[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 212 (Tuesday, November 3, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67645-67647]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27881]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0440; FRL-9936-35-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; North Carolina; Conflict of Interest
Infrastructure Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve revisions to the North Carolina State Implementation
Plan (SIP), submitted by the North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources (DENR), Division of Air Quality (DAQ), on
February 5, 2013, and supplemented on July 27, 2015. The submissions
pertain to conflict of interest requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA
or Act) and were submitted to satisfy the infrastructure SIP sub-
element related to the state board for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), 2010
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) NAAQS, 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS and 2008
Lead NAAQS. The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for
the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each NAAQS
promulgated by EPA, commonly referred to as an ``infrastructure'' SIP,
which includes conflict of interest requirements. EPA is taking final
action to approve the portions of North Carolina's 2010 NO2
infrastructure SIP, 2010 SO2 infrastructure SIP, 2008 8-hour
ozone infrastructure SIP, and 2008 Lead infrastructure SIP as meeting
these State board requirements. EPA is also taking final action to
convert conditional approvals related to the state board requirements
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and the 1997 Annual Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5) and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to
full approval under the CAA. EPA notes that all other applicable North
Carolina infrastructure SIP elements for the above listed NAAQS have
been or will be addressed in separate rulemakings.

DATES: This rule will be effective December 3, 2015.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0440. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Mr. Lakeman can be reached by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>
or via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    SIPs meeting the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the
CAA are to be submitted by states within three years after promulgation
of a new or revised NAAQS. Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) require states to
address basic SIP requirements, including emissions inventories,
monitoring, and modeling to assure attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS. More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and
timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements
that states must meet for ``infrastructure'' SIP requirements related
to a newly established or revised NAAQS.
    EPA is taking final action to approve North Carolina's February 5,
2013, and July 27, 2015, submissions as: (1) Satisfying the
requirements of section 128 of the CAA; and (2) the infrastructure SIP
sub-element for section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) related to the state board
requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, 2010 SO2
NAAQS, 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS and 2008 Lead NAAQS.\1\ Additionally,
North Carolina's February 5, 2013, and July 27, 2015, submissions
satisfy EPA's multiple conditional approvals of sub-element
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) published on February 6, 2012 (77 FR 5703), and
October 16, 2012 (77 FR 63234), for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and
1997

annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively.\2\ As a
result of today's action approving the State's submissions as meeting
section 128 of the CAA, EPA is converting the aforementioned
conditional approvals to full approvals regarding North Carolina's
infrastructure requirements for section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS, and 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Sub-element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) was previously submitted by
North Carolina DAQ previous submissions to EPA to satisfy the state
board requirements for the referenced NAAQS. EPA is taking final
action to approve the February 5, 2013, and July 27, 2015, final
submissions in conjunction with the previously submissions for the
2010 NO2 NAAQS (August 23, 2013), 2010 SO2
NAAQS (March 18, 2014), 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS (November 2, 2012),
and 2008 Lead NAAQS (July 20, 2012) as satisfying for the state
board requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) sub-element.
    \2\ Sub-element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) was previously submitted by
North Carolina DAQ to EPA to satisfy the state board requirements
for the referenced NAAQS. EPA is taking final action to approve the
February 5, 2013, and July 27, 2015, final submissions in
conjunction with the previous conditional approvals for the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS and 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS as satisfying the state board requirements for this sub-
element.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA proposed to approve the February 5, 2013, and July 27, 2015,
submissions in a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) published on
August 24, 2015. See 80 FR 51167. The details of North Carolina's
submittals and the rationale for EPA's actions are explained in the
NPR. Comments on the proposed rulemaking were due on or before
September 23, 2015. No adverse comments were received.

II. Final Action

    As described above, EPA is taking final action to approve North
Carolina's February 5, 2013, and July 27, 2015, submissions concerning
the conflict of interest requirements of CAA section 128(a)(2) for
inclusion into the North Carolina SIP.\3\ Specifically, EPA is
approving North Carolina's submissions related to the Secretary of the
DENR and his/her delegatee that approve air permits or enforcement
orders and as it relates to appealed matters decided by administrative
law judges (ALJs). Additionally, EPA is approving the portions of North
Carolina's 2010 NO2 infrastructure SIP, 2010 SO2
infrastructure SIP, 2008 8-hour ozone infrastructure SIP, and 2008 Lead
infrastructure SIP related to 110(a)(2)(E)(ii). EPA is also converting
previous conditional approvals for North Carolina's infrastructure
submissions for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 1997 annual and 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS addressing CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
requirements to approvals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ As noted in the NPR, as of October 1, 2012, North Carolina
has no boards or bodies with authority over air pollution permits or
enforcement orders and therefore the requirements of section
128(a)(1) are not applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in
any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    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 action 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 CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by January 4, 2016. 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. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: October 20, 2015.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart II--North Carolina

