[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 11, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45861-45863]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19488]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0741; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-13]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class D Airspace and Establishment of Class
E Airspace; Tyndall AFB, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E surface airspace at
Tyndall Air Force Base, (AFB), FL, for the safety of aircraft landing
and departing the airport when the air traffic control tower is closed.
Also, this action proposes to amend Class D airspace by updating the
geographic coordinates of this airport, as well as replacing the
outdated term ``Airport/Facility Directory'' with ``Chart Supplement''.
Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of
instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 26, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Bldg. Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; Telephone: 1-
800-647-5527, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the Docket No. FAA-
2018-0741; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-13, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit and review received comments through the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public
docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final
disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.
    FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed on line at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of
FAA

Order 7400.11B at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This proposed 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 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 would establish Class E surface airspace and amend
Class D airspace at Tyndall AFB, FL, to support IFR operations at this
airport.

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (Docket No. FAA-
2018-0741 and Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-13) and be submitted in
triplicate to DOT Docket Operations (see ADDRESSES section for the
address and phone number.) You may also submit comments through the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on
this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to FAA
Docket No. FAA-2018-0741; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-13.'' The postcard
will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this document may be changed in light of the
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the comment
closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket. All communications received on or before the specified closing
date for comments will be considered before taking action on the
proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in
light of the comments received. A report summarizing each substantive
public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will
be filed in the docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined between 8:00 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays at the office
of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, Room
350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective
September 15, 2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish Class E surface airspace
within a 5.4-mile radius of Tyndall AFB, FL, for the safety of aircraft
landing and departing the airport when the air traffic control tower is
closed.
    In addition, the geographic coordinates of the airport in Class D
airspace would be updated to coincide with the FAA's database.
    Finally, the outdated term `Airport/Facility Directory' would be
replaced with `Chart Supplement' under the Class D description.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraphs 5000 and
6002, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017, and
effective September 15, 2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1. The Class D and Class E airspace designations listed in this
document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under 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 proposed 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.

Environmental Review

    This proposal would be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 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(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ASO FL D Tyndall AFB, FL [Amended]

Tyndall AFB, FL
    (Lat. 30[deg]04'09'' N, long. 85[deg]34'30'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
2,500 feet MSL within a 5.4-mile radius of Tyndall AFB. This Class D
airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times
established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and
time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart
Supplement.

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as Surface Areas.

* * * * *

ASO FL E2 Tyndall AFB, FL [New]

Tyndall AFB, FL
    (Lat. 30[deg]04'09'' N, long. 85[deg]34'30'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 5.4-
mile radius of Tyndall AFB. This Class E airspace is effective
during specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice
to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be
continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 29, 2018.
Ryan W. Almasy,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2018-19488 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 26, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 164)]
[Notices]
[Page 43224-43225]
[DOCID:fr26au09-149]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0152]

Technical Report on the Long-Term Effect of ABS in Passenger Cars
and LTVs

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Request for comments on technical report.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces NHTSA's publication of a Technical
Report reviewing and evaluating the crash-reducing effectiveness of
antilock braking technologies for passenger cars, pickup trucks, SUVs
and vans. The report's title is: The Long-Term Effect of ABS in
Passenger Cars and LTVs.

DATES: Comments must be received no later than December 24, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Report: The technical report is available on the Internet
for viewing in PDF format at http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/
811182.PDF. You may obtain a copy of the report free of charge by
sending a self-addressed mailing label to Charles J. Kahane (NVS-431),
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Room W53-312, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
    Comments: You may submit comments [identified by Docket Number
NHTSA-2009-0152] by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    You may call Docket Management at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments, see
the Procedural Matters section of this document. Note that all comments
received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles J. Kahane, Chief, Evaluation
Division, NVS-431, National Center for Statistics and Analysis,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Room W53-312, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. E-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For information about NHTSA's evaluations of the effectiveness of
existing regulations and programs: You may see a list of published
evaluation reports at http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/cats/
listpublications.aspx?Id=226&ShowBy=Category and if you click on any
report you will be able to view it in PDF format.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Statistical analyses based on data for
calendar years 1995 to 2007 from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System
(FARS) and the General Estimates System (GES) of the National
Automotive Sampling System (NASS) estimate the long-term effectiveness
of antilock brake systems (ABS) for passenger cars and LTVs (light
trucks and vans) subsequent to the 1995 launch of public information
programs on how to use ABS correctly. ABS has close to a zero net
effect on fatal crash involvements. Fatal run-off-road crashes of
passenger cars increased by a statistically significant 9 percent (90%
confidence bounds: 3% to 15% increase), offset by a significant 13-
percent reduction in fatal collisions with pedestrians (confidence
bounds: 5% to 20%) and a significant 12-percent reduction in collisions
with other vehicles on wet roads (confidence bounds: 3% to 20%). ABS is
quite

