[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 138 (Monday, July 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42860-42862]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17660]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75449; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2015-55]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending the NYSE
Arca Equities Schedule of Fees and Charges for Exchange Services

July 14, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on June 24, 2015, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 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 the NYSE Arca Equities Schedule of
Fees and Charges for Exchange Services (``Fee Schedule'') to (i) raise
the fee for Market and Auction-Only Orders executed in an Opening,
Market Order or Trading Halt Auction; (ii) modify the credits the
Exchange provides for routing certain orders to the New York Stock
Exchange LLC (``NYSE''); and (iii) revise the Tape B Step Up Tier. The
Exchange proposes to implement the changes on July 1, 2015.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to (i) raise the
Tier 1 and Tier 2 fee for Market and Auction-Only Orders executed in an
Opening, Market Order or Trading Halt Auction and make corresponding
changes in the Basic Rate pricing; (ii) modify the Tier 1 and Tier 2
credits the Exchange provides for routing certain orders to the NYSE
and make corresponding changes in the Basic Rate pricing; and (iii)
revise the Tape B Step Up Tier. The Exchange proposes to implement the
fee changes on July 1, 2015.
    For Tier 1 and Tier 2, the Exchange currently charges $0.0010 per
share for Market and Auction-Only Orders executed in an Opening, Market
Order or Trading Halt Auction with a cap of $20,000 per month per
Equity Trading Permit ID. The Exchange proposes to raise this fee from
$0.0010 to $0.0015 per share. The Exchange is not proposing any change
to the cap.
    The Exchange proposes to make corresponding changes to the Basic
Rate pricing section of the Fee Schedule. Specifically, in the Basic
Rate pricing section, the current fee for Market and Auction-Only
Orders executed in an Opening, Market Order or Trading Halt Auction is
$0.0010 per share, with a cap of $20,000 per month per Equity Trading
Permit ID. The Exchange proposes to raise this fee to $0.0015 per
share. The Exchange is not proposing any change to the cap.
    In a recent rule filing, the NYSE has proposed to modify its fee
structure for equities transaction, including changes to the rates for
providing liquidity, to become effective July 1, 2015.\4\ The
Exchange's current credits for routing orders to NYSE are closely
related to the NYSE's rates, including credits for providing liquidity,
and the Exchange is proposing an adjustment to its routing credits to
maintain the existing relationship to the rates proposed by the NYSE.
Specifically, for Tier 1 and Tier 2 PO+ orders,\5\ the current Exchange
credit for orders that are routed to the NYSE that provide liquidity to
the NYSE is $0.0015 per share, which is equal to the current NYSE
rebate for execution of customer orders that add liquidity to the NYSE.
The Exchange is proposing to lower the credits for routing Tier 1 and
Tier 2 PO+ Orders to the NYSE by the same amount ($0.0001) as the
decrease in the corresponding NYSE credit. The proposed new credit for
such orders routed to the NYSE that provide liquidity to the NYSE would
be $0.0014 per share. This proposed fee change would maintain the
current relationship with NYSE rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See SR-NYSE-2015-30.
    \5\ A PO+ Order is a Primary Only Order (i.e., a market or limit
order that is to be routed to the primary market) that is entered
for participation in the primary market, other than for
participation in the primary market opening or primary market re-
opening. See NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.31(f)(1)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to make corresponding changes to the Basic
Rate pricing section of the Fee Schedule. Currently, the credit for PO+
Orders that provide liquidity to the NYSE is set at $0.0015 per share.
The Exchange proposes to lower this credit to $0.0014 per share. Again,
this proposed fee change would maintain the current relationship with
NYSE rates.
    Finally, the Exchange proposes to revise the Tape B Step Up Tier.
Currently, ETP Holders and Market Makers, that, on a daily basis,
measured monthly, directly execute providing volume in Tape B
Securities during a billing month (``Tape B Adding ADV'') that is equal
to at least 0.275% of the U.S. Tape B Consolidated Average Daily Volume
(``Tape B CADV'') for the billing month over the ETP Holder's or Market
Maker's May 2013 Tape B Adding ADV taken as a percentage of Tape B CADV
(``Tape B Baseline % CADV'') receive a credit of $0.0004 per share for
orders that provide liquidity to the Exchange in Tape B Securities,
which is in addition to the ETP Holder's Tiered or Basic Rate
credit(s). The Exchange proposes to specify in the Fee Schedule that
ETP Holders that qualify for the Cross-Asset Tier would not be eligible
to qualify for the Tape B Step Up Tier. The Exchange believes that the
credit of $0.0030 per share is sufficient that an ETP Holder that
qualifies for the Cross-Asset Tier should not also receive the
increased credits applicable to the Tape B Step Up Tier. Similar to
Retail Order Tier ETP Holders and Market Makers, who are currently
ineligible to qualify for the Tape B Step Up Tier, the Exchange
proposes to exclude Cross-Asset Tier ETP Holders from also qualifying
for the Tape B Step Up Tier.
    The proposed changes are not otherwise intended to address any
other issues, and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that ETP
Holders would have in complying with the proposed changes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with