0
2. Section 52.1770(e), is amended by adding new entries for ``110(a)(1)
and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS'',
``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS'', ``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure
Requirements for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS'', ``110(a)(1)
and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008

Lead NAAQS'', ``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the
2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS'', ``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure
Requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS'', ``110(a)(1) and (2)
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS'' and
``Chapter 7A section 754 of the North Carolina General Statues'' at the
end of the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1770  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                              EPA-Approved North Carolina Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        State         EPA
             Provision                effective     Approval      Federal Register            Explanation
                                         date         date            citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure       7/27/2015    11/3/2015  [Insert Federal        approving 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
 Requirements for the 1997 8-hour                               Register citation].    as it relates to the
 Ozone NAAQS.                                                                          Secretary of the DENR and
                                                                                his/her delegatee that
                                                                                approve permit or
                                                                                enforcement orders and
                                                                                appealed matters decided
                                                                                by ALJs.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure       7/27/2015    11/3/2015  [Insert Federal        approving 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
 Requirements for the 1997 Annual                               Register citation].    as it relates to the
 PM2.5 NAAQS.                                                                          Secretary of the DENR and
                                                                                his/her delegatee that
                                                                                approve permit or
                                                                                enforcement orders and
                                                                                appealed matters decided
                                                                                by ALJs.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure       7/27/2015    11/3/2015  [Insert Federal        approving 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
 Requirements for the 2006 24-hour                              Register citation].    as it relates to the
 PM2.5 NAAQS.                                                                          Secretary of the DENR and
                                                                                his/her delegatee that
                                                                                approve permit or
                                                                                enforcement orders and
                                                                                appealed matters decided
                                                                                by ALJs.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure       7/27/2015  ...........  .....................  approving 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
 Requirements for the 2008 Lead                                                        as it relates to the
 NAAQS.                                                                                Secretary of the DENR and
                                                                                his/her delegatee that
                                                                                approve permit or
                                                                                enforcement orders and
                                                                                appealed matters decided
                                                                                by ALJs.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure       7/27/2015  ...........  .....................  approving 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
 Requirements for the 2008 8-hour                                                      as it relates to the
 Ozone NAAQS.                                                                          Secretary of the DENR and
                                                                                his/her delegatee that
                                                                                approve permit or
                                                                                enforcement orders and
                                                                                appealed matters decided
                                                                                by ALJs.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure       7/27/2015    11/3/2015  [Insert Federal        approving 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
 Requirements for the 2010 NO2                                  Register citation].    as it relates to the
 NAAQS.                                                                                Secretary of the DENR and
                                                                                his/her delegatee that
                                                                                approve permit or
                                                                                enforcement orders and
                                                                                appealed matters decided
                                                                                by ALJs.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure       7/27/2015    11/3/2015  [Insert Federal        approving 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
 Requirements for the 2010 SO2                                  Register citation].    as it relates to the
 NAAQS.                                                                                Secretary of the DENR and
                                                                                his/her delegatee that
                                                                                approve permit or
                                                                                enforcement orders and
                                                                                appealed matters decided
                                                                                by ALJs.
Chapter 7A section 754 of the North    7/27/2015    11/3/2015  [Insert Federal        Specifically, the
 Carolina General Statues.                                      Register citation].    following paragraph of 7A-
                                                                                754 stating ``The Chief
                                                                                Administrative Law Judge
                                                                                and the administrative
                                                                                law judges shall comply
                                                                                with the Model Code of
                                                                                Judicial Conduct for
                                                                                State Administrative Law
                                                                                Judges, as adopted by the
                                                                                National Conference of
                                                                                Administrative Law
                                                                                Judges, Judicial
                                                                                Division, American Bar
                                                                                Association, (revised
                                                                                August 1998), as amended
                                                                                from time to time, except
                                                                                that the provisions of
                                                                                this section shall
                                                                                control as to the private
                                                                                practice of law in lieu
                                                                                of Canon 4G, and G.S. 126-
                                                                                13 shall control as to
                                                                                political activity in
                                                                                lieu of Canon 5.'' is
                                                                                approved into the SIP.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec.  52.1773  [Amended]

0
3. Amend Sec.  52.1773 by removing paragraph (a), and redesignating
paragraphs (b) and (c) as paragraphs (a) and (b), respectively.