effective in nonfatal crashes, reducing the overall crash-involvement
rate by 6 percent in passenger cars (confidence bounds: 4% to 8%) and
by 8 percent in LTVs (confidence bounds: 3% to 11%). The combination of
electronic stability control (ESC) and ABS will prevent a large
proportion of fatal and nonfatal crashes. The report updates and
supersedes an earlier evaluation of ABS (60 FR 7814).

Procedural Matters

How can I influence NHTSA's thinking on this subject?

    NHTSA welcomes public review of the technical report. NHTSA will
submit to the Docket a response to the comments and, if appropriate,
will supplement or revise the report.

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the Docket
number of this document (NHTSA-2009-0152) in your comments.
    Your primary comments must not be more than 15 pages long (49 CFR
553.21). However, you may attach additional documents to your primary
comments. There is no limit on the length of the attachments.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all 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 DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477) or you may visit http://
www.regulations.gov.
    Please send two paper copies of your comments to Docket Management,
fax them, or use the Federal eRulemaking Portal. The mailing address is
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Management Facility, M-30,
West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. The fax number is 1-202-493-2251. To use the
Federal eRulemaking Portal, go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow
the online instructions for submitting comments.
    We also request, but do not require you to send a copy to Charles
J. Kahane, Chief, Evaluation Division, NVS-431, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, Room W53-312, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590 (or e-mail them to chuck.kahane@dot.gov). He
can check if your comments have been received at the Docket and he can
expedite their review by NHTSA.

How can I be sure that my comments were received?

    If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of
your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the
envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket
Management will return the postcard by mail.

How do I submit confidential business information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, send three copies of your complete submission,
including the information you claim to be confidential business
information, to the Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Include a cover letter supplying the information specified in our
confidential business information regulation (49 CFR Part 512).
    In addition, send two copies from which you have deleted the
claimed confidential business information to U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Management Facility, M-30, West Building, Ground
Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
or submit them via the Federal eRulemaking Portal.

Will the agency consider late comments?

    In our response, we will consider all comments that Docket
Management receives before the close of business on the comment closing
date indicated above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also
consider comments that Docket Management receives after that date.
    Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly,
we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the materials placed in the docket for this document
(e.g., the comments submitted in response to this document by other
interested persons) at any time by going to http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets. You may also
read the materials at the Docket Management Facility by going to the
street address given above under ADDRESSES. The Docket Management
Facility is open between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 30111, 30168; delegation of authority at
49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

James F. Simons,
Director, Office of Regulatory Analysis and Evaluation.
[FR Doc. E9-20522 Filed 8-25-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 104 (Wednesday, May 31, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 34870]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11507]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4646-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2023-0001]

Alaska; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Alaska (FEMA-4646-DR), dated March 14, 2022, and
related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on April 5, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Lance E. Davis,
of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for
this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Yolanda J. Jackson as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-11507 Filed 5-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 223 (Tuesday, November 19, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63917-63919]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24982]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87519; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2019-80]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 7.31-
E To Delete Cross Orders

