[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68863-68870]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27163]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0148; FRL-10003-33-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; Florida; Infrastructure Requirements for the
2015 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission provided by the
State of Florida, through the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (FDEP), through a letter dated September 18, 2018, for
inclusion into the Florida SIP. This proposal pertains to the
infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the
2015 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
Whenever EPA promulgates a new or revised NAAQS, the CAA requires that
each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance,
and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by EPA. FDEP certified

that the Florida SIP contains provisions that ensure the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in Florida. EPA is
proposing to determine that Florida's SIP submission satisfies certain
required infrastructure elements for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 16, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2019-0148 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 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, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tiereny Bell, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is
(404) 562-9088. Ms. Bell can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Overview

    On October 1, 2015 (published on October 26, 2015, see 80 FR
65292), EPA promulgated a revised primary and secondary NAAQS for ozone
revising the 8-hour ozone NAAQS from 0.075 parts per million to a new
more protective level of 0.070 ppm. Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of
the CAA, states are required to submit SIP revisions meeting the
applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years after
promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as
EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic
SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program
requirements and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment
and maintenance of the NAAQS. This particular type of SIP is commonly
referred to as an ``infrastructure SIP.'' States were required to
submit such SIPs for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS to EPA no later than
October 1, 2018.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In these infrastructure SIP submissions, states generally
certify evidence of compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of
the CAA through a combination of state regulations and statutes,
some of which have been incorporated into the federally-approved
SIP. In addition, certain federally-approved, non-SIP regulations
may also be appropriate for demonstrating compliance with sections
110(a)(1) and (2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rulemaking is proposing to approve portions of Florida's
September 18, 2018 \2\ ozone infrastructure SIP submission for the
applicable requirements of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is not
taking action on the interstate transport requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA will consider these requirements for Florida
for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS separately. For the aspects of
Florida's submittal proposed for approval in this rulemaking, EPA notes
that the Agency is not approving any specific rule, but rather
proposing that Florida's already approved SIP meets certain CAA
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The September 18, 2018 SIP submission provided by FDEP was
received by EPA on September 26, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. What elements are required under sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?

    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to provide
for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new or
revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such
NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section
110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to
EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may
vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the
data and analytical tools available at the time the state develops and
submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the
submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary
depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already
contains.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Throughout this rulemaking, unless otherwise indicated, the
term ``Florida Administrative Code'' or ``F.A.C.'' indicates that
the cited regulation has been approved into Florida's federally-
approved SIP. The term ``Florida Statutes'' or ``F.S.'' indicates
cited Florida state statutes, which are not a part of the SIP unless
otherwise indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and
timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements
that states must meet for ``infrastructure'' SIP requirements related
to a newly established or revised NAAQS. As mentioned above, these
requirements include basic SIP elements such as requirements for
monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are
designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The
requirements of section 110(a)(2) are listed below and summarized in
Section IV and in EPA's September 13, 2013, memorandum entitled
``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements
under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2).'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not
governed by the three-year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1)
because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area
controls are not due within three years after promulgation of a new
or revised NAAQS, but rather are due at the time the nonattainment
area plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. These
requirements are: (1) Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C)
to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required
in part D, title I of the CAA; and (2) submissions required by
section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D, title I of the CAA. This proposed rulemaking
does not address infrastructure elements related to section
110(a)(2)(I) or the part D nonattainment permitting requirements of
110(a)(2)(C).

 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures
 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System
 110(a)(2)(C): Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and
for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ As mentioned above, the Part D permit program for
construction and modification of stationary sources is not relevant
to this proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II): Interstate Pollution Transport
 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement and
International Air Pollution
 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of
Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies
 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting
 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency Powers
 110(a)(2)(H): SIP Revisions
 110(a)(2)(I): Plan Revisions for Nonattainment Areas \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ As also mentioned above, this element is not relevant to
this proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with Government Officials, Public
Notification, and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and
Visibility Protection

 110(a)(2)(K): Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling
Data
 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees
 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation and Participation by Affected Local
Entities

III. What is EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP
submissions?

    EPA is acting upon the SIP submission from Florida that addresses
the infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)
for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Whenever EPA promulgates a new or
revised NAAQS, CAA section 110(a)(1) requires states to make SIP
submissions to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of the NAAQS, commonly referred to as an ``infrastructure
SIP.'' These infrastructure SIP submissions must meet the various
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2), as applicable. Due to ambiguity
in some of the language of CAA section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it
is appropriate to interpret these provisions in the specific context of
acting on infrastructure SIP submissions. EPA has previously provided
comprehensive guidance on the application of these provisions through a
guidance document for infrastructure SIP submissions and through
regional actions on infrastructure submissions.\7\ Unless otherwise
noted below, we are following that existing approach in acting on this
submission. In addition, in the context of acting on such
infrastructure submissions, EPA evaluates the submitting state's
implementation plan for facial compliance with statutory and regulatory
requirements, not for the state's implementation of its SIP.\8\ The EPA
has other authority to address any issues concerning a state's
implementation of the rules, regulations, consent orders, etc. that
comprise its SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ EPA explains and elaborates on these ambiguities and its
approach to address them in its September 13, 2013 Infrastructure
SIP Guidance (available at https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/urbanair/sipstatus/docs/Guidance_on_Infrastructure_SIP_Elements_Multipollutant_FINAL_Sept_2013.pdf), as well as in numerous agency actions, including EPA's prior
action on Florida's infrastructure SIP to address the 2010 1-hour
Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS (80 FR 51157 (Aug. 24, 2015)).
    \8\ See Mont. Envtl. Info. Ctr. v. Thomas, 902 F.3d 971 (9th
Cir. 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What is EPA's analysis of how Florida addressed the elements of the
sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``Infrastructure'' provisions?