[FR Doc. 2015-27881 Filed 11-2-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 104 (Wednesday, May 30, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31725-31727]
[FR Doc No: 2012-13031]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0392]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Belle Pass Dredge Operations, Belle Pass, Mile
Marker 1.0 to Mile Marker (-0.2), Port Fourchon, Lafourche Parish, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a 500 foot temporary moving
safety zone around the U.S. Government Contract Cutterhead Dredge
MISSOURI H, while it conducts dredging operations in specified waters
of Belle Pass, Port Fourchon, Louisiana. This action is necessary for
the protection of persons and vessels on navigable waters during
dredging operations. Entry into or transiting in this zone is
prohibited to all vessels, mariners, and persons unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Morgan City or a
designated representative.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective in the CFR from May 30,
2012 until 8 a.m. on June 30, 2012. This rule is effective with actual
notice for purposes of enforcement beginning 8 a.m. on May 2, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2012-0392]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or email Ensign Nicholas Jones, U.S. Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> ext. 232, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If
you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because there is insufficient time to publish
a NPRM. The Coast Guard received notice on April 27, 2012 from Port
Fourchon Harbor Police that fishing vessels were actively fishing in
the immediate vicinity of the Dredge MISSOURI H, creating an unsafe
condition for mariners. This notice did not provide the time needed for
the NPRM process. Publishing a NPRM would be impracticable and contrary
to public interest because it would unnecessarily delay the immediate
action needed to protect persons and vessels from potential safety
hazards associated with dredging operations.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. The Coast Guard received notice on
April 27, 2012 from Port Fourchon Harbor Police that fishing vessels
were actively fishing in the immediate vicinity of the Dredge MISSOURI
H, creating an unsafe condition for mariners. This notice did not
provide an opportunity to make this rule effective only upon a lapsing
of 30 days post publication in the Federal Register. Making this rule
effective only upon the lapse of 30 days post publication in the
Federal Register would be contrary to public interest because it would
unnecessarily delay the immediate action needed to protect persons and
vessels from potential safety hazards associated with dredging
operations.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The purpose of this temporary safety zone is to protect persons and
vessels during the dredging operations of the Dredge MISSOURI H. The
Dredge MISSOURI H will work 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and will
deposit material using floating and submerged pipelines along the Gulf
Shoreline of Belle Pass. In addition to the dredging equipment
described above, there are numerous work and support vessels associated
with the dredging operation. This dredging operation poses significant
safety hazards to both vessels and mariners operating in the vicinity
of the Dredge MISSOURI H.

C. Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a 500 foot temporary moving safety
zone around the Dredge MISSOURI H while

it conducts dredging operations from Mile Marker 1.0 to Mile Marker (-
0.2) located in Belle Pass, Port Fourchon, Louisiana. Entry into or
transiting in this zone is prohibited to all vessels, mariners, and
persons unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port
(COTP) Morgan City or a designated representative.
    The COTP Morgan City or a designated representative will inform the
public through Broadcast Notice to Mariners of changes in the effective
period for the safety zone. This rule is effective from 8 a.m. on May
2, 2012 until 8 a.m. on June 30, 2012.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

 1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    The temporary safety zone listed in this rule will only restrict
vessel traffic from entering or transiting within 500 feet of the
Dredge MISSOURI H. The effect of this regulation will not be a
significant regulatory action because: (1) This rule will only affect
vessel traffic for a short duration; (2) vessels may request permission
from the COTP to transit through the safety zone; and (3) the impacts
on routine navigation are expected to be minimal. Notifications to the
marine community will be made through Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
These notifications will allow the public to plan operations around the
affected area.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The Coast Guard
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
in the affected portions of the Dredge MISSOURI H's proposed dredging
areas. This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: The
zone is limited in size, is of short duration and vessel traffic may
request permission from the COTP Morgan City or a designated
representative to enter or transit through the zone.
    If you are a small business entity and are significantly affected
by this regulation, please contact Ensign Nicholas Jones, Marine Safety
Unit Houma, at<PHONE_NUMBER> ext. 232.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect 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 or
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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.