November 13, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on November 1, 2019, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31-E (Orders and Modifiers)
to delete Cross Orders from its rules and make other conforming
changes. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
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 those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Exchange's
rules to delete Cross Orders.
    As defined in Rule 7.31-E(g), a Cross Order is a two-sided order
with instructions to match the identified buy-side with the identified
sell-side at a specified price (the ``cross price''). The Exchange
offers one type of Cross Order, the Limit IOC Cross Order. As defined
in Rule 7.31-E(g)(1), a Limit IOC Cross Order is a Cross Order that
must trade in full at its cross price, will not route, and will cancel
at the time of order entry if the cross price is not between the BBO or
would trade through the PBBO.
    Due to a lack of demand for Cross Orders, the Exchange proposes to
discontinue supporting Cross Orders. Specifically, in the last three
months, the Exchange has not received any Cross Orders. Accordingly,
the Exchange proposes to delete the definition of Cross Order from Rule
7.31-E(g), as well as the references to Cross Orders in Rules 7.10-
E(e)(1), 7.11-E(a)(5)(E), 7.16-E(f)(5)(H), 7.18-E(c)(5), 7.34-
E(c)(1)(B), 7.34-E(c)(1)(C), and 7.34-E(c)(2)(C). The Exchange proposes
to designate Rules 7.31-E(g), 7.11-E(a)(5)(E), and 7.16-E(f)(5)(H) as
Reserved and proposes to revise Rules 7.10-E(e)(1), 7.18-E(c)(5), 7.34-
E(c)(1)(B), 7.34-E(c)(1)(C), and 7.34-E(c)(2)(C) to delete the
references to Cross Orders. Subject to effectiveness of this proposed
rule change, the Exchange will announce the implementation date of
these changes through a Trader Update, which the Exchange anticipates
will be in November 2019.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,\3\ in general, and Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\4\ in particular, in that it is designed to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. Specifically, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market by eliminating a
little-used order type and improving the clarity of the Exchange's
rules. The Exchange further believes that deleting an order type rarely
used by investors also removes impediments to and perfects the
mechanism of a free and open market by facilitating market
participants' navigation of the Exchange's rulebook and improving their
ability to understand the order types available for trading on the
Exchange. Moreover, the Exchange believes that the elimination of Cross
Orders will simplify order processing and reduce the burden on system
capacity, which the Exchange believes is consistent with promoting just
and equitable principles of trade, as well as the protection of
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Specifically, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would relieve a burden on
competition by making the Exchange's rules easier to navigate and
promoting regulatory clarity through the elimination of a seldom-used
order type.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \5\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\6\
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 \7\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2019-80 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-NYSEARCA-2019-80. 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-NYSEARCA-2019-80, and should be
submitted on or before December 10, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-24982 Filed 11-18-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 31, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 61)]
[Notices]
[Page 16213-16214]
[DOCID:fr31mr10-144]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61769; File No. SR-BX-2010-020]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 3121 To Reflect Changes to Corresponding FINRA Rule

March 24, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 19, 2010, The NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``BX'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange has designated
the proposed rule change as constituting a non-controversial rule
change under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act,\3\ which renders the
proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 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.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is filing this proposed rule change to amend BX Rule
3121 to reflect recent changes to a corresponding rule of the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA''). The Exchange will implement
the proposed rule change thirty days after the date of the filing.
Proposed new language is in italics and proposed deletions are in
brackets.
* * * * *
[ 3121]4570. Custodian of [the]Books and Records

A member who files a [Securities and Exchange Commission] Form BDW
shall designate on the Form BDW, as the custodian of the member's books
and records, a person associated with the member at the time that the
Form BDW is filed.
* * * * *