Section 6(b) of the Act,\6\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\7\ in particular, because it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its
facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers,
issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed fee increase for Market and
Auction-Only Orders executed in an Opening, Market Order or Trading
Halt Auction are reasonable because they are the same as the fees
imposed by at least one other exchange.\8\ In addition, the proposed
fee changes are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because they
apply uniformly to all similarly situated ETP Holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See NASDAQ Crossing Network Fees at http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=PriceListTrading2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to routing credits
for PO+ Orders that provide liquidity to the NYSE are reasonable
because the Exchange's credits for routing such orders are closely
related to the NYSE's rebates for its members for providing liquidity,
and the proposed change is consistent with the change proposed by the
NYSE to lower its rebate for providing liquidity. The proposed change
would result in maintaining the existing relationship between the two
sets of fees. In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change, which would result in a decrease in the per share credit for
PO+ Orders routed to the NYSE that provide liquidity to the NYSE, would
thereby align the rate that the Exchange provides to ETP Holders with
the rate that NYSE provides to its members for providing liquidity.
Further, the proposed change is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the rebate reduction would apply uniformly
across pricing tiers and all similarly situated ETP Holders would be
subject to the same credit.
    The Exchange believes that prohibiting Cross-Asset Tier ETP Holders
from qualifying for the Tape B Step Up Tier is reasonable, equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory because ETP Holders that qualify for
the Cross-Asset Tier would already receive a higher credit of $0.0030
before the Tape B Step Up Credit, which is higher than other tiers with
the Tape B Step Up credit. For example, Tier 1 ETP Holders that qualify
for Tape B Step Up Tier would receive a Tier 1 credit of $0.0023 plus a
Tape B Step Up credit of $0.0004 for a total credit of $0.0027,
compared with the standalone Cross-Asset credit of $0.0030. The
Exchange notes that Cross-Asset Tier ETP Holders and Market Makers
currently do not qualify for Tape C Step Up Tier 2 credit.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition. For these reasons, the Exchange
believes that the proposal is consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\9\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. In particular, the proposed routing credit changes
would not place a burden on competition because the Exchange is seeking
to align its credits with the credits provided by the NYSE.\10\ In
addition, the proposed change to the Exchange's fee for Market and
Auction-Only Orders executed in an Opening, Market Order or Trading
Halt Auction is consistent with the fee charged by at least one other
exchange.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
    \10\ See supra note 4.
    \11\ See supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not believe prohibiting Cross-Asset Tier ETP
Holders from qualifying for increased credit(s) will impair ETP
Holders' ability to compete. The Exchange already provides a credit for
Cross-Asset Tier ETP Holders and ETP Holders impacted by the proposed
change may readily adjust their trading behavior to maintain or
increase their credits or decrease their fees in a favorable manner.
    The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can readily favor competing venues. In
such an environment, the Exchange must continually review, and consider
adjusting, its fees and credits to remain competitive with other
exchanges. For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change promotes a competitive environment.

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 foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \12\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \13\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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 under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \14\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-2015-55 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2015-55. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's

Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with
respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission,
and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change
between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be
withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C.
552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the
Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-1090. Copies of the filing will also be available for inspection
and copying at the NYSE's principal office and on its Internet Web site
at www.nyse.com. 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-
NYSEARCA-2015-55 and should be submitted on or before August 7, 2015.

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

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

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-17660 Filed 7-17-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 137 (Friday, July 17, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 42492]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17626]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9930-82-OAR]

Request for Nominations for the 2016 Clean Air Excellence Awards
Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Request for nominations for Clean Air Excellence Awards.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the competition for the 2016 Clean Air
Excellence Awards Program. EPA established the Clean Air Excellence
Awards Program in February 2000 to recognize outstanding and innovative
efforts that support progress in achieving clean air.

DATES: All submissions of entries for the Clean Air Excellence Awards
Program must be postmarked by September 11, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Additional information on this awards
program, including the entry form, can be found on EPA's Clean Air Act
Advisory Committee (CAAAC) Web site: http://epa.gov/air/cleanairawards/index.html. Any member of the public who wants further information may
contact Ms. Catrice Jefferson, Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. EPA by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Awards Program Notice: Pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
7403(a)(1) and (2) and sections 103(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), notice is hereby given that the EPA's Office of Air and
Radiation (OAR) announces the opening of competition for the 2016 Clean
Air Excellence Awards Program (CAEAP). The intent of the program is to
recognize and honor outstanding, innovative efforts that help to make
progress in achieving cleaner air. The CAEAP is open to both public and
private entities. Entries are limited to efforts related to air quality
in the United States. There are five general award categories: (1)
Clean Air Technology; (2) Community Action; (3) Education/Outreach; (4)
Regulatory/Policy Innovations; and (5) Transportation Efficiency
Innovations. There are also two special awards categories: (1) Thomas
W. Zosel Outstanding Individual Achievement Award; and (2) Gregg Cooke
Visionary Program Award. Awards are given periodically and are for
recognition only.
    Entry Requirements: All applicants are asked to submit their entry
on a CAEAP entry form, contained in the CAEAP Entry Package, which may
be obtained from the CAAAC Web site at http://www.epa.gov/air/cleanairawards/entry.html. Applicants can also contact Ms. Catrice
Jefferson, Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. EPA by telephone at (202)
564-1668 or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The entry form is a
simple, three-part form asking for general information on the
applicant; a narrative description of the project; and three (3)
independent references for the proposed entry. Applicants should also
submit additional supporting documentation as necessary. Specific
directions and information on filing an entry form are included in the
Entry Package.
    Judging and Award Criteria: EPA staff will use a screening process,
with input from outside subject experts, as needed. Members of the
CAAAC will provide advice to EPA on the entries. The EPA Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation will make the final award
decisions. Entries will be judged using both general criteria and
criteria specific to each individual category. These criteria are
listed in the 2016 Entry Package.

    Dated July 1, 2015.
Catrice Jefferson,
Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2015-17626 Filed 7-16-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 170 (Wednesday, September 2, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53086-53087]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21684]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0256; FRL-9927-13-Region 9]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona;
Phased Discontinuation of Stage II Vapor Recovery Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revision from the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality related to the removal of ``Stage
II'' vapor recovery equipment at gasoline dispensing facilities in the
Phoenix-Mesa area. Specifically, the EPA is proposing to approve a SIP
revision that eliminates the requirement to install and operate such
equipment at new gasoline dispensing facilities, and that provides for
the phased removal of such equipment at existing gasoline dispensing
facilities from October 2016 through September 2018. The EPA has
previously determined that onboard refueling vapor recovery is in
widespread use nationally and waived the stage II vapor recovery
requirement. The EPA is proposing to approve this SIP revision because
the resultant short-term incremental increase in emissions would not
interfere with attainment or maintenance of the national ambient air
quality standards or any other requirement of the Clean Air Act and
because it would avoid longer-term increases in emissions from the
continued operation of stage II vapor recovery equipment at gasoline
dispensing facilities in the Phoenix-Mesa area.