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves a moving safety zone in effect for a
limited period of time. The moving safety zone provides safety for the
public while the Dredge MISSOURI H is conducting dredging operations.
This rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph
(34)(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental
analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical
Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to
the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

E. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.

0
2. A new temporary Sec.  165.T08-0392 is added to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0392  Safety Zone; Belle Pass Dredge Operations, Belle
Pass, Mile Marker 1.0 to Mile Marker (-0.2), Port Fourchon, Lafourche
Parish, LA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a moving safety zone: all
waters 500 feet around the Dredge MISSOURI H, while it conducts
dredging operations from Belle Pass Mile Marker 1.0 to Mile Marker (-
0.2).
    (b) Effective date. This rule is effective from 8 a.m. on May 2,
2012 until 8 a.m. on June 30, 2012.
    (c) Periods of enforcement. This rule will be enforced with actual
notice from 8 a.m. on May 2, 2012 until 8 a.m. on June 30, 2012. The
Captain of the Port Morgan City or a designated representative will
inform the public through Broadcast Notice to Mariners of the
enforcement period for the safety zone as well as any changes in the
planned schedule.
    (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
33 CFR part 165, subpart C, entry into this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Morgan City or a designated
representative.
    (2) Vessels requiring entry into or passage through the Safety Zone
must request permission from the Captain of the Port Morgan City, or a
designated representative. They may be contacted on VHF Channel 13 or
16, or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mariners should contact the Dredge MISSOURI H, on VHF-FM
Channel 13 or 16 prior to the arrival at the safety zone for permission
to enter or transit through the safety zone.
    (4) If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply
with the instructions of the Captain of the Port or a designated
representative.
    (5) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the Captain of the Port Morgan City and designated on-scene patrol
personnel. On-scene patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant, and
petty officers of the U.S. Coast Guard.
    (e) Informational Broadcasts. The Captain of the Port Morgan City
or a designated representative will inform the public through Broadcast
Notice to Mariners of the enforcement period for the safety zone as
well as any changes in the planned schedule.

    Dated: May 1, 2012.
J.C. Burton,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Morgan City, Louisiana.
[FR Doc. 2012-13031 Filed 5-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 158 (Thursday, August 15, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41717-41720]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17476]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0472; FRL-9998-27-Region 9]

Official Release of EMFAC2017 Motor Vehicle Emission Factor Model
for Use in the State of California

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving and
announcing the availability of the latest version of the California
EMFAC (short for EMission FACtor) model for use in state implementation
plan (SIP) development and transportation conformity in California.
EMFAC2017 is the latest update to the EMFAC model for use by California
state and local governments to meet Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements.
The new model, which is based on new and improved data, calculates air
pollution emissions factors for passenger cars, trucks, motorcycles,
motor homes and buses. Today's notice also sets the date after which
EMFAC2017, rather than EMFAC2014, must be used to satisfy the
requirement that conformity determinations be based on the latest
emissions model available. This requirement can be met by using the
most current version of the motor vehicle emissions model approved by
the EPA. Since the EMFAC model is used only in California, the EPA's
approval and the announcement of the availability of the model does not
affect the applicability of the Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator
(MOVES) model for users in other states.

DATES: The EPA's approval of the EMFAC2017 emissions model for SIP and
conformity purposes is effective August 15, 2019. EMFAC2017 must be
used as described in this Notice for all new regional emissions
analyses for transportation conformity purposes that are started on or
after August 16, 2021 and for all new carbon monoxide (CO) and
particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) hot-spot
analyses that are started on or after August 17, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karina O'Connor,
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER>, Air Planning Office (AIR-2),
Air and Radiation Division, U.S. EPA, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California 94105-3901.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of the official version of the
EMFAC2017 model, including technical support documents, are available
on the California Air Resources Board (CARB) website: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/categories.htm#onroad_motor_vehicles.
    Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the
EPA.