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    Many of BX's rules are based on rules of FINRA (formerly the
National Association of Securities Dealers (``NASD'')). During 2008,
FINRA embarked on an extended process of moving rules formerly
designated as ``NASD Rules'' into a consolidated FINRA rulebook. In
most cases, FINRA has renumbered these rules, and in some cases has
substantively amended them. Accordingly, BX also proposes to initiate a
process of modifying its rulebook to ensure that BX rules corresponding
to FINRA rules continue to mirror them as closely as practicable. In
some cases, it will not be possible for the rule numbers of BX rules to
mirror corresponding FINRA rule numbers, because existing or planned BX
rules make use of those numbers. However, wherever possible, BX plans
to update its rules to reflect changes to corresponding FINRA rules.
    This filing addresses BX Rule 3121, which formerly corresponded to
NASD 3121. In SR-FINRA-2009-080,\4\ FINRA redesignated NASD Rule 3121
as FINRA Rule 4570 with minor technical changes. FINRA Rule 4570
requires a member to designate, as the custodian of its required books
and records on Form BDW, a person who is associated with the firm at
the time Form BDW is filed. The rule is intended to enhance the SRO's
ability to obtain required books and records from firms that are no
longer conducting business and to ensure that the custodian of the
books and records has been subject to certain background checks. The
FINRA Rule 4570 text makes minor technical changes by adopting
terminology consistent with that used in Form BDW.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61332 (January 12,
2010), 75 F.R. 3270 (January 20, 2010) (SR-FINRA-2009-080).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BX is adopting the new FINRA rule in full, and redesignating BX
Rule 3121 to be BX Rule 4570, so as to correspond to the new FINRA rule
number.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\5\ in general, and with
Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ in particular, in that the proposal is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The proposed
changes will conform BX Rule 3121 to recent changes made to a
corresponding FINRA rule, to promote application of consistent
regulatory standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \7\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \8\ thereunder
in that it effects a change that: (i) Does not significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not impose
any significant burden on competition; and (iii) by its terms, does not
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent

with the protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the
Commission written notice of its 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 Commission notes that the Exchange has satisfied the
five-day pre-filing notice requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its guidance on the proposed rules of Self-Regulatory
Organizations (``SROs''),\9\ the Commission concluded that filings
based on the rules of another SRO already approved by the Commission
are eligible for immediate effectiveness under Rule 19b-4(f)(6).\10\
The Commission noted that ``a proposed rule change appropriately may be
filed as an immediately effective rule so long as it is based on and
similar to another SRO's rule and each policy issue raised by the
proposed rule (i) has been considered previously by the Commission when
the Commission approved another exchange's rule (that was subject to
notice and comment), and (ii) the rule change resolves such policy
issue in a manner consistent with such prior approval.''\11\ The
Exchange notes that the change is identical to a change by FINRA
approved by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58092 (July 3, 2008), 73
FR 40144 (July 11, 2008).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \11\ See supra note 9 at 40149.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as amended, 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BX-2010-020 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2010-020. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions.
    You should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2010-020
and should be submitted on or before April 21, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-7104 Filed 3-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56746-56747]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23403]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2554-000.
    Applicants: Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC.
    Description: Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC submits tariff
filing per 154.402: TW--ACA--2011--Filing to be effective 10/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 09/02/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110902-5086.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 14, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2555-000.
    Applicants: Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.
    Description: Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc. Notice of
Termination of Negotiated Rate Agreement with Empire District Electric
Co.
    Filed Date: 09/02/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110902-5111.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 14, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2556-000.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company.
    Description: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company submits tariff filing
per 154.601: Permanent Assignment DOMAC to GDF SUEZ Negotiated Rate to
be effective 10/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 09/02/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110902-5139.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 14, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2557-000.
    Applicants: Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.
    Description: Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., Petition for
Waiver of Missed Capacity Release Bidding Deadlines.
    Filed Date: 09/02/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110902-5153.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 14, 2011.

    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
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2443-001.
    Applicants: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company.
    Description: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company submits tariff
filing per 154.205(b): ACA Errata 2011 to be effective 10/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 09/02/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110902-5041.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 14, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2533-001.
    Applicants: MIGC LLC.
    Description: MIGC LLC submits tariff filing per 154.205(b): MIGC
LLC Amended 2011 ACA Filing to be effective 10/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 09/02/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110902-5117.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 14, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2356-001.
    Applicants: Kern River Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Kern River Gas Transmission Company submits tariff
filing per 154.203: 2011 September 6 Compliance to be effective 9/1/
2011.
    Filed Date: 09/06/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110906-5155.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 19, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2503-001.
    Applicants: National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation.
    Description: National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation submits tariff
filing per: ACA Correction 2 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 09/06/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110906-5039.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 19, 2011.

    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, and service 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 (202) 502-
8659.