    The Florida infrastructure SIP submission addresses the provisions
of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described below.
    1. 110(a)(2)(A) Emission Limits and Other Control Measures: Section
110(a)(2)(A) requires that each implementation plan include enforceable
emission limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques
(including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and
auctions of emissions rights), as well as schedules and timetables for
compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the applicable
requirements. Several regulations within Florida's SIP are relevant to
air quality control. The regulations described below include
enforceable emission limitations and other control measures. Florida
Administrative Code (F.A.C.) Chapters 62-204, Air Pollution Control--
General Provisions; 62-210, Stationary Sources--General Requirements;
62-212, Stationary Sources--Preconstruction Review; 62-296, Stationary
Sources--Emissions Standards; and 62-297, Stationary Sources--Emissions
Monitoring collectively establish enforceable emissions limitations and
other control measures, means or techniques for activities that
contribute to ozone concentrations in the ambient air, and provide
authority for FDEP to establish such limits and measures as well as
schedules for compliance through SIP-approved permits to meet the
applicable requirements of the CAA.
    Additionally, the following sections of the Florida Statutes
provide FDEP the authority to conduct certain actions in support of
this infrastructure element. Section 403.061(9), Florida Statutes,
authorizes FDEP to ``[a]dopt a comprehensive program for the
prevention, control, and abatement of pollution of the air . . . of the
state;'' and Section 403.8055, Florida Statutes, authorizes FDEP to
``[a]dopt rules substantively identical to regulations adopted in the
Federal Register by the United States Environmental Protection Agency
pursuant to federal law . . .''
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that the provisions
contained in these SIP-approved regulations and sections of the Florida
Statutes satisfy section 110(a)(2)(A) for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS
in the State.
    2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System: Section
110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to provide for establishment and operation
of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to:
(i) Monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii)
upon request, make such data available to the Administrator. SIP-
approved rules at Chapters 62-204, 62-210, and 62-212 of the F.A.C.
require the use of federal reference methods or equivalent monitors and
also provide authority for FDEP to establish monitoring requirements
through SIP-approved permits. Additionally, the following three
sections of the Florida Statutes provide FDEP the authority to take
specific actions in support of this infrastructure element: Section
403.061(1), Florida Statutes, authorizes FDEP to ``[a]pprove and
promulgate current and long-range plans developed to provide for air
quality and control and pollution abatement; Section 403.061(9),
Florida Statutes, authorizes FDEP to [a]dopt a comprehensive program
for the prevention, control and abatement of pollution of the air . . .
of the State; and Section 403.061(11), Florida Statutes, authorizes
FDEP to ``[e]stablish ambient air quality . . . standards for the state
as a whole or for any part thereof.'' Annually, states develop and
submit to EPA for approval statewide ambient monitoring network plans
consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR parts 50, 53, and 58. The
annual network plan involves an evaluation of any proposed changes to
the monitoring network, includes the annual ambient monitoring network
design plan, and includes a certified evaluation of the state's ambient
monitors and auxiliary support equipment.\9\ Florida submitted its
monitoring network plan for 2018 to EPA on June 24, 2018. On October
22, 2019, EPA approved Florida's monitoring network plan. Florida's
approved monitoring network plan can be accessed at www.regulations.gov
using Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0148. EPA has made the preliminary
determination that Florida's SIP and practices are adequate for the
ambient air quality monitoring and data system related to the 2015 8-
hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ On occasion, proposed changes to the monitoring network are
evaluated outside of the network plan approval process in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. 110(a)(2)(C) Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and
for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources: This element