I. Background

A. What is the EMFAC model?

    The EMFAC model is a computer model that can estimate emissions
rates for on-road mobile sources (``motor vehicles'') for calendar
years 2000 to 2050 operating in California. Pollutant emissions for
hydrocarbons (HC), CO, nitrogen oxides (NOX),
PM10, PM2.5, carbon dioxide (CO2), and
sulfur oxides are output from the model. Emissions are calculated for
over forty different vehicle classes composed of passenger cars,
various types of trucks and buses, motorcycles, and motor homes.
    EMFAC is used to calculate current and future inventories of motor
vehicle emissions at the state, air district, air basin, county, or
project level. EMFAC contains default vehicle activity data, and the
option of modifying that data, so it can be used to estimate a motor
vehicle emissions inventory in tons per day for a specific year, month,
or season, and as a function of ambient temperature, relative humidity,
vehicle population, mileage accrual, miles of travel and speeds. Thus,
the model can be used to make decisions about air pollution policies
and programs at the local or state level.
    Inventories based on EMFAC are also used to meet the SIP and
transportation conformity requirements under the CAA. Transportation
conformity is required under CAA section 176(c) to ensure that
federally supported transportation plans, transportation improvement
programs (TIPs), and highway and transit projects are consistent with
(``conform to'') the purpose of the SIP. Conformity to a SIP means that
a transportation activity will not cause or contribute to new air
quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely
attainment of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) or
interim milestones. The EPA's transportation conformity regulations (40
CFR parts 51.390 and 93) describe how federally funded and approved
highway and transit projects meet these statutory requirements. EMFAC
is used statewide in all regional emissions analyses and CO,
PM10 and PM2.5 hot-spot analyses for
transportation conformity determinations in California.

B. What versions of EMFAC are currently in use in California?

    Most SIPs in California were developed using EMFAC2014 (released by
CARB in December 2014) or EMFAC2011 (released by CARB in September
2011). The EPA approved and announced the availability of EMFAC2014 on
December 14, 2015 (80 FR 77337) and approved and announced the
availability of EMFAC2011 on March 16, 2013 (78 FR 14533) for all
nonattainment and maintenance areas in California.
    EMFAC2014 was considered a major update to previous versions of
EMFAC and most SIPs in California were updated with EMFAC2014 in the
2015-2018 timeframe. EMFAC2014 included a new model structure, new data
and methodologies regarding calculation of motor vehicle emissions, and
revisions to implementation data for control measures.

C. Why is the EPA announcing its approval of the EMFAC model?

    CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR 51.114(a) require that SIP
inventories be based on the most current, accurate, and applicable
models that are available at the time the SIP is developed. CAA section
176(c)(1) and 40 CFR 93.111(a) require that the latest emissions
estimates be used in conformity analyses. The EPA approves models that
fulfill these requirements.
    Under 40 CFR 93.111(a), the EPA must approve new versions of EMFAC
for SIP purposes before they can be used in transportation conformity
analyses. In a July 20, 2018 letter, CARB requested that the EPA
approve EMFAC2017 for use in developing SIPs and in determining
conformity in California.\1\ As described further below, EMFAC2017 is a
significant change from previous EMFAC models and can calculate motor
vehicle emissions for all areas in California. EMFAC2017 is being
approved as the latest emissions model for statewide use in SIP
development and emissions analyses for conformity purposes. Because the
EMFAC model is only used in California, the EPA's statewide approval of
the model does not affect the applicability of the MOVES emissions
factor model for users in other states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The EMFAC2017 model and supporting information is available
for downloading at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/categories.htm#onroad_motor_vehicles. Technical documentation
explaining the changes to the model and the technical foundations
for the model is available at https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msei/downloads/emfac2017-volume-iii-technical-documentation.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. EPA Action

A. What version of EMFAC is the EPA approving?

    In this notice, the EPA is approving and announcing that EMFAC2017
is available to use in statewide California SIP development and for
regional emissions analyses, and CO, PM10 and
PM2.5 hot-spot analyses for transportation conformity.
EMFAC2017 was developed by CARB and transmitted for approval to the EPA
on July 20, 2018.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EMFAC2017, v1.0.2 (March 1, 2018 release).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EMFAC2017 model uses the same structure, using Python and MySQL
software, as EMFAC2014. This structure was developed to allow CARB to
incorporate updated regulations and emissions data into the model and
provide for a simplified user experience. The model is operated in
either the Emissions Mode or the Emissions Rate Mode for regional
emissions analyses to access emissions databases and vehicle activity
data for the appropriate geographic subarea. EMFAC2017 also includes
the Project-Level Assessment (EMFAC2017-PL) feature, which is available
when EMFAC2017 is run in Emissions Rate Mode. The design of this part
of EMFAC has not significantly changed from EMFAC2014. When using
EMFAC2017-PL, emissions rates are estimated based on user-specified,
project-specific conditions. An updated handbook for using EMFAC2017 at
the project level is available from CARB at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/downloads/emfac2017-volume-ii-pl-handbook.pdf. EMFAC2017 allows
users to run one model for SIP inventories, regional emissions
analyses, and project analyses.