DATES: Comments must be received by October 2, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-
2014-0256, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Email: Jeffrey Buss at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax: Jeffrey Buss, Air Planning Office (AIR-2), at fax number
415-947-3579.
    4. Mail: Jeffrey Buss, Air Planning Office (AIR-2), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne, San
Francisco, California 94105.

    5. Hand or Courier Delivery: Jeffrey Buss, Air Planning Section
(AIR-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne,
San Francisco, California 94105. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-
2014-0256. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which
is restricted by statute. Do not submit information through
www.regulations.gov or email that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected from disclosure. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an
anonymous access system, which means the 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 the EPA without
going through 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the
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.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
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 www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, California 94105. The EPA requests that if at
all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection during normal
business hours.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Buss, Office of Air Planning,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of
this Federal Register, the EPA is approving the State of Arizona's
Stage II vapor recovery SIP revision in a direct final action without
prior proposal because we believe this SIP revision is not
controversial. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in
the direct final rule. If we receive adverse comments, however, we will
publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the
comments in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. Please
note that if the EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, the EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
    We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone
interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not
receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further
information, see please see the direct final action.

    Dated: March 30, 2015.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Editorial Note:  This document was received for publication by
the Office of the Federal Register on August 27, 2015.

[FR Doc. 2015-21684 Filed 9-1-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


ConocoPhillips Manassas Terminal Tank Capacities Dimensions from Site Drainage Map Tank Number Diameter ( feet) Height ( feet) Equation Volume ( ft^ 3) Conversion Gallon Capacity Barrel Capacity 1 65 48 Volume =  ( D/ 2)^ 2 x H 159,198 1 ft^ 3 = 7.481 Gallons 1,190,960 28,356 2 90 48 Volume =  ( D/ 2)^ 2 x H 305,208 1 ft^ 3 = 7.481 Gallons 2,283,261 54,363 3 55 40 Volume =  ( D/ 2)^ 2 x H 94,985 1 ft^ 3 = 7.481 Gallons 710,583 16,919 4 85 48 Volume =  ( D/ 2)^ 2 x H 272,238 1 ft^ 3 = 7.481 Gallons 2,036,612 48,491 5 55 48 Volume =  ( D/ 2)^ 2 x H 113,982 1 ft^ 3 = 7.481 Gallons 852,699 20,302 6 90 53 Volume =  ( D/ 2)^ 2 x H 337,001 1 ft^ 3 = 7.481 Gallons 2,521,101 60,026 7 90 53 Volume =  ( D/ 2)^ 2 x H 337,001 1 ft^ 3 = 7.481 Gallons 2,521,101 60,026   = 3.14 1 Barrel = 42 Gallons File location: q:\ natstrat\ pbst\ site_ visits\ conoco_ tanks. xls


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 22, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42497-42498]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17041]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0128; FRL-9981-88-OAR]

Release of Risk and Exposure Assessment Plan for the Secondary
National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Oxides of Nitrogen, Oxides of
Sulfur and Particulate Matter

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is conducting a
periodic review of the air quality criteria and the secondary National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for oxides of nitrogen, oxides of
sulfur, and particulate matter (PM). On or about August 6, 2018, the
EPA will make available for public review the document titled Review of
the Secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Oxides of
Nitrogen, Oxides of Sulfur and Particulate Matter: Risk and Exposure
Assessment Planning Document (REA Planning Document). This plan
presents considerations and the proposed approach for conducting
quantitative analyses of oxides of nitrogen, oxides of sulfur, and PM
exposures and welfare risks in this NAAQS review. This planning
document is intended to facilitate consultation with the Clean Air
Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) and public comment on plans for
such quantitative analyses.

DATES: Comments should be received on or before October 22, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2014-0128, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
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. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web,
Cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. The REA Planning Document will be available primarily via the
internet at: https://www.epa.gov/naaqs/nitrogen-dioxide-no2-and-sulfur-dioxide-so2-secondary-standards-planning-documents-current.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ginger Tennant, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (Mail Code C504-06), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number:
919-541-4072; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

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

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
https://www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on any
digital storage media that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
digital storage media as CBI and then identify electronically within
the digital storage media 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. If you submit any digital storage media that does not
contain CBI, mark the outside of the digital storage media clearly that
it does not contain CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed
except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI
only to the following address: OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-
02), OAQPS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-
0128.
    2. Tips for Preparing your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the notice by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
     Follow directions. The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a CFR part or
section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternative and
substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumption and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Information About the Document

    Two sections of the Clean Air Act (CAA) govern the establishment
and revision of the NAAQS. Section 108 (42 U.S.C. 7408) directs the
Administrator to identify and list certain air pollutants and then to
issue air quality criteria for those pollutants. The Administrator is
to list those air pollutants that in his ``judgment, cause or
contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to
endanger public health or welfare;'' ``the presence of which in the
ambient air results from numerous or diverse mobile or stationary
sources;'' and ``for which . . . [the Administrator] plans to issue air
quality criteria. . . . '' Air quality criteria are intended to
``accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge useful in
indicating the kind and extent of all identifiable effects on public
health or welfare which may be expected from the presence of [a]
pollutant in the ambient air . . . '' 42 U.S.C. 7408(b). Under section
109 (42 U.S.C. 7409), the EPA establishes primary (health-based) and
secondary (welfare-based) NAAQS for pollutants for which air quality
criteria are issued. Section 109(d) requires periodic review and, if
appropriate, revision of existing air quality criteria. The revised air
quality criteria reflect advances in scientific knowledge on the
effects of the pollutant on public health or welfare. The EPA is also
required to periodically review and, if appropriate, revise the NAAQS
based on the revised criteria. Section 109(d)(2) requires that an
independent scientific review committee ``shall complete a review of
the criteria . . . and the national primary and secondary ambient air
quality standards . . . and shall recommend to the Administrator any
new . . . standards and revisions of existing criteria and standards as
may be appropriate. . . .'' Since the early

