[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40619-40620]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17598]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: QSA Customer
Feedback Report

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The information is collected from holders of FAA production
approvals and selected suppliers in the form of a feedback survey, to
obtain their input on how well the agency is performing the
administration and conduct of the Aircraft Certification Systems
Quality System Audit (QSA).

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by October 15, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA at the following address: Barbara
Hall, Federal Aviation Administration, ASP-110, 10101 Hillwood Parkway,
Fort Worth, TX 76177.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Hall by email at:
[email protected]; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Control Number: 2120-0605.
    Title: QSA Customer Feedback Report.
    Form Numbers: FAA Form 8100-7.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The information collection is voluntary and is
collected by way of a self-addressed stamped envelope. The information
collected is used by the local field offices, manufacturing inspection
offices and the surveillance and oversight policy section of AIR-600 to
improve the administration and conduct of the QSA at the local and
national levels. Improvements to FAA Order 8120.23, Certificate
Management of Production Approval Holders, have been and will continue
to be incorporated as a result of the on-going collection of data. It
will also be used for reporting as a Customer Service Standard in
fulfillment of Executive Order 12862, Setting Customer Service
Standards, dated September 11, 1993.
    Respondents: Approximately 150 holders of FAA production approvals
and selected suppliers.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 100 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 9, 2018.
Robin Darden,
Management Support Specialist, Performance, Policy, and Records
Management Branch, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2018-17598 Filed 8-14-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 41 (Monday, March 3, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 11787]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04618]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9907-34-OEI]

Cross-Media Electronic Reporting: Authorized Program Revision
Approval, State of Rhode Island

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's approval of the State of Rhode
Island's request to revise/modify its EPA Administered Permit Programs:
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System EPA-authorized
program to allow electronic reporting.

DATES: EPA's approval is effective March 3, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Seeh, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Information, Mail Stop
2823T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, (202) 566-
1175<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 13, 2005, the final Cross-Media
Electronic Reporting Rule (CROMERR) was published in the Federal
Register (70 FR 59848) and codified as part 3 of title 40 of the CFR.
CROMERR establishes electronic reporting as an acceptable regulatory
alternative to paper reporting and establishes requirements to assure
that electronic documents are as legally dependable as their paper
counterparts. Subpart D of CROMERR requires that state, tribal or local
government agencies that receive, or wish to begin receiving,
electronic reports under their EPA-authorized programs must apply to
EPA for a revision or modification of those programs and obtain EPA
approval. Subpart D provides standards for such approvals based on
consideration of the electronic document receiving systems that the
state, tribe, or local government will use to implement the electronic
reporting. Additionally, Sec.  3.1000(b) through (e) of 40 CFR part 3,
subpart D provides special procedures for program revisions and
modifications to allow electronic reporting, to be used at the option
of the state, tribe or local government in place of procedures
available under existing program-specific authorization regulations. An
application submitted under the subpart D procedures must show that the
state, tribe or local government has sufficient legal authority to
implement the electronic reporting components of the programs covered
by the application and will use electronic document receiving systems
that meet the applicable subpart D requirements.
    On November 13, 2013, the Rhode Island Department of Environmental
Management (RI DEM) submitted an application titled ``National Network
Discharge Monitoring Report System'' for revision/modification of its
EPA-authorized Part 123 program under title 40 CFR. EPA reviewed RI
DEM's request to revise/modify its EPA-authorized Part 123--EPA
Administered Permit Programs: The National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System program and, based on this review, EPA determined
that the application met the standards for approval of authorized
program revision/modification set out in 40 CFR part 3, subpart D. In
accordance with 40 CFR 3.1000(d), this notice of EPA's decision to
approve Rhode Island's request to revise/modify its Part 123--EPA
Administered Permit Programs: The National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System program to allow electronic reporting under 40 CFR
part 122.41(I)(4)(i) is being published in the Federal Register.
    RI DEM was notified of EPA's determination to approve its
application with respect to the authorized program listed above.

