[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 73 (Tuesday, April 18, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18268-18272]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07826]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0638; FRL-9960-02-Region 3]

Determination of Attainment by the Attainment Date for the 2008
Ozone Standard; Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE
Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
determine that the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE
marginal ozone nonattainment area (the Philadelphia Area) has attained
the 2008 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by the
July 20, 2016 attainment date. This proposed determination is based on
complete, certified, and quality assured ambient air quality monitoring
data for the Philadelphia Area for the 2013-2015 monitoring period.
This proposed determination does not constitute a redesignation to
attainment. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 18, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2016-0638 at https://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, 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. 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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Becoat,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Statutory Requirement--Determination of Attainment by the Attainment
Date

    Section 181(b)(2) of the CAA requires EPA to determine, within 6
months of an ozone nonattainment area's attainment date, whether that
area attained the ozone standard by that date. Section 181(b)(2) of the
CAA also requires that areas that have not attained the standard by
their attainment deadlines be reclassified to either the next higher
classification (e.g., marginal to moderate, moderate to serious, etc.)
or to the classifications applicable to the areas' design values in
Table 1 of 40 CFR 51.1103. CAA section 181(a)(5) provides a mechanism
by which the EPA Administrator may grant a 1-year extension of an
area's attainment deadline, provided that the relevant states meet
certain criteria.

B. The Philadelphia Area and Its Attainment Date

    On July 18, 1997 at 62 FR 38855, EPA promulgated a revised ozone
NAAQS of 0.08 parts per million (ppm), averaged over eight hours. This
standard was determined to be more protective of public health than the
previous 1979 1-hour ozone standard. In 2008, EPA revised the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS from 0.08 to 0.075 ppm (the 2008 ozone NAAQS). See 73 FR
16436 (March 27, 2008). In a May 21, 2012 final rule, the Philadelphia
Area was designated as marginal nonattainment for the more stringent
2008 ozone NAAQS, effective on July 20, 2012. 77 FR 30088, 30143.

The Philadelphia Area consists of Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery
and Philadelphia Counties in Pennsylvania; Atlantic, Burlington,
Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Gloucester, Mercer, Ocean and Salem
Counties in New Jersey; Cecil County, Maryland; and New Castle County
in Delaware. See 40 CFR 81.331, 81.339, 81.321, and 81.308.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In 2015, EPA revised the 8-hour ozone NAAQS from 0.075 ppm
to 0.070 ppm (the 2015 ozone NAAQS). See 80 FR 65292 (October 26,
2015). The initial area designations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS are
required by October 2017. Those designations will be based on
ambient air quality monitoring data for the 2014-2016 monitoring
period. This proposed rulemaking action does not address the 2015
ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a separate rulemaking action, also published on May 21, 2012 and
effective on July 20, 2012, EPA established the air quality thresholds
that define the classifications assigned to all nonattainment areas for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS (the Classifications Rule). See 77 FR 30160. This
rule also established December 31 of each relevant calendar year as the
attainment date for all nonattainment area classification categories.
Section 181 of the CAA provides that the attainment deadline for ozone
nonattainment areas is ``as expeditiously as practicable'' but no later
than the prescribed dates provided in Table 1 of that section. In the
Classifications Rule, EPA translated the deadlines in Table 1 of CAA
section 181 for purposes of the 2008 standard by measuring those
deadlines from the effective date of the new designations, but extended
those deadlines by several months to December 31 of the corresponding
calendar year. Pursuant to a challenge of EPA's interpretation of the
attainment deadlines, on December 23, 2014, the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) issued a
decision rejecting, among other things, the Classifications Rule's
attainment deadlines for the 2008 ozone nonattainment areas. NRDC v.
EPA, 777 F.3d 456, 464- 69 (D.C. Cir. 2014). The D.C. Circuit ruled
that EPA did not have statutory authority under the CAA to extend those
deadlines to the end of the calendar year. Accordingly, as part of the
final rule, ``Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements,''
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015) (hereinafter, SIP
Requirements Rule), EPA modified the maximum attainment dates for all
nonattainment areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, consistent with the D.C.
Circuit's decision. The SIP Requirements Rule established a maximum
deadline for marginal nonattainment areas of three years from the
effective date of designation, or July 20, 2015, to attain the 2008
ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR at 12268; 40 CFR 51.1103.
    In a final rulemaking action published on May 4, 2016, EPA
determined that the Philadelphia Area did not attain the 2008 ozone
NAAQS by its July 20, 2015 attainment date, based on ambient air
quality monitoring data for the 2012 through 2014 monitoring period. In
that same action, EPA determined that the Philadelphia Area qualified
for a 1-year extension of its attainment date, as provided in section
181(a)(5) of the CAA and interpreted by regulation at 40 CFR 51.1107,
and granted the requested extension. EPA established the new attainment
date for the Philadelphia Area as July 20, 2016 to be based on ambient
air quality monitoring data for the 2013-2015 monitoring period. See 81
FR 26697 (May 4, 2016).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ On July 5, 2016, the State of Delaware filed a petition for
review (the Petition) of that portion of EPA's May 4, 2016 final
rule granting the Philadelphia Area a 1-year extension of the 2008
ozone NAAQS attainment date, under CAA 181(a)(5), 42 U.S.C.
7511(a)(5), from July 20, 2015, to July 20, 2016. The Petition was
filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit. See State of Delaware Department of Natural Resources &
Environmental Control v. United States Environmental Protection
Agency, No. 16-1230.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. EPA's Analysis of the Relevant Air Quality Data

    Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, appendix P, the 2008 ozone
NAAQS is attained at a monitoring site when the three-year average of
the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ambient air
quality ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.075 ppm. This
three-year average is referred to as the design value. When the design
value is less than or equal to 0.075 ppm at each ambient air quality
monitoring site within the area, then the area is deemed to be meeting
the NAAQS. 40 CFR part 50, appendix P dictates that concentrations
shall be reported in ppm to the third decimal place, with additional
digits to the right being truncated. Thus, a computed three-year
average ozone concentration of 0.0759 ppm or lower would meet the
standard, but 0.0760 ppm or higher is over the standard.
    EPA's proposed determination of attainment for the Philadelphia
Area is based upon data that has been collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in EPA's Air Quality System
(AQS) database. Ambient air quality monitoring data for the three-year
period must also meet a data completeness requirement. 40 CFR part 50,
appendix P. The ambient air quality monitoring data completeness
requirement is met when the three-year average of the percent (%) of
required monitoring days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater
than 90%, and no single year has less than 75% data completeness, as
determined according to 40 CFR part 50, appendix P. Tables 1 and 2 show
the data completeness and ozone design values, respectively, for each
of the 18 monitors in the Philadelphia Area for years 2013 through
2015.