1980's, this independent review function has been performed by CASAC.
    Presently, the EPA is reviewing the secondary NAAQS for oxides of
nitrogen, oxides of sulfur, and PM.\1\ PM was added to this review
after the draft Integrated Review Plan (80 FR 69220, November 9, 2015)
was released to the public and reviewed by CASAC in recognition of
linkages between these pollutants (oxides of nitrogen, oxides of
sulfur, and PM) with respect to deposition and atmospheric chemistry,
as well as from an environmental effects perspective. Additional
welfare effects associated with PM, such as visibility, climate and
materials effects, and the health effects of PM (including particulate
transformation products of oxides of nitrogen and oxides of sulfur) are
considered as part of the review of the NAAQS for PM (81 FR 87933,
December 6, 2016). The health effects of oxides of nitrogen were
considered in a separate assessment that was completed recently as part
of the review of the primary (health-based) NAAQS for oxides of
nitrogen (83 FR 17226, April 18, 2018). Similarly, the health effects
of oxides of sulfur are currently being considered in a separate
assessment as part of the review of the primary NAAQS for oxides of
sulfur (83 FR 26752, June 8, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The EPA's call for information for the NOX/
SOX secondary review was issued on August 29, 2013 (78 FR
53452), and the call for information on the PM review (both
secondary and primary) was issued on December 3, 2014 (79 FR 71764).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's overall plan for this review is presented in the
Integrated Review Plan for the Secondary NAAQS for Oxides of Nitrogen,
Oxides of Sulfur and Particulate Matter.\2\ The REA Planning Document
considers the degree to which important uncertainties identified in
quantitative analyses from previous reviews have been addressed by
newly available scientific evidence, tools, or information, including
those in the second external review draft of the Integrated Science
Assessment for Oxides of Nitrogen, Oxides of Sulfur and Particulate
Matter-Ecological Criteria (83 FR 29786, June 26, 2018). Based on these
considerations, the document reaches preliminary conclusions on the
extent to which updated quantitative analyses of exposures or public
welfare risks are warranted in the current review. For updated analyses
that are supported, this planning document presents anticipated
approaches to conducting such analyses. This document will be available
on or about August 6, 2018, on the EPA's Technology Transfer Network
website at https://www.epa.gov/naaqs/nitrogen-dioxide-no2-and-sulfur-dioxide-so2-secondary-standards-planning-documents-current.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Available at https://www.epa.gov/naaqs/nitrogen-dioxide-no2-and-sulfur-dioxide-so2-secondary-standards-planning-documents-current.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The REA Planning Document will be discussed at a public meeting for
review by CASAC and the public. A separate Federal Register notice
provides details about this meeting and the process for participation
(83 FR 31755, July 9, 2018). The EPA will also consider public comments
on the REA Planning Document that are submitted to the docket, as
described above.

    Dated: August 2, 2018.
Panagiotis Tsirigotis,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2018-17041 Filed 8-21-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 161 (Wednesday, August 20, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49297-49298]
[FR Doc No: 2014-19664]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2146-162]

Alabama Power Company; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing,
Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Shoreline Management Plan.
    b. Project No: 2146-162.
    c. Date Filed: June 19, 2014.
    d. Applicant: Alabama Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: Coosa River Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: Coosa River in Cherokee and Etowah Counties, Alabama
and Floyd County, Georgia.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: David K. Anderson, Hydro Licensing
Specialist,

Alabama Power Company, 600 North 18th Street, P.O. Box 2641,
Birmingham, AL 35291; Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Jon E. Cofrancesco at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests: September 12, 2014.
    All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
Please include the project number (P-2146-162) on any comments,
motions, or recommendations filed.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Request: As required by article 414 of the
license, Alabama Power Company requests Commission approval of a
proposed shoreline management plan (SMP) for the project. The SMP
defines shoreline management policies and classifications for the
shorelines within the project boundary, identifies allowable uses
within the shoreline areas, includes a shoreline use permitting and
compliance program, and a public education and outreach program.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field (P-2146) to access the document. You
may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-
208-3676 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call (202) 502-
8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the
address in item (h) above. Agencies may obtain copies of the
application directly from the applicant. Agencies may obtain copies of
the application directly from the applicant.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions To Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214, respectively. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only
those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments,
protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the
specified comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all
capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or ``MOTION TO
INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the
applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing
responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the
person commenting, protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply
with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis. Any filing made by an intervenor must be accompanied
by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared
by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR
385.2010.

    Dated: August 13, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-19664 Filed 8-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


3 1 CHAPTER THREE TOTAL BURDEN AND COST SAVINGS This chapter presents the total burden and cost savings associated with the final Phase 1 rule. Because the final rule will affect all TRI reports, the universe of affected forms considered in this analysis equals the number of forms filed in RY2002, the most current year for which TRI data are available. First year reporters under the final rule are approximated by the number of first year reporters in RY2002. Total burden and cost savings are estimated separately for PBT Form Rs, non PBT Form Rs, and non PBT Form As. Table 3 1 summarizes the number and type of report in RY 2002.

TABLE 3 1 UNIVERSE OF AFFECTED FORMS UNDER THE FINAL RULE Form R Form A First Year Non  PBT Forms 880 324 PBT Forms 458 NA*

Subsequent Years Non PBT Forms 65,006 11,594 PBT Forms 15,085 NA*

* Facilities may not use Form A for PBT chemicals.

