[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 103 (Wednesday, May 31, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24864-24871]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10928]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0044; FRL-9962-72-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Redesignation of the Belding Area in
Ionia County to Attainment of the 2008 Lead Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the
State of Michigan's request to revise the designation of (redesignate)
the Belding nonattainment area (Belding) to attainment of the 2008
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or standard) for lead.
EPA is also approving the maintenance plan and related elements of the
redesignation. EPA is approving reasonably available control measure
(RACM)/reasonably available control technology (RACT) measures and a
comprehensive emissions inventory as meeting the Clean Air Act (CAA)
requirements. EPA is taking these actions in accordance with the CAA
and EPA's implementation regulations regarding the 2008 lead NAAQS.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective July 31, 2017, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by June 30, 2017. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2016-0044 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Rau, Environmental Engineer,
Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. Why is EPA concerned about lead?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of Michigan's request?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Why is EPA concerned about lead?

    Lead (Pb) is a metal found naturally in the environment and present
in some manufactured products. However, Pb has serious public health
effects and depending on the level of exposure can adversely affect the
nervous system,

kidney function, immune system, reproductive and developmental systems
and the cardiovascular system. Infants and young children are
especially sensitive to even low levels of Pb, which may contribute to
behavioral problems, learning deficits and lowered intelligence
quotient. The major sources of Pb for air emissions have historically
been from fuels used in on-road motor vehicles (such as cars and
trucks) and industrial sources. As a result of EPA's regulatory efforts
to remove Pb from on-road motor vehicle gasoline, emissions of Pb from
the transportation sector dramatically declined by 95 percent between
1980 and 1999, and levels of Pb in the air decreased by 94 percent
between 1980 and 1999.

II. What is the background for these actions?

    On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964), EPA established the 2008
primary and secondary Pb NAAQS at 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter
([mu]g/m\3\) based on a maximum arithmetic 3-month mean concentration
for a 3-year period. 40 CFR 50.16.
    On November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71033), EPA completed its initial air
quality designations and classifications for the 2008 Pb NAAQS based
upon air quality monitoring data for calendar years 2007-2009. The
designations became effective on December 31, 2010. In Michigan, EPA
designated a portion of Ionia County, specifically a portion of the
city of Belding, as nonattainment for the 2008 Pb NAAQS. 40 CFR 81.336.
    On January 12, 2016, Michigan requested EPA to designate the
Belding portion of Ionia County as attainment of the Pb NAAQS. Michigan
documented its request meets the redesignation criteria of CAA section
107.
    Michigan found that the Mueller Industries, Inc. (Mueller) facility
in Belding, Michigan, is the sole source of Pb emissions in the area.
Mueller's Belding facility produces brass rods used to produce plumbing
fittings and fixtures and other products.

III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?

    The requirements for redesignating an area from nonattainment to
attainment are found in CAA section 107 (d)(3)(E). There are five
criteria for redesignating an area. First, the Administrator must
determine that the entire area has attained the applicable NAAQS based
on current air quality data. Second, the Administrator has fully
approved the applicable SIP for the area under CAA section 110(k). The
third criterion is for the Administrator to determine that the air
quality improvement is the result of permanent and enforceable emission
reductions. Fourth, the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance
plan meeting the CAA section 175A requirements. The fifth criterion is
that the state has met all the redesignation requirements of CAA
section 110 and part D.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of Michigan's request?

A. Attainment Determination and Redesignation

1. The Area Has Attained the 2008 Pb NAAQS (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i))
    On July 24, 2015, EPA determined that the Belding, Michigan
nonattainment area has attained the 2008 Pb NAAQS. 80 FR 43956. EPA
made its clean data determination based upon complete, quality-assured
and certified ambient air monitoring data for the 2012-2014 period. The
Belding area attained the 2008 Pb NAAQS, with a design value of 0.06
[micro]g/m\3\ for 2012-2014.
    EPA has reviewed the current monitoring data for Ionia County,
Michigan. The 2013-2015 design values are 0.06 [micro]g/m\3\ for
monitor 26-067-0002, 545 Reed Street in Belding, and 0.05 [micro]g/m\3\
for monitor 26-067-0003, 509 Merrick Street in Belding. The highest
monitored value was 0.06 [micro]g/m\3\ for monitor 26-067-0002 in 2013.
Current monitoring data indicate that the Belding area continues to
attain the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
2. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v))
    EPA determines that Michigan has met all currently applicable SIP
requirements for purposes of redesignation for the Belding area under
section 110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements). In addition, with
the exceptions of the RACM/RACT requirements under section 172(c)(1)
and the emissions inventory under section 172(c)(3), all applicable
requirements of the Michigan SIP for purposes of redesignation have
either been approved or have been suspended, by either a clean data
determination or determination of attainment. EPA is also approving
Michigan's 2013 emissions inventory as meeting the section 172(c)(3)
comprehensive emissions inventory requirement as well as approving the
RACM provisions as meeting the section 172(c)(1) requirement. Thus, we
are determining that the Michigan submission meets all SIP requirements
currently applicable for purposes of redesignation under part D of
title I of the CAA, in accordance with sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and
107(d)(3)(E)(v).
    In making these determinations, EPA has ascertained which SIP
requirements are applicable for purposes of redesignation, and
concluded that the Michigan SIP includes measures meeting those
requirements and that they are fully approved under section 110(k) of
the CAA.
a. Michigan Has Met All Applicable Requirements for Purposes of
Redesignation of the Belding Area Under Section 110 and Part D of the
CAA
i. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
    Section 110(a) of title I of the CAA contains the general
requirements for a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the
implementation plan submitted by a state must have been adopted by the
state after reasonable public notice and hearing, and, among other
things, must: (1) Include enforceable emission limitations and other
control measures, means or techniques necessary to meet the
requirements of the CAA; (2) provide for establishment and operation of
appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to
monitor ambient air quality; (3) provide for implementation of a source
permit program to regulate the modification and construction of any
stationary source within the areas covered by the plan; (4) include
provisions for the implementation of part C, Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) and part D, New Source Review (NSR) permit
programs; (5) include criteria for stationary source emission control
measures, monitoring, and reporting; (6) include provisions for air
quality modeling; and (7) provide for public and local agency
participation in planning and emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs contain measures to
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another state.
    EPA interprets the ``applicable'' requirements for an area's
redesignation to be those requirements linked with a particular area's
nonattainment designation. Therefore, EPA believes that the section 110
elements described above that are not connected with nonattainment plan
submissions and not linked with an area's attainment status, such as
the ``infrastructure SIP'' elements of section 110(a)(2), are not
applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. A state remains
subject to