consists of three sub-elements: Enforcement, state-wide regulation of
new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of major
sources, and preconstruction permitting of major sources and major
modifications in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for the
subject NAAQS as required by CAA title I part C (i.e., the major source
PSD program). FDEP's 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS infrastructure SIP
submission cited a number of SIP provisions to address these
requirements. EPA's rationale for its proposed action regarding each
sub-element is described below.
    Enforcement: FDEP cited Chapters 62-210, 62-212, F.A.C., which
provide for enforcement of emission limits and control measures through
permitting. Florida also cited to Section 403.061(6), Florida Statutes,
which requires FDEP to ``[e]xercise general supervision of the
administration and enforcement of the laws, rules, and regulations
pertaining to air and water pollution;'' and Section 403.121, Florida
Statutes, which authorizes FDEP to seek judicial and administrative
remedies for violations, including civil penalties, injunctive relief,
and criminal prosecution for violations of any FDEP rule or permit.
These provisions provide FDEP with authority for enforcement of
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen of oxides
(NOX) emission limits and control measures.
    Regulation of minor sources and modifications: Section 110(a)(2)(C)
also requires the SIP to include provisions that govern the minor
source program that regulates emissions of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
FDEP cited Chapter 62-210, F.A.C. These provisions of Florida's SIP
regulate the construction of any new minor stationary source and minor
modifications at an existing stationary source. These regulations
enable FDEP to regulate sources contributing to the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
    PSD Permitting for Major Sources: EPA interprets the PSD sub-
element to require that a state's infrastructure SIP submission for a
particular NAAQS demonstrate that the state has a complete PSD
permitting program in place covering the current PSD requirements for
all regulated NSR pollutants. A state's PSD permitting program is
complete for this sub-element (and J related to PSD) if EPA has already
approved or is simultaneously approving the state's SIP with respect to
all PSD requirements that are due under the EPA regulations or the CAA
on or before the date of the EPA's proposed action on the
infrastructure SIP submission. Florida's authority to regulate new and
modified sources to assist in the protection of air quality in
attainment or unclassifiable areas is established in F.A.C. Chapters
62-210, Stationary Sources--General Requirements, Section 200--
Definitions, and 62-212, Stationary Sources--Preconstruction Review,
Section 400--Prevention of Significant Deterioration, of the Florida
SIP. Under Florida's SIP, new major sources and major modifications in
areas of the State designated attainment or unclassifiable for a NAAQS
are subject to a federally-approved PSD permitting program meeting all
the current structural requirements of part C of title I of the CAA to
satisfy the infrastructure SIP PSD elements.
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that Florida's SIP and
practices are adequate for program enforcement of control measures,
regulation of minor sources and modifications, and PSD preconstruction
permitting of major sources and major modifications.
    4. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) Interstate Pollution Transport:
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Each of these components has two subparts
resulting in four distinct components, commonly referred to as
``prongs,'' that must be addressed in infrastructure SIP submissions.
The first two prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),
are provisions that prohibit any source or other type of emissions
activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment
of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 1'') and interfering with
maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 2''). The third and
fourth prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are
provisions that prohibit emissions activity in one state from
interfering with measures required to prevent significant deterioration
of air quality in another state (``prong 3''), or to protect visibility
in another state (``prong 4'').
    110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--prongs 1 and 2: EPA is not proposing any action
in this rulemaking related to the interstate transport provisions
pertaining to the contribution to nonattainment or interference with
maintenance in other states pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
(prongs 1 and 2). EPA will address prongs 1 and 2 in separate
rulemakings.
    110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--prong 3: With regard to section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), the PSD element referred to as prong 3, this
requirement may be met by a state's confirmation in an infrastructure
SIP submission that new major sources and major modifications in the
state are subject to a PSD program meeting current structural
requirements of part C of title I of the CAA, or (if the state contains
a nonattainment areas that has the potential to impact PSD in another
state) a NNSR program. A state's PSD permitting program satisfies prong
3 if EPA has already approved or is simultaneously approving the
state's implementation plan with respect to all PSD requirements that
are due under EPA regulations or the CAA on or before the date of EPA's
proposed action on the infrastructure SIP submission.
    Florida's SIP contains provisions for the State's PSD program that
reflects the required structural PSD requirements to satisfy prong 3 of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Florida addresses prong 3 through F.A.C.
62-204, 62-210, and 62-212 for the PSD and NNSR programs. EPA has made
the preliminary determination that Florida's SIP and practices are
adequate for intestate transport for PSD permitting of major sources
and major modifications related to the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS for
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3).
    110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--prong 4: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires
that the SIP contain adequate provisions to protect visibility in other
states. This requirement is satisfied for any relevant NAAQS when the
state has a fully approved regional haze SIP.
    Florida's submission relied on the State's SIP-approved regional
haze program to address the prong 4 requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\10\ Federal
regulations require that a state's regional haze SIP contain a long-
term strategy to address regional haze visibility impairment in each
Class I area within the state and each Class I area outside the state
that may be affected by emissions from the state.\11\ A state
participating in a regional planning process, such as Florida, must
include all measures needed to achieve its apportionment of emissions
reduction obligations agreed upon through that process.\12\ EPA's
approval of Florida's