                                                              Table 1--2013-2015 Philadelphia Area Ozone Monitor Data Completeness
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Percent data completeness               2013-2015
                                                                                ------------------------------------------------     average
                  State                               County                 Site ID                                                         percent                     Comment
                                                                                2013            2014            2015        completeness
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delaware.................................  New Castle..................       100031007              97              94             100              97  .......................................
                                                                              100031010              77              74              91              81  Incomplete \a\.
                                                                              100031013              91              99              93              94  .......................................
                                                                              100032004              86              83              87              85  Incomplete \a\.
Maryland.................................  Cecil.......................       240150003              98              95              89              94  .......................................
New Jersey...............................  Atlantic....................       340010006              96              99              96              97  .......................................
New Jersey...............................  Camden......................       340070002             100             100             100             100  .......................................
New Jersey...............................  Camden......................       340071001              96             100              97              98  .......................................
New Jersey...............................  Cumberland..................       340110007              99             100              99              99  .......................................
New Jersey...............................  Gloucester..................       340150002              99              84              96              93  .......................................

New Jersey...............................  Mercer......................       340210005             100             100              99             100  .......................................
New Jersey...............................  Mercer......................       340219991              92             100              99              97  .......................................
New Jersey...............................  Ocean.......................       340290006             100             100             100             100  .......................................
Pennsylvania.............................  Bucks.......................       420170012             100              99              96              98  .......................................
Pennsylvania.............................  Chester.....................       420290100             100              94              97              97  .......................................
Pennsylvania.............................  Delaware....................       420450002             100              98              96              98  .......................................
Pennsylvania.............................  Montgomery..................       420910013             100              99              99              99  .......................................
Pennsylvania.............................  Philadelphia................       421010004             100              98             100              99  .......................................
Pennsylvania.............................  Philadelphia................       421010024              97              94             100              97  .......................................
Pennsylvania.............................  Philadelphia................       421010048               6              93              98              66  Site began operation October 2013 \b\.
Pennsylvania.............................  Philadelphia................       421011002              82  ..............  ..............              27  Site shut down in July 2013 \b\.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
a. Monitoring data at these sites does not meet completeness criteria set forth in 40 CFR part 50 Appendix P, section 2.3(b).
b. The monitoring site shutdowns and startups are included in the City of the Philadelphia's Air Management Services (AMS) July 2013 Annual Network Plan. AMS submitted the monitoring plan to
  EPA on July 1, 2013, and EPA approved it on December 10, 2013.

    As shown in Table 1, two monitoring sites in Philadelphia County do
not meet the completeness criteria set out in 40 CFR part 50, appendix
P. However, the reasons for the completeness issues were the shutdown
of one monitor and startup of another monitor that were approved by EPA
in the City of Philadelphia's AMS July 2013 Annual Network Plan.
Because three years of complete data is not possible at these
monitoring sites, EPA does not look for valid design values at these
sites.
    Table 1 also shows that two monitors in New Castle County,
Delaware, AQS ID # 100031010 (also known as the ``Brandywine''
monitor), and AQS ID # 100032004 (also known as the ``MLK'' monitor),
which are maintained by the Delaware Department of Natural Resources
and Environmental Control (DNREC), had insufficient data in the 2013
through 2015 period to meet the data completeness requirements in 40
CFR part 50, appendix P. As stated previously, the three-year average
of the percent of required monitoring days with valid ambient
monitoring data must be greater than 90%, with no single year having
less than 75% data completeness. The ozone season for the Philadelphia
Area \3\ runs from April 1 through October 31. Therefore, a complete
ozone season for this area contains 214 possible monitoring days, with
at least 160 days of valid ozone season ambient monitoring data needed
to meet the 75% data completeness requirement. Because of missed
monitoring days at the Brandywine and MLK monitors (AQS ID # 100031010
and # 100032004), the design value for these two monitors would not be
considered valid without further measures being taken to meet the data
completeness requirements for these two monitors. Therefore, EPA
conducted an analysis of the meteorological data and a regression
analysis in order to meet the data completeness requirements for the
Brandywine and MLK monitors. EPA also conducted a substitution analysis
as a check on the validity of the meteorological analysis and
regression analysis. Using these methods, EPA was able to ``add''
enough ozone season days for each of the two monitors to meet the data
completeness requirements of 40 CFR part 50, appendix P. Further detail
on the missing monitor data at these two Delaware monitors and on the
data completeness analysis undertaken by EPA for those monitors is
provided in the January 10, 2017 Technical Support Document (TSD)
prepared by EPA. This TSD is included in the docket for this rulemaking
(EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0638) and is also available online at
www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 40 CFR part 58, appendix D specifies the applicable ``ozone
season'' for the Philadelphia Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After ensuring data completeness for those two Delaware monitors
(AQS ID # 100031010 and # 100032004), EPA reviewed the ozone ambient
air quality monitoring data for the monitoring period from 2013 through
2015 for all the monitors in the Philadelphia Area, as recorded in the
AQS database, in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR part 50. As
shown in Table 2, below, all 2013-2015 design values are less than or
equal to 0.075 ppm. Therefore, EPA concludes the Philadelphia Area has
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by July 20, 2016 based upon monitored
ozone data for the 2013 through 2015 period in accordance with
requirements in 40 CFR part 50.

                                              Table 2--2013-2015 Philadelphia Area 2008 Ozone Design Values
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                4th highest daily maximum               2013-2015
                   State                               County                 Site ID    ------------------------------------------------  Design value
                                                                                2013            2014            2015            (ppm)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delaware..................................  New Castle..................       100031007           0.062           0.071           0.065           0.066
                                                                               100031010           0.063           0.074           0.071       \a\ 0.069
                                                                               100031013           0.067           0.069           0.069           0.068
                                                                               100032004           0.067           0.068           0.072       \a\ 0.069
Maryland..................................  Cecil.......................       240150003           0.072           0.074           0.074           0.073
New Jersey................................  Atlantic....................       340010006           0.070           0.061           0.068           0.066

New Jersey................................  Camden......................       340070002           0.065           0.068           0.079           0.070
New Jersey................................  Camden......................       340071001           0.068           0.068           0.072           0.069
New Jersey................................  Cumberland..................       340110007           0.061           0.067           0.068           0.065
New Jersey................................  Gloucester..................       340150002           0.073           0.070           0.076           0.073
New Jersey................................  Mercer......................       340210005           0.070           0.071           0.073           0.071
New Jersey................................  Mercer......................       340219991           0.069           0.071           0.075           0.071
New Jersey................................  Ocean.......................       340290006           0.070           0.072           0.075           0.072
Pennsylvania..............................  Bucks.......................       420170012           0.073           0.071           0.082           0.075
Pennsylvania..............................  Chester.....................       420290100           0.068           0.071           0.068           0.069
Pennsylvania..............................  Delaware....................       420450002           0.069           0.073           0.074           0.072
Pennsylvania..............................  Montgomery..................       420910013           0.069           0.072           0.073           0.071
Pennsylvania..............................  Philadelphia................       421010004           0.047           0.058           0.057           0.054
Pennsylvania..............................  Philadelphia................       421010024           0.068           0.072           0.079           0.073
Pennsylvania..............................  Philadelphia................       421010048           0.036           0.068           0.078  ..............
Pennsylvania..............................  Philadelphia................       421011002           0.071  ..............  ..............  ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
a. Monitoring data at these sites did not meet completeness criteria set forth in 40 CFR part 50 Appendix P 2.3(b) prior to EPA undertaking the analyses
  set forth in the TSD.