these requirements after an area is redesignated to attainment, and
thus EPA does not interpret such requirements to be relevant applicable
requirements to evaluate in a redesignation. For example, the
requirement to submit state plans addressing interstate transport
obligations under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) continue to apply to a
state regardless of the designation of any one particular area in the
state, and thus are not applicable requirements to be evaluated in the
redesignation context.
    EPA has applied this interpretation consistently in many
redesignations for decades. See e.g., 81 FR 44210 (July 7, 2016) (final
redesignation for the Sullivan County, Tennessee area); 79 FR 43655
(July 28, 2014) (final redesignation for Bellefontaine, Ohio Pb
nonattainment area); 61 FR 53174-53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR
24826 (May 7, 1997) (proposed and final redesignation for Reading,
Pennsylvania ozone nonattainment area); 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996)
(final redesignation for Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio ozone
nonattainment area); and 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (final
redesignation of Tampa, Florida ozone nonattainment area). See also 65
FR 37879, 37890 (June 19, 2000) (discussing this issue in final
redesignation of Cincinnati, Ohio 1-hour ozone nonattainment area); 66
FR 50399 (October 19, 2001) (final redesignation of Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania 1-hour ozone nonattainment area).
    EPA has reviewed the Michigan SIP and has determined that it meets
the general SIP requirements under section 110 of the CAA to the extent
the requirements are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA has
previously approved provisions of Michigan's SIP addressing section 110
requirements, including provisions addressing Pb, at 40 CFR 52.1170.
    On April 3, 2012, and supplemented on August 9, 2013, and September
19, 2013, Michigan submitted its infrastructure SIP elements for the
2008 Pb NAAQS as required by CAA section 110(a)(2). EPA approved
Michigan's infrastructure SIP requirements for the 2008 Pb NAAQS on
July 16, 2014. 79 FR 41439. The requirements of section 110(a)(2) are
statewide requirements that are not linked to the Pb nonattainment
status of the Belding area or Michigan's redesignation request.
ii. Part D Requirements
    EPA determined that upon approval of the base year emissions
inventories and RACM provisions discussed in this rulemaking, the
Michigan SIP will meet the applicable SIP requirements for the Belding
area applicable for purposes of redesignation under part D of the CAA.
Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the basic nonattainment requirements
applicable to all nonattainment areas.
(1) Section 172 Requirements
    Section 172(c) sets out general nonattainment plan requirements. A
thorough discussion of these requirements can be found in the General
Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992)
(``General Preamble''). EPA's longstanding interpretation of the
nonattainment planning requirements of section 172 is that once an area
is attaining the NAAQS, those requirements are not ``applicable'' for
purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and therefore need not be
approved into the SIP before EPA can redesignate the area. In the
General Preamble, EPA set forth its interpretation of applicable
requirements for purposes of evaluating redesignation requests when an
area is attaining a standard. 57 FR 13564. EPA noted that the
requirements for reasonable further progress (RFP) and other measures
designed to provide for an area's attainment do not apply in evaluating
redesignation requests because those nonattainment planning
requirements ``have no meaning'' for an area that has already attained
the standard. Id. This interpretation was also set forth in the
Calcagni Memorandum.
    EPA's understanding of section 172 also forms the basis of its
Clean Data Policy. Under the Clean Data Policy, EPA promulgates a
determination of attainment, published in the Federal Register and
subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking, and this determination
formally suspends a state's obligation to submit most of the attainment
planning requirements that would otherwise apply, including an
attainment demonstration and planning SIPs to provide for RFP, RACM,
and contingency measures under section 172(c)(9). The Clean Data Policy
has been codified in regulations regarding the implementation of the
ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005) and
72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007). The Clean Data Policy has also been
specifically applied in a number of Pb nonattainment areas where EPA
has determined that the area is attaining the Pb NAAQS. 79 FR 46212
(August 7, 2014) (proposed determination of attainment of Lyons,
Pennsylvania Pb nonattainment area); 80 FR 51127 (determination of
attainment of Eagan, Minnesota Pb nonattainment area). EPA finalized a
Clean Data Determination under this policy for the Belding Pb
nonattainment area on July 24, 2015. 80 FR 43956.
    EPA's long-standing interpretation regarding the applicability of
section 172(c)'s attainment planning requirements for an area that is
attaining a NAAQS applies in this redesignation of the Belding Pb
nonattainment area as well, except for the applicability of the
requirement to implement all reasonably available control measures
under section 172(c)(1). On July 14, 2015, the United States Court of
Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (6th Circuit) ruled that to meet the
requirement of section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii), states are required to submit
plans addressing RACM/RACT under section 172(c)(1) and EPA is required
to approve those plans prior to redesignating the area, regardless of
whether the area is attaining the standard. Sierra Club v. EPA, 793
F.3d 656 (6th Cir. 2015). As Michigan is within the jurisdiction of the
6th Circuit, EPA is acting in accordance with the Sierra Club decision
by approving RACM provisions in parallel with this redesignation
action.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Although the approach being implemented here is inconsistent
with the Agency's longstanding national policy, such deviation is
required in order to act in accordance with a Circuit Court
decision. Consistent with 40 CFR 56.5(b), the Region does not need
to seek concurrence from EPA Headquarters for such deviation in
these circumstances. 81 FR 51102 (August 3, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for all nonattainment areas to
provide for the implementation of all RACM as expeditiously as
practicable and to provide for attainment of the primary NAAQS. Under
this requirement, a state must consider all available control measures,
including reductions that area available from adopting RACT on existing
sources, for a nonattainment area and adopt and implement such measures
as are reasonably available in the area as components of the area's
attainment demonstration. EPA is today approving Michigan's RACM
submission. Therefore, Michigan has met its requirements under CAA
sections 172(c)(1) and 107(d)(3)(E)(v).
    The remaining section 172(c) ``attainment planning'' requirements
are not applicable for purposes of evaluating Michigan's redesignation
request. Specifically, the RFP requirement under section 172(c)(2),
which is defined as progress that must be made toward attainment, the
requirement to submit section 172(c)(9) contingency measures, which are
measures to be taken if the area fails to make reasonable further
progress to attainment, and section 172(c)(6)'s requirement that the
SIP contain control

measures necessary to provide for attainment of the standard, are not
applicable requirements that Michigan must meet here because the
Belding area has monitored attainment of the 2008 Pb NAAQS. As noted,
EPA issued a determination of attainment (or clean data determination)
for the Belding area in July 2015, which formally suspended the
obligation to submit any of the attainment planning SIPs. 80 FR 43956
(July 24, 2015).
    Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions.
Michigan submitted 2009, 2011, and 2013 emission inventories along with
its redesignation request. The 2013 inventory can be used as the most
accurate and current inventory. As discussed in section III.B., EPA is
approving the 2013 base year inventory as meeting the section 172(c)(3)
emissions inventory requirement for the Belding area.
    Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and modified stationary sources in an
area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for the
construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources
anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA approved Michigan's current NSR
program on December 16, 2013. 78 FR 76064. In addition, the state's
maintenance plan does not rely nonattainment NSR, therefore having a
fully approved NSR program is not an applicable requirement, but that,
nonetheless, EPA has approved the state's program.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ A detailed rationale for this view is described in a
memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D New Source
Review Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures
necessary to provide for attainment of the standard. No additional
measures are needed to provide for attainment because attainment has
been reached.
    Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable
provisions of section 110(a)(2). EPA finds that the Michigan SIP meets
the section 110(a)(2) applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation.
(2) Section 176 Conformity Requirements
    CAA section 176(c) requires states to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that Federally-supported or funded activities,
including highway and transit projects, conform to the air quality
planning goals in the applicable SIPs. The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and projects
developed, funded or approved under title 23 of the U.S. Code and the
Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity) as well as to all other
Federally-supported or funded projects (general conformity).
Considering the elimination of Pb additives in gasoline, transportation
conformity does not apply to the Pb NAAQS. 73 FR 66964, 67043 n.120.
EPA approved Michigan's general conformity SIP on December 18, 1996. 61
FR 66607.
b. Michigan Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of
the CAA
    Upon final approval of Michigan's comprehensive 2013 emissions
inventories and approval of RACM for the Belding Pb area, EPA will have
fully approved the Michigan SIP for the Belding area under section
110(k) of the CAA for all requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation, in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). EPA may
rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request (See
page 3 of the September 4, 1992, Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment: Policy Memorandum (Calcagni memorandum));
Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984,
989-990 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001)).
EPA also relies on measures approved in conjunction with a
redesignation action. See 68 FR 25413 (May 12, 2003) (approving I/M
program for St. Louis) and 68 FR 25413, 25426 (May 12, 2003). Michigan
has adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully approved, required SIP
provisions addressing the 2008 Pb standards. Of the CAA requirements
applicable to this redesignation request, only two remain--the
emissions inventory requirement of section 172(c)(3) and the RACM
requirement of section 172(c)(1).
    EPA is approving the submitted Mueller emission controls as RACM/
RACT and Michigan's 2013 emissions inventories for the Belding area as
meeting the requirement of CAA section 172(c)(3). There are no SIP
provisions are currently disapproved, conditionally approved, or
partially approved in the Belding, Michigan area under section 110(k)
in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable
Reductions in Emissions Resulting From Implementation of the SIPs and
Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and Other
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
    To support the revision of an area's designation from nonattainment
to attainment, CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) requires EPA to determine
that the air quality improvement in the area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions. The permanent and enforceable
emission reductions result from the implementation of the SIP and
applicable Federal air pollution control regulations and other
permanent and enforceable emission reductions.
    Michigan identified Mueller as the lone source of Pb emissions near
the nonattainment area. Mueller produces brass rods that are used in
making plumbing fixtures and fittings among other products at its
facility in Belding, Michigan. Mueller implemented various control
measures on its west chip and east chip dryers that result in decreased
emissions. In 2010, it stopped operating its uncontrolled east chip
dryer and installed controls on its west chip dryer. A permanent and
enforceable Permit to Install number 16-11 (PTI 16-11) was issued on
October 20, 2011, and revised on March 15, 2012, which limits Pb
emissions and requires certain controls for the east and west chip
dryers. PTI 16-11 requires each chip dryer to operate a cyclone, a
thermal oxidizer, a wet scrubber, and a demister to control emissions.
Operation of the east chip dryer is allowed once the required controls
are installed. The west chip dryer stack height was increased to 122
feet in January 2012. The east chip dryer stack height is also required
to be 122 feet. Increasing the stack height creates more dispersion of
the exhaust, which can reduce the maximum concentration. The controls
and emission limits in PTI 16-11 are permanent and enforceable.
Michigan analyzed the control measures added in PTI 16-11 and found
that these measures brought the Belding area into attainment of the
2008 Pb NAAQS. The monitoring data in the Belding area, as detailed in
III.A.1, show the area has met and continues to meet the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
    In addition, the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act (Section
1417 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300g-6) prohibits the
use of Pb in plumbing fittings or fixtures. Effective January 4, 2014,
plumbing fittings and fixtures must go from a weighted average of 8.0
percent Pb to 0.25 percent