B. What analyses can EMFAC2017 be used for?

    The EPA is approving the model to estimate regional emissions of
HC, CO, NOX, PM10, PM2.5, and sulfur
oxides.\3\ However, EMFAC2017 will only be used in transportation
conformity for pollutants and precursors that are transportation-
related emissions, e.g., HC, CO, NOX, PM10 and
PM2.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The EPA notes that EMFAC2017 can be used for CO2
emissions analyses as well, but there are no SIP or transportation
conformity requirements for greenhouse gases (GHGs). In addition,
although SO2 is listed as a potential precursor for
PM2.5 formation in 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(v), this precursor
has not been considered significant for the on-road mobile sources
covered by transportation conformity in California to date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is also approving EMFAC2017 to estimate CO, PM10
and PM2.5 emissions for conformity hot-spot analyses
involving individual transportation projects. A hot-spot analysis is
defined in 40 CFR 93.101 as an estimation of likely future localized
pollutant concentrations and a comparison of those concentrations to
the relevant NAAQS. This analysis is conducted on a smaller scale than
a nonattainment or maintenance area, e.g., for a congested roadway
intersection. Hot-spot analyses are completed for only certain types of
transportation projects; see 40 CFR 93.123(a) and (b) for further
information.
    The EPA also notes that today's approval action does not affect the
methodology required for calculating re-entrained road dust for
PM10 and PM2.5 SIPs and transportation conformity
analyses. Estimates for PM10 and PM2.5 in
EMFAC2017 do not include such emissions. When applicable,
PM10 and PM2.5 nonattainment and maintenance
areas are required to use the EPA's AP-42 road dust method for
calculating road dust emissions, unless a local method is approved in
advance by the EPA.\4\ In addition, EMFAC2017 does not estimate ammonia
emissions. Air quality and transportation agencies should contact the
EPA Regional Office if ammonia emissions estimates are needed for SIPs
or regional conformity emissions analyses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For further information, see the EPA's February 4, 2011
Notice of Availability for the January 2011 AP-42 Method for
Estimating Re-entrained Road Dust from Paved Roads (76 FR 6328).
Also, for using AP-42 for unpaved roads, see the EPA's August 2,
2007 memorandum, ``Policy Guidance on the Use of the November 1,
2006, Update to AP-42 for Re-entrained Road Dust for SIP Development
and Transportation Conformity.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Why does the EPA consider EMFAC2017 to be a major update to EMFAC?

    EMFAC2017 includes new data and significant changes to the
methodologies regarding calculation of motor vehicle emissions and
revisions to implementation data for control measures. EMFAC2017
includes updated emissions factors and data on car and truck
activities, and emissions reductions associated with new regulations
supporting new estimates of emissions from heavy-heavy duty diesel
trucks and buses.\5\ New emissions factor data was developed based on
data from EPA's In-Use Vehicle Program, CARB's Vehicle and Truck and
Bus Surveillance Programs, CARB's PEMs and Transit Bus testing and
Integrated Bus Information Systems of West Virginia and Altoona. Motor
vehicle fleet age, vehicle types and vehicle population

have also been updated based on 2013-2016 California Department of
Motor Vehicle (DMV) data, International Registration Plan (IRP) data,
Truck Regulation Upload, Compliance, and Reporting System (TRUCRS)
data, Port Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) data, California Highway
Patrol School Bus Inspections and National Transit Database
information. Each of these changes affect emissions factors for each
area in California. The EMFAC2017 model interface and overall design
has not significantly changed as compared to EMFAC2014. CARB's website
describes these and other model changes at: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msei/msei.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Regulations include the Federal Phase 2 Greenhouse Gas
Standards, California Senate Bill 1 which impacts compliance
assumptions in EMFAC2017 for CARB's Truck and Bus Regulation and
Updates to CARB's Advanced Clean Cars regulations from CARB's 2017
Midterm review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. How were stakeholders and the public involved in the EMFAC
development process?