    Dated: September 7, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-23403 Filed 9-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 148 (Thursday, August 1, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46521-46525]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18438]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2011-0659; FRL-9840-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
State of Colorado; Second 10-Year Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan for
Colorado Springs

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Colorado.
On March 31, 2010, the Governor of Colorado's designee submitted to EPA
a Clean Air Act (CAA) section 175A(b) second 10-year maintenance plan
for the Colorado Springs area for the carbon monoxide (CO) National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This limited maintenance plan
(LMP) addresses maintenance of the CO NAAQS for a second 10-year period
beyond the original redesignation. This action is being taken under
sections 110 and 175A of the CAA.

DATES: This rule is effective on September 30, 2013 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by September 3, 2013. If
adverse comment is 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-R08-
OAR-2011-0659, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> (please alert the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
     Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air Program, EPA, Region 8,
Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.
     Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director, Air Program, EPA,
Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.
Such deliveries are only accepted Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays. Special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-
2011-0659. 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 email. 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 email comment directly to EPA, without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email 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, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or

viruses. For additional instructions on submitting comments, go to
Section I. General Information 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 Air Program, EPA,
Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.
EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the individual listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of
the docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through
Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adam Clark, Air Program, EPA, Region
8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303)
312-7104<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
II. Background
III. What was the State's process?
IV. EPA's Evaluation of the Revised Colorado Springs Maintenance
Plan
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Review

Definitions

    For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain
words or initials as follows:
    (i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air
Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
    (ii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
    (iii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
    (iv) The words Colorado and State mean the State of Colorado.

I. General Information

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

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
http://regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    a. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    b. Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    c. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    d. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    e. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    f. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    g. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    h. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.

II. Background

    Under the CAA Amendments of 1990, the Colorado Springs area was
designated as nonattainment and classified as a ``moderate'' CO area,
with a design value of less than or equal to 12.7 parts per million
(ppm) (56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991). On August 19, 1998, the Governor
of Colorado submitted to EPA a request to redesignate the Colorado
Springs CO nonattainment area to attainment for the CO NAAQS. Along
with this request, the Governor submitted a CAA section 175A(a)
maintenance plan which demonstrated that the area would maintain the CO
NAAQS for the first 10 years following EPA's approval of the
redesignation request. On October 1, 1998, the Governor submitted
revisions to Colorado Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC) Regulation
No. 13, ``Oxygenated Fuels Program.'' EPA approved the State's
redesignation request, the CAA section 175A(a) 10-year maintenance
plan, and the revisions to AQCC Regulation No. 13 on August 25, 1999
(64 FR 46279).
    On May 10, 2000, the Governor of Colorado submitted a revised
Colorado Springs CO maintenance plan to EPA which changed the
attainment year from 1993 to 1990, provided a revised projected
emissions inventory out to 2010, and demonstrated maintenance of the CO
NAAQS in the Colorado Springs area through 2010. The Governor also
submitted a transportation conformity motor vehicle emission budget
(MVEB) for 2010, and revisions to AQCC Regulation No. 13, ``Oxygenated
Fuels Program,'' which allowed for the removal of the oxygenated fuels
program in Colorado Springs. We approved all of these changes into the
SIP on December 22, 2000 (65 FR 80779).
    On April 12, 2004, the Governor of Colorado submitted to us a
revised maintenance plan which demonstrated maintenance of the CO NAAQS
in the Colorado Springs area through 2015 and revised the 2010
transportation conformity MVEB. The Governor also submitted revisions
to AQCC Regulation No. 11, ``Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection
Program,'' which allowed for the removal of the basic inspection/
maintenance program in El Paso County, including the Colorado Springs
area. We approved all of these changes into the SIP on September 7,
2004 (see 69 FR 54019).
    Eight years after an area is redesignated to attainment, CAA
section 175A(b) requires the state to submit a subsequent maintenance
plan to EPA, covering a second 10-year period.\1\ This second 10-year
maintenance plan must demonstrate continued maintenance of the
applicable NAAQS during this second 10-year period. To fulfill this
requirement of the Act, the Governor of Colorado's designee submitted
the second 10-year Colorado Springs CO maintenance plan (hereafter,
``revised Colorado Springs Maintenance Plan'') to us on March 31, 2010.
With this action, we are approving the revised Colorado Springs
Maintenance Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In this case, the initial maintenance period extended
through 2010. Thus, the second 10-year period extends through 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 8-hour CO NAAQS--9.0 ppm--is attained when such value is not
exceeded more than once a year. 40 CFR 50.8(a)(1). The Colorado Springs
area has attained the 8-hour CO NAAQS from 1990 to the present.\2\ In
October 1995, EPA issued guidance that