Following the methodology presented in Chapter Two, unit burden and cost savings were derived. This information is then combined with the number of affected Form Rs and As to estimate total burden and cost savings. Tables 3 2 and 3 3 show the national burden and cost saving estimates for first year reporters and subsequent reporters, respectively. Table 3 2 shows an estimated total burden savings of 2,367 hours and total cost savings of $ 106,634 for first year reporters as a result of the final rule. Subsequent year reporters are estimated to experience a total burden savings of 49,693 hours and total cost savings of $ 2,158,314 as shown in Table 3 3. 3 2 TABLE 3 2 NATIONAL BURDEN AND COST SAVINGS FOR FIRST YEAR REPORTERS Form Type Number of Forms Burden Savings per Form ( hours) Total Burden Savings ( hours) Cost Saving per Form Total Cost Savings Form R Non PBT Forms 880 1.37 1,203 $ 61.99 $ 54,554 PBT Forms 458 2.17 996 $ 97.93 $ 44,852 Form A Non PBT Forms 324 0.52 168 $ 22.31 $ 7,227 Total 1,662 2,367 $ 106,634 Note: Due to rounding, the total may not equal the sum of the column.

TABLE 3 3 NATIONAL BURDEN AND COST SAVINGS FOR SUBSEQUENT YEAR REPORTERS Form Type Number of Forms Burden Savings per Form ( hours) Total Burden Savings ( hours) Cost Saving per Form Total Cost Savings Form R Form R Non PBT 65,006 0.56 36,564 $ 24.73 $ 1,607,661 Form R PBT 15,085 0.78 11,837 $ 33.67 $ 507,856 Form A Form A Non PBT 11,594 0.11 1,292 $ 3.69 $ 42,797 Total 91,685 49,693 $ 2,158,314 Note: Due to rounding, the total may not equal the sum of the column.


[Federal Register: February 13, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 30)]
[CORRECTIONS]
[Page 8408]
[DOCID:fr13fe08-181]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 97

[EPA-R05-OAR-2007-0390; FRL-8519-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Ohio; Clean Air Interstate Rule

Correction

    In rule document E8-1804 beginning on page 6034 in the issue of
Friday, February 1, 2008, make the following corrections:

Appendix A to Subpart IIII of Part 97 [Corrected]

    1. On page 6041, in the first column, in amendatory instruction 8,
in the first line, ``Appendix A to Subpart IV'' should read ``Appendix
A to Subpart IIII''.
    2. On the same page, in the same column, in the last appendix
heading, in the first line, ``Appendix A to Subpart IV of Part 97''
should read ``Appendix A to Subpart IIII of Part 97''.

[FR Doc. Z8-1804 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 16 (Friday, January 24, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4073-4075]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01288]

========================================================================
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.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 16 / Friday, January 24, 2014 / Rules
and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0860; Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-36]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment and Modification of Area Navigation (RNAV) Routes;
Atlanta, GA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes 14 RNAV Q-routes and modifies 4 Q-
routes to enhance the efficiency of the National Airspace System (NAS)
by improving the flow of air traffic in the vicinity of Atlanta, GA,
and Charlotte, NC.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, April 3, 2014. 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: Paul Gallant, Airspace Policy and
Regulations Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On November 27, 2013, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish 14 new RNAV routes
and modify 4 RNAV routes in the vicinity of the Atlanta, GA and
Charlotte, NC areas (78 FR 70895). Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal. No comments were received.

Differences from the NPRM

    The order of points listed in the descriptions of Q-110 and Q-118
is reversed in this rule from that shown in the NPRM. This is only an
editorial change for format standardization and does not affect the
track of the two routes.

The Rule

    The FAA is amending Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 to establish 14 new RNAV Q-routes and modify 4 Q-routes to
improve the flow of air traffic in the Atlanta, GA, and Charlotte, NC
areas. The changes are described below.
    Q-22: Q-22 is extended approximately 582 nautical miles (NM) to the
northeast of its current termination point, to the BEARI, VA, waypoint
(WP) to segregate aircraft landing at various airports in the northeast
U.S.
    Q-39: Q-39 is a new route extending between the CLAWD, NC, WP and
the TARCI, WV, fix, used by aircraft landing at Port Columbus, OH,
Cleveland, OH and Detroit, MI airports.
    Q-40: Q-40 is extended approximately 548 NM to the northeast
terminating at the FANPO, VA, WP, providing a shorter route and
reducing conflictions with departures from the Atlanta, GA, area.
    Q-50: Q-50 is a new route extending between the Louisville, KY,
VORTAC (IIU) and the CUBIM, KY, WP, to help segregate Charlotte, NC,
departures from conflicting high altitude flows headed towards the
Louisville, KY area.
    Q-52: Q-52 is a new route extending between the CHOPZ, GA, WP and
the COLZI, NC, fix, providing an RNAV alternative to jet route J-37 for
southwest-bound overflights joining traffic departing from the CLT area
and overflying ATL. The route parallels J-37 between COLZI and CHOPZ
thereby segregating the southwest-bound flights from ATL departure
flows that are in opposite direction proceeding northeast-bound.
    Q-54: Q-54 is a new route extending between the Greenwood, SC,
VORTAC (GRD) and the NUTZE, NC, WP, serving ATL departures destined to
the Norfolk, VA, area.
    Q-56: Q-56 is a new route that extends between the CATLN, AL, Fix
and the KIWII, VA, WP, diverging northeasterly from Q-22, above, to
serve aircraft landing at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and
Joint Base Andrews.
    Q-58: Q-58 is a new route that extends between the KELLN, SC, WP
and the PEETT, NC, WP, used by ATL departures headed to Baltimore/
Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport.
    Q-60: Q-60 is a new route extending between the Spartanburg, SC,
VORTAC (SPA) and the JAXSN, VA, fix, to serve aircraft landing at
Washington Dulles International, Richmond, VA, International and
LaGuardia (LGA) airports.
    Q-63: Q-63 is a new route extending between the DOOGE, VA, WP and
the HEVAN, IN, WP, to facilitate CLT departures traveling northwest-
bound and overflying the Cincinnati, OH, area.
    Q-64: Q-64 is a new route extending between the CATLN, AL, fix and
the Tar River, NC, VORTAC (TYI), providing routing for aircraft
destined to airports in the New York City area.
    Q-65: Q-65 is a new route extending between the JEFOI, GA, WP and
Rosewood, OH, VORTAC (ROD), to serve northbound traffic from Florida
and to the east of ATL.
    Q-66: Q-66 is a new route extending between the Little Rock, AR,
VORTAC (LIT) and the ALEAN, VA, WP, transferring RNAV aircraft off
conventional jet routes and away from the Volunteer, TN (VXV) and
Pulaski, VA (PSK) VORTACs, to facilitate climbs for northbound aircraft
departing ATL and providing a more direct route to Little Rock.
    Q-67: Q-67 is a new route extending between the SMITH, TN, WP and
Henderson, WV, VORTAC (HNN), providing RNAV routing for ATL departures.
    Q-69: Q-69 is a new route extending between the BLAAN, SC, WP and
Elkins, WV, VORTAC (EKN), better providing for unrestricted climbs for
CLT departures headed toward Pittsburgh International (PIT), Buffalo
Niagara International (BUF) and Toronto Pearson International (TOR)
airports. The route also can be an RNAV alternative to jet route J-53.
    Q-71: Q-71 is a new route extending between the BOBBD, TN, WP and
the GEFFS, WV, fix. In conjunction with Q-67, Q-71 facilitates the
segregation of

