuesday, there would be three outstanding
Wednesday Expirations at one time. See Notice, supra note 3, 88 FR
at 39877, n.4.
    \11\ See id. at 39877.
    \12\ The Wednesday ETP Expirations would have a strike interval
of $0.50 or greater for strike prices below $100, $1 or greater for
strike prices between $100 and $150, and $2.50 or greater for strike
prices above $150.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In support of its proposal, the Exchange represents that it has an
adequate surveillance program in place to detect manipulative trading
in the proposed option expirations, in the same way that it monitors
trading in the current Short Term Option Daily Expirations.\13\ The
Exchange also represents that it has the necessary system capacity to
support and properly monitor trading in the proposed new
expirations.\14\ Additionally, the Exchange states that it does not
believe that any market disruptions will be encountered with the
introduction of these proposed option expirations.\15\ The Exchange
currently trades Short Term Option Daily Expirations on SPY, QQQ, and
IWM, including Wednesday Expirations, and states that it has not
experienced any market disruptions nor issues with capacity.\16\
Further, the Exchange provides data comparing the ETPs to SPY, QQQ, and
IWM, which have Wednesday Expirations today.\17\ According to the
Exchange, the occurrence of the ETPs moving through at least one strike
price after the close of trading has been less frequent than for SPY,
QQQ, and IWM. In addition, the average annualized closing volatility in
the last thirty minutes of trading for the ETPs has historically been
lower than that of SPY, QQQ, and IWM.\18\ Finally, the Exchange states
that the ETPs trade within ``complexes'' where, in addition to the
underlying security, there are multiple highly-correlated instruments
available for hedging.\19\ Therefore, the Exchange believes the

proposal would not be a strain on liquidity providers.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See id. at 39884.
    \14\ See id.
    \15\ See id.
    \16\ See id. at 39878.
    \17\ See id. at 39882-83.
    \18\ See id. at 39883.
    \19\ See id. at 39884.
    \20\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    The Commission received one supportive comment on the proposed rule
change from a market maker. The commenter states that there is a great
amount of liquidity in the Short Term Option Daily Expirations, and
they do not cause market disruption and may be used to hedge more
narrowly defined risks.\21\ The commenter expects that the proposed
Wednesday ETP Expirations to exhibit the same characteristics and
provide the same benefits.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See letter from Richard J. McDonald, Susquehanna
International Group, LLP (October 20, 2023).
    \22\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange
and, in particular, with Section 6(b) of the Act.\23\ The Commission
finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act,\24\ which requires, among other things, that a national
securities exchange have rules designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). In approving this proposed rule change,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the Exchange currently has Wednesday Expirations
for SPY, QQQ, and IWM. The Exchange proposes to limit the listing of
additional Wednesday Expirations to the five ETPs, which generally have
similar or lower volatility in terms of post-closing and end of day
volatility as SPY, QQQ, and IWM. And, like SPY, QQQ, and IWM, the ETPs
have multiple highly-correlated instruments available for hedging. In
addition, the Wednesday ETP Expirations will be subject to the same
rules for Wednesday Expirations in SPY, QQQ, and IWM. Further, as noted
above, the commenter expects that the proposed Wednesday ETP
Expirations to exhibit the same characteristics and provide the same
benefits as existing Short Term Option Daily Expirations in SPY, QQQ,
and IWM.\25\ The Exchange's proposal is reasonably designed as a
limited expansion of Wednesday Expirations and may provide the
investing public and other market participants more flexibility to
closely tailor their investment and hedging decisions using options on
these ETPs, thus allowing them to better manage their risk exposure.
Further, the Exchange has represented that it has an adequate
surveillance program in place to detect manipulative trading in the
Wednesday ETP Expirations and has the necessary systems capacity to
support the new options series.\26\ The proposal, which would overall
add a small number of Wednesday ETP Expirations by limiting the
additional Wednesday Expirations to five ETPs and to two weeks beyond
the current week, reasonably balances the Exchange's desire to offer a
wider array of investment opportunitieswith the need to avoid
unnecessary proliferation of options series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See supra note 22 and accompanying text.
    \26\ See supra notes 13 and 14, and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \27\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\28\ that the proposed rule change (SR-ISE-2023-11), be, and hereby
is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-25378 Filed 11-16-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 171 (Tuesday, September 4, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44815-44816]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18990]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 4, 2018 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0754; Product Identifier 2018-CE-028-AD; Amendment
39-19365; AD 2018-17-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Linstrandt Propane Cylinders