Pb. This reduction requires Mueller to reduce the amount of Pb used in
its brass rod production, which is expected to continue the decrease in
its Pb emissions.
4. Michigan Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section
175A of the CAA (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
    In conjunction with its request to designate the Belding
nonattainment area to attainment, Michigan requested a SIP revision to
provide for maintenance of the 2008 Pb NAAQS in the area through 2025.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
    The required elements of a maintenance plan for areas seeking
redesignation from nonattainment to attainment are contained in section
175A of the CAA. Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate
continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years
after EPA approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after
redesignation, the state must submit a revised maintenance plan which
demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for the
subsequent 10 years.
    To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the
maintenance plan must contain contingency measures with a schedule for
implementation as EPA deems necessary to assure prompt correction of
any future Pb violations.
    The September 4, 1992, Calcagni memorandum provides additional
guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. The memorandum states
that a maintenance plan should address the following items: The
attainment emissions inventory, a maintenance demonstration showing
maintenance for the 10 years of the maintenance period, a commitment to
maintain the existing monitoring network, factors and procedures to be
used for verification of continued attainment of the NAAQS, and a
contingency plan to prevent or correct future violations of the NAAQS.
    Michigan's maintenance plan shows that the Belding area's emissions
will remain below the attainment year levels through 2025.
b. Attainment Inventory
    Michigan provided Pb emissions inventories for the nonattainment
years (2009 and 2011), attainment year (2013), and future year (2025).
The Pb emissions for Mueller's Belding, Michigan facility are listed in
Table 1.

                                         Table 1--Mueller Lead Emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009...................................  2,277.73 pounds...........  nonattainment year.
2011...................................  1,402.93 pounds...........  nonattainment year.
2013...................................  1,153.15 pounds...........  attainment year.
2025...................................  864 pounds................  future year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Michigan identified Mueller as the lone source of Pb emissions in
the vicinity of the Belding nonattainment area. Thus, the emissions
inventories provided are adequate for the Belding area.
c. Demonstration of Maintenance
    Michigan included a section 175(A) maintenance plan in its
submission. Section 175A requires a state seeking redesignation to
attainment to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of
the NAAQS in the area ``for at least 10 years after the
redesignation''. EPA has interpreted this as a showing of maintenance
``for a period of ten years following redesignation''. Calcagni
memorandum at 9. Where the emissions inventory method of showing
maintenance is used, its purpose is to show that emissions during the
maintenance period will not increase over the attainment year
inventory. Calcagni memorandum at 9-10.
    A maintenance demonstration need not be based on modeling. See Wall
v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F. 3d 537
(7th Cir. 2004). See also 66 FR 53094, 53099-53100 (October 19, 2001),
68 FR 25413, 25430-25432 (May 12, 2003). Michigan has provided both an
emissions inventory as well as air dispersion modeling of the emission
limits established in PTI 16-11 to demonstrate that the area should
maintain the standard into the future. A summary of the air dispersion
modeling for Mueller was included in Michigan's submissions. The
modeling evaluated the Consent Order 9-2011 and PTI 16-11 revisions.
Michigan used the American Meteorology Society/Environmental Protection
Agency Regulatory Model version 11103. That analysis yielded a maximum
impact of 0.13 [micro]g/m\3\, which is below the 2008 Pb NAAQS of 0.15
[micro]g/m\3\. This modeling analysis is valid for the Belding
redesignation as the Mueller control revisions are responsible for the
emission reductions that brought the area into attainment. Michigan
also provided an emissions inventory for an attainment year, 2013, and
for a future year, 2025. See Table 1. Michigan is projecting a 25
percent decrease below attainment year emissions Pb emissions from the
source due to the reduction in Pb usage in brass manufacturing. Under
the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act, plumbing fittings and
fixtures must go from a weighted average of 8.0 percent Pb to 0.25
percent Pb, driving the expected Pb decreases from Mueller.
    Michigan's maintenance plan submission shows that the Belding
area's Pb emissions will remain below the attainment year inventories
through 2025. The reductions in Pb emissions in Belding result from the
permeant and enforceable control measures for Mueller, the lone Pb
source in the area. Monitoring data show the Belding area ambient Pb
concentrations declined following the Mueller emission reductions. It
is reasonable to expect the emissions to remain at the reduced levels
because of the control measures implemented. Thus, it is reasonable to
expect the Belding area will continue to attain the 2008 Pb NAAQS
through 2027.
    EPA believes that Michigan's submission demonstrates that the area
will continue to maintain the 2008 Pb NAAQS at least through 2027. This
is because the 2027 emissions should remain at the same level as
projected for 2025 due to the permanent and enforceable limits in PTI
16-11 along with additional reductions from other rules. In addition,
the air dispersion modeling indicates that with the PTI 16-11 controls
the Belding area ambient Pb concentration will be below the 2008 Pb
NAAQS. Thus, EPA is approving the redesignation request and maintenance
plans based on a showing, in accordance with section 175A, that the
Michigan's maintenance plan provides for maintenance for at least 10
years after redesignation.
d. Monitoring Network
    Michigan will monitor ambient Pb levels during the 10 year
maintenance period in the Belding area to confirm continued maintenance
of the 2008 Pb