    EPA acknowledges that preliminary 2014 through 2016 ambient air
quality monitoring data, which has not been quality assured or
certified, shows potential violations of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the
Philadelphia Area.\4\ However, this does not affect EPA's proposed
determination of attainment by the attainment date for section
181(b)(2) of the CAA. This determination for section 181(b)(2) is an
evaluation of the Philadelphia Area's design value as of its attainment
date, July 20, 2016, considering 2013-2015 ozone monitored data, and
does not consider air quality monitoring data from any other monitoring
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ On January 19, 2017, EPA received an email request from the
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP)
requesting EPA remove certain data from the PADEP Philadelphia
monitors based on exceptional events. EPA is considering PADEP's
request related to monitoring data for 2016, but has not taken
further action at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proposed Action

    EPA evaluated ozone data from air quality monitors in the
Philadelphia Area in order to determine the Area's attainment status
under the 2008 ozone NAAQS. State and local agencies responsible for
ozone air monitoring networks supplied and quality assured the data.
All the monitoring sites in the Philadelphia Area had design values
equal to or less than 0.075 ppm based on the 2013 through 2015
monitoring period. Considering that review, EPA concludes that this
area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS based on complete, quality assured
and certified data for the 2013 through 2015 ozone seasons. Thus, EPA
proposes to determine, in accordance with its statutory obligations
under section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA, that the Philadelphia Area
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of July
20, 2016. EPA's proposed determination is in accordance with applicable
regulatory requirements under 81 FR 26697 (with respect to issuance of
the 1-year extension of the attainment date for Philadelphia Area) and
with the related provisions of the SIP Requirements Rule (40 CFR
51.1103).
    This proposed determination of attainment does not constitute a
redesignation to attainment. Redesignations require states to meet a
number of additional criteria, including EPA approval of a state plan
to maintain the air quality standard for 10 years after redesignation.
EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This rulemaking action proposes to make a determination of
attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS based on air quality and, if
finalized, would not impose additional requirements. For that reason,
this proposed determination of attainment:
     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, this proposed rulemaking to determine that the
Philadelphia Area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by its July 20, 2016
attainment date does not have tribal implications, as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because this
proposed determination of attainment does not apply in Indian country
located in the states and because EPA notes that it will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ozone,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: March 2, 2017.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

    Dated: March 1, 2017.
Catherine McCabe,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region II.
[FR Doc. 2017-07826 Filed 4-17-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 173 (Thursday, September 8, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54880-54882]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19287]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0827; Airspace Docket No. 21-AEA-12]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment and Revocation of Air Traffic Service (ATS) Routes;
Eastern United States

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends four jet routes and removes eight jet
routes in the eastern United States. This action is associated with the
Northeast Corridor Atlantic Coast Route Project and supports the VHF
Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Minimum Operational Network (MON) to
improve the efficiency of the National Airspace System (NAS) and reduce
dependency on ground-based navigational systems.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, November 3, 2022. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it modifies the route structure as necessary to preserve
the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the NAS.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No.
FAA-2022-0827 in the Federal Register (87 FR 41633; July 13, 2022),
amending 4 jet routes and removing 8 jet routes in the eastern United
States. Interested parties were invited to participate in this
rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal. No
comments were received.
    Jet routes are published in paragraph 2004 of FAA Order JO 7400.11F
dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The jet routes listed in this
document will be subsequently published in and removed from FAA Order
JO 7400.11.

Difference From the NPRM

    The NPRM did not address an error in the description of jet route
J-68 as published in FAA Order JO 7400.11F that misidentified the state
for the Gopher VORTAC as MI instead of MN. The description of J-68 in
the NPRM and this rule is correct.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class
A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by amending 4 jet routes and
removing 8 jet routes in the eastern United States. This action is
associated with the Northeast Corridor Atlantic Coast Route Project,
and supports the VOR MON Program. Additionally, the jet route changes
reduce aeronautical chart clutter by removing unneeded route segments.
    The route changes are as follows:
    J-14: J-14 extends from Panhandle, TX to Vulcan, AL; and From
Greensboro, NC to Patuxent, MD. This action removes the segments from
Greensboro, NC, to Patuxent, MD. This supports the decommissioning of
the Patuxent VHF Omnidirectional Range and Tactical Air Navigational
System (VORTAC). Existing Area Navigation (RNAV) Q routes, Q-22 and Q-
60, partially overlay this segment.
    J-24: J-24 extends from Myton, UT, to Hayden, CO; and From Hugo,
CO, to Harcum, VA. This removes the segment from Flat Rock, VA, to
Harcum, VA. This segment of the route is no longer used by air traffic
control (ATC). Other Performance Based Navigation (PBN) route structure
is being implemented to reflect current traffic flows in the area. As
amended, J-24 extends from Myton, UT, to Hayden, CO; and From Hugo, CO,
to Montebello, VA.
    J-52: J-52 extends from Vancouver, BC, Canada, to Vulcan, AL; and
From the intersection of the Columbia, SC, 042[deg], and the Flat Rock,
VA, 212[deg] radials to Richmond, VA. The FAA is removing the segments
between Bigbee, MS, and Vulcan, AL; and the segments between the
intersection of Columbia, SC, and Flat Rock, VA, radials and Richmond,
VA. RNAV routes Q-87, Q-99, and Q-122 will be extended to replace the
segments of J-52. As amended, J-52 extends from Vancouver, BC, Canada,
to Sidon, MS.
    J-68: J-68 extends from Gopher, MN, to Flint, MI; and From Hancock,
NY, to Nantucket, MA. This action removes the segments from Hancock, NY
to Nantucket, MA. These segments are no longer used by ATC. Other PBN
route structure will be implemented to reflect current air traffic
flows in the area. As amended, J-68 extends from Gopher, MN, to Flint,
MI.
    J-165: J-165 extends from the intersection of the Charleston, SC
025[deg] and the Florence, SC 085[deg] radials to Richmond, VA. The
route is cancelled in its entirety. RNAV route Q-99 will be extended as
a partial overlay and replacement of J-165.
    J-207: J-207 extends from Florence, SC, to Franklin, VA. This
action removes J-207 in its entirety. RNAV route Q-87 will be extended
as a substitute for J-207.
    J-506: J-506 extends from Millinocket, ME to the intersection of
the St John, NB, 267[deg] radial and the United States/Canadian border.
The FAA is removing J-506 in its entirety. This route is no longer used
by ATC. Currently, RNAV routes Q-947 and Q-806 exist in this area.
    J-561: J-561 extends from Presque Isle, ME, to Mont Joli, PQ,
Canada. This route is no longer used by ATC. The FAA is removing the
route in its entirety.
    J-563: J-563 extends from Albany, NY, to Sherbrooke, PQ, Canada.
This route is no longer used by ATC. The Sherbrooke VHF Omnidirectional
Range (VOR) has been decommissioned by NavCanada. This action removes
the route in its entirety.
    J-573: J-573 extends from Kennebunk, ME, to St John, NB, Canada.
The route is no longer used by ATC. The FAA is removing J-573 in its
entirety.
    J-582: J-582 extends from Presque Isle, ME to Sept Isle, PQ,
Canada. The route is no longer used by ATC. This action removes the
route in its entirety.
    J-585: J-585 extends from Nantucket, MA, to Yarmouth, NS, Canada.
This route is no longer used by ATC. This action removes the route in
its entirety.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action of amending four jet
routes, and removing eight jet routes, in the eastern United States
qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental
Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its implementing regulations at
40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F,
Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-6.5a, which
categorically excludes from further environmental impact review
rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace areas,
airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation
of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes;
and Reporting Points); and paragraph 5-6.5b, which categorically
excludes from further environmental impact review ``Actions regarding
establishment of jet routes and Federal airways (see 14 CFR 71.15,
Designation of jet routes and VOR Federal airways) . . .''. As such,
this action is not expected to result in any potentially significant
environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph
5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this
action for factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically
excluded action may have a significant environmental impact requiring
further analysis. The FAA has determined no extraordinary circumstances
exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11F Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10,
2021, and effective September 15, 2021, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 2004 Jet Routes.