ATL departures prior to entering the adjacent Air Route Traffic Control
Center's (ARTCC) airspace.
    Q-110: Q-110 is extended an additional 404 NM to the northwest,
terminating at the BLANS, IL, WP, serving traffic overflying Atlanta
ARTCC airspace from Florida airports en route to the Minneapolis-St.
Paul International/World-Chamberlain Airport (MSP).
    Q-118: Q-118 extends between the KPASA, FL, WP and the LENIE, GA,
WP. The LENIE WP is eliminated and instead Q-118 is realigned to the
west of LENIE through the JOHNN, GA, Fix. From the JOHNN Fix, Q-118 is
extended approximately 544 NM to the north to terminate at the Marion,
IN, VOR/DME (MZZ). This supports a preferred arrival route into Chicago
O'Hare International Airport (ORD).
    High altitude RNAV routes are published in paragraph 2006 of FAA
Order 7400.9X dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15, 2013,
which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The RNAV routes
listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.
    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 only affects air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when
promulgated, does 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 modifies the route structure as required to enhance the safe and
efficient flow of air traffic in the eastern United States.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 311a. 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 amends14 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 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9X,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 7, 2013, and
effective September 15, 2013, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 2006 United States Area Navigation Routes

* * * * *

Q-22 GUSTI, LA to BEARI, VA [Amended]

GUSTI, LA FIX (lat. 29[deg]58'15'' N., long. 92[deg]54'35'' W.)
OYSTY, LA FIX (lat. 30[deg]28'15'' N., long. 90[deg]11'49'' W.)
ACMES, AL WP (lat. 30[deg]55'27'' N., long. 88[deg]22'11'' W.)
CATLN, AL FIX (lat. 31[deg]18'26'' N., long. 87[deg]34'48'' W.)
TWOUP, GA WP (lat. 33[deg]53'45'' N., long. 83[deg]49'08'' W.)
Spartanburg (SPA), SC VORTAC (lat. 35[deg]02'01'' N., long.
81[deg]55'37'' W.)
NYBLK, NC WP (lat. 35[deg]34'35'' N., long. 81[deg]02'34'' W.)
MASHI, NC WP (lat. 35[deg]58'18'' N., long. 80[deg]23'05'' W.)
KIDDO, NC WP (lat. 36[deg]10'35'' N., long. 80[deg]02'24'' W.)
OMENS, VA WP (lat. 36[deg]49'29'' N., long. 78[deg]55'30'' W.)
BEARI, VA WP (lat. 37[deg]12'02'' N., long. 78[deg]15'24'' W.)

Q-39 CLAWD, NC to TARCI, WV [New]

CLAWD, NC WP (lat. 36[deg]25'09'' N., long. 81[deg]08'50'' W.)
TARCI, WV FIX (lat. 38[deg]16'36'' N., long. 81[deg]18'34'' W.)

Q-40 Alexandria, LA (AEX) to FANPO, VA [Amended]

Alexandria, LA (AEX) VORTAC (lat. 31[deg]15'24'' N., long.
92[deg]30'04'' W.)
DOOMS, MS WP (lat. 31[deg]53'08'' N., long. 91[deg]09'56'' W.)
WINAP, MS WP (lat. 32[deg]38'00'' N., long. 89[deg]21'56'' W.)
MISLE, AL WP (lat. 33[deg]24'00'' N., long. 87[deg]38'00'' W.)
BFOLO, AL WP (lat. 34[deg]03'34'' N., long. 86[deg]31'30'' W.)
NIOLA, GA WP (lat. 34[deg]47'00'' N., long. 85[deg]16'14'' W.)
JAARE, TN WP (lat. 35[deg]44'20'' N., long. 83[deg]32'30'' W.)
OJESS, TN WP (lat. 35[deg]55'00'' N., long. 83[deg]10'54'' W.)
ALEAN, VA WP (lat. 36[deg]43'55'' N., long. 81[deg]37'26'' W.)
FEEDS, VA WP (lat. 37[deg]16'29'' N., long. 80[deg]30'33'' W.)
MAULS, VA WP (lat. 37[deg]52'49'' N., long. 79[deg]19'49'' W.)
FANPO, VA WP (lat. 38[deg]25'25'' N., long. 78[deg]13'51'' W.)

Q-50 Louisville, KY (IIU) to CUBIM, KY [New]

Louisville, KY (IIU) VORTAC (lat. 38[deg]06'12'' N., long.
85[deg]34'39'' W.)
HELUB, KY WP (lat. 37[deg]42'55'' N., long. 84[deg]44'28'' W.)
ENGRA, KY WP (lat. 37[deg]29'02'' N., long. 84[deg]15'02'' W.)
IBATE, KY WP (lat. 36[deg]59'12'' N., long. 83[deg]13'40'' W.)
CUBIM, KY WP (lat. 36[deg]52'37'' N., long. 83[deg]00'21'' W.)