NAAQS. EPA determines that the Belding, Michigan area Pb monitoring
network is adequate to confirm maintenance. Michigan commits to
continue to operate an adequate monitoring network.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
    Michigan will also continue to enter its air monitoring data into
the Air Quality System in accordance with Federal guidelines. It will
also submit periodic emissions inventories to EPA as required by the
Federal Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule to verify continued
attainment. 67 FR 39602, June 10, 2002. Both actions will help to
verify continued attainment in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
f. Contingency Plan
    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct or
prevent a violation of the NAAQS that might occur after redesignation
of an area to attainment. CAA section 175A requires that the
maintenance plan include such contingency measures. The maintenance
plan should identify the contingency measures to be adopted, a schedule
and procedure for adoption and implementation of the contingency
measures, and a time limit for action by the state. The state should
also identify specific indicators to be used to determine when the
contingency measures need to be adopted and implemented. The
maintenance plan must include a requirement that the state will
implement all pollution control measures that were contained in the SIP
before redesignation of the area to attainment. Section 175A(d) of the
CAA.
    Michigan commits to implement one or more contingency measures
should the 2008 Pb NAAQS be violated during the maintenance period. The
contingency measures are:
    i. Increase inspection frequency of Mueller to twice per year,
beginning three months after a quality-assured violation of the NAAQS
at a Belding, Michigan air monitoring site. The increased inspection
frequency will remain in place until the quality-assured Pb ambient air
monitored levels show NAAQS compliance on a 3-year rolling average.
    ii. Require Mueller to submit an enhanced preventative maintenance/
malfunction abatement plan within six months after a quality-assured
violation of the NAAQS at a Belding, Michigan air monitoring site.
    iii. Require Mueller to reassess control strategies that further
limit Pb emissions within one year of a quality-assured violation of
the NAAQS at a Belding, Michigan air monitoring site.
    Michigan will also consider any other potential contingency
measures at the time of the selection.
    EPA finds that Michigan's maintenance plan adequately addresses the
five basic components of a maintenance plan: attainment inventory,
maintenance demonstration, monitoring network, verification of
continued attainment, and a contingency plan.
    As required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, Michigan commits to
submit to the EPA an updated Pb maintenance plan eight years after
redesignation of the Belding area to cover an additional 10 year period
beyond the initial 10 year maintenance period.
    EPA is approving Michigan's 2008 Pb maintenance plan for the
Belding area as meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A.

B. Comprehensive Emissions Inventory

    Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires areas to submit a
comprehensive, accurate, and current emissions inventory. Michigan
provided such an inventory in its submission.
    Michigan identified Mueller as the lone source of Pb emissions in
the vicinity of the Belding nonattainment area. Thus, it provided the
emissions for Mueller that represent the emissions of the Belding area.
In 2013, Pb emissions were 1,153.15 pounds. See Table 1.
    EPA approves the Pb emissions inventories submitted by Michigan in
January 2016 as fully meeting the comprehensive inventory requirement
of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for the Belding area for the 2008 Pb
NAAQS.

C. RACM Requirements

    Based on the 6th Circuit decision, CAA Section 172(c)(1) requires
areas to have approved RACM/RACT provisions to be redesignated. PTI 16-
11 added legally enforceable emission controls on Mueller considered to
be RACT for Pb. PTI 16-11 requires each Mueller chip dryer to operate a
cyclone, a thermal oxidizer, a wet scrubber, and a demister to control
emissions. The west chip dryer stack height was increased to 122 feet
in January 2012. The east chip dryer stack height is also required to
be 122 feet. EPA is approving the emission controls as required by PTI
16-11 as satisfying the RACT requirement of Section 172(c)(1).

V. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA has determined that the Belding area is attaining the 2008 Pb
NAAQS and that the area has met the requirements for redesignation
under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus approving the
requests from Michigan to change the legal designation of the Belding
area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 Pb standard. EPA is
approving Michigan's maintenance plan for the Belding area as a
revision to the Michigan SIP because the plan meets the requirements of
section 175A of the CAA. EPA is approving the emission controls in PTI
16-11 as required by Consent Order 9-2011 as meeting the RACM/RACT
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1). EPA is approving the 2013
emissions inventory as meeting the comprehensive emissions inventory
requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. EPA is taking these
actions in accordance with the CAA and EPA's implementation regulations
regarding the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
    We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective July 31, 2017
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by June 30, 2017. If we receive such comments, we will
withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective July
31, 2017.

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 CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting

Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

    Dated: May 4, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  52.1170 the table in paragraph (e) is amended:
0
a. Under ``Emissions Inventories'' by adding an entry for ``2008 lead
(Pb) 2013 base year'' after the entry for ``1997 annual
PM2.5 2005 base year;'' and
0
 b. Under ``Maintenance Plans'' by adding an entry for ``2008 lead
(Pb)'' after the entry for ``2006 24-Hour PM2.5.''
    The additions read as follows:

Sec.  52.1170  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                       EPA-Approved Michigan Nonregulatory And Quasi-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Applicable
    Name of nonregulatory SIP         geographic or          State       EPA approval date         Comments
            provision               nonattainment area  submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  * * * * * * *
                                              Emissions Inventories
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
2008 lead (Pb) 2013 base year....  Belding area (Ionia       1/12/2016  5/31/2017, [insert   ...................
                                    County, part).                       Federal Register
                                                                         citation].

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  * * * * * * *
                                                Maintenance Plans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
2008 lead (Pb)...................  Belding area (Ionia       1/12/2016  5/31/2017, [insert   ...................
                                    County, part).                       Federal Register
                                                                         citation].

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

0
3. Section 52.1188 is amended by adding paragraphs (b) and (c) to read
as follows:

Sec.  52.1188  Control strategy: Lead (Pb).

* * * * *
    (b) Michigan's 2013 lead emissions inventory for the Belding area
as submitted on January 12, 2016, satisfying the emission inventory
requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act for the Belding
area.
    (c) Approval. The 2008 lead maintenance plan for the Belding,
Michigan nonattainment area has been approved as submitted on January
12, 2016.

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
4. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

0
5. Section 81.323 is amended by revising the entry for Belding, MI in
the table entitled ``Michigan--2008 Lead NAAQS'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.323  Michigan.

* * * * *

                        Michigan--2008 Lead NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Designation for the 2008 NAAQS \a\
         Designated area          --------------------------------------
                                      Date \1\              Type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Belding, MI:
    Ionia County (part)..........       5/31/2017  Attainment.
        The area bounded by the
         following coordinates:
         Southeast corner by
         latitude 43.0956705 N
         and longitude 85.2130771
         W; southwest corner
         (intersection of S.
         Broas St. and W.
         Washington St.) by
         latitude 43.0960358 N
         and longitude 85.2324027
         W; northeast corner by
         latitude 43.1074942 N
         and longitude 85.2132313
         W; western boundary 1
         (intersection of W.
         Ellis St. and the
         vertical extension of S.
         Broas St.) by latitude
         43.1033277 N and
         longitude 85.2322553 W;
         western boundary 2
         (intersection of W.
         Ellis St. and N. Bridge
         St.) by latitude
         43.1033911 N and
         longitude 85.2278464 W;
         western boundary 3
         (intersection of N.
         Bridge St. and Earle
         St.) by latitude
         43.1074479 N and
         longitude 85.2279722 W.

                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as
  otherwise specified.
\1\ December 31, 2011 unless otherwise noted.

[FR Doc. 2017-10928 Filed 5-30-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 133 (Wednesday, July 11, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32108-32109]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14766]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #3

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

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1159-001.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., Pioneer
Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2018-07-02_Deficiency response re
Pioneer Attachment O Filing to be effective 6/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5179.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1911-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-07-02_Termination of SA
2893 Black Hawk MPFCA (J233, J274, J278, J279) to be effective 7/3/
2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5028.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1912-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: First Revised ISA SA No.
3041; Queue No. AC2-133 to be effective 6/4/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5134.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1913-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Second Revised ISA, SA No.
4109; Queue No. AB2-191 to be effective 8/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5135.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1914-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-07-02_SA 2959 Northern
States Power-Stoneray Power Partners 1stRevGIA(J426) to be effective 6/
20/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5149.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1915-000.
    Applicants: Bowfin KeyCon Energy, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Bowfin Energy FERC Electric
Tariff, Original Baseline to be effective 8/13/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5168.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1917-000.
    Applicants: Bowfin KeyCon Power, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Bowfin Power FERC Electric
Tariff, Original Baseline to be effective 8/13/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5169.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1918-000.
    Applicants: Kestrel Acquisition, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Notices of succession to be
effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5173.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1919-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Midwest Energy Formula Rate
Protocols Revisions to be effective 7/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5178.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1920-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.,
MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-07-02_SA 3128
MidAmerican-CIPCO Amended Interconnection Agreement GFA 471 to be
effective 7/3/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5180.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1921-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 607R32 Westar Energy, Inc.
NITSA NOA to be effective 6/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5184.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1922-000.
    Applicants: Lakeswind Power Partners, LLC.
    Description: Market-Based Triennial Review Filing: Triennial Market
Power Update (Central Region) and Tariff Revisions to be effective 9/1/
2018.
    Filed Date: 7/2/18.
    Accession Number: 20180702-5185.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/23/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 2, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-14766 Filed 7-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 9 (Thursday, January 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1971-1976]
[FR Doc No: 2016-00567]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76856; File No. 4-694]

Program for Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities Pursuant to
Rule 17d-2; Notice of Filing of Proposed Plan for the Allocation of
Regulatory Responsibilities Between the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. and the National Stock Exchange, Inc.