* * * * *

J-14 [Amended]

    From: Panhandle, TX via Will Rogers, OK; Little Rock, AR; to
Vulcan, AL.
* * * * *

J-24 [Amended]

    From Myton, UT, to Hayden, CO. From Hugo, CO, Hays, KS; via
Salina, KS; Kansas City, MO; St. Louis, MO; Brickyard, IN; Falmouth,
KY; Charleston, WV; to Montebello, VA.
* * * * *

J-52 [Amended]

    From Vancouver, BC, Canada; via Spokane, WA; Salmon, ID; Dubois,
ID; Rock Springs, WY; Falcon, CO; Hugo, CO; Lamar, CO; Liberal, KS;
INT Liberal 137[deg] and Ardmore, OK, 309[deg] radials; Ardmore;
Texarkana, AR; to Sidon, MS.
* * * * *

J-68 [Amended]

    From Gopher, MN, INT Gopher 109[deg] and Dells, WI, 310[deg]
radials; Dells; Badger, WI; INT Badger 086[deg] and Flint, MI,
278[deg] radials; to Flint.
* * * * *

J-165 [Removed]

* * * * *

J-207 [Removed]

* * * * *

J-506 [Removed]

* * * * *

J-561 [Removed]

* * * * *

J-563 [Removed]

* * * * *

J-573 [Removed]

* * * * *

J-582 [Removed]

* * * * *

J-585 [Removed]

* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 1, 2022.
Scott M. Rosenbloom,
Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2022-19287 Filed 9-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 81)]
[Notices]
[Page 22454-22455]
[DOCID:fr25ap08-136]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

RTCA Special Committee 217/EUROCAE Working Group 44: Airport
Mapping Databases First Joint Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 217/EUROCAE Working Group 44
meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of RTCA Special Committee 217/EUROCAE Working Group 44: Airport
Mapping Databases.

DATES: The meeting will be held May 14-16, 2008, from 9 a.m.-5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at EUROCONTROL, Rue de la Fusee,
96, B-1130 Brussels, Belgium.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (1) RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street,
NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC, 20036 telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>: fax
(202) 833-9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org (2) Mr. Sam van cler
Stricht, telephone +32-2-729 3197, fax 32-2-729 9008.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463. 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice
is

hereby given for a Special Committee 217/EUROCAE Working Group 44
meeting.
     May 14:
     Open Plenary (Chairmen's Remarks and Introductions, Review
and Approve Meeting Agenda, Discussion).
     Schedule--Completion in no more than three meetings.
     Schedule for this week.
     Schedule for next meetings.
     Presentations:
     Gap Analysis--ARINC 816 and RTCAIEUROCAE documents;
     Gap Analysis--ATXM and RTCA/EUROCAE documents.
     Begin effort to revise documents.
     May 15:
     Plenary Session.
     May 16:
     Plenary Session.
     Other Business.
     Determine and agree on action plan.
     Meeting Plans and Dates.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC. on April 17, 2008.
Francisco Estrada C.,
RTCA Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. E8-9044 Filed 4-24-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 170 (Tuesday, September 5, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60673-60674]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19091]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC23-122-000.
    Applicants: Elgin Energy Center, LLC, Rocky Road Power, LLC, Middle
River Power VI LLC, Middle River Power VII LLC
    Description: Supplement to August 14, 2023, Joint Application for
Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act of Elgin
Energy Center, LLC.
    Filed Date: 8/22/23.
    Accession Number: 20230822-5171
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: EC23-126-000.
    Applicants: Old Gold Energy Center, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act of Old Gold Energy Center, LLC.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5126.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2054-003.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., Central Maine Power Company,
Versant Power, Fitchburg Gas and Electric Light Company, Green Mountain
Power Corporation, New England Power Company, New Hampshire
Transmission, LLC, NSTAR Electric Company, Public Service Company of
New Hampshire, The Connecticut Light and Power Company, The United
Illuminating Company, Unitil Energy Systems, Inc., Vermont Electric
Cooperative, Inc., Vermont Transco LLC
    Description: Compliance filing: ISO New England Inc. submits tariff
filing per 35: ISO-NE PTOs; Joint Offer of Settlement Re VP, Bangor
Hydro District Charges to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5031.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1736-001.
    Applicants: Big Plain Solar, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Notice of Commercial Operation and
Revised Rate Schedule to be effective 6/30/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5097.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1752-001.
    Applicants: Oak Trail Solar, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Response to Deficiency Letter in
ER23-1752 to be effective 6/30/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/28/23.
    Accession Number: 20230828-5408.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2003-001.
    Applicants: Invenergy Nelson Expansion LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Deficiency Letter Response to be
effective 7/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/28/23.
    Accession Number: 20230828-5384.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2035-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., Versant Power.
    Description: Refund Report: ISO New England Inc. submits tariff
filing per 35.19a(b): Versant Power; Refund Report--ER23-2035 to be
effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5037.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2189-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 1895R12 Evergy Kansas Central, Inc.
NITSA NOA to be effective 9/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5113.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2194-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 1892R12 Evergy Kansas Central, Inc.
NITSA NOA to be effective 9/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5093.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2197-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 1893R13 Evergy Kansas Central, Inc.
NITSA NOA to be effective 9/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5095.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2198-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 1894R12 Evergy Kansas Central, Inc.
NITSA NOA to be effective 9/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5117.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2199-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 1978R12 Evergy Kansas Central, Inc.
NITSA NOA to be effective 9/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5119.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2204-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2066R12 Evergy Kansas Central, Inc.
NITSA NOA to be effective 9/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5123.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2213-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2491R11 Evergy Kansas Central, Inc.
NITSA NOA to be effective 9/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5131.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2309-000.
    Applicants: DCR Transmission, L.L.C.
    Description: Report Filing: DCRT Supplemental Testimony Filing to
be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 8/18/23.
    Accession Number: 20230818-5083.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/1/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2363-001.
    Applicants: HXOap Solar One, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: HXOap Solar One, LLC--Amendment
Filing to be effective 8/28/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5118.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2456-000.
    Applicants: Platteview Solar, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to July 21, 2023, Platteview Solar, LLC
tariff filing.