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Linstrandt T30 propane cylinders installed on hot air balloons. This AD
results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
issued by the aviation authority of another country to identify and
correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes
the unsafe condition as welding defects on the propane cylinder that
could result in leaking of liquid propane. We are issuing this AD to
require actions to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective September 24, 2018.
    We must receive comments on this AD by October 19, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0754; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations (telephone (800)
647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in
the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Standards Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
AD No. 2018-0107, dated May 15, 2018, corrected on May 22, 2018
(referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    A review of cylinder production records has shown that the
affected cylinders have unacceptable welding defects.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could result in
an uncontrolled release of liquid propane and consequent fire or
explosion, with consequent injury to balloon occupants and persons
on the ground.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Cameron Balloons
Limited issued the SB, providing instructions to remove the affected
cylinders from service.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
replacement of the affected cylinders with serviceable parts.
    This [EASA] AD is re-published to correct the list of TCDS
numbers. The TCDS EASA.SAS.BA.001 was erroneously introduced, and
has been removed, as it is not for a hot air balloon.

You may examine the MCAI on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0754.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. We are
issuing this AD because we evaluated all information provided by the
State of Design Authority and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because
replacement of the propane cylinders is required within 30 days.
Therefore, we find good cause that notice and opportunity for prior
public comment are impracticable. In addition, for the reason stated
above, we find that good cause exists for making this amendment
effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2018-0754; Product
Identifier 2018-CE-028-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 10 propane cylinders. We also
estimate that it would take about 2 work-hours to replace a cylinder,
at an average labor rate of $85 per work-hour, and required parts would
cost about $3,000 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate a
total cost of $3,170 per balloon.
    We know the unsafe condition affects 10 propane cylinders
worldwide; however, we have no way of knowing the number of hot air
balloons on the U.S. Registry that may have an affected propane
cylinder installed. As such, we have no way of estimating the potential
costs of compliance on U.S. operators.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to small airplanes, gliders,
balloons, airships, domestic business jet transport airplanes, and
associated appliances to the Director of the Policy and Innovation
Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2018-17-11 Linstrandt Propane Cylinders: Amendment 39-19365; Docket
No. FAA-2018-0754; Product Identifier 2018-CE-028-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective September 24, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Linstrandt T30 part number (P/N) CY050001
propane cylinders, serial numbers (S/N) 0227/0158, 0316/-, 0321/-,
0322/0150, 0446/0152, 0534/0145, 0539/-, 0543/0154, 0626/0153, and
0638/0151; installed on hot air balloons.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 28: Fuel.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) issued by the aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as welding defects
on the propane cylinders that could result in leaking of liquid
propane. We are issuing this AD to prevent leaking of liquid propane
that could lead to fire or explosion.

 (f) Actions and Compliance

    (1) If any hot air balloon has an affected P/N and serial number
propane cylinder, as listed in paragraph (c) of this AD, within 30
days after September 24, 2018 (the effective date of this AD),
remove from service Linstrandt T30 propane cylinder P/N CY050001 and
replace with a propane cylinder that is not listed in paragraph (c)
of this AD.
    (2) After September 24, 2018 (the effective date of this AD), do
not install on any hot air balloon a propane cylinder listed in
paragraph (c) of this AD.

(g) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provision also applies to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Small Airplane Standards Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. Send information to ATTN: Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Standards Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas
City, Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (816) 329-
4090; email: [email protected]. Before using any approved AMOC on
any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate
principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Reserved.