regional haze SIP therefore ensures that emissions from Florida are not
interfering with measures to protect visibility in other states,
satisfying the requirements of prong 4 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)
for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Thus, EPA has made the preliminary
determination that Florida's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2015
8-hour ozone NAAQS meet the requirements of prong 4 of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ EPA approved Florida's regional haze SIP--see 77 FR 71111
(November 29, 2012); 78 FR 53250 (August 29, 2013).
    \11\ See 40 CFR 51.308(d).
    \12\ See, e.g., 40 CFR 51.308(d)(3)(ii). Florida participated in
the Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association of the
Southeast regional planning organization, a collaborative effort of
state governments, tribal governments, and various Federal agencies
established to initiate, and coordinate activities associated with
the management of regional haze, visibility, and other air quality
issues in the Southeastern United States. Member state and tribal
governments included: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky,
Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia,
West Virginia, and the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) Interstate Pollution Abatement and
International Air Pollution: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to
include provisions ensuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the
Act, relating to notification to neighboring air agencies and
interstate and international pollution abatement. Chapters 62-204, 62-
210, and 62-212 of the F.A.C. require any new major source or major
modification to undergo PSD or NNSR permitting and thereby provide
notification to other potentially affected Federal, state, and local
government agencies. Additionally, Florida does not have any pending
obligation under sections 115 and 126 of the CAA relating to
international or interstate pollution abatement. EPA has made the
preliminary determination that Florida's SIP and practices are adequate
for ensuring compliance with the applicable requirements relating to
interstate and international pollution abatement for the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.
    6. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of
Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies:
Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires that each implementation plan provide:
(i) Necessary assurances that the state will have adequate personnel,
funding, and authority under state law to carry out its implementation
plan, (ii) that the state comply with the requirements respecting state
boards pursuant to section 128 of the Act, and (iii) necessary
assurances that, where the state has relied on a local or regional
government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any
plan provision, the state has responsibility for ensuring adequate
implementation of such plan provisions. EPA is proposing to approve
Florida's infrastructure SIP submission as meeting the requirements of
sub-elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i), (ii), and (iii).
    In support of sub-elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii), FDEP's
infrastructure submission demonstrates that it has authority to carry
out its SIP as it is responsible for a comprehensive program to address
air pollution in the state as described in Section IV.1 above in
reference to 110(a)(2)(A). Additionally, FDEP cites to provisions that
provide assurances for adequate personnel and funding. Section
403.061(2), Florida Statutes, authorizes FDEP to ``[h]ire only such
employees as may be necessary to effectuate the responsibilities of the
department.'' Section 403.061(4), Florida Statutes, authorizes FDEP to
``[s]ecure necessary scientific, technical, research, administrative,
and operational services by interagency agreement, by contract, or
otherwise.'' Section 320.03(6), Florida Statutes, authorizes FDEP to
establish an Air Pollution Control Trust Fund and use a $1 fee on every
motor vehicle license registration sold in the State for air pollution
control purposes. Regarding the 110(a)(2)(E)(iii), Section 403.182,
Florida Statutes, authorizes FDEP to approve local pollution control
programs, and provides for the State air pollution control program
administered by FDEP to supersede a local program if FDEP determines
that an approved local program is inadequate, and the locality fails to
take the necessary corrective actions.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ CAA Section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii) requires states to provide
necessary assurances that, where the State has relied on a local or
regional government, agency, or instrumentality for the
implementation of any plan provision, the State has responsibility
for ensuring adequate implementation of such plan provision. In the
State of Florida, no local or regional areas submit implementation
plans and the Department is solely responsible for the SIP. However,
Florida Statute 403.061(21) authorizes the department to consult,
cooperate and enter into agreements with other agencies of the
State. The Department has specific operating agreements with Duval,
Orange, Hillsborough, Pinellas, Sarasota, Palm Beach, Broward and
Miami-Dade counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As evidence of the adequacy of FDEP's resources with respect to
sub-elements (i) and (iii), FDEP has a performance partnership
agreement with EPA outlining 105 grant commitments and current status
of these commitments for fiscal year 2018. Annually, the State updates
this performance partnership agreement based on current SIP
requirements, air quality planning, and applicable requirements related
to the NAAQS. Florida satisfactorily met all commitments agreed to in
the Air Planning Agreement for fiscal year 2018, therefore, FDEP's
grants were finalized and closed out. EPA has made the preliminary
determination that Florida has adequate resources and authority for
implementation of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires that the state comply with
section 128 of the CAA. Section 128 requires that the SIP contain
provisions providing that: (1) The majority of members of the state
board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders represent
the public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their
income from persons subject to permitting or enforcement orders under
the CAA; and (2) any potential conflicts of interest by such board or
body, or the head of an executive agency with similar powers be
adequately disclosed. For purposes of section 128(a)(1), Florida has no
boards or bodies with authority over air pollution permits or
enforcement actions. Such matters are instead handled by an appointed
Secretary. As such, a ``board or body'' is not responsible for
approving permits or enforcement orders in Florida, and the
requirements of section 128(a)(1) are not applicable. For the
requirements of 128(a)(2), Florida Statutes, subsections 112.3143(4),
F.S., Voting conflicts and 112.3144, F.S, Full and public disclosure of
financial interests address the conflict of interest provisions
applicable to the head of FDEP and all public officers within the
Department. On July 30, 2012 (77 FR 44485), EPA approved these Florida
statutes into the SIP to comply with section 128 respecting state
boards. EPA has made the preliminary determination that the State has
adequately addressed the requirements of section 128(a)(2), and
accordingly has met the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) with
respect to infrastructure SIP requirements.
    Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve Florida's infrastructure SIP
submission as meeting the requirements of sub-elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i),
(ii) and (iii).
    7. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting: Section
110(a)(2)(F) requires SIPs to meet applicable requirements addressing:
(i) The installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, and
the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators of
stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources, (ii)
periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions and emissions
related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such reports
by the state agency with any emission limitations or standards
established pursuant to this section, which reports shall be available
at reasonable times for public inspection. EPA's rules regarding how
SIPs need to address source monitoring requirements at 40 CFR 51.212
require SIPs to exclude any provision that would prevent the use of
credible evidence of noncompliance. Florida meets these

