[Federal Register: January 18, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 11)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 2799]
[DOCID:fr18ja11-1]

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

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

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-1022; Airspace Docket No. 10-AWP-4]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Jet Route J-93; CA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Jet Route J-93 in California between the
Julian VHF Omnidrectional Radio Range Tactical Air Navigation Aid
(VORTAC), and the ASUTA intersection on the United States/Mexican
border. The FAA is realigning the jet route due to the relocation of
the Penasco VOR, located in Mexico. This action ensures the efficient
use of our National Airspace System.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, May 5, 2011. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken McElroy, Airspace Regulation and
ATC Procedures Group, Office of Mission Support Services, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On October 28, 2010, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend J-93, (75 FR 66344).
Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal. No comments were
received in response to the NPRM. Jet routes are published in paragraph
2004 of FAA Order 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, and effective
September 15, 2010, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1.
The jet routes listed in this document will be published subsequently
in the Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by modifying Jet Route J-93 in California, between the Julian
VORTAC and the ASUTA intersection along the United States/Mexican
Border, realigning the route with the revised location of the Penasco
VOR located in Mexico.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant
preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so
minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air
traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule,
when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
subtitle VII, part A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends Jet Route J-93 in California.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with 311a, FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures.'' This airspace action is not expected to cause any
potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary
circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental
assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.9U, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 18,
2010 and effective September 15, 2010 amended as follows:

Paragraph 2004 Jet routes.

* * * * *

J-93 [Amended]

    From the INT of the United States/Mexican Border and the Julian,
CA, 122[deg] radial via Julian; Paradise, CA; INT Paradise 290[deg]
and Los Angeles, CA, 083[deg] radials; to Los Angeles.

    Issued in Washington, DC on January 7, 2011.
Edith V. Parish,
Manager, Airspace Regulation and ATC Procedures Group.
[FR Doc. 2011-826 Filed 1-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 179 (Monday, September 18, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 43486]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19754]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0799]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sacramento River, Sacramento, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Tower Drawbridge across the
Sacramento River, mile 59.0, at Sacramento, CA. The deviation is
necessary to allow the community to participate in the Farm-to-Fork
Dinner event. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-
to-navigation position during the deviation period.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 1 p.m. through 10 p.m. on
September 24, 2017.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, USCG-2017-0799, is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Carl T. Hausner, Chief, Bridge
Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The California Department of Transportation
has requested a temporary change to the operation of the Tower
Drawbridge over the Sacramento River, mile 59.0, at Sacramento, CA. The
drawbridge navigation span provides a vertical clearance of 30 feet
above Mean High Water in the closed-to-navigation position. The draw
operates as required by 33 CFR 117.189(a). Navigation on the waterway
is commercial and recreational.
    The drawspan will be secured in the closed-to-navigation position
from 1 p.m. through 10 p.m. on September 24, 2017, to allow the
community to participate in the Farm-to-Fork Dinner event. This
temporary deviation has been coordinated with the waterway users. No
objections to the proposed temporary deviation were raised.
    Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed position may
do so at anytime. In the event of an emergency the draw can open on
signal if at least two hours notice is given to the bridge operator.
There are no immediate alternate routes for vessels to pass. The Coast
Guard will also inform the users of the waterway through our Local and
Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for
the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to
minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: September 13, 2017.
Carl T. Hausner,
District Bridge Chief, Eleventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-19754 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 5 (Wednesday, January 8, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 891]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00083]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER20-703-000]

41MB 8me LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate
Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
41MB 8me LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is January 22, 2020.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 2, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-00083 Filed 1-7-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 48 (Monday, March 12, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10652-10655]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04812]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0738; FRL-9975-35-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Emissions Statement Rule Certification for the 2008 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revision formally submitted
by the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia). Under the Clean Air Act
(CAA), states' SIPs must require stationary sources in ozone
nonattainment areas classified as marginal or above to report annual
emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic
compounds (VOC). This emissions statement requirement also applies to
stationary sources located in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) that
emit or have the potential to emit at least 50 tons per year (tpy) of
VOC or 100 tpy of NOX. The SIP revision provides Virginia's
certification that its existing emissions statement program satisfies
the emissions statement requirements of the CAA for the 2008 ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA is proposing to
approve Virginia's emissions statement program certification for the
2008 ozone NAAQS as a SIP revision in accordance with the requirements
of the CAA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 11, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2017-0738 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be 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: Sara Calcinore,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under the CAA, EPA establishes NAAQS for criteria pollutants in
order to protect human health and the