January 8, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 17(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 17d-2 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 23, 2015, the National Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NSX'') and
the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') (together
with NSX, the ``Parties'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'') a plan for the allocation of
regulatory responsibilities, dated December 22, 2015 (``17d-2 Plan'' or
the ``Plan''). The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the 17d-2 Plan from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78q(d).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.17d-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Introduction

    Section 19(g)(1) of the Act,\3\ among other things, requires every
self-regulatory organization (``SRO'') registered as either a national
securities exchange or national securities association to examine for,
and enforce compliance by, its members and persons associated with its
members with the Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the
SRO's own rules, unless the SRO is relieved of this responsibility
pursuant to Section 17(d) or Section 19(g)(2) of the Act.\4\ Without
this relief, the statutory obligation of each individual SRO could
result in a pattern of multiple examinations of broker-dealers that
maintain memberships in more than one SRO (``common members'') for
compliance with certain rules that are substantially identical across
multiple SROs. Such regulatory duplication would add unnecessary
expenses for common members and their SROs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(g)(1).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78q(d) and 15 U.S.C. 78s(g)(2), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 17(d)(1) of the Act \5\ was intended, in part, to eliminate
unnecessary multiple examinations and regulatory duplication.\6\ With
respect to a common member, Section 17(d)(1) authorizes the Commission,
by rule or order, to relieve an SRO of the responsibility to receive
regulatory reports, to examine for and enforce compliance with
applicable statutes, rules, and regulations, or to perform other
specified regulatory functions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q(d)(1).
    \6\ See Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Report of the Senate
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs to Accompany S.
249, S. Rep. No. 94-75, 94th Cong., 1st Session 32 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To implement Section 17(d)(1), the Commission adopted two rules:
Rule 17d-1 and Rule 17d-2 under the Act.\7\ Rule 17d-1 authorizes the
Commission to name a single SRO as the designated examining authority
(``DEA'') to examine common members for compliance with the financial
responsibility requirements imposed by the Act, or by Commission or SRO

rules.\8\ When an SRO has been named as a common member's DEA, all
other SROs to which the common member belongs are relieved of the
responsibility to examine the firm for compliance with the applicable
financial responsibility rules. On its face, Rule 17d-1 deals only with
an SRO's obligations to enforce member compliance with financial
responsibility requirements. Rule 17d-1 does not relieve an SRO from
its obligation to examine a common member for compliance with its own
rules and provisions of the federal securities laws governing matters
other than financial responsibility, including sales practices and
trading activities and practices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 240.17d-1 and 17 CFR 240.17d-2, respectively.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 12352 (April 20,
1976), 41 FR 18808 (May 7, 1976).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To address regulatory duplication in these and other areas, the
Commission adopted Rule 17d-2 under the Act.\9\ Rule 17d-2 permits SROs
to propose joint plans for the allocation of regulatory
responsibilities with respect to their common members. Under paragraph
(c) of Rule 17d-2, the Commission may declare such a plan effective if,
after providing for appropriate notice and comment, it determines that
the plan is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and for the
protection of investors; to foster cooperation and coordination among
the SROs; to remove impediments to, and foster the development of, a
national market system and a national clearance and settlement system;
and is in conformity with the factors set forth in Section 17(d) of the
Act. Commission approval of a plan filed pursuant to Rule 17d-2
relieves an SRO of those regulatory responsibilities allocated by the
plan to another SRO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 12935 (October 28,
1976), 41 FR 49091 (November 8, 1976).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Proposed Plan

    The proposed 17d-2 Plan is intended to reduce regulatory
duplication for firms that are common members of both NSX and
FINRA.\10\ Pursuant to the proposed 17d-2 Plan, FINRA would assume
certain examination and enforcement responsibilities for common members
with respect to certain applicable laws, rules, and regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The proposed 17d-2 Plan refers to these common members as
``Dual Members.'' See Paragraph 1(c) of the proposed 17d-2 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the Plan delineates the proposed regulatory
responsibilities with respect to the Parties. Included in the proposed
Plan is an exhibit (the ``National Stock Exchange (``NSX'') Rules
Certification for 17d-2 Agreement with FINRA,'' referred to herein as
the ``Certification'') that lists every NSX rule, and select federal
securities laws, rules, and regulations, for which FINRA would bear
responsibility under the Plan for overseeing and enforcing with respect
to NSX members that are also members of FINRA and the associated
persons therewith (``Dual Members'').
    Specifically, under the 17d-2 Plan, FINRA would assume examination
and enforcement responsibility relating to compliance by Dual Members
with the rules of NSX that are substantially similar to the applicable
rules of FINRA,\11\ as well as any provisions of the federal securities
laws and the rules and regulations thereunder delineated in the
Certification (``Common Rules''). In the event that a Dual Member is
the subject of an investigation relating to a transaction on NSX, the
plan acknowledges that NSX may, in its discretion, exercise concurrent
jurisdiction and responsibility for such matter.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See paragraph 1(b) of the proposed 17d-2 Plan (defining
Common Rules). See also paragraph 1(f) of the proposed 17d-2 Plan
(defining Regulatory Responsibilities). Paragraph 2 of the Plan
provides that annually, or more frequently as required by changes in
either NSX rules or FINRA rules, the parties shall review and
update, if necessary, the list of Common Rules. Further, paragraph 3
of the Plan provides that NSX shall furnish FINRA with a list of
Dual Members, and shall update the list no less frequently than once
each calendar quarter.
    \12\ See paragraph 6 of the proposed 17d-2 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Plan, NSX would retain full responsibility for
surveillance and enforcement with respect to trading activities or
practices involving NSX's own marketplace, including, without
limitation, registration pursuant to its applicable rules of associated
persons (i.e., registration rules that are not Common Rules); its
duties as a DEA pursuant to Rule 17d-1 under the Act; and any NSX rules
that are not Common Rules.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See paragraph 2 of the proposed 17d-2 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed 17d-2 Plan is as follows:

Agreement Between Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. and
National Stock Exchange, Inc. Pursuant to Rule 17d-2 Under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934

    This Agreement, by and between the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') and the National Stock Exchange, Inc.
(``NSX''), is made this 22nd day of December, 2015 (the ``Agreement''),
pursuant to Section 17(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended (the ``Exchange Act'') and Rule 17d-2 thereunder, which permits
agreements between self-regulatory organizations to allocate regulatory
responsibility to eliminate regulatory duplication. FINRA and NSX may
be referred to individually as a ``party'' and together as the
``parties.''
    This Agreement replaces and restates the agreement entered into
between the parties on June 20, 1977 as amended, entitled ``Agreement
Between the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. and the
Cincinnati Stock Exchange Pursuant to SEC Rule 17d-2 Under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934,'' and any subsequent amendments
thereafter.
    WHEREAS, FINRA and NSX desire to reduce duplication in the
examination of their Dual Members (as defined herein) and in the filing
and processing of certain registration and membership records; and
    WHEREAS, FINRA and NSX desire to execute an agreement covering such
subjects pursuant to the provisions of Rule 17d-2 under the Exchange
Act and to file such agreement with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``SEC'' or ``Commission'') for its approval.
    NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained
hereinafter, FINRA and NSX hereby agree as follows:
    1. Definitions. Unless otherwise defined in this Agreement or the
context otherwise requires, the terms used in this Agreement shall have
the same meaning as they have under the Exchange Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder. As used in this Agreement, the following terms
shall have the following meanings:
    (a) ``NSX Rules'' or ``FINRA Rules'' shall mean: (i) The rules of
NSX or (ii) the rules of FINRA, respectively, as the rules of an
exchange or association are defined in Exchange Act Section 3(a)(27).
    (b) ``Common Rules'' shall mean NSX Rules that are substantially
similar to the applicable FINRA Rules and certain provisions of the
Exchange Act and SEC rules set forth on Exhibit 1 in that examination
for compliance with such provisions and rules would not require FINRA
to develop one or more new examination standards, modules, procedures,
or criteria in order to analyze the application of the provision or
rule, or a Dual Member's activity, conduct, or output in relation to
such provision or rule; provided, however Common Rules shall not
include the application of the SEC, NSX or FINRA rules as they pertain
to violations of insider trading activities, which is covered by a
separate 17d-2 Agreement by and among the NSX Exchange, Inc., NSX Y-
Exchange, Inc., Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., Chicago Stock