requirements through Chapters 62-210, 62-212, 62-296, and 62-297,
F.A.C., which require emissions monitoring and reporting for activities
that contribute to ozone concentrations in the air, including
requirements for the installation, calibration, maintenance, and
operation of equipment for continuously monitoring or recording
emissions. These rules also provide authority for FDEP to establish
such emissions monitoring and reporting requirements through SIP-
approved permits and require reporting of ozone precursor emissions
(NOX and VOC) in a manner that allows the state to correlate
such data and provide the information to EPA.
    The following sections of the Florida Statutes provide FDEP the
authority to conduct certain actions in support of this infrastructure
element. Section 403.061(13) authorizes FDEP to ``[r]equire persons
engaged in operations which may result in pollution to file reports
which may contain . . . any other such information as the department
shall prescribe . . .'' Section 90.401, Florida Statutes, defines
relevant evidence as evidence tending to prove or disprove a material
fact. Section 90.402, Florida Statutes, states that all relevant
evidence is admissible except as provided by law. EPA is unaware of any
provision preventing the use of credible evidence in the Florida SIP.
    Additionally, Florida is required to submit emissions data to EPA
for purposes of the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) pursuant to
Subpart A to 40 CFR part 51,--``Air Emissions Reporting Rule'' (AERR).
The NEI is EPA's central repository for air emissions data.
Specifically, all states are required to submit a comprehensive
emission inventory every three years and report emissions for certain
larger sources annually through EPA's online Emissions Inventory
System. States report emissions data for the six criteria pollutants
and the precursors that form them--nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide,
ammonia, lead, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and volatile
organic compounds. Many states also voluntarily report emissions of
hazardous air pollutants. Florida made its latest update to the NEI on
December 17, 2014. EPA compiles the emissions data, supplementing it
where necessary, and releases it to the general public through the
website http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html. EPA has made
the preliminary determination that Florida's SIP and practices are
adequate for the stationary source monitoring systems related to the
2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    8. 110(a)(2)(G) Emergency Powers: This section requires that states
demonstrate authority comparable with section 303 of the CAA and
adequate contingency plans to implement such authority. Section 303
authorizes EPA to take action seeking to immediately restrain pollution
sources if such pollution is presenting an imminent and substantial
endangerment to public health, welfare, or the environment. Florida's
infrastructure SIP submission addresses emergency powers as outlined in
Florida Statutes Sections 403.131 and 120.569(2)(n). These sections of
the Florida Statutes were submitted for inclusion in the SIP to address
the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(G) of the CAA and have been
approved by EPA into Florida's SIP. Section 403.131 authorizes FDEP to:
Seek injunctive relief to enforce compliance with this chapter or any
rule, regulation or permit certification, or order; to enjoin any
violation specified in Section 403.061(1); and to seek injunctive
relief to prevent irreparable injury to the air, waters, and property,
including animal, plant, and aquatic life, of the State and to protect
human health, safety, and welfare caused or threatened by any
violation. Section 120.569(2)(n), Florida Statutes, authorizes FDEP to
issue emergency orders to address immediate dangers to the public
health, safety, or welfare. EPA has made the preliminary determination
that Florida's SIP, State laws, and practices are adequate to satisfy
the infrastructure SIP obligations for emergency powers related to the
2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve
Florida's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section
110(a)(2)(G).
    9. 110(a)(2)(H) SIP Revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H), in summary,
requires each SIP to provide for revisions of such plan: (i) As may be
necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or
secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved
or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii)
whenever the Administrator finds that the plan is substantially
inadequate to attain the NAAQS or to otherwise comply with any
additional applicable requirements. As previously discussed, FDEP is
responsible for adopting air quality rules and revising SIPs as needed
to attain or maintain the NAAQS. Florida has the ability and authority
to respond to calls for SIP revisions and has provided a number of SIP
revisions over the years for implementation of the NAAQS.
    The following sections of the Florida Statutes provide FDEP the
authority to conduct certain actions in support of this element.
Section 403.061(35) gives FDEP the ``broad authority to implement the
CAA.'' Section 403.061(9) authorizes FDEP to ``adopt a comprehensive
program for the prevention, control, and abatement of pollution of the
air of the state, and to review and modify such programs as
necessary.'' EPA has made the preliminary determination that Florida
adequately demonstrates a commitment to provide future SIP revisions
related to the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA
is proposing to approve Florida's infrastructure SIP submission with
respect to section 110(a)(2)(H).
    10. 110(a)(2)(J) Consultation With Government Officials, Public
Notification, and PSD and Visibility Protection: EPA is proposing to
approve Florida's infrastructure SIP for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS
with respect to the general requirement in section 110(a)(2)(J) to
include a program in the SIP that complies with the applicable
consultation requirements of section 121, the public notification
requirements of section 127, PSD, and visibility protection. EPA's
rationale for each sub-element is described below.
    Consultation with government officials (121 consultation): Section
110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires states to meet the requirements of
section 121 relating to consultation with local governments, designated
organizations and federal land managers (FLMs) carrying out NAAQS
implementation requirements. Florida's SIP-approved Chapters 62-204,
62-210, and 62-212, F.A.C., as well as its Regional Haze Implementation
Plan (which allows for continued consultation with appropriate state,
local, and tribal air pollution control agencies as well as the
corresponding FLMs), provide for consultation with government officials
whose jurisdictions might be affected by SIP development activities.
Specifically, Florida adopted state-wide consultation procedures for
the implementation of transportation conformity which includes the
development of mobile inventories for SIP development. Required
partners covered by Florida's consultation procedures include Federal,
state and local transportation and air quality agency officials. Also,
Section 403.061(21), Florida Statutes, authorizes FDEP to ``[a]dvise,
consult, cooperate, and enter into agreements with other agencies of
the state, the Federal Government, other states,