environment. In response to scientific evidence linking ozone exposure
to adverse health effects, EPA promulgated the first ozone NAAQS, the
0.12 part per million (ppm) 1-hour ozone NAAQS, in 1979. See 44 FR 8202
(February 8, 1979). The CAA requires EPA to review and reevaluate the
NAAQS every 5 years in order to consider updated information regarding
the effects of the criteria pollutants on human health and the
environment. On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised ozone NAAQS,
referred to as the 1997 ozone NAAQS, of 0.08 ppm averaged over eight
hours. 62 FR 38855. This 8-hour ozone NAAQS was determined to be more
protective of public health than the previous 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
In 2008, EPA strengthened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS from 0.08 to 0.075
ppm. The 0.075 ppm standard is referred to as the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See
73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
    On May 21, 2012 and June 11, 2012, EPA designated nonattainment
areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 77 FR 30088 and 77 FR 34221. Effective
July 20, 2012, the Washington, DC-MD-VA area was designated as marginal
nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The Washington, DC-MD-VA
nonattainment area is comprised of Arlington County, Fairfax County,
Loudoun County, Prince William County, Alexandria City, Fairfax City,
Falls Church City, Manassas City, and Manassas Park City. See 40 CFR
81.347.
    Section 182 of the CAA identifies additional plan submissions and
requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. Specifically, section
182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA requires that states develop and submit, as a
revision to their SIP, rules which establish annual reporting
requirements for certain stationary sources. Sources that are within
marginal or above ozone nonattainment areas must annually report the
actual emissions of NOX and VOC to the state. However,
states may waive sources that emit under 25 tpy of NOX and
VOC if the state provides an inventory of emissions from such class or
category of sources as required by CAA sections 172 and 182. See CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii).
    Additionally, portions of Virginia are included in the ozone
transport region (OTR) established by Congress in section 184 of the
CAA. The OTR is comprised of the states of Connecticut, Delaware,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, and the Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area that
includes the District of Columbia and portions of Virginia. The areas
designated as in the Virginia portion of the OTR are as follows:
Arlington County, Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince William
County, Stafford County, Alexandria City, Fairfax City, Falls Church
City, Manassas City, and Manassas Park City.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See, e.g. ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality
Implementation Plans; Virginia; NSR in the Ozone Transport Region'',
71 FR 39570 (July 13, 2006) and 71 FR 890 (January 6, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to section 184(b)(2), any stationary source located in the
OTR that emits or has the potential to emit at least 50 tpy of VOC
shall be considered a major stationary source and subject to the
requirements which would be applicable to major stationary sources if
the area was classified as a moderate nonattainment area. See CAA
section 184. Thus, states within the OTR are subject to plan (or SIP)
requirements in CAA section 182(b) applicable to moderate nonattainment
areas. Also, section 182(f)(1) of the CAA requires that the plan
provisions required for major stationary sources of VOC also apply to
major stationary sources of NOX for states with ozone
nonattainment areas. A major stationary source of NOX is
defined as a stationary facility or source of air pollutants which
directly emits, or has the potential to emit, 100 tpy or more of
NOX. See CAA section 302(j).
    In summary, sources located within the portions of Virginia
included in the OTR, including areas designated as attainment for the
2008 ozone NAAQS, that emit more than 50 tpy of VOC or 100 tpy of
NOX are considered major sources and are subject to the same
requirements as major stationary sources located in moderate or above
nonattainment areas. These requirements include the emissions statement
requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). See CAA section 182(f) and
184(b)(2). Sources located in designated marginal or above
nonattainment areas must also submit an emissions statement as required
by CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). As stated previously, states may waive
sources that emit less than the 25 tpy of NOX and 25 tpy of
VOC threshold if the state provides an inventory of emissions from such
class or category of sources as required by CAA sections 172 and 182.
See CAA section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii). States are required by section
182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA to submit, for approval into the state's SIP,
rules requiring the sources described above to provide annual
statements showing their actual emissions of NOX and VOC to
the state.
    The EPA published guidance on source emissions statements in a July
1992 memorandum titled, ``Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission
Statement Program'' and in a March 14, 2006 memorandum titled,
``Emission Statement Requirements Under 8-hour Ozone NAAQS
Implementation'' (2006 memorandum). In addition, on March 6, 2015, EPA
issued a final rule addressing a range of nonattainment area SIP
requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, including the emissions
statement requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) (2015 final rule).
80 FR 12264. The 2006 memorandum clarified that the source emissions
statement requirement of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) was applicable to all
areas designated nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and classified
as marginal or above under subpart 2, part D, title I of the CAA. Per
EPA's 2015 final rule, the source emissions statement requirement also
applies to all areas designated nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
    According to EPA's 2015 final rule, most areas that are required to
have an emissions statement program for the 2008 ozone NAAQS already
have one in place due to a nonattainment designation for an earlier
ozone NAAQS. EPA's 2015 final rule states that, ``If an area has a
previously approved emissions statement rule in force for the 1997
ozone NAAQS or the 1-hour ozone NAAQS that covers all portions of the
nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, such rule should be
sufficient for purposes of the emissions statement requirement for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.'' In cases where an existing emissions statement rule
is still adequate to meet the emissions statement requirement under the
2008 ozone NAAQS, states may provide the rationale for that
determination to EPA in a written statement for approval in the SIP to
meet the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). In this statement,
states should identify how the emissions statement requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B) are met by their existing emissions statement
rule.
    In summary, the Commonwealth of Virginia is required to submit, as
a formal revision to its SIP, a statement certifying that Virginia's
existing emissions statement program satisfies the requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B) and covers the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment
area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA did not require Virginia or other states to certify that
its existing SIP approved emissions statement program continued to
satisfy CAA requirements for areas in the OTR to have an emissions
statement program.