provided nonclassifiable CO nonattainment areas the option of using a
less rigorous ``limited maintenance plan'' (LMP) option to demonstrate
continued attainment and maintenance of the CO NAAQS.\3\ According to
this guidance, areas that can demonstrate design values at or below
7.65 ppm (85% of exceedance levels of the CO 8-hour NAAQS) for eight
consecutive quarters qualify to use an LMP. For the revised Colorado
Springs Maintenance Plan, the State used EPA's LMP option to
demonstrate continued maintenance of the CO NAAQS in the Colorado
Springs area through 2020. We have determined that the Colorado Springs
area qualifies for the LMP option for this plan revision because the
area's maximum design value for the most recent eight consecutive
quarters with certified data at the time the State adopted the plan
(years 2007 and 2008) was 2.3 ppm.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The 1-hour CO NAAQS of 35 ppm has not been exceeded in the
Colorado Springs area since 1979.
    \3\ Memorandum ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for
Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas'' from Joseph W. Paisie,
Group Leader, EPA Integrated Policy and Strategies Group, to Air
Branch Chiefs, October 6, 1995 (hereafter referred to as ``LMP
guidance'').
    \4\ See Table 1 below. Additionally, according to the LMP
guidance, an area using the LMP option must continue to have a
design value ``at or below 7.65 ppm until the time of final EPA
action on the redesignation.'' Table 1, below, demonstrates that the
area meets this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What was the State's Process?

    Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA requires that a state provide
reasonable notice and public hearing before adopting a SIP revision and
submitting it to us.
    The AQCC held a public hearing for the revised Colorado Springs
Maintenance Plan on December 17, 2009. The AQCC adopted the revised
Colorado Springs Maintenance Plan directly after the hearing. The
Governor's designee submitted the revised plan to EPA on March 31,
2010.
    We have evaluated the SIP revision and have determined that the
State met the requirements for reasonable notice and public hearing
under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. On September 30, 2010, by operation
of law under CAA section 110(k)(1)(B), the SIP revision was deemed to
have met the minimum ``completeness'' criteria found in 40 CFR part 51,
appendix V.

IV. EPA's Evaluation of the Revised Colorado Springs Maintenance Plan

    The following are the key elements of a LMP for CO: Emission
Inventory, Maintenance Demonstration, Monitoring Network/Verification
of Continued Attainment, Contingency Plan, and Conformity
Determinations. Below, we describe our evaluation of each of these
elements for the revised Colorado Springs Maintenance Plan.

A. Emission Inventory

    The revised Colorado Springs CO Maintenance Plan contains an
emission inventory for the base year 2007. The emission inventory is a
list, by source category, of the air contaminants directly emitted into
the Colorado Springs CO maintenance area on a typical winter day in
2007.\5\ The data in the emission inventory were developed using EPA-
approved emissions modeling methods. The State provided a more detailed
description of the 2007 inventory in its Technical Support Document
(TSD) and the supplemental TSD for the revised Colorado Springs
Maintenance Plan.\6\ Included in this inventory are aircraft,
commercial cooking, fuel combustion, highway vehicle exhaust, non-road
mobile sources, railroads, structure fires, woodburning, and non-oil-
and-gas point sources. The revised maintenance plan and TSD contain
detailed emission inventory information that was prepared in accordance
with EPA guidance and is acceptable to us.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Violations of the CO NAAQS are most likely to occur on
winter weekdays.
    \6\ Both the TSD and the Supplemental TSD are available in the
docket for this action.
    \7\ See ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment,'' from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, EPA, September 4, 1992.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Maintenance Demonstration