    Filed Date: 8/22/23.
    Accession Number: 20230822-5174.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2511-000.
    Applicants: Hardy Hills Solar Energy LLC.
    Description: Supplement to July 28, 2023, Hardy Hills Solar Energy
LLC tariff filing.
    Filed Date: 8/28/23.
    Accession Number: 20230828-5435.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/7/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2716-000.
    Applicants: Moraine Sands Wind Power, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Baseline new to be effective
10/30/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/28/23.
    Accession Number: 20230828-5400.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2717-000.
    Applicants: NRG Business Marketing LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Informational Filing Regarding
Upstream Transfer of Ownership to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5005.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2718-000.
    Applicants: NRG Business Marketing LLC, Midwest Generation, LLC.
    Description: NRG Business Marketing LLC, et. al. requests a
limited, one-time waiver of the 90-day notice requirement contained in
Schedule 2 to the PJM Tariff.
    Filed Date: 8/28/23.
    Accession Number: 20230828-5423.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2719-000.
    Applicants: Orlando CoGen Limited, L.P.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market Based
Rate to be effective 1/1/2024.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5055.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2720-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original ISA, Service
Agreement No. 7052; Queue No. AF1-205 to be effective 7/31/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5074.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2722-000.
    Applicants: SEPG Energy Marketing Services, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Notice of Cancellation to be
effective 8/30/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5134.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2723-000.
    Applicants: Puget Sound Energy, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Powerex P-T-P, SA No. 1042
to be effective 9/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230829-5157.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/23.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a
complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with
Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211,
385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the
specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is
necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<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: August 29, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-19091 Filed 9-1-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 28 (Friday, February 10, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7171-7172]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3055]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2012-0008; OMB No. 1660-0069]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request, National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) v5.0

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity
to comment on a proposed revision of a currently approved information
collection. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
this notice seeks comments concerning National Fire Incident Reporting
System (NFIRS) v5.0. The program provides a well established mechanism,
using standardized reporting methods, to collect and analyze fire
incident data at the Federal, State, and local levels with a myriad of
life and property saving uses and benefits.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before April 10, 2012.

ADDRESSES: To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use
only one of the following means to submit comments:
    (1) Online. Submit comments at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
FEMA-2012-0008. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Regulatory Affairs Division,
Office of Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street, SW., Room 835,
Washington, DC 20472-3100.
    (3) Facsimile. Submit comments to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) Email. Submit comments to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Include Docket
ID FEMA-2012-0008 in the subject line.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material,
all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any
personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this
information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act
notice that is available via

the link in the footer of www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Whitney, Fire Program Specialist,
United States Fire Administration, National Fire Data Center, (301)
447-1836 for additional information. You may contact the Records
Management Division for copies of the proposed collection of
information at facsimile number<PHONE_NUMBER> or email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Commission on Fire Prevention
and Control conducted a comprehensive study of the Nation's fire
problem and recommended to Congress actions to mitigate the fire
problem, reduce loss of life and property, and educate the public on
fire protection and prevention. As a result of the study, Congress
enacted Public Law 93-498, Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of
1974, which establishes the U.S. Fire Administration to administer fire
prevention and control programs, supplement existing programs of
research, training, and education, and encourage new and improved
programs and activities by State and local governments. Section 9(a) of
the Act authorizes the Administrator, U.S. Fire Administration (USFA),
to operate directly or through contracts or grants, an integrated,
comprehensive method to select, analyze, publish, and disseminate
information related to prevention, occurrence, control, and results of
fires of all types.

Collection of Information

    Title: National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) v5.0.
    Type of Information Collection: Revision of a currently approved
information collection.
    OMB Number: OMB No. 1660-0069.
    Form Titles and Numbers: The National Fire Incident Reporting
System (NFIRS) v5.0.
    Abstract: NFIRS provides a mechanism using standardized reporting
methods to collect and analyze fire incident data at the Federal,
State, and local levels. Data analysis helps local fire departments and
States to focus on current problems, predict future problems in their
communities, and measure whether their programs are working.
    Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal Government.
    Number of Respondents: 23,890.
    Number of Responses: 29,970,120.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 13,704,900 hours.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                                              Total annual
          Type of respondent             Form name/form number      Number of     responses per   Total number     Average  burden  per     burden  (in
                                                                   respondents     respondent     of responses     response  (in hours)       hours)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 State, Local, or Tribal Government..  NFIRS Version 5.0                    230           1,304         299,920  68 minutes (1.13 hr)...         338,910
                                        Modules 1-12 (Manual).
 State, Local, or Tribal Government..  NFIRS Version 5.0                 22,770           1,303      29,669,310  27 min (0.45 hr).......      13,351,190
                                        Modules 1-12
                                        (Electronic).
State, Local, or Tribal Government...  NFA Program Manager                   30               1              30  48 hours...............           1,440
                                        Training.
State, Local, or Tribal Government...  NFA Program Manager                   60               1              60  16 hours...............             960
                                        Orientation.
State, Local, or Tribal Government...  NFIC Training Workshop..             100               1             100  16 hours...............           1,600
State, Local, or Tribal Government...  NFIC CD/on-site                      200               1             200  4 hours................             800
                                        Orientation.
State, Local, or Tribal Government...  Introduction to NFRIS                500               1             500  20 hours...............          10,000
                                        Distance Learning.
                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total............................  ........................          23,890  ..............      29,970,120  .......................      13,704,900
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual operations and maintenance
costs to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of
information is $13,775,850. The estimated annual cost to the Federal
Government is $2,794,252.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