    Dated: February 24, 2014.
Andrew Battin,
Director, Office of Information Collection.
[FR Doc. 2014-04618 Filed 2-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 211 (Wednesday, October 31, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65834-65837]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26648]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0278; FRL-9365-4]

Residues of Fatty Acids, Tall-Oil, Ethoxylated Propoxylated;
Tolerance Exemption

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of fatty acids, tall-oil, ethoxylated
propoxylated; when used as an inert ingredient in a pesticide chemical
formulation. Stephan Company submitted a petition to EPA under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the
need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of fatty

acids, tall-oil, ethoxylated propoxylated on food or feed commodities.

DATES: This regulation is effective October 31, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before December 31, 2012,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0278, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-
5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information
about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Cutchin, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. Can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0278 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
December 31, 2012. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any CBI) for inclusion in the public docket.
Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy
of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0278, by one of the following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of July 25, 2012 (77 FR 43562) (FRL-9353-
6), EPA issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a,
announcing the receipt of a pesticide petition (PP 2E7995) filed by
Stephan Company, 22 West Frontage Rd., Northfield, Illinois 60093. The
petition requested that 40 CFR 180.960 be amended by establishing an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of fatty
acids, tall-oil, ethoxylated propoxylated; CAS No. 67784-86-5. That
notice included a summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner
and solicited comments on the petitioner's request. The Agency did not
receive any comments.
    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and use in residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance and to ``ensure that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue * * *'' and
specifies factors EPA is to consider in establishing an exemption.

III. Risk Assessment and Statutory Findings

    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be shown that the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably foreseeable
circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human health. In order
to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the inert in
conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert ingredient
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate
exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other

relevant information in support of this action and considered its
validity, completeness and reliability and the relationship of this
information to human risk. EPA has also considered available
information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major
identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children. In
the case of certain chemical substances that are defined as polymers,
the Agency has established a set of criteria to identify categories of
polymers expected to present minimal or no risk. The definition of a
polymer is given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and the exclusion criteria for
identifying these low-risk polymers are described in 40 CFR 723.250(d).
Fatty acids, tall-oil, ethoxylated propoxylated conforms to the
definition of a polymer given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and meets the
following criteria that are used to identify low-risk polymers.
    1. The polymer is not a cationic polymer nor is it reasonably
anticipated to become a cationic polymer in a natural aquatic
environment.
    2. The polymer does contain as an integral part of its composition
the atomic elements carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
    3. The polymer does not contain as an integral part of its
composition, except as impurities, any element other than those listed
in 40 CFR 723.250(d)(2)(ii).
    4. The polymer is neither designed nor can it be reasonably
anticipated to substantially degrade, decompose, or depolymerize.
    5. The polymer is manufactured or imported from monomers and/or
reactants that are already included on the TSCA Chemical Substance
Inventory or manufactured under an applicable TSCA section 5 exemption.
    6. The polymer is not a water absorbing polymer with a number
average molecular weight (MW) greater than or equal to 10,000 daltons.
    Additionally, the polymer also meets as required the following
exemption criteria specified in 40 CFR 723.250(e).
    7. The polymer's number average MW of 2,009 is greater than 1,000
and less than 10,000 daltons. The polymer contains less than 10 percent
oligomeric material below MW 500 and less than 25 percent oligomeric
material below MW 1,000, and the polymer does not contain any reactive
functional groups.
    Thus, fatty acids, tall-oil, ethoxylated propoxylated meets the
criteria for a polymer to be considered low risk under 40 CFR 723.250.
Based on its conformance to the criteria in this unit, no mammalian
toxicity is anticipated from dietary, inhalation, or dermal exposure to
fatty acids, tall-oil, ethoxylated propoxylated.

IV. Aggregate Exposures

    For the purposes of assessing potential exposure under this
exemption, EPA considered that fatty acids, tall-oil, ethoxylated
propoxylated could be present in all raw and processed agricultural
commodities and drinking water, and that non-occupational non-dietary
exposure was possible. The number average MW (amu) of fatty acids,
tall-oil, ethoxylated propoxylated is 2,009 daltons. Generally, a
polymer of this size would be poorly absorbed through the intact
gastrointestinal tract or through intact human skin. Since fatty acids,
tall-oil, ethoxylated propoxylated conform to the criteria that
identify a low-risk polymer, there are no concerns for risks associated
with any potential exposure scenarios that are reasonably foreseeable.
The Agency has determined that a tolerance is not necessary to protect
the public health.