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

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

    On August 1, 2017, the Commonwealth of Virginia, through the
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ), submitted, as a
formal revision to its SIP, a statement certifying that Virginia's
existing SIP-approved emissions statement program covers the Virginia
portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 2008
ozone NAAQS and is at least as stringent as the requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B). In its submittal, Virginia states that the
emissions statement requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) are
contained under 9VAC5-20-160 (Registration) of the Virginia
Administrative Code and are SIP-approved under 40 CFR 52.2420(c).
According to Virginia, these provisions mandate that facilities
emitting more than 25 tpy of NOX or VOC must submit emission
statements to Virginia while those emitting less than 25 tpy must
comply with inventory requirements.
    The provisions under 9VAC5-20-160 that implement Virginia's
emissions statement program were approved into the Virginia SIP on May
2, 1995 (60 FR 21451).\3\ These provisions require the owner of any
stationary source that emits 25 tpy or more of VOC or NOX
and is located in an emissions control area designated under 9VAC5-20-
206 (Volatile Organic Compound and Nitrogen Oxides Emissions Control
Areas) to submit an emissions statement to the Virginia State Air
Pollution Control Board by April 15 of each year for the emissions
discharged during the previous calendar year.\4\ Emissions statements
are required to be prepared and submitted in accordance with 9VAC5-20-
121 (Air Quality Program Policies and Procedures), which references
Virginia's January 1, 1993 document AQP-8 titled, ``Procedures for
Preparing and Submitting Emission Statements for Stationary Sources.''
The provisions under 9VAC5-20-121 were also approved into the Virginia
SIP on May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21451).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The provisions under 9VAC5-20-160 were derived from VR120-
02-31. EPA's May 2, 1995 direct final rulemaking (DFR) approved a
SIP revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia requesting
the addition of provisions under VR120-02-31 paragraph B, which
established Virginia's emissions statement program, and Appendix S
(Air Quality Program Policies and Procedures), which described the
procedure for preparing and submitting emissions statements for
stationary sources, to the Virginia SIP. See 60 FR 21451. On March
6, 1992, the Virginia State Assembly enacted Chapter 216--an act to
amend Section 9-77.7, Code of Virginia, which authorized
reorganization of the Virginia Administrative Code, including
reorganization of the air pollution control regulations, effective
July 1, 1992. Beginning April 17, 1995, Virginia began publication
of its air quality control regulations in the new format. On April
21, 2000, EPA approved a SIP revision from Virginia requesting the
reorganization and renumbering of the Virginia SIP to match the
recodification of Virginia's air pollution control regulations under
the Virginia Administrative Code. See 65 FR 21315. As a result, the
SIP approved provisions under VR120-02-31 and Appendix S are now
under 9VAC5-20-160 and 9VAC5-20-121, respectively.
    \4\ The emissions control areas defined under 9VAC5-20-206
include the Northern Virginia Emissions Control Area, the
Fredericksburg Emissions Control Area, the Richmond Emissions
Control Area, the Hampton Roads Emissions Control Area, and the
Western Virginia Emissions Control Area. The Northern Virginia
Emissions Control Area consists of the localities of Arlington
County, Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince William County,
Stafford County, Alexandra City, Fairfax City, Falls Church City,
Manassas City, and Manassas Park City.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's review of the Commonwealth of Virginia's submittal finds that
Virginia's existing, SIP-approved emissions statement program under
9VAC5-20-160 satisfies the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) for
emission statements for sources located in marginal or above
nonattainment areas including such sources in the Virginia portion of
the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
EPA notes 9VAC5-20-160 also requires sources located in portions of
Virginia included in the OTR to submit required emission statements in
accordance with CAA section 184 (OTR requirements) and 182 (plan
submissions and requirements for ozone nonattainment areas). Pursuant
to CAA sections 182 and 184, Virginia is required to have an emissions
statement program for sources located in marginal or above
nonattainment areas and the portions of Virginia included in the OTR.
EPA finds the provisions under 9VAC5-20-160 satisfy these requirements
of CAA sections 182 and 184 because they apply to the Northern Virginia
Emissions Control Area, which includes the Virginia localities within
the Virginia portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS (i.e., Arlington County, Fairfax County, Loudoun
County, Prince William County, Alexandria City, Fairfax City, Falls
Church City, Manassas City, and Manassas Park City), and the portions
of Virginia included in the OTR (i.e., Arlington County, Fairfax
County, Loudoun County, Prince William County, Stafford County,
Alexandria City, Fairfax City, Falls Church City, Manassas City, and
Manassas Park City). EPA also finds Virginia's emissions thresholds for
sources that are required to submit an emissions statement meet the
requirements of CAA sections 182 and 184. As stated above, 9VAC5-20-160
requires the owner of any stationary source located in an emissions
control area that emits 25 tpy or more of VOC or NOX to
annually submit an emissions statement. This 25 tpy threshold is
equivalent to the threshold required by CAA section 182. As previously
mentioned, per CAA section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii), states may waive sources
that emit less than 25 tpy of NOX or VOC if the state
provides an inventory of emissions from such class or category of
sources as required by CAA sections 172 and 182. Virginia does provide
emissions inventories for nonattainment areas as required by CAA
section 172(c)(3).\5\ Therefore, EPA has determined that 9VAC5-20-160,
which is currently in the Virginia SIP, is appropriate to address the
emissions statement requirements in section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. EPA is proposing to approve, as a SIP revision, the
Commonwealth of Virginia's August 1, 2017 emissions statement program
certification for the 2008 ozone NAAQS as approvable under CAA section
182(a)(3)(B). EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed
in this document. These comments will be considered before taking final
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality
Implementation Plans; District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia;
2011 Base Year Emissions Inventories for the Washington, DC-MD-VA
Nonattainment Area for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard,'' 80 FR 27255 (May 13, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the Commonwealth of Virginia's SIP
revision submitted on August 1, 2017, which certifies that Virginia's
existing SIP-approved emissions statement program under 9VAC5-20-160
satisfies the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008
ozone NAAQS.