John J. Jenkins, Jr.,
Acting Director, Records Management Division, Mission Support Bureau,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2012-3055 Filed 2-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-45-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 229 (Friday, November 27, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76150-76151]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26158]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0109; FMCSA-2013-0442; FMCSA-2013-0443; FMCSA-
2018-0051]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and
Seizure Disorders

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for eight
individuals from the requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs) that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
drivers have ``no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of
epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause loss of
consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.'' The exemptions
enable these individuals who have had one or more seizures and are
taking anti-seizure medication to continue to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates
stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates provided
below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have
questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Dockets Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Insert the docket number, FMCSA-2013-0109, FMCSA-2013-0442, FMCSA-2013-
0443, or FMCSA-2018-0051, in the keyword box, and click ``Search.''
Next, click the ``Open Docket Folder'' button and choose the document
to review. If you do not have access to the internet, you may view the
docket online by visiting Dockets Operations in Room W12-140 on the
ground floor of the

DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202)
366-9317 or<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting Dockets Operations.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.transportation.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On May 7, 2020, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision to
renew exemptions for eight individuals from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (85 FR
27262). The public comment period ended on September 24, 2020, and no
comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of
safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved
by complying with Sec.  391.41(b)(8).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy
found in Sec.  391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which
is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to
control a CMV.
    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria \1\ to assist medical examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ These criteria may be found in Appendix A to Part 391--
Medical Advisory Criteria, section H. Epilepsy: Sec.  391.41(b)(8),
paragraphs 3, 4, and 5, which is available on the internet at
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2015-title49-vol5/pdf/CFR-2015-title49-vol5-part391-appA.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

IV. Conclusion

    Based on its evaluation of the eight renewal exemption
applications, FMCSA announces its decision to exempt the following
drivers from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in Sec.
391.41(b)(8).
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), the following
groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of May and
are discussed below.
    As of May 19, 2020, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b), the following six individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (85 FR
27262):

Jeffrey Ballweg (WI)
Ronald Hartl (WI)
Craig Hoisington (NH)
Raymond Lobo (NJ)
Michael Miller (WI)
Peter Thompson (FL)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2013-0109, FMCSA-
2013-0442, and FMCSA-2013-0443. Their exemptions were applicable as of
May 19, 2020, and will expire on May 19, 2022.
    As of May 30, 2020, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b), the following two individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (85 FR
27262):

Nathan Kanouff (GA) and
Joe L. King, Jr. (NC).

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2018-0051. Their
exemptions were applicable as of May 30, 2020, and will expire on May
30, 2022.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid
for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b).

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-26158 Filed 11-25-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40361-40364]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13106]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-97724; File No. SR-MEMX-2023-10]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MEMX LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Modify the Method
by Which the Exchange Provides Certain Rebates

June 14, 2023.
    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 June 1, 2023, MEMX LLC (``MEMX'' or the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the 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 is filing with the Commission a proposed rule change
to amend the Exchange's fee schedule applicable to Members \3\ (the
``Fee Schedule'') pursuant to Exchange Rules 15.1(a) and (c). The
Exchange proposes to implement the changes to the Fee Schedule pursuant
to this proposal on June 1, 2023. The text of the proposed rule change
is provided in Exhibit 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Exchange Rule 1.5(p).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Fee
Schedule to modify the method by which the Exchange provides the rebate
under Liquidity Provision Tiers 4, 5, and 6 such that if a Member
achieves any of the criteria under Liquidity Provision Tiers 4, 5, or 6
in a given month, it would receive that rebate for that month and in
the following month. As described further below, this differs from the
current practice, whereby a Member receives the applicable rebate at
the end of the month if it achieved the applicable criteria during that
month, and the process resets the following month.
    The Exchange first notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. More specifically, the
Exchange is only one of 16 registered equities exchanges, as well as a
number of alternative trading systems and other off-exchange venues, to
which market participants may direct their order flow. Based on
publicly available information, no single registered equities exchange
currently has more than approximately 16% of the total market share of
executed volume of equities trading.\4\ Thus, in such a low-
concentrated and highly competitive market, no single equities exchange
possesses significant pricing power in the execution of order flow, and
the Exchange currently represents approximately 3% of the overall
market share.\5\ The Exchange in particular operates a ``Maker-Taker''
model whereby it provides rebates to Members that add liquidity to the
Exchange and charges fees to Members that remove liquidity from the
Exchange. The Fee Schedule sets forth the standard rebates and fees
applied per share for orders that add and remove liquidity,
respectively. Additionally, in response to the competitive environment,
the Exchange also offers tiered pricing, which provides Members with
opportunities to qualify for higher rebates or lower fees where certain
volume criteria and thresholds are met. Tiered pricing provides an
incremental incentive for Members to strive for higher tier levels,
which provides increasingly higher benefits or discounts for satisfying
increasingly more stringent criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Market share percentage calculated as of June 1, 2023. The
Exchange receives and processes data made available through
consolidated data feeds (i.e., CTS and UTDF).
    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liquidity Provision Tiers