V. Cumulative Effects From Substances With a Common Mechanism of
Toxicity

    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering
whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency
consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative effects of
a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances that have a
common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found fatty acids, tall-oil, ethoxylated propoxylated
to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and
fatty acids, tall-oil, ethoxylated propoxylated does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
fatty acids, tall-oil, ethoxylated propoxylated does not have a common
mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding
EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of
toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see
EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

VI. Additional Safety Factor for the Protection of Infants and Children

    Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the data base unless EPA concludes
that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and
children. Due to the expected low toxicity of fatty acids, tall-oil,
ethoxylated propoxylated, EPA has not used a safety factor analysis to
assess the risk. For the same reasons the additional tenfold safety
factor is unnecessary.

VII. Determination of Safety

    Based on the conformance to the criteria used to identify a low-
risk polymer, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty of no
harm to the U.S. population, including infants and children, from
aggregate exposure to residues of fatty acids, tall-oil, ethoxylated
propoxylated.

VIII. Other Considerations

A. Existing Exemptions From a Tolerance

    There are no existing tolerance exemptions for this polymer.

B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation.

C. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has not established a MRL for fatty acids, tall-oil,
ethoxylated propoxylated.

IX. Conclusion

    Accordingly, EPA finds that exempting residues of fatty acids,
tall-oil, ethoxylated propoxylated from the requirement of a tolerance
will be safe.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes an exemption from the requirement of a

tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition
submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted these rules from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled
``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993).
Because this final rule has been exempted from review under Executive
Order 12866, this final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or
Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997). This final rule does not contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it involve any technical standards that
would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards
pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the exemption in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or otherwise have any unique
impacts on local governments. Thus, the Agency has determined that
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition, this final rule
does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as
described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    Although this action does not require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994), EPA seeks to achieve
environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of
any group, including minority and/or low-income populations, in the
development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies. As such, to the extent that information is
publicly available or was submitted in comments to EPA, the Agency
considered whether groups or segments of the population, as a result of
their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical
or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or
environmental effects from exposure to the pesticide discussed in this
document, compared to the general population.

XI. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 15, 2012.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. Section 180.960 is amended by alphabetically adding the following
new entry to the table to read as follows:

Sec.  [emsp14]180.960  Polymers; exemptions from the requirement of a
tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Polymer                              CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
Fatty acids, tall-oil, ethoxylated propoxylated, minimum      67784-86-5
 number average molecular weight (in amu), 2,009...........

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

[FR Doc. 2012-26648 Filed 10-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 203 (Tuesday, October 21, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62979-62983]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24944]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73357; File No. SR-BYX-2014-027]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 11.16 of BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.