Q-52 CHOPZ, GA to COLZI, NC [New])

CHOPZ, GA WP (lat. 33[deg]51'24'' N., long. 83[deg]41'18'' W.)
IPTAY, GA WP (lat. 34[deg]20'57'' N., long. 82[deg]50'23'' W.)
AWYAT, SC WP (lat. 35[deg]02'21'' N., long. 81[deg]36'45'' W.)
COLZI, NC FIX (lat. 36[deg]13'39'' N., long. 80[deg]30'32'' W.)

Q-54 Greenwood, SC (GRD) to NUTZE, NC [New]

Greenwood, SC (GRD) VORTAC (lat. 34[deg]15'06'' N., long.
82[deg]09'15'' W.)
NYLLA, SC WP (lat. 34[deg]34'39'' N., long. 81[deg]17'00'' W.)
CHYPS, NC WP (lat. 34[deg]53'18'' N., long. 80[deg]25'57'' W.)
AHOEY, NC WP (lat. 35[deg]00'36'' N., long. 80[deg]05'56'' W.)
RAANE, NC WP (lat. 35[deg]09'22'' N., long. 79[deg]41'34'' W.)
NUTZE, NC WP (lat. 35[deg]50'40'' N., long. 77[deg]40'57'' W.)

Q-56 CATLN, AL to KIWII, VA [New]

CATLN, AL FIX (lat. 31[deg]18'26'' N., long. 87[deg]34'48'' W.)

KBLER, GA WP (lat. 33[deg]43'21'' N., long. 83[deg]43'14'' W.)
KELLN, SC WP (lat. 34[deg]31'33'' N., long. 82[deg]10'17'' W.)
KTOWN, NC WP (lat. 35[deg]11'49'' N., long. 81[deg]03'18'' W.)
BYSCO, NC WP (lat. 35[deg]46'09'' N., long. 80[deg]04'34'' W.)
JOOLI, NC WP (lat. 35[deg]54'55'' N., long. 79[deg]49'16'' W.)
NUUMN, NC WP (lat. 36[deg]09'54'' N., long. 79[deg]23'39'' W.)
ORACL, NC WP (lat. 36[deg]28'02'' N., long. 78[deg]52'15'' W.)
KIWII, VA WP (lat. 36[deg]34'57'' N., long. 78[deg]40'04'' W.)

Q-58 KELLN, SC to PEETT, NC [New]

KELLN, SC WP (lat. 34[deg]31'33'' N., long. 82[deg]10'17'' W.)
GLOVR, NC FIX (lat. 35[deg]30'24'' N., long. 80[deg]14'51'' W.)
LUMAY, NC WP (lat. 35[deg]44'47'' N., long. 79[deg]49'40'' W.)
STUKI, NC WP (lat. 36[deg]09'08'' N., long. 79[deg]06'14'' W.)
PEETT, NC WP (lat. 36[deg]26'45'' N., long. 78[deg]34'16'' W.)

Q-60 Spartanburg, SC (SPA) to JAXSN, VA [New]

Spartanburg, SC (SPA) VORTAC (lat. 35[deg]02'01'' N., long.
81[deg]55'37'' W.)
BYJAC, NC FIX (lat. 35[deg]57'27'' N., long. 80[deg]09'03'' W.)
EVING, NC WP (lat. 36[deg]05'22'' N., long. 79[deg]53'56'' W.)
LOOEY, VA WP (lat. 36[deg]35'05'' N., long. 79[deg]01'09'' W.)
JAXSN, VA FIX (lat. 36[deg]42'38'' N., long. 78[deg]47'23'' W.)

Q-63 DOOGE, VA to HEVAN, IN [New]

DOOGE, VA WP (lat. 36[deg]48'39'' N., long. 82[deg]35'14'' W.)
HAPKI, KY WP (lat. 37[deg]04'56'' N., long. 82[deg]51'03'' W.)
TONIO, KY FIX (lat. 37[deg]15'15'' N., long. 83[deg]01'48'' W.)
OCASE, KY WP (lat. 38[deg]23'59'' N., long. 84[deg]11'05'' W.)
HEVAN, IN WP (lat. 39[deg]21'09'' N., long. 85[deg]07'47'' W.)

Q-64 CATLN, AL to Tar River, NC (TYI) [New])

CATLN, AL FIX (lat. 31[deg]18'26'' N., long. 87[deg]34'48'' W.)
FIGEY, GA WP (lat. 33[deg]52'27'' N., long. 82[deg]52'23'' W.)
Greenwood, SC (GRD) VORTAC (lat. 34[deg]15'06'' N., long.
82[deg]09'15'' W.)
DARRL, SC FIX (lat. 34[deg]47'49'' N., long. 81[deg]03'22'' W.)
IDDAA, NC WP (lat. 35[deg]11'05'' N., long. 79[deg]59'31'' W.)
Tar River, NC (TYI) VORTAC (lat. 35[deg]58'36'' N., long.
77[deg]42'13'' W.)

Q-65 JEFOI, GA to Rosewood, OH (ROD) [New]

JEFOI, GA WP (lat. 31[deg]35'37'' N., long. 82[deg]31'18'' W.)
CESKI, GA WP (lat. 32[deg]16'21'' N., long. 82[deg]40'39'' W.)
DAREE, GA WP (lat. 34[deg]37'36'' N., long. 83[deg]51'35'' W.)
LORNN, TN WP (lat. 35[deg]21'16'' N., long. 84[deg]14'19'' W.)
SOGEE, TN WP (lat. 36[deg]31'51'' N., long. 84[deg]11'35'' W.)
ENGRA, KY WP (lat. 37[deg]29'02'' N., long. 84[deg]15'02'' W.)
OCASE, KY WP (lat. 38[deg]23'59'' N., long. 84[deg]11'05'' W.)
Rosewood, OH (ROD) VORTAC (lat. 40[deg]17'16'' N., long.
84[deg]02'35'' W.)