    The Exchange currently provides a base rebate of $0.0018 per share
for executions of Added Displayed Volume.\6\ The Exchange also
currently offers Liquidity Provision Tiers 1-6 under which a Member may
receive an enhanced rebate for executions of Added Displayed Volume by
achieving the corresponding required volume criteria for each such
tier. The Exchange now proposes to modify the method by which it
provides the rebate under Liquidity Provision Tiers 4, 5, and 6, as
further described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The base rebate for executions of Added Displayed Volume is
referred to by the Exchange on the Fee Schedule under the existing
description ``Added displayed volume'' with a Fee Code of ``B'',
``D'' or ``J'', as applicable, on execution reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to Liquidity Provision Tier 4, the Exchange currently
provides an enhanced rebate of $0.0029 per share for executions of
Added Displayed Volume for Members that qualify for such tier by
achieving: (1) an ADAV \7\ that is equal to or greater than 0.15% of
the TCV; \8\ or (2) a Displayed ADAV \9\ that is equal to or greater
than 0.02% of the TCV and a Step-Up Displayed ADAV \10\ of the TCV from
April 2023 that is equal to or greater than 50% of the Member's April
2023 Displayed ADAV of the TCV.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As set forth on the Fee Schedule, ``ADAV'' means the average
daily added volume calculated as the number of shares added per day,
which is calculated on a monthly basis, and ``Displayed ADAV'' means
ADAV with respect to displayed orders.
    \8\ As set forth on the Fee Schedule, ``TCV'' means total
consolidated volume calculated as the volume reported by all
exchanges and trade reporting facilities to a consolidated
transaction reporting plan for the month for which the fees apply.
    \9\ As set forth on the Fee Schedule, ``Non-Displayed ADAV''
means ADAV with respect to non-displayed orders (including orders
subject to Display-Price Sliding that receive price improvement when
executed and Midpoint Peg orders).
    \10\ As set forth on the Fee Schedule, ``Step-Up Displayed
ADAV'' means Displayed ADAV in the relevant baseline month
subtracted from current Displayed ADAV.
    \11\ The pricing for Liquidity Provision Tier 4 is referred to
by the Exchange on the Fee Schedule under the existing description
``Added displayed volume, Liquidity Provision Tier 4'' with a Fee
Code of ``B4'', ``D4'' or ``J4'', as applicable, to be provided by
the Exchange on the monthly invoices provided to Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to Liquidity Provision Tier 5, the Exchange currently
provides an enhanced rebate of $0.0027 per share for executions of
Added Displayed Volume for Members that qualify for such tier by
achieving an ADAV that is

equal to or greater than 0.075% of the TCV.\12\ With respect to
Liquidity Provision Tier 6, the Exchange currently provides an enhanced
rebate of $0.0024 per share for executions of Added Displayed Volume
for Members that qualify for such tier by achieving a Displayed ADAV
that is equal to or greater than 0.007% of the TCV and has a Step-Up
Displayed ADAV of the TCV from May 2023 that is equal to or greater
than 50% of the Member's May 2023 Displayed ADAV of the TCV.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The pricing for Liquidity Provision Tier 5 is referred to
by the Exchange on the Fee Schedule under the existing description
``Added displayed volume, Liquidity Provision Tier 5'' with a Fee
Code of ``B5'', ``D5'' or ``J5'', as applicable, to be provided by
the Exchange on the monthly invoices provided to Members.
    \13\ The pricing for Liquidity Provision Tier 6 is referred to
by the Exchange on the Fee Schedule under the existing description
``Added displayed volume, Liquidity Provision Tier 6'' with a Fee
Code of ``B6'', ``D6'' or ``J6'', as applicable, to be provided by
the Exchange on the monthly invoices provided to Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is not proposing to modify the rebates provided or
qualification criteria of Liquidity Provision Tiers 4, 5, and 6 as
described above. However, the Exchange now proposes to modify the
method by which it will provide the rebates under Liquidity Provision
Tiers 4, 5, and 6 and it will indicate this in a note under the
Liquidity Provision Tiers pricing table on the Fee Schedule.
Specifically, the Exchange will note: ``Members that qualify for Tier
4, 5, or 6 based on activity in a given month will also receive the
associated Tier 4, 5, or 6 rebate during the following month.''
Effectively, this means that if a Member achieves the applicable
criteria under any of the Liquidity Provision Tiers 4, 5, or 6 during a
given month, that Member will receive that rebate for the total amount
of Added Displayed Volume executed during that month and in the
following month, even if they do not achieve the applicable criteria
under that same Liquidity Provision Tier during that following month.
This is different from the current practice, whereby the Exchange
calculates Members' overall ADAV on a monthly basis, and Members that
qualify for a Liquidity Provision Tier by achieving the applicable
criteria receive the applicable enhanced rebate per share for all
executions of Added Displayed Volume in that previous month.
Accordingly, Members do not know whether they will receive the enhanced
rebate at the time of execution, but rather, receive it at the end of
the month based on their activity during that month.
    To illustrate, the Exchange offers the following example: Under the
current method, at the end of June 2023, the Exchange would calculate a
Member's total ADAV for June 2023 and if that Member met either of the
criteria under Liquidity Provision Tier 4, the Member would receive the
enhanced rebate of $0.0029 per share for the Added Displayed Volume it
executed in June 2023. Under the new model, the Exchange will continue
to calculate a Member's total ADAV at the end of June 2023, and will
continue to provide $0.0029 per share for the Member's Added Displayed
execution volume in June 2023, but it will also provide $0.0029 per
share for the Added Displayed Volume the Member executes in July 2023
(regardless of the Member's activity in July 2023). Accordingly, in
this example, the Member will be aware of the rebate it will receive
under Liquidity Provision Tier 4 during the month of July 2023,
regardless of what their July 2023 ADAV is, because it is awarded based
on its June 2023 ADAV. The Exchange notes that although the enhanced
rebate of $0.0029 per share would be provided to the Member in July of
2023, if the Member in the example above did not qualify for Liquidity
Provision Tier 4 based on their July 2023 ADAV, the Member would no
longer qualify for the enhanced rebate of $0.0029 per share for the
Added Displayed Volume the Member executes in August 2023.
    The tiered pricing structure for executions of Added Displayed
Volume under the Liquidity Provision Tiers provides an incremental
incentive for Members to strive for higher volume thresholds to receive
higher enhanced rebates for such executions and, as such, is intended
to encourage Members to maintain or increase their order flow,
primarily in the form of liquidity-adding volume, to the Exchange,
thereby contributing to a deeper and more liquid market to the benefit
of all Members and market participants. The Exchange believes that the
Liquidity Provision Tiers reflect a reasonable and competitive pricing
structure that is right-sized and consistent with the Exchange's
overall pricing philosophy of encouraging added and/or displayed
liquidity. The proposed change does not modify any criteria or rebate
provided under any of the Liquidity Provision Tiers, rather, it
modifies the process by which rebates paid under Liquidity Provision
Tier 4, 5, and 6 are awarded to Members, allowing Members to anticipate
whether such rebate will apply at the time of execution based on
whether the criteria was achieved in the prior month. The Exchange
believes this method will provide Members with additional certainty
when trading on the Exchange, which in turn, will incentivize Members
to achieve certain volume thresholds on the Exchange on an ongoing
basis.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of section 6 of the Act,\14\ in general, and with
sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among its Members and other persons using its facilities
and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
shift order flow or discontinue to reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to new or different pricing structures being
introduced into the market. The Exchange believes the proposal
continues to reflect a reasonable and competitive pricing structure
designed to incentivize market participants to direct additional order
flow to the Exchange, which the Exchange believes would promote price
discovery and enhance liquidity and market quality on the Exchange to
the benefit of all Members and market participants.
    The Exchange notes that volume-based incentives and discounts (such
as tiers) have been widely adopted by exchanges (including the
Exchange), and are reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because they are open to all members on an equal basis
and provide additional benefits or discounts that are reasonably
related to the value to an exchange's market quality associated with
higher levels of market activity, such as higher levels of liquidity
provision and/or growth patterns, and the introduction of higher
volumes of orders into the price and volume discovery process. The
Exchange believes that the proposed modification of the way it provides
the rebate under Liquidity Provision Tiers 4, 5, and 6 is reasonable,
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory for these same reasons, as
the tiers continue to provide Members with incremental incentives to
achieve certain volume thresholds on the Exchange, are available to all
Members on an equal