IV. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia

    In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to
certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit)
``privilege'' for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a
regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden
of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's
legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty
waiver for violations of environmental laws

when a regulated entity discovers such violations pursuant to a
voluntary compliance evaluation and voluntarily discloses such
violations to the Commonwealth and takes prompt and appropriate
measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's Voluntary Environmental
Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, provides a privilege
that protects from disclosure documents and information about the
content of those documents that are the product of a voluntary
environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not extend to
documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed before
the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2) are
prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) are required by law.
    On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the
Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents
and information ``required by federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce
federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their federal counterparts. . . .'' The opinion
concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec.  10.1-1198, therefore, documents or
other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of
these programs could not be privileged because such documents and
information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required
by federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or
approval.''
    Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that
``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by federal
law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a
state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute,
regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from
administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12,
1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute
inapplicable to enforcement of any federally authorized programs, since
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with
federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
    Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its
program consistent with the federal requirements. In any event, because
EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law
can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on federal
enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under
the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to
enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan,
independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen
enforcement under section 304 of the CAA is likewise unaffected by
this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the 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 proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     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).
This SIP revision consisting of Virginia's certification that its
existing SIP-approved emissions statement program under 9VAC5-20-160
satisfies the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008
ozone NAAQS is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land as
defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151 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 in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: February 26, 2018.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2018-04812 Filed 3-9-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 180)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 56919-56920]
[DOCID:fr17se10-20]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 167

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0785]

Port Access Route Study: The Approaches to San Francisco

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of public meetings; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces a public meeting to receive comments
on the study entitled ``Port Access Route Study: Off San Francisco''
that was published in the Federal Register on Thursday, December 10,
2009. As stated in that document, the Coast Guard is conducting a Port
Access Route Study (PARS) to evaluate the continued applicability of
and the potential need for modifications to the current vessel routing
in the approaches to San Francisco.