interstate agencies, groups, political subdivisions, and industries
affected by the provisions of this act, rules, or policies of the
department.'' EPA has made the preliminary determination that Florida's
SIP and practices adequately demonstrate consultation with government
officials related to the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS when necessary.
    Public notification (127 public notification): With respect to
public notification, section 110(a)(3)(J) of the CAA requires states to
notify the public of NAAQS exceedances and associated health hazards,
and to enhance public awareness of measures that can prevent such
exceedances. FDEP has public notice mechanisms in place to notify the
public of instances or areas exceeding the NAAQS along with associated
health effects through the Air Quality Index reporting system in
required areas. Section 403.061(20), Florida Statutes, authorizes FDEP
to ``[c]ollect and disseminate information . . . relating to
pollution.'' Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Florida's
infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(J)
public notification.
    PSD: With regard to the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J), this
requirement is met when a state demonstrates in an infrastructure SIP
submission that its PSD program meets all the current requirements of
part C of title I of the CAA. As discussed in more detail above under
the section discussing 110(a)(2)(C), Florida's SIP contains provisions
for the State's PSD program that reflect the relevant SIP revisions to
satisfy the requirement of the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA
has made the preliminary determination that Florida's SIP is adequate
for PSD permitting of major sources and major modifications related to
the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the PSD element of section
110(a)(2)(J).
    Visibility protection: EPA's 2013 Guidance notes that it does not
treat the visibility protection aspects of section 110(a)(2)(J) as
applicable for purposes of the infrastructure SIP approval process.
FDEP referenced its regional haze program as germane to the visibility
component of section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA recognizes that states are
subject to visibility protection and regional haze program requirements
under part C of the Act (which includes sections 169A and 169B).
However, there are no newly applicable visibility protection
obligations after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Thus, EPA
has determined that states do not need to address the visibility
component of 110(a)(2)(J) in infrastructure SIP submittals so FDEP does
not need to rely on its regional haze program to fulfill its
obligations under section 110(a)(2)(J). As such, EPA has made the
preliminary determination that Florida's infrastructure SIP submission
is approvable for section 110(a)(2)(J) related to the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS and that Florida does not need to rely on its regional haze
program to address this element.
    11. 110(a)(2)(K) Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling
Data: Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires that SIPs provide for
performing air quality modeling so that effects on air quality of
emissions from NAAQS pollutants can be predicted and submission of such
data to the EPA can be made. FDEP cites to SIP-approved sections of
Chapters 62-210 and 62-212, F.A.C., for this requirement. Specific to
modeling, 62-212, F.A.C. requires air quality models to meet the
requirements of 52.21(l). Also, the following sections of the Florida
Statutes provide FDEP the authority to conduct actions in support of
this element. Section 403.061(13), Florida Statutes, authorizes FDEP to
``[r]equire persons engaged in operations which may result in pollution
to file reports which may contain information relating to locations,
size of outlet, height of outlet, rate and period of emission, and
composition and concentration of effluent and such other information as
the department shall prescribe to be filed . . .'' Section 403.061(18),
Florida Statutes, authorizes FDEP to ``[e]ncourage and conduct studies,
investigations, and research relating to pollution and its causes,
effects, prevention, abatement, and control.'' These regulations and
State statutes demonstrate that Florida has the authority to conduct
modeling and provide relevant data for the purpose of predicting the
effect on ambient air quality of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Additionally, Florida participates in a regional effort to coordinate
the development of emissions inventories and conduct regional modeling
for several NAAQS, including the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS, for the
Southeastern states. Florida notes in its SIP submission that the FDEP
has the technical capability to conduct or review all air quality
modeling associated with the NSR program and all SIP-related modeling,
except that photochemical grid modeling may be performed for FDEP under
contract. FDEP also states that all such modeling is conducted in
accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR part 51, Appendix W,
``Guideline on Air Quality Models,'' and agreed to submit any NSR or
SIP modeling to EPA upon request. Taken as a whole, Florida's
submission demonstrates that FDEP has the authority to conduct air
quality modeling under EPA guidelines, and to provide such information
to the EPA Administrator upon request. EPA has made the preliminary
determination that Florida's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate
the State's ability to provide for air quality modeling, along with
analysis of the associated data, related to the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Florida's
infrastructure SIP submissions with respect to section 110(a)(2)(K).
    12. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting Fees: This section requires the owner
or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the permitting
authority, as a condition of any permit required under the CAA, a fee
sufficient to cover: (i) The reasonable costs of reviewing and acting
upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) if the owner or
operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable costs of
implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any such permit
(not including any court costs or other costs associated with any
enforcement action), until such fee requirement is superseded with
respect to such sources by the Administrator's approval of a fee
program under title V. Section 403.087(6)(a), Florida Statutes, directs
FDEP to ``require a processing fee in an amount sufficient, to the
greatest extent possible, to cover the costs of reviewing and acting
upon any application for a permit. . . .'' Chapter 62-4.040(4)(a)1.,
F.A.C., requires each NSR permittee to pay a fee of $7,500.\14\
Additionally, Florida has a fully approved title V operating permit
program at Chapter 62-213 F.A.C.\15\ that covers the costs of
implementation and enforcement of the title V program, including
applicable requirements of the SIP. EPA has made the preliminary
determination that Florida's State rules and statutes adequately
provide for permitting fees related to the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Florida's
infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(L).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ This regulation is not approved into the Florida SIP.
    \15\ Florida's title V program regulations are federally-
approved but not incorporated into the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation and Participation by Affected Local
Entities: This element requires states to provide for consultation and
participation in SIP