Exchange, Inc., EDGA Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange, Inc., Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX
PHLX LLC, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, National Stock Exchange, Inc.,
New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE Amex LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., and NYSE
Regulation, Inc., approved by the SEC on December 16, 2011 as the same
may be amended from time to time.
    (c) ``Dual Members'' shall mean those NSX members that are also
members of FINRA and the associated persons therewith.
    (d) ``Effective Date'' shall be the date this Agreement is approved
by the Commission.
    (e) ``Enforcement Responsibilities'' shall mean the conduct of
appropriate proceedings, in accordance with FINRA's Code of Procedure
(the Rule 9000 Series) and other applicable FINRA procedural rules, to
determine whether violations of Common Rules have occurred, and if such
violations are deemed to have occurred, the imposition of appropriate
sanctions as specified under FINRA's Code of Procedure and sanctions
guidelines.
    (f) ``Regulatory Responsibilities'' shall mean the examination
responsibilities and Enforcement Responsibilities relating to
compliance by the Dual Members with the Common Rules and the provisions
of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder, and other
applicable laws, rules and regulations, each as set forth on Exhibit 1
attached hereto.
    2. Regulatory and Enforcement Responsibilities. FINRA shall assume
Regulatory Responsibilities and Enforcement Responsibilities for Dual
Members. Attached as Exhibit 1 to this Agreement and made part hereof,
NSX furnished FINRA with a current list of Common Rules and certified
to FINRA that such rules that are NSX Rules are substantially similar
to the corresponding FINRA Rules (the ``Certification''). FINRA hereby
agrees that the rules listed in the Certification are Common Rules as
defined in this Agreement. Each year following the Effective Date of
this Agreement, or more frequently if required by changes in either the
rules of NSX or FINRA, NSX shall submit an updated list of Common Rules
to FINRA for review which shall add NSX Rules not included in the
current list of Common Rules that qualify as Common Rules as defined in
this Agreement; delete NSX Rules included in the current list of Common
Rules that no longer qualify as Common Rules as defined in this
Agreement; and confirm that the remaining rules on the current list of
Common Rules continue to be NSX Rules that qualify as Common Rules as
defined in this Agreement. Within 30 days of receipt of such updated
list, FINRA shall confirm in writing whether the rules listed in any
updated list are Common Rules as defined in this Agreement.
Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, it is explicitly
understood that the term ``Regulatory Responsibilities'' does not
include, and NSX shall retain full responsibility for (unless otherwise
addressed by separate agreement or rule) (collectively, the ``Retained
Responsibilities'') the following:
    (a) Surveillance, examination, investigation and enforcement with
respect to trading activities or practices involving NSX's own
marketplace;
    (b) registration pursuant to its applicable rules of associated
persons (i.e., registration rules that are not Common Rules);
    (c) discharge of its duties and obligations as a Designated
Examining Authority pursuant to Rule 17d-1 under the Exchange Act; and
    (d) any NSX Rules that are not Common Rules.
    3. Dual Members. Prior to the Effective Date, NSX shall furnish
FINRA with a current list of Dual Members, which shall be updated no
less frequently than once each quarter.
    4. No Charge. There shall be no charge to NSX by FINRA for
performing the Regulatory Responsibilities and Enforcement
Responsibilities under this Agreement except as hereinafter provided.
FINRA shall provide NSX with ninety (90) days advance written notice in
the event FINRA decides to impose any charges to NSX for performing the
Regulatory Responsibilities under this Agreement. If FINRA determines
to impose a charge, NSX shall have the right at the time of the
imposition of such charge to terminate this Agreement; provided,
however, that FINRA's Regulatory Responsibilities under this Agreement
shall continue until the Commission approves the termination of this
Agreement.
    5. Applicability of Certain Laws, Rules, Regulations or Orders.
Notwithstanding any provision hereof, this Agreement shall be subject
to any statute, or any rule or order of the Commission. To the extent
such statute, rule, order or action is inconsistent with this
Agreement, the statute, rule, order or action shall supersede the
provision(s) hereof to the extent necessary for them to be properly
effectuated and the provision(s) hereof in that respect shall be null
and void.
    6. Notification of Violations.
    (a) In the event that FINRA becomes aware of apparent violations of
any NSX Rules, which are not listed as Common Rules, discovered
pursuant to the performance of the Regulatory Responsibilities assumed
hereunder, FINRA shall notify NSX of those apparent violations for such
response as NSX deems appropriate.
    (b) In the event that NSX becomes aware of apparent violations of
any Common Rules, discovered pursuant to the performance of the
Retained Responsibilities, NSX shall notify FINRA of those apparent
violations and such matters shall be handled by FINRA as provided in
this Agreement.
    (c) Apparent violations of Common Rules shall be processed by, and
enforcement proceedings in respect thereto shall be conducted by FINRA
as provided hereinbefore; provided, however, that in the event a Dual
Member is the subject of an investigation relating to a transaction on
NSX, NSX may in its discretion assume concurrent jurisdiction and
responsibility.
    (d) Each party agrees to make available promptly all files, records
and witnesses necessary to assist the other in its investigation or
proceedings.
    7. Continued Assistance.
    (a) FINRA shall make available to NSX all information obtained by
FINRA in the performance by it of the Regulatory Responsibilities
hereunder with respect to the Dual Members subject to this Agreement.
In particular, and not in limitation of the foregoing, FINRA shall
furnish NSX any information it obtains about Dual Members which
reflects adversely on their financial condition. NSX shall make
available to FINRA any information coming to its attention that
reflects adversely on the financial condition of Dual Members or
indicates possible violations of applicable laws, rules or regulations
by such firms.
    (b) The parties agree that documents or information shared shall be
held in confidence, and used only for the purposes of carrying out
their respective regulatory obligations. Neither party shall assert
regulatory or other privileges as against the other with respect to
documents or information that is required to be shared pursuant to this
Agreement.
    (c) The sharing of documents or information between the parties
pursuant to this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver as against
third parties of regulatory or other privileges relating to the
discovery of documents or information.
    8. Statutory Disqualifications. When FINRA becomes aware of a
statutory