Q-66 Little Rock, AR (LIT) to ALEAN, VA [New]

Little Rock, AR (LIT) VORTAC (lat. 34[deg]40'40'' N., long.
92[deg]10'50'' W.)
CIVKI, AR WP (lat. 34[deg]48'15'' N., long. 91[deg]36'01'' W.)
RICKX, AR WP (lat. 35[deg]06'30'' N., long. 90[deg]14'16'' W.)
TROVE, TN WP (lat. 35[deg]23'16'' N., long. 88[deg]54'39'' W.)
BAZOO, TN WP (lat. 35[deg]58'32'' N., long. 85[deg]52'12'' W.)
METWO, TN WP (lat. 36[deg]04'22'' N., long. 85[deg]18'38'' W.)
MXEEN, TN WP (lat. 36[deg]28'06'' N., long. 83[deg]11'08'' W.)
ALEAN, VA WP (lat. 36[deg]43'55'' N., long. 81[deg]37'26'' W.)

Q-67 SMTTH, TN to Henderson, WV (HNN) [New]

SMTTH, TN WP (lat. 35[deg]54'42'' N., long. 84[deg]00'20'' W.)
CEMEX, KY WP (lat. 36[deg]45'45'' N., long. 83[deg]23'34'' W.)
IBATE, KY WP (lat. 36[deg]59'12'' N., long. 83[deg]13'40'' W.)
TONIO, KY FIX (lat. 37[deg]15'15'' N., long. 83[deg]01'48'' W.)
Henderson, WV (HNN) VORTAC (lat. 38[deg]45'15'' N., long.
82[deg]01'34'' W.)

Q-69 BLAAN, SC to Elkins, WV (EKN) [New]

BLAAN, SC WP (lat. 33[deg]51'09'' N., long. 80[deg]53'33'' W.)
RYCKI, NC WP (lat. 36[deg]24'43'' N., long. 80[deg]25'08'' W.)
LUNDD, VA WP (lat. 36[deg]44'22'' N., long. 80[deg]21'07'' W.)
ILLSA, VA WP (lat. 37[deg]38'56'' N., long. 80[deg]13'18'' W.)
EWESS, WV WP (lat. 38[deg]21'50'' N., long. 80[deg]06'52'' W.)
Elkins, WV (EKN) VORTAC (lat. 38[deg]54'52'' N., long.
80[deg]05'57'' W.)

Q-71 BOBBD, TN to GEFFS, WV [New]

BOBBD, TN WP (lat. 35[deg]47'58'' N., long. 83[deg]51'34'' W.)
ATUME, KY WP (lat. 36[deg]57'14'' N., long. 83[deg]03'24'' W.)
HAPKI, KY WP (lat. 37[deg]04'56'' N., long. 82[deg]51'03'' W.)
KONGO, KY FIX. (lat. 37[deg]30'19'' N., long. 82[deg]08'13'' W.)
WISTA, WV WP (lat. 38[deg]17'01'' N., long. 81[deg]27'47'' W.)
GEFFS, WV FIX (lat. 39[deg]00'50'' N., long. 80[deg]48'50'' W.)

Q-110 BLANS, IL TO THNDR, FL [Amended]

BLANS, IL WP (lat. 37[deg]28'09'' N., long. 088[deg]44'01'' W.)
BETIE, TN WP (lat. 36[deg]07'30'' N., long. 087[deg]54'01'' W.)
SKIDO, AL WP (lat. 34[deg]31'49'' N., long. 086[deg]53'11'' W.)
BFOLO, AL WP (lat. 34[deg]03'34'' N., long. 086[deg]31'30'' W.)
JYROD, AL WP (lat. 33[deg]10'53'' N., long. 085[deg]51'55'' W.)
FEONA, GA WP (lat. 31[deg]36'22'' N., long. 084[deg]43'08'' W.)
GULFR, FL WP (lat. 30[deg]12'23'' N., long. 083[deg]33'08'' W.)
BRUTS, FL WP (lat. 29[deg]30'58'' N., long. 082[deg]58'57'' W.)
KPASA, FL WP (lat. 28[deg]10'34'' N., long. 081[deg]54'27'' W.)
RVERO, FL WP (lat. 27[deg]24'35'' N., long. 081[deg]35'57'' W.)
JAYMC, FL WP (lat. 26[deg]58'51'' N., long. 081[deg]22'08'' W.)
THNDR, FL FIX (lat. 26[deg]37'38'' N., long. 080[deg]52'00'' W.)

Q-118 Marion, IN (MZZ) to KPASA, FL [Amended]

Marion, IN (MZZ) VOR/DME (lat. 40[deg]29'36'' N., long.
085[deg]40'45'' W.)
HEVAN, IN WP (lat. 39[deg]21'09'' N., long. 085[deg]07'47'' W.)
VOSTK, KY WP (lat. 38[deg]28'16'' N., long. 084[deg]43'04'' W.)
HELUB, KY WP (lat. 37[deg]42'55'' N., long. 084[deg]44'28'' W.)
JEDER, KY WP (lat. 37[deg]19'31'' N., long. 084[deg]45'14'' W.)
GLAZR, TN WP (lat. 36[deg]25'21'' N., long. 084[deg]46'49'' W.)
KAILL, GA WP (lat. 34[deg]01'47'' N., long. 084[deg]31'24'' W.)
JOHNN, GA FIX (lat. 31[deg]31'23'' N., long. 083[deg]57'27'' W.)
BRUTS, FL WP (lat. 29[deg]30'58'' N., long. 082[deg]58'57'' W.)
KPASA, FL WP (lat. 28[deg]10'34'' N., long. 081[deg]54'27'' W.)

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 16, 2014.
Gary A. Norek,
Manager, Airspace Policy and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2014-01288 Filed 1-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P