development by local political subdivisions affected by the SIP.
Florida coordinates with local governments affected by the SIP. Florida
has consulted with local entities for the development of transportation
conformity and has worked with the FLMs as a requirement of the
regional haze rule. Section 403.061(21), Florida Statutes, authorizes
FDEP to ``[a]dvise, consult, cooperate and enter into agreements with
other agencies of the state, the Federal Government, other states,
interstate agencies, groups, political subdivisions, and industries
affected by the provisions of this act, rules, or policies of the
department.'' Further, Florida adopted state-wide consultation
procedures for the implementation of transportation conformity which
includes the development of mobile inventories for SIP development and
the requirements that link transportation planning and air quality
planning in nonattainment and maintenance areas. Required partners
covered by Florida's consultation procedures include Federal, state and
local transportation and air quality agency officials. The state and
local transportation agency officials are most directly impacted by
transportation conformity requirements and are required to provide
public involvement for their activities including the analysis
demonstrating how they meet transportation conformity requirements.
Also, FDEP has agreements with eight county air pollution control
agencies (Duval, Orange, Hillsborough, Pinellas, Sarasota, Palm Beach,
Broward, and Miami-Dade) that delineate the responsibilities of each
county in carrying out Florida's air program, including the Florida
SIP. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Florida's SIP and
practices adequately demonstrate consultation with affected local
entities related to the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS when necessary.

V. Proposed Action

    With the exception of interstate transport provisions of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) pertaining to the contribution to nonattainment or
interference with maintenance in other states, EPA is proposing to
approve Florida's infrastructure submission provided on September 18,
2018, for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the above described
infrastructure SIP requirements. EPA is proposing to approve Florida's
infrastructure SIP submission for certain elements for the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS because the submission is consistent with section 110 of
the CAA for those elements.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting federal
requirements and would not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.

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

    Dated: November 21, 2019.
Mary S. Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2019-27163 Filed 12-16-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 207 (Thursday, October 25, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53814-53816]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23301]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0986]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Allegheny River, Miles 0.25 to 0.7, Pittsburgh, PA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
all navigable waters of the Allegheny River from mile 0.25 to mile 0.7.
This safety zone is necessary to protect persons, vessels, and the
marine environment from potential hazards associated with low flying
aircraft over the Allegheny River. Entry of persons or vessels into
this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port
Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from October 25,
2018 through noon on November 5, 2018. For the purposes of enforcement,
actual notice will be used from 6 a.m. on October 22, 2018 through
October 25, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0986 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer Jennifer Haggins, Marine Safety Unit
Pittsburgh, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that it is
``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.''
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists
for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect
to this rule because it is impracticable. This safety zone must be
established as early as October 22, 2018, and we lack sufficient time
to provide a reasonable comment period and then consider those comments
before issuing this rule. The NPRM process would delay the
establishment of the safety zone until after the aircraft operation.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying this rule would be
contrary to the public interest because immediate action is necessary
to respond to the potential safety hazards associated with low flying
aircraft over the Allegheny River.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh (COTP) has
determined that potential hazards associated with low flying aircraft
will be a safety hazard for anyone within a one half-mile stretch of
the Allegheny River. The rule is needed to protect persons, vessels,
and the marine environment on the navigable waters within the safety
zone before, during, and after the aircraft operation.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone from 6 a.m. on
October 22, 2018 through noon on November 5, 2018. The safety zone will
cover all navigable waters of the Allegheny River, from mile 0.25 to
mile 0.7. The safety zone will be enforced only on one day during the
effective period, from 6 a.m. through noon. The COTP or a designated
representative would inform the public through Broadcast Notices to
Mariners (BNMs), Local Notices to Mariners (LNMs), and/or Marine Safety
Information Bulletins (MSIBs), and/or other means of public notice, as
appropriate, at least 24 hours in advance of the enforcement period.
The duration of the zone is intended to protect persons, vessels, and
the marine environment on these navigable waters before, during, and
after a low-flying aircraft operation. No vessel or person will be
permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from
the COTP or a designated representative. A designated representative is
a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard
assigned to units under the operational control of USCG Marine Safety
Unit Pittsburgh. Persons and vessels seeking entry into this safety
zone must request permission from the COTP or a designated
representative. They may be contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16 or by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Persons and vessels permitted to enter
this safety zone must transit at their slowest safe speed and comply
with all lawful instructions of the COTP or a designated
representative. The COTP or a designated representative will inform the
public of the enforcement period for the safety zone as well as any
changes in the schedule through Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs),
Local Notices to Mariners (LNMs), and/or Marine Safety Information
Bulletins (MSIBs), as appropriate.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and duration of the temporary safety zone. This regulation
will impact vessel traffic on a less than one-half mile stretch the
Allegheny River for six hours on one morning. Moreover, the Coast Guard