DATES: A Public meeting will be held on Wednesday, October 20, 2010
from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. to provide an opportunity for oral
comments. Written comments and related material may also be submitted
to Coast Guard personnel specified at the meetings.

ADDRESSES: The October 20, 2010 public meeting will be held at the
Executive Inn and Suites at 1755 Embarcadero, Oakland, California.
Visitor parking is available in the lots outside the hotel.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions concerning the
meeting or the study, please call or e-mail LTJG Lucas Mancini, Coast
Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you
have questions on viewing the docket call Ms. Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Purpose

    We published a notice of study in the Federal Register on December
10, 2009 (74 FR 65543), entitled ``Port Access Route Study: Off San
Francisco'' in which we did not state a plan to hold a public meeting.
We have decided to hold a meeting in order to give the public and
waterway users a chance to comment in person.
    In the notice of PARS, we discussed our intent to help reduce the
risk of marine casualties and increase the efficiency of vessel traffic
in the study region. Our goal is to assess whether the current vessel
routing system is effective

in its predictability of vessel movements, which may decrease the
potential for collisions, oil spills, and other events that could
threaten the marine environment.
    You may view the notice of PARS in our online docket, in addition
to comments submitted thus far by going to http://www.regulations.gov.
Once there, insert ``USCG-2009-0576'' in the ``keyword'' box and click
``search.'' If you do not have access to the Internet, you may view the
docket online by visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-
140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We
have an agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the
Docket Management Facility.
    We encourage you to participate in this study by submitting
comments at the meeting either orally or in writing. If you bring
written comments to the meeting, you may submit them to Coast Guard
personnel specified at the meeting to receive written comments. These
comments will be posted to our online public docket. All comments
received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov
and will include any personal information you have provided.
    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Information on Service for Individuals With Disabilities

    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the public meeting,
contact LTJG Lucas Mancini at the telephone number or e-mail address
indicated under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
notice.

Public Meeting

    The Coast Guard will hold a public meeting regarding its Port
Access Route Study in the Approaches to San Francisco on Wednesday
October 20, 2010 from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. at the Executive Inn and Suites
located at 1755 Embarcadero, Oakland California, telephone 510-536-
6633. We will provide a written summary of the meeting and additional
comments received at the meeting in the docket.

    Dated: September 2, 2010.
S.P. Metruck,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2010-23176 Filed 9-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 53 (Monday, March 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 16704]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05527]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 34853; 812-15440]

The RBB Fund, Inc., et al.

March 14, 2023.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from sections
2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d) and 22(e) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the
Act and under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from
sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act.

Summary of Application: Applicants request an order (``Order'') that
permits: (a) the Funds (as described in the Reference Order (as defined
below)) to issue shares (``Shares'') redeemable in large aggregations
only (``creation units''); (b) secondary market transactions in Shares
to occur at negotiated market prices rather than at net asset value;
(c) certain Funds to pay redemption proceeds, under certain
circumstances, more than seven days after the tender of Shares for
redemption; and (d) certain affiliated persons of a Fund to deposit
securities into, and receive securities from, the Fund in connection
with the purchase and redemption of creation units. The relief in the
Order would incorporate by reference terms and conditions of the same
relief of a previous order granting the same relief sought by
applicants, as that order may be amended from time to time (``Reference
Order'').\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Blue Tractor ETF Trust and Blue Tractor Group, LLC,
Investment Company Act Rel. Nos. 33682 (November 14, 2019) (notice)
and 33710 (December 10, 2019) (order).

Applicants: The RBB Fund, Inc., The RBB Fund Trust, Quasar Distributors
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LLC, and F/m Investments LLC, DBA North Slope Capital LLC.