disqualification as defined in the Exchange Act with respect to a Dual
Member, FINRA shall determine pursuant to Sections 15A(g) and/or
Section 6(c) of the Exchange Act the acceptability or continued
applicability of the person to whom such disqualification applies and
keep NSX advised of its actions in this regard for such subsequent
proceedings as NSX may initiate.
    9. Customer Complaints. NSX shall forward to FINRA copies of all
customer complaints involving Dual Members received by NSX relating to
FINRA's Regulatory Responsibilities under this Agreement. It shall be
FINRA's responsibility to review and take appropriate action in respect
to such complaints.
    10. Advertising. FINRA shall assume responsibility to review the
advertising of Dual Members subject to the Agreement, provided that
such material is filed with FINRA in accordance with FINRA's filing
procedures and is accompanied with any applicable filing fees set forth
in FINRA Rules.
    11. No Restrictions on Regulatory Action. Nothing contained in this
Agreement shall restrict or in any way encumber the right of either
party to conduct its own independent or concurrent investigation,
examination or enforcement proceeding of or against Dual Members, as
either party, in its sole discretion, shall deem appropriate or
necessary.
    12. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by NSX or FINRA
at any time upon the approval of the Commission after one (1) year's
written notice to the other party, except as provided in paragraph 4.
    13. Arbitration. In the event of a dispute between the parties as
to the operation of this Agreement, NSX and FINRA hereby agree that any
such dispute shall be settled by arbitration in Washington, DC in
accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association then
in effect, or such other procedures as the parties may mutually agree
upon. Judgment on the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be
entered in any court having jurisdiction. Each party acknowledges that
the timely and complete performance of its obligations pursuant to this
Agreement is critical to the business and operations of the other
party. In the event of a dispute between the parties, the parties shall
continue to perform their respective obligations under this Agreement
in good faith during the resolution of such dispute unless and until
this Agreement is terminated in accordance with its provisions. Nothing
in this Section 13 shall interfere with a party's right to terminate
this Agreement as set forth herein.
    14. Separate Agreement. This Agreement is wholly separate from the
following agreements: (1) The multiparty agreement for insider trading
activities, which is covered by a separate 17d-2 Agreement by and among
NSX Exchange, Inc., NSX-Y Exchange, Inc., Chicago Board Options
Exchange, Incorporated, Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., EDGA Exchange
Inc., EDGX Exchange Inc., Financial Industry Regulatory Authority,
Inc., NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC, The NASDAQ Stock Market
LLC, National Stock Exchange, Inc., New York Stock Exchange, LLC, NYSE
Amex LLC, and NYSE Arca Inc. effective December 16, 2011, as may be
amended from time to time and (2) the multiparty 17d-2 agreement
relating to Regulation NMS rules by and among NSX Exchange, Inc., NSX-Y
Exchange, Inc., BOX Options Exchange LLC, Chicago Board Options
Exchange, Incorporated, C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated, Chicago
Stock Exchange, Inc., EDGA Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange, Inc., FINRA,
International Securities Exchange, LLC, ISE Gemini, LLC, Miami
International Securities Exchange, LLC, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC,
NASDAQ OMX BOX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc., National Stock Exchange,
Inc., New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE MKT LLC, and NYSE Arca, Inc.
effective October 29, 2015 as may be amended from time to time.
    15. Notification of Members. NSX and FINRA shall notify Dual
Members of this Agreement after the Effective Date by means of a
uniform joint notice.
    16. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended in writing duly
approved by each party. All such amendments must be filed with and
approved by the Commission before they become effective.
    17. Limitation of Liability. Neither FINRA nor NSX nor any of their
respective directors, governors, officers or employees shall be liable
to the other party to this Agreement for any liability, loss or damage
resulting from or claimed to have resulted from any delays,
inaccuracies, errors or omissions with respect to the provision of
Regulatory Responsibilities as provided hereby or for the failure to
provide any such responsibility, except with respect to such liability,
loss or damages as shall have been suffered by one or the other of
FINRA or NSX and caused by the willful misconduct of the other party or
their respective directors, governors, officers or employees. No
warranties, express or implied, are made by FINRA or NSX with respect
to any of the responsibilities to be performed by each of them
hereunder.
    18. Relief from Responsibility. Pursuant to Sections 17(d)(1)(A)
and 19(g) of the Exchange Act and Rule 17d-2 thereunder, FINRA and NSX
join in requesting the Commission, upon its approval of this Agreement
or any part thereof, to relieve NSX of any and all responsibilities
with respect to matters allocated to FINRA pursuant to this Agreement;
provided, however, that this Agreement shall not be effective until the
Effective Date.
    19. Severability. Any term or provision of this Agreement that is
invalid or unenforceable in any jurisdiction shall, as to such
jurisdiction, be ineffective to the extent of such invalidity or
unenforceability without rendering invalid or unenforceable the
remaining terms and provisions of this Agreement or affecting the
validity or enforceability of any of the terms or provisions of this
Agreement in any other jurisdiction.
    20. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and such
counterparts together shall constitute one and the same instrument.
    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each party has executed or caused this
Agreement to be executed on its behalf by a duly authorized officer as
of the date first written above.

FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY, INC.
By Name:---------------------------------------------------------------
Title:

NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE, INC.
By Name:---------------------------------------------------------------
Title:

EXHIBIT 1

National Stock Exchange (``NSX'') Rules Certification for 17d-2
Agreement With FINRA

    NSX hereby certifies that the requirements contained in the rules
listed below are identical to, or substantially similar to, the
comparable FINRA Rule, NASD Rule, Exchange Act provision or SEC rule
identified (``Common Rules'').