will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16
about the zone, and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter
the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the
Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is
one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human environment. This regulation
will impact vessel traffic on a less than one-half mile stretch the
Allegheny River for six hours on one morning. It is categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A,
Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of
Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available
in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0986 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0986  Safety Zone; Allegheny River, miles 0.25 to 0.7,
Pittsburgh, PA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of the Allegheny River from mile 0.25 to mile 0.7.
    (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 6 a.m. on
October 22, 2018 through noon on November 5, 2018.
    (c) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced on one day
during the effective period from 6 a.m. through noon. The Captain of
the Port Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh (COTP) or a designated
representative will inform the public as provided in subsection (e) at
least 24 hours in advance of the enforcement period.
    (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23, entry into this zone is prohibited unless authorized by
the COTP or a designated representative. A designated representative is
a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard
assigned to units under the operational control of USCG Marine Safety
Unit Pittsburgh.
    (2) Persons and vessels seeking entry into this safety zone must
request permission from the COTP or a designated representative. They
may be

contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16 or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Persons and vessels permitted to enter this safety zone must
transit at their slowest safe speed and comply with all lawful
instructions of the COTP or a designated representative.
    (e) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated
representative will inform the public of the enforcement period for the
safety zone as well as any changes in the schedule through Broadcast
Notices to Mariners (BNMs), Local Notices to Mariners (LNMs), and/or
Marine Safety Information Bulletins (MSIBs) as appropriate.

    Dated: October 19, 2018.
A.W. Demo,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit
Pittsburgh.
[FR Doc. 2018-23301 Filed 10-24-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: July 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 132)]
[Notices]
[Page 39135-39136]
[DOCID:fr11jy06-127]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54097; File No. SR-CBOE-2006-38]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1
Thereto Regarding Transfer of Designated Primary Market Maker
Appointments

July 5, 2006.
    On April 17, 2006, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend Exchange rules relating
to the transfer of Designated Primary Market Maker (``DPM'')
appointments. On May 11, 2006, CBOE submitted Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change. The Commission published the proposed rule
change, as amended, for comment in the Federal Register on June 1,
2006.\3\ The Commission received no comments on the proposed rule
change, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53869 (May 25,
2006), 71 FR 31239.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to eliminate section (f) of
CBOE Rule 8.89, which subjects any DPM transfer proposal decision made
by the appropriate Exchange committee (``transfer proposal decision'')
\4\ to a 10-day review period during which any transfer proposal
decision may be directly reviewed by the Board of Directors of the
Exchange (``Board'') upon:

    (1) A written application by a party claiming to be aggrieved \5\
by the DPM transfer decision, or (2) a request for review by any five
Directors. The Exchange notes that any member aggrieved by a transfer
proposal decision can still seek a review of the decision through the
hearing and review process provided for under Chapter XIX of CBOE's
rules.\6\ In any such appeal proceeding under Chapter XIX, the decision
regarding a transfer proposal by the appropriate Exchange committee
under CBOE Rule 8.89 would be subject to review by the CBOE Appeals
Committee. In addition, the Appeals Committee decision in the matter
would be subject to review by the Board on its own motion, or could be
appealed to the Board, pursuant to CBOE Rule 19.5. The Exchange
believes that the special review process for transfer proposal
decisions in CBOE Rule 8.89(f) is no longer necessary, given the more
routine nature of DPM transfers, and that the elimination of the
special process will improve the overall efficiency of the review
process.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See CBOE Rule 8.89(c), (d), and (e) for a description of the
scope of a transfer proposal and the committee decision process.
    \5\ Under CBOE Rule 8.89, a person must be ``aggrieved'' as
described in Chapter XIX of Exchange Rules.
    \6\ Chapter XIX of CBOE Rules governs the process by which
persons, including members, claiming to be economically aggrieved by
Exchange action may seek a review of such a decision.
    \7\ The Exchange also proposes to delete Interpretation and
Policy .02 of CBOE Rule 8.89, which provided for the application of
a transfer fee on any DPM appointment transfer, because it expired
on June 30, 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is
consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange,
and, in particular, with the requirements of section 6(b) of the
Act.\8\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as amended, is consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\
which requires among other things, that the rules of the Exchange be
designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. Specifically, the Commission believes it is consistent
with the Act for the Exchange to eliminate the special review process
for DPM transfer proposal decisions, which the Exchange believes could
improve efficiency of the review process for such decisions. The
Commission notes that such decisions would continue to be subject to a
hearing and review process at the Exchange under Chapter XIX, which
provides for review by the Appeals Committee and the Board. The
Commission also believes it is consistent with the Act for CBOE to
remove, as a matter of housekeeping, Interpretation and Policy .02 of
CBOE Rule 8.89 from its rules, as the provision relating to a transfer
fee has currently expired.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). In approving this proposed rule change,
the Commission considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\10\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2006-38) and Amendment
No. 1 thereto be, and hereby are, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 [FR Doc. E6-10788 Filed 7-10-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 84 (Thursday, May 1, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 24703]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09975]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Lykins Energy Solutions; Docket No. ER14-1755-000]

Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing
Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Lykins Energy Solution's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is May 14, 2014.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 24, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
 Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-09975 Filed 4-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P