October 15, 2014.
    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 October 7, 2014, BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II 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 filed a proposed rule change to amend paragraph (f) of
Rule 11.16 to provide Members \3\ with additional time within which to
submit a written claim for compensation for ``losses resulting directly
from the malfunction of the Exchange's physical equipment, devices and/
or programming or the negligent acts or omissions of its employees''
(``Exchange Systems Issues''). In addition, the Exchange proposes to
add a new paragraph (g) to Rule 11.16 to permit the Exchange, subject
to certain conditions and limitations, to compensate Members for
certain losses incurred in connection with orders or portions of orders
routed by the Exchange through its affiliated routing broker-dealer,
BATS Trading, Inc. (``BATS Trading''), to Trading Centers \4\ where
such losses are claimed by the Member to have resulted directly from a
malfunction of the physical equipment, devices and/or programming, or
the negligent acts or omissions of the employees, of such Trading
Centers (``Trading Center Systems Issue'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or
dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange. A
Member will have the status of a ``member'' of the Exchange as that
term is defined in Section 3(a)(3) of the Act. Membership may be
granted to a sole proprietor, partnership, corporation, limited
liability company or other organization which is a registered broker
or dealer pursuant to Section 15 of the Act, and which has been
approved by the Exchange.'' See Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
    \4\ Rule 600(b)(78) of Regulation NMS, 17 CFR 242.600(b)(78),
defines a ``Trading Center'' as ``a national securities exchange or
national securities association that operates an SRO trading
facility, an alternative trading system, an exchange market maker,
an OTC market maker, or any other broker or dealer that executes
orders internally by trading as principal or crossing orders as
agent.'' See also Exchange Rule 2.11(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change is substantially similar to the existing
functionality on EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX'') and EDGA Exchange, Inc.
(``EDGA'').\5\ The Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as
non-controversial and provided the Commission with the notice required
by Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See EDGA Rules 11.12(d)(3) and (e); EDGX Rules 11.12(d)(3)
and (e). See also Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 71061
(December 12, 2013), 78 FR 76685 (December 18, 2013) (SR-EDGA-2013-
36) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Amend EDGX Rule 11.12, Limitations of Liability); and
71062 (December 12, 2013), 78 FR 76693 (December 18, 2013) (SR-EDGX-
2013-45) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend EDGX Rule 11.12, Limitations of Liability). The
Exchange notes that proposed Rule 11.16(g)(4) refers the liability
limits under BATS Rule 11.16(d)(1)-(3), which differ from the
existing EDGA and EDGX monthly liability limit of $500,00 referenced
under EDGA and EDGX Rules 11.12(e)(4) and set forth under EDGA and
EDGX Rules 11.12(d)(1). The Exchange understands that both EDGA and
EDGX intend to submit a proposed rule change to harmonize its
liability limits with those of BATS and BYX.
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the 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 parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 11.16 to: (i) Amend paragraph
(f) to provide Members with additional time within which to submit a
written claim for compensation for Exchange Systems Issues; and (ii)
add a new paragraph (g) permitting the Exchange, subject to certain
conditions and limitations, to compensate Members for certain losses
incurred in connection with orders or portions of orders routed by the
Exchange through BATS Trading to Trading Centers where such losses are
claimed by the Member to have resulted directly from a Trading Center
Systems Issue.
    Earlier this year, the Exchange and its affiliate BATS Exchange,
Inc. (``BZX'') received approval to effect a merger (the ``Merger'') of
the Exchange's parent company, BATS Global Markets, Inc., with Direct
Edge Holdings LLC, the indirect parent of EDGX and EDGA (together with
BZX, BYX, EDGA and EDGX, the ``BGM Affiliated Exchanges'').\7\ In the
context of the Merger, the BGM Affiliated Exchanges are working to
align certain rules, retaining only intended differences between the
BGM Affiliated Exchanges. Thus, the proposal set forth below is
intended to align the requirements for Member reimbursements with that
of EDGX and EDGA in order to provide consistent requirement for users
of the BGM Affiliated Exchanges.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71375 (January 23,
2014), 79 FR 4771 (January 29, 2014) (SR-BATS-2013-059; SR-BYX-2013-
039).
    \8\ The Exchange understands that BZX is to file a proposed rule
change with the Commission to adopt similar requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extension of Deadline To Submit Claims
    Rule 11.16 currently states that, except as provided in subsection
(d) of the Rule, the Exchange and its affiliates shall not be liable