(h) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI EASA AD No. 2018-0107, dated May 15, 2018,
corrected on May 22, 2018, for related information. You may examine
the MCAI on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0754.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on August 10, 2018.
Melvin J. Johnson,
Deputy Director, Policy & Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-18990 Filed 8-31-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 130 (Monday, July 8, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32365-32366]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14250]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0345; FRL-9995-96-Region 9]

Approval and Promulgation of State Plans for Designated
Facilities and Pollutants; Pinal County Air Quality Control District;
Control of Emissions From Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a state plan submitted by the Pinal County Air Quality Control
District (PCAQCD). For the purposes of this plan, the PCAQCD is
considered a ``State'' as defined in the ``Standards of Performance for
New Stationary Sources''. This state plan submittal pertains to the
regulation of landfill gas and its components, including methane, from
existing municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills. This state plan was
submitted in response to the EPA's promulgation of Emissions Guidelines
and Compliance Times for MSW landfills. This action is being taken
under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 7, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2019-0345 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the ``For Further Information Contact'' section. For the
full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Buss, U.S. EPA Region IX,
(415) 947-4152<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On August 29, 2016, the EPA finalized Standards of Performance for
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills and Emission Guidelines and Compliance
Times for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills in 40 CFR part 60 subpart XXX
and Cf,. 81 FR 59332 and 81 FR 59276 respectively. These actions were
taken under section 111 of the CAA.
    Section 111(d) of the CAA requires the EPA to establish a procedure
for a state to submit a plan to the EPA which establishes standards of
performance for any air pollutant: (1) For which air quality criteria
have not been issued or which is not included on a list published under
CAA section 108 or emitted from a source category which is regulated
under CAA section 112 but (2) to which a standard of performance under
CAA section 111 would apply if such existing source were a new source.
The EPA established these requirements for state plan submittal in 40
CFR part 60, subpart B. State submittals under CAA sections 111(d) must
be consistent with the relevant emission guidelines, in this instance
40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf, and the requirements of 40 CFR part 60,
subpart B.
    On March 4, 2019, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ), on behalf of the PCAQCD, submitted to the EPA a formal section
111(d) plan for existing municipal solid waste landfills. The submitted
section 111(d) plan was in response to the August 29, 2016 promulgation
of federal NSPS and emission guidelines requirements for MSW landfills,
40 CFR part 60, subparts XXX and Cf, respectively (81 FR 59332 and 81
FR 59276).

II. Summary of the Plan and EPA Analysis

    The EPA has reviewed the PCAQCD section 111(d) plan submittal in
the context of the requirements of 40 CFR part 60, subparts B and Cf,
and part 62, subpart A. In this action, the EPA is proposing to
determine that the submitted section 111(d) plan meets the above-cited
requirements. The primary mechanism selected by PCAQCD to implement the
emission guidelines for MSW landfills under state jurisdiction is
through incorporation by reference of 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf and 40
CFR part 60, subpart XXX into the PCAQCD Code at Chapter 5, Article 34
(5-34-2050), entitled ``Standards of Performance for Existing Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills'', and Chapter 6, Article 1 (6-1-030), entitled
``New Source Performance Standards,'', on December 19, 2018. These
subparts will be applicable to MSW landfills under the plan upon the
EPA's approval of the plan by final rulemaking. A detailed explanation
of the rationale behind this proposed approval is available in the
Technical Support Document (TSD).

III. Proposed Action

    The EPA is proposing to approve the PCAQCD section 111(d) plan for
MSW landfills submitted pursuant to 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to amend 40 CFR part 62, subpart D, to
reflect this action. This approval is based on the rationale previously
discussed and in further detail in the TSD associated with this action.
The scope of the proposed approval of the section 111(d) plan is
limited to the provisions of 40 CFR parts 60 and 62 for existing MSW
landfills, as referenced in the emission guidelines, subpart Cf.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA
rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference of the
state plan. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference PCAQCD rules regarding MSW
landfills discussed in section II of this preamble. The EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these materials generally available through
http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0345, and at

the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the person identified in the
For Further Information Contact section of this preamble for more
information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    In reviewing state plan submissions, the 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 proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because this action is not significant under
Executive Order 12866.
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 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 the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed approval of the PCAQCD plan submittal
for existing MSW landfills does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the state plan is not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and the EPA notes that it will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Landfills,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Methane,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: June 20, 2019.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2019-14250 Filed 7-5-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P