basis, and, as described above, are reasonably designed to encourage
Members to maintain or increase their order flow to the Exchange with
an added layer of certainty in the rebate they will receive, if
applicable.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed modification is
appropriate to apply only to Liquidity Provision Tiers 4, 5, and 6 at
this time given that the enhanced rebates provided under those specific
Liquidity Provision Tiers (as opposed to Liquidity Provision Tiers 1,
2, and 3 \16\) are each less than $0.0030 per share, which is the
standard fee charged by the Exchange for orders that remove liquidity
and also the highest transaction fee allowed by the Commission under
Rule 610(c)(1) of Regulation NMS.\17\ The Exchange considers this
distinction relevant in light of the fact that this is the first time
the Exchange will be providing rebates in this manner, and as such,
would like to initiate this change under Liquidity Provision Tiers that
provide rebates below the aforementioned standard fee for removing
liquidity. Again, the Exchange believes that the application of its
methodology of awarding rebates under Liquidity Provision Tiers 4, 5,
and 6 is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory, as
there is a legitimate distinction between the rebates provided under
these Liquidity Provision Tiers as opposed to Liquidity Provision Tiers
1, 2, and 3, and the opportunity to qualify for the Liquidity Provision
Tiers is available equally to all Members of the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Currently, the rebates provided under Liquidity Provision
Tiers 1, 2, and 3 are $0.00335, $0.00325, and $0.0031 per share,
respectively.
    \17\ 17 CFR 242.610.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the reasons discussed above, the Exchange submits that the
proposal satisfies the requirements of sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of
the Act \18\ in that it provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its Members and other
persons using its facilities and is not designed to unfairly
discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposal will result in any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Instead, as discussed above,
the proposal is intended to incentivize market participants to direct
additional order flow to the Exchange, which the Exchange believes
would promote price discovery and enhance liquidity and market quality
on the Exchange to the benefit of all Members and market participants.
As a result, the Exchange believes the proposal would enhance its
competitiveness as a market that attracts actionable orders, thereby
making it a more desirable destination venue for its customers. For
these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal furthers the
Commission's goal in adopting Regulation NMS of fostering competition
among orders, which promotes ``more efficient pricing of individual
stocks for all types of orders, large and small.'' \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See supra note 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intramarket Competition
    As discussed above, the Exchange believes that the proposal would
maintain a tiered pricing structure that is still consistent with the
Exchange's overall pricing philosophy of encouraging added and/or
displayed liquidity and would incentivize market participants to direct
additional order flow to the Exchange through volume-based tiers,
thereby enhancing liquidity and market quality on the Exchange to the
benefit of all Members, as well as enhancing the attractiveness of the
Exchange as a trading venue, which the Exchange believes, in turn,
would continue to encourage market participants to direct additional
order flow to the Exchange. Greater liquidity benefits all Members by
providing more trading opportunities and encourages Members to send
additional orders to the Exchange, thereby contributing to robust
levels of liquidity, which benefits all market participants.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed change would impose
any burden on intramarket competition because such change will
incentivize members to submit additional order flow, thereby
contributing to a more robust and well-balanced market ecosystem on the
Exchange to the benefit of all Members as well as enhancing the
attractiveness of the Exchange as a trading venue, which the Exchange
believes, in turn, would continue to encourage market participants to
direct additional order flow to the Exchange. Greater liquidity
benefits all Members by providing more trading opportunities and
encourages Members to send additional orders to the Exchange, thereby
contributing to robust levels of liquidity, which benefits all market
participants. The opportunity to qualify for each of the Liquidity
Provision Tiers is still available to all Members that meet the
associated volume requirements in any month. For the foregoing reasons,
the Exchange believes the proposed changes would not impose any burden
on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Intermarket Competition
    As noted above, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. Members have numerous
alternative venues that they may participate on and direct their order
flow to, including 15 other equities exchanges and numerous alternative
trading systems and other off-exchange venues. As noted above, no
single registered equities exchange currently has more than
approximately 16% of the total market share of executed volume of
equities trading. Thus, in such a low-concentrated and highly
competitive market, no single equities exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of order flow. Moreover, the Exchange
believes that the ever-shifting market share among the exchanges from
month to month demonstrates that market participants can shift order
flow or discontinue to reduce use of certain categories of products, in
response to new or different pricing structures being introduced into
the market. Accordingly, competitive forces constrain the Exchange's
transaction fees and rebates and market participants can readily choose
to send their orders to other exchange and off-exchange venues if they
deem fee levels and processes at those other venues to be more
favorable. As described above, the proposed change represents a
competitive proposal through which the Exchange is seeking to
incentivize market participants to direct additional order flow to the
Exchange through volume-based tier rebates that are awarded based on a
prior month's activity, thus allowing Members to have greater certainty
of the rebate that they will receive when trading on the Exchange.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes the proposal would not burden, but
rather promote, intermarket competition by enabling it to better
compete with other exchanges that offer similar pricing structures and
incentives to market participants.
    Additionally, the Commission has repeatedly expressed its
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities

markets. Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted
the importance of market forces in determining prices and SRO revenues
and, also, recognized that current regulation of the market system
``has been remarkably successful in promoting market competition in its
broader forms that are most important to investors and listed
companies.'' \20\ The fact that this market is competitive has also
long been recognized by the courts. In NetCoalition v. SEC, the D.C.
Circuit stated as follows: ``[n]o one disputes that competition for
order flow is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S.
national market system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the
broker-dealers that act as their order-routing agents, have a wide
range of choices of where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no
exchange can afford to take its market share percentages for granted'
because `no exchange possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in
the execution of order flow from broker dealers'. . . .''.\21\
Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe its proposed rule change
imposes any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Id.
    \21\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2006-21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \22\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \23\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \23\ 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 such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change 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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-MEMX-2023-10 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-MEMX-2023-10. 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 (https://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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-MEMX-2023-10 and should be
submitted on or before July 12, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-13106 Filed 6-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P