for any losses, damages, or other claims arising out of the Exchange or
its use. Exchange Rule 11.16(d) provides a limited exception to its
general limitation of liability that allows for the payment of
compensation to Members for Exchange Systems Issues, subject to certain
conditions. Subsection (d)(1) thru (3) of Rule 11.16 sets forth the
aggregate limits of all claims made by market participants related to
the use of the Exchange.
    Currently, Rule 11.16(f) requires Members to submit claims for
compensation to the Exchange by the opening of trading on the business
day following the day on which the Member's use of the Exchange gave
rise to the claim. To be consistent with EDGX and EDGA, the Exchange
proposes to extend the deadline to submit a claim to no later than 4:00
p.m. Eastern Time, or 1 p.m. in the event of an early market close,\9\
on the second business day following the day on which the Member's use
of the Exchange gave rise to the claim. The Exchange believes that such
expansion of time is reasonable given that Members often do not have
all the necessary information to substantiate all facts bearing on the
accuracy and completeness of a claim within the required current
timeframe under Rule 11.16(f). The expansion of time to submit
compensation claims should, therefore, increase the likelihood that
Members will be able to submit claims to the Exchange in a timely
manner. In addition, the proposed extended deadline is identical to
that contained in EDGX Rule 11.12(d)(3) and EDGA Rule 11.12(d)(3).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Regular trading hours for days when the markets close early
are typically 9:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. Eastern Time on the day after
Thanksgiving and on Christmas Eve, unless Christmas Eve happens to
fall on a weekend. See, e.g., BATS Exchange Trading Hours available
at http://batstrading.com/support/hours/.
    \10\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reimbursement for Losses Sustained at Trading Centers
    The Exchange also proposes to amend Exchange Rule 11.16 to add a
new paragraph (g) that would authorize the Exchange, subject to express
conditions and limitations, to compensate Members for losses relating
to orders routed by the Exchange through BATS Trading to Trading
Centers that the Member claims resulted directly from a Trading Center
Systems Issue. Proposed Rule 11.16(g) is substantially similar to EDGX
Rule 11.12(e) and EDGA Rule 11.12(e).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will provide a
remedy, not currently available under Rule 11.16, to Members that
experience losses due to Trading Center Systems Issues after BATS
Trading routed the Members' orders to a Trading Center that experienced
such issues. The Exchange's authority to compensate Members for losses
under Rule 11.16(d) only covers losses incurred as a result of Exchange
Systems Issues, and does not currently extend to Trading Center Systems
Issues. Even if the Exchange, via BATS Trading, were to seek and
receive compensation on behalf of a Member from a Trading Center
relating to a Trading Center Systems Issue, it does not currently have
the authority to, in turn, pass such compensation along to the affected
Member. The Exchange, therefore, proposes to add a new paragraph (g) to
Rule 11.16 as an accommodation to Members, whereby the Exchange, via
BATS Trading, would employ reasonable efforts to submit Members' claims
for compensation on such Members' behalf to a Trading Center, and pass
along to such Members the full amount of compensation, if any, obtained
by BATS Trading from such Trading Center.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ BATS Trading is considered a facility of the Exchange, and,
therefore, claims for compensation due to an Exchange Systems Issue
experienced by BATS Trading must be submitted in accordance with
Exchange Rule 11.16(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under proposed Rule 11.16(g), the Exchange would undertake to
accept claims for losses submitted by Members, which claims must
contain representations from such Members as to the accuracy of the
information contained therein and that any losses incurred were the
direct result of a Trading Center Systems Issue.\13\ The Exchange would
employ reasonable efforts to submit such claims, via BATS Trading, to
the Trading Center in question. If and to the extent that BATS Trading
were to receive compensation from a Trading Center in response to a
claim submitted on behalf of a Member, the full amount of such
compensation would be passed through to the Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Members receive reports from the Exchange shortly after a
trade is consummated indicating whether their order, or a portion
thereof, was executed at a Trading Center. The report will indicate
the size and price of the execution on the Trading Center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 11.16(g)(1) would require that a Member seeking
compensation for a loss due to a Trading Center Systems Issue must
submit its claim to the Exchange in writing. The proposed rule would
not include a specific deadline by which Members must submit claims for
compensation. The Exchange notes that Trading Centers that are national
securities exchanges impose different deadlines by which their Members
must submit claims for compensation,\14\ and that