    EPA considers the maintenance demonstration requirement to be
satisfied for areas that qualify for and are using the LMP option. As
mentioned above, a maintenance area is qualified to use the LMP option
if that area's maximum 8-hour CO design value for eight consecutive
quarters does not exceed 7.65 ppm (85% of the CO NAAQS). EPA maintains
that if an area begins the maintenance period with a design value no
greater than 7.65 ppm, the applicability of prevention of significant
deterioration requirements, the control measures already in the SIP,
and federal measures should provide adequate assurance of maintenance
over the 10-year maintenance period. Therefore, EPA does not require
areas using the LMP option to project emissions over the maintenance
period. Because CO design values in the Colorado Springs area are
consistently well below the LMP threshold (See Table 1 below), the
State has adequately demonstrated that the Colorado Springs area will
maintain the CO NAAQS into the future.

     Table 1--8-Hour CO Design Values for Colorado Springs, Colorado
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Design Value (ppm)*                          Year
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.1..........................................................       2004
2.7..........................................................       2005
2.4..........................................................       2006
2.1..........................................................       2007
2.3..........................................................       2008
1.9..........................................................       2009
2.1..........................................................       2010
1.5..........................................................       2011
1.4..........................................................       2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Design Values were derived from the EPA AirData Web site (http://www.epa.gov/airdata/).

C. Monitoring Network/Verification of Continued Attainment

    In the revised Colorado Springs Maintenance Plan, the State commits
to continuing operation of an air quality monitoring network in
accordance with 40 CFR Part 58 to verify continued attainment of the CO
NAAQS. The State also commits to conducting an annual review of the air
quality surveillance system in accordance with 40 CFR 58.10.
Additionally, the plan indicates that if measured mobile source
parameters change significantly over time, the State will perform
appropriate studies to determine whether additional and/or re-sited
monitors are necessary. We are approving these commitments as
satisfying the relevant requirements.

D. Contingency Plan

    Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions to promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS
that occurs after redesignation of an area. To meet this requirement,
the State has indentified appropriate contingency measures along with a
schedule for the development and implementation of such measures.
    As stated in the revised Colorado Springs Maintenance Plan, the
contingency measures will be triggered by a violation of the CO NAAQS.
No more than 60 days after notification from the Colorado Air Pollution
Control Division (APCD) that a violation of the CO NAAQS has occurred,
the Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments (PPACG), in conjunction with
the APCD, AQCC, and local governments will initiate a process to begin
evaluating potential contingency measures. The PPACG will present
recommendations within 120 days of notification, and the recommended
contingency measures will be presented to the AQCC within 180 days of
notification. The AQCC will then hold a public hearing to consider the

recommended contingency measures along with any other contingency
measures the AQCC believes may be appropriate to effectively address
the violation. The necessary contingency measures will be adopted and
implemented within one year after a violation occurs.
    The potential contingency measures that are identified in the
revised Colorado Springs CO maintenance plan include, but are not
limited to: (1) A basic vehicle inspection and maintenance program, as
such program existed in AQCC Regulation Number 11 before December 18,
2003; (2) a 2.7% oxygenated gasoline program, as such program existed
in AQCC Regulation Number 13 before February 17, 2000; (3) re-
establishing nonattainment new source review permitting for stationary
sources; and (4) wood burning restrictions.
    We find that the contingency measures provided in the revised
Colorado Springs Maintenance Plan are sufficient and meet the
requirements of section 175A(d) of the CAA.