Filing Dates: The application was filed on February 28, 2023.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing:  An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by emailing
the SEC's Secretary at [email protected] and serving the
Applicants with a copy of the request by email, if an email address is
listed for the relevant Applicant below, or personally or by mail, if a
physical address is listed for the relevant Applicant below. Hearing
requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on April 10,
2023, and should be accompanied by proof of service on the Applicants,
in the form of an affidavit, or, for lawyers, a certificate of service.
Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the
nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the
desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request,
and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing
may request notification by emailing the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: The Commission: [email protected]. Applicants:
Steven Plump, [email protected], Michael W. Mundt,
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trace W. Rakestraw, Senior Special
Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division of Investment Management, Chief
Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For Applicants' representations, legal
analysis, and conditions, please refer to Applicants' application,
dated February 28, 2023, which may be obtained via the Commission's
website by searching for the file number at the top of this document,
or for an Applicant using the Company name search field on the SEC's
EDGAR system. The SEC's EDGAR system may be searched at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/legacy/companysearch.html. You may also
call the SEC's Public Reference Room at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-05527 Filed 3-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 14, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 134)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 40760-40762]
[DOCID:fr14jy10-16]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2009-0665; FRL-9175-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Illinois; Volatile Organic Compound Site-Specific State Implementation
Plan for Abbott Laboratories

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve Illinois' amendments to its
manufacturing rules into the Illinois State Implementation Plan (SIP).
On July 17, 2009, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
(Illinois EPA) submitted amendments to its pharmaceutical manufacturing
rules for approval into its SIP. These amendments consist of a site-
specific rulemaking for certain of Abbott Laboratories' (Abbott) tunnel
dryers and fluid bed dryers. This site-specific rule revision is
approvable because it lowers the allowable emissions from these dryers
and it is consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA regulations.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 13, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2009-0665, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Jay Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Jay Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
regional office normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2009-0665. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters and any form of encryption, and be free
of any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting
comments, go to Section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal
holidays. We recommend that you telephone Steven Rosenthal at (312)
886-6052 before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Rosenthal, Environmental
Engineer, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What action is EPA proposing to take?
III. What is the background for this action?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of Illinois' revised pharmaceutical
manufacturing rule?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    When submitting comments, remember to:
    1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number).
    2. Follow directions--EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.

II. What action is EPA proposing to take?

    EPA is proposing to approve revisions to Illinois' pharmaceutical
manufacturing rule for three of Abbott's fluid bed dryers and four of
its tunnel dryers. Each of the three fluid bed dryers previously had a
five tons volatile organic compound (VOC) per year applicability cutoff
and each of the four tunnel dryers had a 7.5 tons VOC per year
applicability cutoff. This rule revision replaces these individual
cutoffs with an overall combined cutoff for all seven dryers of 20.6
tons VOC per year.

III. What is the background for this action?

    This rule revision was requested by Abbott to provide it with more
manufacturing flexibility. Abbott owns a pharmaceutical manufacturing
facility located in Lake County, Illinois. Abbott's operations are
subject to the emission standards for VOCs at 35 Ill. Adm. Code,
Subpart T--Pharmaceutical Manufacturing (Subpart T rules). Section
218.480(b) contains certain exemptions that are only applicable to
Abbott's air suspension coater/dryer, fluid bed dryers, tunnel dryers,
and Accelacotas. This rule revision amends these site-specific
exemptions by capping and lowering the overall

emissions allowable under the exemptions from its tunnel dryers
numbered 1, 2, 3, and 4, and fluid
bed dryers numbered 1, 2, and 3. This
amendment reduces combined cutoffs for these seven dryers while
increasing Abbott's operational flexibility, by allowing it to make
preferential use of the more efficient fluid bed dryers.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of Illinois' revised pharmaceutical
manufacturing rule?

    The revisions to Illinois' pharmaceutical manufacturing rule are
approvable because it lowers the total allowable emissions from seven
dryers and is consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations, and relevant
policy.
    More specifically, the individual applicability cutoffs for the
seven affected dryers results in a combined allowable emission total of
45 tons of VOC per year. The 45 tons VOC per year is based on a 5 tons
VOC cutoff (in prior subsection 218.480(b)(2)) for each of the three
fluid bed dryers and a 7.5 tons VOC per year cutoff (in prior
subsection 218.480 (b)(3) for each of the four tunnel dryers. This
compares with a 20.6 tons VOC per year total in new subsection
218.480(b)(4) for tunnel dryers numbered 1, 2,
3, and 4, and fluid bed dryers numbered 1,
2, and 3. Subsection 218.480(b)(4) replaces
subsections 218.480(b)(2) and 218.480(b)(3) for these seven dryers.
    The main basis for evaluating this proposal is EPA's January 2001
policy on Economic Incentive Programs (EIP), which is EPA's applicable
policy for evaluating emission averaging plans, also referred to as
``bubbles.'' Under the EIP policy, a combined emission limit is based
on the lower of actual or allowable emissions. Actual emissions are
based on the highest consecutive two-year period during the preceding
ten-year period, which in this case is 1999-2000. The average annual
actual emissions for the seven dryers during this two-year period was
calculated to be 22.9 tons VOC per year. The EIP policy also requires
reducing this annual emission average by ten percent to establish an
environmental benefit. This results in a combined emission limit of
20.6 tons VOC per year, which is the value in the new subsection
218.480(b)(4).
    Illinois amended its July 17, 2009, SIP submittal in a May 12,
2010, letter and attachments from Laurel L. Kroack, Chief, Bureau of
Air, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, to EPA. This letter
establishes how compliance with Abbott's 20.6 tons VOC per year limit
is determined as well as Abbott's recordkeeping requirements.
Specifically, this letter states:

    It is the Illinois EPA's interpretation that compliance with
Abbott's 20.6 tons VOC per year limit shall be determined on a
monthly basis from the sum of the data for the current month plus
the preceding 11 months (running 12 month total) consistent with
Condition 7.1.6(i) of Abbott's current Title V permit
96010010, issued on September 26, 2007. Compliance will be
demonstrated according to the compliance calculation methodology and
corresponding recordkeeping procedures in Katherine Hodge's April
23, 2008 email to EPA, including both the body of the email and its
attachments, as well as the compliance procedures in Condition
7.1.12(e) of Abbott's current Title V permit. Also, Abbott's
recordkeeping requirements should also be consistent with the
recordkeeping requirements reflected in Katherine Hodge's April 23,
2008 email, including both the body of the e-mail and its
attachments. These records would need to be maintained for five
years.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: June 30, 2010.
Walter W. Kovalick Jr.,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2010-17139 Filed 7-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22552-22554]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10259]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83199; File No. SR-BX-2018-016]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Memorialize
Its Order and Execution Information Into Chapter VI, Section 19,
Entitled Data Feeds

May 9, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on April 27, 2018, Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``BX'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to a proposal to memorialize its order and
execution information into Chapter VI, Section 19, entitled ``Data
Feeds.''
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://nasdaqbx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal office
of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to memorialize its order and execution
information into Chapter VI, Section 19, entitled ``Data Feeds.'' The
Exchange proposes to rename this rule ``Data Feeds and Trade
Information.'' The Exchange proposes other grammatical corrections in
Section 19(a) as well.
Section 19(b)
    First, the Exchange proposes to adopt a new Section 19(b) and
memorialize the following order and execution information which were
previously filed by the Exchange: (1) CTI; \3\ (2) TradeInfo \4\; and
(3) FIX DROP.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73894 (December 19,
2014), 79 FR 78119 (December 29, 1014) (SR-BX-2014-060) (``CTI and
FIX DROP Filing'').
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60826 (October 14,
2009), 74 FR 54605 (October 22, 2009) (SR-BX-2009-062) (``TradeInfo
Filing'').
    \5\ See note 3 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange originally noted in the CTI and FIX DROP Filing that
CTI offers real-time clearing trade updates.\6\ The message containing
the trade details is also simultaneously sent to The Options Clearing
Corporation. The trade messages are routed to a member's connection
containing certain information. The administrative and market event
messages include, but are not limited to: System event messages to
communicate operational-related events; options directory messages to
relay basic option symbol and contract information for options traded
on the Exchange; complex strategy messages to relay information for
those strategies traded on the Exchange; trading action messages to
inform market participants when a specific option or strategy is halted
or released for trading on the Exchange; and an indicator which
distinguishes electronic and non-electronically delivered orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A real-time clearing trade update is a message that is sent
to a member after an execution has occurred and contains trade
details. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73894 (December 19,
2014), 79 FR 78119 (December 29, 1014) (SR-BX-2014-060).