many Trading Centers that are not national securities exchanges either
do not impose any deadline or otherwise handle requests for
compensation on a case-by-case basis. It is, therefore, incumbent on,
and the sole responsibility of, the Member to submit claims to the
Exchange in a timely manner so that the Exchange may then forward such
claim, via BATS Trading, in advance of any deadline required by that
Trading Center. Upon receipt of a Member's claim, the Exchange would
only verify that a valid order was submitted by the Member and accepted
and acknowledged by the Exchange, that the Member's order or a portion
of the order was routed by the Exchange via BATS Trading to a Trading
Center, and that the Member represented that it incurred a loss as a
result of a Trading Center Systems Issue. The Exchange would then use
reasonable efforts to forward the claim, via BATS Trading, to such
Trading Center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Nasdaq Stock Market LLC Rule 4626 (requiring claims for
compensation to be submitted by 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time on T+1). See
also NYSE Arca, Inc. Options Rule 14.2, NYSE MKT LLC Rule 905NY,
Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated Rule 6.7 (requiring
claims for compensation to be submitted by the open of regular
trading hours on T+1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 11.16(g)(2) would state that the Exchange would pass
along to the Member the full amount of any compensation that the
Exchange, via BATS Trading, received from a Trading Center as a result
of a claim submitted on behalf of the Member. Any compensation paid to
the Member would be paid solely from the compensation, if any,
recovered from that Trading Center and not from any other source.
    Proposed Rule 11.16(g)(3) would account for the circumstance where
more than one Member submitted a claim for loss resulting from the same
Trading Center Systems Issue and the total amount of compensation
received from the Trading Center is insufficient to fully satisfy the
claims of all such Members. In such case, the Exchange would
proportionally allocate the total amount received from the Trading
Center, if any, among all such Members' claims based on the proportion
that each such claim bears to the sum of all such claims. The Exchange
believes that this provision will provide for equitable compensation
among all Members that submit a valid claim related to a Trading Center
Systems Issue by ensuring that Members are compensated on a pro rata
basis.
    The payment of claims submitted in response to an Exchange Systems
Issue would be separate and apart from any pass-through of compensation
paid due to a Trading Center Systems Issue. Proposed Rule 11.16(g)(4)
would state that any pass-through of compensation to a Member in
accordance with Rule 11.16(g) would be unrelated to any other claims
for compensation that are made due to an Exchange Systems Issues under
Exchange Rule 11.16(d). Accordingly, proposed Rule 11.16(g)(4) would
state that any compensation paid to Members from reimbursement
recovered from a Trading Center would not count against the Exchange's
liability limits set forth in Rule 11.16(d), nor any applicable
insurance maintained by the Exchange.
    Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Exchange is not proposing to
undertake or assume any responsibility to: (1) Independently validate
information submitted by a Member in connection with a claim for
compensation for loss arising out of a Trading Center Systems Issue,
other than the ticker, size and side of the affected orders and the
Trading Center to which the affected orders were routed and alleged to
have experienced a Trading Center Systems Issue; (2) ascertain or
comply with any mandatory deadlines within which to submit claims for
compensation to a Trading Center; (3) guarantee that any compensation
will be procured from a Trading Center; (4) negotiate agreements with
any Trading Centers to require compensation under any circumstances; or
(5) take any additional steps with respect to a Trading Center Systems
Issue if such Trading Center denies or fails to respond to any claim
for compensation, in whole or in part. In other words, the Exchange
will, upon receipt of a claim for compensation from a Member for loss
resulting from a Trading Center Systems Issue, reasonably endeavor to
submit such claim, via BATS Trading, to the applicable Trading Center
as soon as reasonably practicable, and if BATS Trading in turns
receives an accommodation from such Trading Center, such accommodation
will be passed along to the Member via the Exchange. Neither the
Exchange nor BATS Trading will be under any obligation to know any
Trading Center's rules, procedures and/or customs, to the extent any
exist, for the submission of claims for compensation, nor to dispute a
Trading Center's denial of a claim, whether in whole or in part, nor to
take any further actions with respect to such claim in the event that
the Trading Center does not respond at all to the claim. Accordingly,
with this proposed rule change, the Exchange is not assuming any
additional liability to Members for losses claimed to have resulted
from Trading Center Systems Issues; rather, it proposes to serve a
purely ministerial role, given the contractual privity that exists
between BATS Trading and Trading Centers, in the submission of Members'
claims for compensation to such Trading Centers on their behalf. To
that end, proposed Rule 11.16(g)(5) would make clear that under no
circumstances will the Exchanges' inability to procure compensation
from a Trading Center, in whole or in part, for whatever reason, give
rise to a claim for compensation from the Exchange pursuant to
paragraph (d) of Rule 11.16 as a ``negligent act or omission of an
Exchange employee.'' Proposed Rule 11.16(g)(5) would further state that
the Exchange would not be liable should the Trading Center deny such
claim made pursuant to proposed Rule 11.16(g), in whole or in part, for
any reason.
    The Exchange believes that the provisions outlined in the above
paragraph are equitable because any claim submitted under the proposed
Rule 11.16(g) would be subject to the rules, procedures, and discretion
of the Trading Center in question. It is the Trading Center, and not
the Exchange or BATS Trading, that ultimately decides whether to
approve or deny a Member's claim, or even whether to act on such
request at all. For example, the Exchange has no discretion over or
responsibility for the information provided by the Member in its claim,
and no discretion over or responsibility for whether such information
is sufficient for the Trading Center to provide compensation. In
addition, any claim submitted under the proposal would be subject to
compensation only to the extent that the Trading Center provided such
compensation to BATS Trading. Accordingly, because it is the Trading
Center, and not the Exchange or BATS Trading, that ultimately decides
whether a claim for compensation would be granted, the Exchange
believes the proposal is fair and just in limiting the Exchange's
liability in the event a Trading Center determines, for any reason, to
deny a claim, in whole or in part, or even not to respond to such
claim.
Implementation Date
    The Exchange intends to implement the proposed rule changes as soon
as practicable and will announce its availability via a trading notice
to be posted on the Exchange's Web site.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with