E. Transportation Conformity

    Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not
produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or
delay timely attainment of the NAAQS (CAA 176(c)(1)(B)). EPA's
conformity rule at 40 CFR part 93 requires that transportation plans,
programs and projects conform to SIPs and establish the criteria and
procedures for determining whether or not they conform. To effectuate
its purpose, the conformity rule requires a demonstration that
emissions from the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) are consistent with the motor
vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) contained in the control strategy SIP
revision or maintenance plan (40 CFR 93.101, 93.118, and 93.124). A
MVEB is defined as the level of mobile source emissions of a pollutant
relied upon in the attainment or maintenance demonstration to attain or
maintain compliance with the NAAQS in the nonattainment or maintenance
area.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Further information concerning EPA's interpretations
regarding MVEBs can be found in the preamble to EPA's November 24,
1993, transportation conformity rule (see 58 FR 62193-62196).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the LMP guidance, emissions budgets generally are treated as
not constraining for the length of the maintenance period. While EPA's
LMP guidance does not exempt an area from the need to affirm
conformity, it explains that the area may demonstrate conformity
without submitting a MVEB. According to the LMP guidance, it is
unreasonable to expect that an LMP area will experience so much growth
in that period that a violation of the CO NAAQS would result.\9\
However, under our conformity regulations, consistency with existing
MVEBs must be demonstrated as long as those MVEBs are within the
timeframe of the transportation plan. See 40 CFR 93.118(b)(2)(i) and
(d)(2).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ LMP Guidance at 4. October 6, 1995.
    \10\ As required by our transportation conformity adequacy
process, we made a finding in a March 4, 2011 letter to the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) that the revised
Colorado Springs Maintenance Plan was adequate for transportation
conformity purposes. This finding was based substantially on the
fact that the Colorado Springs CO maintenance area meets the LMP
criteria, and is therefore not required to project future emissions.
In a Federal Register notice dated August 2, 2011, we notified the
public of our finding that the revised Colorado Springs Maintenance
Plan was adequate for transportation conformity purposes (see 76 FR
46288). This adequacy determination became effective on August 17,
2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CO maintenance plan for Colorado Springs that we approved in
2004 (69 FR 54019) contains MVEBs applicable only through 2010. As 2010
is no longer within the timeframe of the transportation plan, there is
no longer a need to demonstrate conformity with the 2010 MVEB for the
Colorado Springs CO maintenance area. For the reasons described in our
LMP guidance, all actions that would require conformity determinations
for the Colorado Springs CO maintenance area under our conformity rule
provisions are considered to have already satisfied the regional
emissions analysis and ``budget test'' requirements in 40 CFR 93.118
because of our approval of the Colorado Springs CO LMP.
    However, since LMP areas are still maintenance areas, certain
aspects of transportation conformity determinations still will be
required for transportation plans, programs and projects. Specifically,
for such determinations, RTPs, TIPs and transportation projects still
will have to demonstrate that they are fiscally constrained (40 CFR
93.108) and meet the criteria for consultation and Transportation
Control Measure (TCM) implementation in the conformity rule provisions
(40 CFR 93.112 and 40 CFR 93.113, respectively). In addition, projects
in LMP areas still will be required to meet the applicable criteria for
CO hot spot analyses to satisfy ``project level'' conformity
determinations (40 CFR 93.116 and 40 CFR 93.123), which must also
incorporate the latest planning assumptions and models available (40
CFR 93.110 and 40 CFR 93.111, respectively).
    Our approval of the revised Colorado Springs Maintenance Plan
affects future CO RTP and TIP conformity determinations prepared by
PPACG, the Colorado Department of Transportation, the Federal Highway
Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration.

V. Final Action

    We are approving the revised Colorado Springs Maintenance Plan
submitted on March 31, 2010. This maintenance plan meets the applicable
CAA requirements, and we have determined it is sufficient to provide
for maintenance of the CO NAAQS over the course of the second 10-year
maintenance period out to 2020.
    We are publishing this rule without prior proposal because we view
this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments
are filed. This rule will be effective September 30, 2013 without
further notice unless we receive adverse comments by September 3, 2013.
If we receive adverse comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take
effect. We will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed rule. We will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so
at this time. Please note that if we receive adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by

state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq).
Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law
and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that
required by state law, it 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).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq, as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 30, 2013. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed
rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so
that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in
the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See Clean Air Act section
307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: July 16, 2013.
Judith Wong,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended to read as follows:

PART 52 [AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart G--Colorado

0
2. Section 52.349 is amended by adding paragraph (o) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.349  Control strategy: Carbon monoxide.

* * * * *
    (o) Revisions to the Colorado State Implementation Plan, revised
Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan for Colorado Springs, as adopted by
the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission on December 17, 2009 and
submitted by the Governor's designee on March 31, 2010.

[FR Doc. 2013-18438 Filed 7-31-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:This document was submitted before the advent of the online system.  Please contact the EPA Docket Center for a copy.