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Finra Rule, NASD Rule, Exchange
               NSX Rule:                    Act Provision or SEC Rule:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 3.1 Business Conduct of Members*..  FINRA Rule 2010 Standards of
                                          Commercial Honor and
                                          Principles of Trade.* \1\
Rule 3.2 Violations Prohibited*........  FINRA Rule 2010 Standards of
                                          Commercial Honor and
                                          Principles of Trade and FINRA
                                          Rule 3110 Supervision.* \2\
Rule 3.3 Use of Fraudulent Devices*....  FINRA Rule 2020 Use of
                                          Manipulative, Deceptive or
                                          Other Fraudulent Device.*
Rule 3.5(a) Advertising Practices......  FINRA Rule 2210(d)(1)(B)
                                          Communications with the
                                          Public.
Rule 3.5(c) Advertising Practices......  FINRA Rule 2210(d)(1)
                                          Communications with the
                                          Public.
Rule 3.5(g) Advertising Practices......  FINRA Rule 2210(d)(1)(B)
                                          Communications with the
                                          Public.
Rule 3.5(h) Advertising Practices......  FINRA Rule 2210(d)(1)(B)
                                          Communications with the
                                          Public.
Rule 3.6 Fair Dealing with Customers...  FINRA Rule 2020 Use of
                                          Manipulative, Deceptive or
                                          Other Fraudulent Device and
                                          FINRA Rule 2111
                                          Suitability.\3\
Rule 3.7(a) and .01 Recommendations to   FINRA Rule 2111 Suitability.
 Customers.
Rule 3.8(a) The Prompt Receipt and       FINRA Rule 11860 COD Orders.
 Delivery of Securities.
Rule 3.9 Charges for Services Performed  FINRA Rule 2122 Charges for
                                          Services Performed.
Rule 3.10 Use of Information...........  FINRA Rule 2060 Use of
                                          Information Obtained in
                                          Fiduciary Capacity.
Rule 3.11 Publication of Transactions    FINRA Rule 5210 Publication of
 and Quotations.                          Transactions and Quotations.
                                          \4\
Rule 3.12 Offers at Stated Prices......  FINRA Rule 5220 Offers at
                                          Stated Prices.
Rule 3.13 Payment Designed to Influence  FINRA Rule 5230 Payments
 Market Prices, Other than Paid           Involving Publications that
 Advertising.                             Influence the Market Price of
                                          a Security. \5\
Rule 3.14 Disclosure on Confirmations..  FINRA Rule 2232(a) Customer
                                          Confirmations and SEC Rule 10b-
                                          10 Confirmation of
                                          Transactions.
Rule 3.15 Disclosure of Control........  FINRA Rule 2262 Disclosure of
                                          Control Relationship With
                                          Issuer.
Rule 3.16 Discretionary Accounts.......  NASD Rule 2510 Discretionary
                                          Accounts. \6\
Rule 3.17 Customer's Securities or       FINRA Rule 2150(a) Customers'
 Funds.                                   Securities or Funds--Improper
                                          Use.
Rule 3.18 Prohibition Against            FINRA Rule 2150(b) Customers'
 Guarantees.                              Securities or Funds--
                                          Prohibition Against
                                          Guarantees.
Rule 3.19 Sharing in Accounts; Extent    FINRA Rule 2150(c)(1)
 Permissible.                             Customers' Securities or
                                          Funds--Sharing in Accounts;
                                          Extent Permissible.
Rule 3.21 Telephone Solicitation.......  FINRA Rule 3230 Telemarketing.
Rule 4.1 Requirements*.................  FINRA Rule 4511 General
                                          Requirements.* \7\
Rule 4.3 Record of Written Complaints..  FINRA Rule 4513 Records of
                                          Written.
Rule 5.1 Written Procedures*...........  FINRA Rule 3110(b) Supervision--
                                          Written Procedures.* \8\
Rule 5.2 Responsibility of Members.....  FINRA Rule 3110(a) and (b)(7)
                                          Supervision.*
Rule 5.3 Records*......................  FINRA Rule 3110(a)
                                          Supervision.*
Rule 5.4 Review of Activities..........  FINRA Rule 3110(c) and (d)
                                          Supervision--Internal
                                          Inspections/Review of
                                          Transactions and
                                          Correspondence.* \9\
Rule 5.6 Anti-Money Laundering           FINRA Rule 3310 Anti-Money
 Compliance Program.                      Laundering Compliance
                                          Program.\10\
Rule 5.7 Annual Certification of         FINRA Rule 3130 Annual
 Compliance and Supervisory Processes.    Certification of Compliance
                                          and Supervisory Processes.\11\
Rule 11.1(c) Hours of Trading..........  FINRA Rule 2265 Extended Hours
                                          Trading Risk Disclosure.
Rule 11.21(b) Short Sales..............  FINRA Rule 6182 Trade Reporting
                                          of Short Sales.\11\
Rule 11.22 Locking or Crossing           FINRA Rule 6240 Prohibition
 Quotations in NMS Stocks.                from Locking or Crossing
                                          Quotation in NMS Stocks.
Rule 11.24 Limit Up-Limit Down.........  FINRA Rule 6190(a)(1) and (2)
                                          Compliance with Regulation NMS
                                          Plan to Address Extraordinary
                                          Market Volatility.
Rule 12.10 Best Execution..............  FINRA Rule 5310 Best Execution
                                          and Interpositioning.\12\
Rule 13.2 Failure to Deliver and         Regulation SHO Rule 200 and
 Failure to Receive \13\.                 203.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ FINRA shall not have Regulatory Responsibilities regarding .01 of
  NSX Rule 3.1.
\2\ FINRA shall only have Regulatory Responsibilities regarding the
  first phrase of the NSX rule regarding prohibitions from violating the
  Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the rules and regulations
  thereunder; responsibility for the remainder of the rule shall remain
  with NSX.
\3\ FINRA shall not have Regulatory Responsibilities regarding .01 of
  NSX Rule 3.6.
\4\ FINRA shall not have Regulatory Responsibilities with regard to the
  requirement to report to NSX.
\5\ FINRA shall not have Regulatory Responsibilities with regard to the
  prohibitions set forth under subsection (a) of FINRA Rule 5230 to the
  extent subsections (b)(2) or (b)(3) of the rule apply.
\6\ FINRA shall not have Regulatory Responsibilities for the NSX rule to
  the extent the exception in FINRA Rule 2510(d)(2) applies.
\7\ FINRA shall not have Regulatory Responsibilities regarding
  requirements to keep records ``in conformity with . . . Exchange
  Rules;'' responsibility for such requirement remains with NSX.
\8\ FINRA shall not have Regulatory Responsibilities regarding
  requirements to assure compliance with Exchange Rules; responsibility
  for such requirement remains with NSX.
\9\ FINRA shall not have Regulatory Responsibilities regarding the NSX
  requirement to annually inspect each office of the ETP Holder (other
  than as required by the FINRA rule to annually inspect each OSJ and
  any branch office that supervises one or more non-branch locations).
\10\ FINRA shall not have Regulatory Responsibilities regarding
  notification to NSX.
\11\ FINRA shall not have Regulatory Responsibilities regarding
  certification as to compliance with NSX rules, the requirement that
  the certification be delivered to NSX, and the requirement that the
  report is titled in a manner indicating that it is responsive to NSX
  Rule 5.7.
\12\ FINRA shall not have Regulatory Responsibilities regarding .01 of
  NSX Rule 12.10.
\13\ FINRA shall only have Regulatory Responsibilities regarding Rules
  200 and 203 of Regulation SHO.
* FINRA shall not have any Regulatory Responsibilities for these rules
  as they pertain to violations of insider trading activities, which is
  covered by a separate 17d-2 Agreement by and among NSX Exchange, Inc.,
  NSX-Y Exchange, Inc., Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated,
  Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., EDGA Exchange Inc., EDGX Exchange Inc.,
  Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.,
  NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, National Stock
  Exchange, Inc., New York Stock Exchange, LLC, NYSE Amex LLC, and NYSE
  Arca Inc. effective December 16, 2011, as may be amended from time to
  time.

    In addition, the following provisions shall be part of this 17d-2
Agreement:
    Securities Exchange Act of 1934:
    Section 15(f)
* * * * *

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

    Pursuant to Section 17(d)(1) of the Act \14\ and Rule 17d-2
thereunder,\15\ after January 29, 2016, the Commission may, by written
notice, declare the plan submitted by NSX and FINRA, File No. 4-694, to
be effective if the Commission finds that the plan is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest and for the protection of investors,
to foster cooperation and coordination among self-regulatory
organizations, or to remove impediments to and foster the development
of the national market system and a national system for the clearance
and settlement of securities transactions and in conformity with the
factors set forth in Section 17(d) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78q(d)(1).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.17d-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    In order to assist the Commission in determining whether to approve
the proposed 17d-2 Plan and to relieve NSX of the responsibilities
which would be assigned to FINRA, interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing.
Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number 4-694 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number 4-694. 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/other.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed plan that are filed with the
Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
plan 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, on official business days between
the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the plan also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal offices of NSX
and FINRA. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number 4-694
and should be submitted on or before January 29, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(34).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-00567 Filed 1-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 18 (Thursday, January 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4233-4234]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01644]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0655; FRL-9508-01-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Metallic Mineral Processing Plants
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), NSPS for Metallic Mineral
Processing Plants (EPA ICR Number 0982.13, OMB Control Number 2060-
0016), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a
proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
March 31, 2022. Public comments were previously requested, via the
Federal Register, on February 8, 2021 during a 60-day comment period.
This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A
fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated
burden and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before February 28,
2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2020-0655, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method)
or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
    Submit written comments and recommendations to OMB for the proposed
information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Muntasir Ali, Sector Policies and
Program Division (D243-05), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
https://www.regulations.gov, or in person, at the EPA Docket Center,
WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington,
DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For
additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Metallic
Mineral Processing Plants (40 CFR part 60, subpart LL) apply to the
following facilities at metallic mineral processing plants: Each
crusher and screen at open-pit mines and each crusher, screen, bucket
elevator, conveyor belt transfer point, thermal dryer, product
packaging station, storage bin, enclosed storage area, and truck
loading and unloading station at mills or concentrators commencing
construction, modification or reconstruction after the date of
proposal. The NSPS does not apply to facilities located in underground
mines or uranium ore beneficiation processing plants. In general, all
NSPS standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and
periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities.
They are also required to

maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup,
shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or
any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These
notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining
compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart LL.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Metallic mineral processing plants.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart LL).
    Estimated number of respondents: 29 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, and semiannually.
    Total estimated burden: 3,350 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $416,000 (per year), which includes $18,900
in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the
total estimated burden as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of
Approved Burdens. This increase is not due to any program changes. This
increase is not due to any program changes. The adjustment increase in
burden from the most recently-approved ICR is primarily due to a more
accurate estimate of existing sources, which is based more recent
information from EPA's Enforcement and Compliance History Online
database. Additionally, EPA increased the person-hours per occurrence
for familiarization with rule requirements; records of startup,
shutdown, and malfunction; and time to train personnel based on
comments received from industry consultations. The increase in
operation and maintenance (O&M) costs as calculated in section
6(b)(iii), compared with the costs in the previous ICR, is due the
increase in the estimate of existing sources.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-01644 Filed 1-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P