Section 6(b) of the Act \15\ and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\16\ in that it is designed promote just and
equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, protect investors and the public interest. In addition, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers or
dealers. The proposed rule change is substantially similar to the
existing rules of EDGX and EDGA.\17\ The proposed rule change is
intended to add certain requirements for Member reimbursements
currently offered by EDGA and EDGX in order to provide consistent rules
across the BGM Affiliated Exchanges. Consistent rules, in turn, will
simplify the regulatory requirements for Members of the Exchange that
are also participants on EDGA and EDGX. The proposed rule change would
provide greater harmonization between Exchange and EDGX and EDGA rules
of similar purpose, resulting in greater uniformity and less burdensome
and more efficient regulatory compliance. As such, the proposed rule
change would foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged
in facilitating transactions in securities and would remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \17\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extension of Deadline To Submit Claims
    Extending the deadline by which claims for compensation are
submitted to the Exchange is designed to increase the likelihood that
Members will be able to submit claims in a timely manner. The Exchange
believes that such expansion of time is reasonable given that Members
often do not have all the necessary information to substantiate all
facts bearing on the accuracy and completeness of a claim within the
required current timeframe under Rule 11.16(f). Therefore, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change is equitable and will promote
fairness in the market place by providing Members increased time to
submit claims that result from an Exchange Systems Issue.
Reimbursement for Losses Sustained at Other Trading Centers
    Like EDGX Rule 11.12(e) and EDGA Rule 11.12(e),\18\ proposed Rule
11.16(g) would enable the Exchange to pass through to Members any
compensation that the Exchange is able to procure, via BATS Trading,
from a Trading Center for losses claimed by Members to have resulted
from a Trading Center Systems Issue. The proposal specifies a
standardized method for Members to submit claims for compensation from
a Trading Center, and for the Exchange to pass through to its Members
any such compensation obtained, if and to the extent the Exchange, via
BATS Trading, is able to obtain such compensation from the Trading
Center. Furthermore, any compensation obtained by the Exchange from a
Trading Center would be passed on to the Member who requested such
reimbursement. If the amount received by the Exchange from the Trading
Center was insufficient to satisfy all claims, it would be allocated
among the claimants proportionally based on the percentage that each
claimant's claim in relation to the sum of all claims received by the
Exchange. In addition, the proposed pro-rata allocation methodology
that the Exchange would employ would provide for equitable compensation
among all Members who submit a claim related to a Trading Center
Systems Issue and deter the risk of preferential treatment of certain
Members by the Exchange. Therefore, the Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change would protect investors and the public interest by
potentially providing Members with a remedy not currently available to
them to recover for losses incurred as a result of Trading Center
Systems Issues, which generally arise from factors unrelated to their
trading activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
competition. The proposed rule change is designed to promote fairness
in the marketplace by increasing the time within which a Member is to
submit claims for Exchange System Issues and to be compensated for
losses that result from Trading Center Systems Issues. The Exchange
believes that the proposed rule changes will not burden intramarket
competition because all Members would be subject to the same deadline
to submit a claim for Exchange Systems Issues and be able to submit
claims for reimbursement for certain losses incurred due to Trading
Center System Issues. The proposed rule change is not designed to
address any competitive issues but rather is designed to provide
greater harmonization among Exchange and EDGA and EDGX rules of similar
purpose, resulting in less burdensome and more efficient regulatory
compliance for common members of the BGM Affiliated Exchanges.