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

    The Exchange is proposing to more specifically describe the CTI
offering and memorialize it within Section 19(b)(1). The description
provides more detail as to the current functionality of CTI, which is
not changing. The description would continue to state that CTI is a
real-time clearing trade update message that is sent to a Participant
after an execution has occurred and contains trade details specific to
that Participant. The information includes, among other things, the
following: (i) The Clearing Member Trade Agreement or ``CMTA'' or The
Options Clearing Corporation or ``OCC'' number; (ii) Exchange badge or
house number; (iii) the Exchange internal firm identifier; (iv) an
indicator which will distinguish electronic and non-electronically
delivered orders; (v) liquidity indicators and transaction type for
billing purposes; and (vi) capacity. The Exchange proposes to not add
the sentence which states, ``The message containing the trade details
is also simultaneously sent to The Options Clearing Corporation.'' The
Exchange's System sends clearing information to OCC for each
transaction. This sentence does not add information that is useful or
relevant and therefore the Exchange proposes to remove it. The Exchange
notes that while the description is being amended, it retains more
broadly the former descriptions. The information provided is specific
to a market participant. The Exchange is expressing more specifically
the type of data contained in CTI. The CTI offering is not changing.
The Exchange is providing more details regarding the CTI offering than
was originally filed in the CTI and FIX DROP Filing.
    The Exchange originally noted in the TradeInfo Filing that
TradeInfo allows subscribing members to scan for their orders submitted
to BX. Members can scan for all orders in a particular security or all
orders of a particular type, regardless of their status (open,
canceled, executed, etc.). Members are also able to cancel open orders
at the order, port or MPID level (an MPID is a firm mnemonic). For
example, after scanning for open orders, the member is then able to
select an open order and cancel the order. TradeInfo BX also allows
members to scan other order statuses, such as executed, cancelled,
broken, rejected and suspended orders. TradeInfo BX enables members to
generate reports of execution, order or cancel information, which can
be exported into a spreadsheet for review.
    The Exchange proposes to amend and memorialize TradeInfo within
Section 19(b)(2). The Exchange proposes to note that TradeInfo is a
user interface, as compared to a data stream, to add more detail to the
description. While some descriptive language is being removed from the
rules, such as permitting a subscribing member to scan other order
statuses, such as executed, cancelled, broken, rejected and suspended
orders, the Exchange believes that this language is covered in the
current description in that the text indicates that all orders may be
searched regardless of their status. Similarly, the description which
provides that a subscribing member may generate reports of execution,
order or cancel information, which can be exported into a spreadsheet
for review is covered in that the Exchange notes that a view of the
orders and execution may be downloaded.
    The Exchange originally noted in its FIX DROP filing that the Order
Entry DROP provides real time information regarding orders sent to BX
and executions that occurred on BX. The DROP interface is not a trading
interface and does not accept order messages. The ``Order Entry DROP''
interface is being renamed ``FIX DROP'' for clarity as it relates to
FIX ports.
    The Exchange is now expanding on the original description by
providing more detail by stating that it is a real-time order and
execution update message that is sent to a Participant after an order
has been received/modified or an execution has occurred and contains
trade details specific to that Participant. The information includes,
among other things, the following: (1) Executions; (2) cancellations;
(3) modifications to an existing order (4) busts or post-trade
corrections. The Exchange believes that the additional specificity will
provide more information to Participants.
    The Exchange considers it appropriate to memorialize the order and
execution information available on BX within a rule so that
Participants may understand the trade information which is available on
the Exchange as it pertains to a firm's trading information. This data
is available to all Participants regarding that Participant's
transactions. Pricing for these products is included in the Exchange's
fee schedule at Chapter XV, Section 3.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See also SR-BX-2018-017 (not yet published) which proposes
conforming changes to the fee schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 19(a)
    The Exchange proposes minor changes to Section 19(a)(1) and (2) to
change the language to indicate the BX Depth of Market and BX Top of
Market each separately are data feeds and removing the ``A'' before the
description.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act''),\8\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act,\9\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism for a free and open market and a national market system,
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest, by
providing greater transparency as to the order and execution
information offered on BX. The Exchange notes that it described this
information in prior rule changes.\10\ The Exchange believes that
memorializing this information within a rule and updating the
information will provide market participants with a list of information
available specific to their trading on BX. The Exchange believes that
this proposal is consistent with the Act because it provides
information on the content available to market participants regarding
the trades they execute on BX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \10\ See notes 3 and 4 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\11\ the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden
on intermarket or intra-market competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange's
proposal does not impose an undue burden on competition, rather the
Exchange is seeking to provide greater transparency within its rules
with respect to the various order and execution information offered on
BX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, if

consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest,
the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \12\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of the proposed rule change at least five
business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \9\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\10\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange states that
such waiver will allow it to update its rules immediately to provide
more information regarding the order and execution information it
offers and further the protection of investors and the public interest
because it will provide greater transparency as to the trade detail
available to members. For this reason, the Commission believes that
waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest and, therefore, the Commission
designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \14\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-BX-2018-016 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2018-016. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-BX-2018-016 and should be submitted on
or before June 5, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-10259 Filed 5-14-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P