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \19\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \20\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 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 proposal is
consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the
following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-BYX-2014-027 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities

and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-BYX-2014-027. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing will also be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-BYX-2014-027 and should be
submitted on or before November 12, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-24944 Filed 10-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: November 4, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 213)]
[Notices]
[Page 67967-67968]
[DOCID:fr04no10-33]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9221-3]

Proposed Consent Decree, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed consent decree; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (``CAA'' or the ``Act''), 42 U.S.C. 7413(g), notice is hereby
given of a proposed consent decree to address a lawsuit filed by
WildEarth Guardians in the United States District Court for the
District of Colorado: WildEarth Guardians v. Jackson, No. 10-cv-01218-
REB-BNB (D. CO.). On May 26, 2010, Plaintiff filed a complaint alleging
that EPA failed to perform a mandatory duty under section 110(k)(2) of
the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7410(k)(2) to take action on two State
Implementation Plan (``SIP'') submissions from the State of Utah with
the time frame required. The proposed consent decree establishes
deadlines for EPA to take action.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed consent decree must be received
by December 6, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OGC-2010-0901, online at http://www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred
method); by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by mail to EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; or by hand delivery or courier to
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. Comments on a disk or CD-ROM should be
formatted in Word or ASCII file, avoiding the use of special characters
and any form of encryption, and may be mailed to the mailing address
above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara Laumann, Air and Radiation Law
Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Additional Information About the Proposed Consent Decree

    The proposed consent decree would resolve a lawsuit seeking to
compel action by the Administrator to take final action under section
110(k) of the CAA on the Utah SIP submissions. The proposed consent
decree requires EPA to sign for publication in the Federal Register no
later than December 1, 2011, a final action in which it either approves
in whole, approves in part and disapproves in part, or disapproves in
whole, the State of Utah's request to re-designate Salt Lake and Utah
Counties and Ogden City to attainment for the National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (``NAAQS'') for particulate matter having an
aerodynamic diameter of a nominal 10 micrometers (``PM-10''), along
with Utah's maintenance plan for Salt Lake and Utah Counties and Ogden
City for the PM-10 NAAQS, that Utah submitted to EPA on September 2,
2005, and which EPA previously proposed to disapprove in whole on
December 1, 2009.
    The proposed consent decree also requires EPA to sign for
publication in the Federal Register no later than April 30, 2012, a
notice of proposed action in which it proposes either to approve in
whole, approve in part and disapprove in part, or disapprove in whole,
the State of Utah's Regional Haze SIP submission that Utah submitted to
EPA on September 9, 2008. In addition, the proposed consent decree
requires EPA to sign for publication in the Federal Register no later
than October 31, 2012, a final action in which it either approves in
whole, approves in part and disapproves in part, or disapproves in
whole, the State of Utah's Regional Haze SIP submission that Utah
submitted to EPA on September 9, 2008.
    For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication
of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the
proposed consent decree from persons who were not named as parties or
intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of
Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree
if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that
such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent
with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of
Justice

determines that consent to this consent decree should be withdrawn, the
terms of the decree will be affirmed.

II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Consent
Decree.

A. How can I get a copy of the consent decree?

    The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2010-0901) contains a copy of the proposed consent
decree. The official public docket is available for public viewing at
the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the OEI Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through
http://www.regulations.gov. You may use http://www.regulations.gov to
submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the
contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents
in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, key in the appropriate docket identification number then select
``search''.
    It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available
for public viewing online at http://www.regulations.gov without change,
unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information
claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute is not included in the official public docket or in the
electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material,
including copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not
be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only
in printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all
docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access
any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket
Center.

B. How and to whom do I submit comments?

    You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an e-mail address or other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD
ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or
contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included
as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot
read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you
for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    Use of the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments
to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments.
The electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail
(e-mail) system is not an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an
e-mail comment directly to the Docket without going through http://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address is automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.

    Dated: October 28, 2010.
Richard B. Ossias,
Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2010-27884 Filed 11-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P