    Since 2017, CARB has held a series of public workshops to discuss
emissions inventory updates and EMFAC updates and to receive comments
on the resulting changes in the emissions inventory and models.\6\ CARB
also conducted beta testing of interim versions of the model with air
districts and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). Stakeholders
and other members of the public had the opportunity to request
briefings with CARB staff and provide them with comments and
suggestions to improve the model. CARB also developed and posted
training modules for EMFAC2017 and supports a mobile source emissions
inventory email listserv to announce updates and changes to the EMFAC
supporting material.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/workshop-meetings.htm.
    \7\ To subscribe to CARB's listserv for Mobile Source Emission
Inventory development, see ``Join our MSEI listserv'' at https://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/categories.htm#onroad_motor_vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CARB also made available to the public a technical document that
describes updates to the model and public presentations that summarize
the changes from earlier versions of the model. The technical
documentation and presentations are available on CARB's website at:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/categories.htm.
    Specific changes incorporated into the EMFAC2017 model are also
discussed in https://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/downloads/emfac2017-volume-iii-technical-documentation.pdf. All presentations from the public
workshops are available on the CARB website at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/workshop-meetings.htm.

E. Does this notice establish a transportation conformity grace period
for the use of this model?

    The transportation conformity rule (40 CFR 93.111) requires that
conformity determinations be based on the latest motor vehicle
emissions model approved by the EPA for SIP purposes for a state or
area. Section 176(c)(1) of the CAA states that

    ``. . . [t]he determination of conformity shall be based on the
most recent estimates of emissions, and such estimates shall be
determined from the most recent population, employment, travel, and
congestion estimates. . . .''

    When the EPA approves and announces the availability of a new
emissions model such as EMFAC2017, the EPA will consult with the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT) to establish a grace period before
the model is required for conformity analyses (40 CFR 93.111(b)). The
conformity rule provides for a grace period for new emissions models of
between 3 and 24 months after notice of availability is published in
the Federal Register (40 CFR 93.111(b)(1)).
    The EPA articulated its intentions for establishing the length of a
conformity grace period in the preamble to the 1993 transportation
conformity rule (November 24, 1993, 58 FR 62211):
    ``EPA and DOT will consider extending the grace period if the
effects of the new emissions model are so significant that previous SIP
demonstrations of what emission levels are consistent with attainment
would be substantially affected. In such cases, States should have an
opportunity to revise their SIPs before MPOs must use the model's new
emissions factors.''
    In consultation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and
the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the EPA considers ``the
degree of change in the model and the scope of re-planning likely to be
necessary by MPOs in order to assure conformity'' in establishing the
length of the grace period (40 CFR 93.111(b)(2)).
    Upon consideration of these factors, the EPA is establishing a two-
year grace period before EMFAC2017 is required for all new HC,
NOX, PM10, PM2.5 and CO regional
emissions analyses (e.g., supporting transportation plan and TIP
conformity determinations).
    The grace period for regional emissions analyses begins on August
15, 2019 and ends on August 16, 2021. Areas have the option of using
the new model for regional emissions analyses prior to the end of the
grace period.
    Upon consideration of the transportation conformity rule's factors,
the EPA is also establishing a one-year grace period before EMFAC2017
is required in conformity analyses for all new CO, PM10 and
PM2.5 hot-spot analyses supporting project-level conformity
determinations.
    The grace period for hot-spot analyses begins on August 15, 2019
and ends on August 17, 2020. Areas have the option of using the new
model for hot-spot analyses prior to the end of the grace period.
    As discussed earlier in the notice, EMFAC2017 incorporates
significant changes to the emissions and vehicle fleet data assumptions
used to estimate emissions for regional emissions analysis. In addition
to incorporating the new EMFAC2017 emissions rate and fleet data, state
and local agencies also need to consider how the model affects regional
conformity analysis results and whether SIP and/or transportation plan/
TIP changes are necessary to assure future conformity determinations.
As stated earlier in the notice, the changes to EMFAC affect emissions
factors for each area in California. CARB has requested a 24-month
grace period to allow them to update SIPs previously developed using
EMFAC2011 or EMFAC2014 with the updated emissions from EMFAC2017. CARB
anticipates that 24 months are needed to develop and submit revised
SIPs based on EMFAC2017. The EPA agrees that additional time is
necessary for CARB to revise previously approved SIPs with EMFAC2017
and complete the SIP revision process so that MPOs can incorporate
revised SIP motor vehicle emission budgets (``budgets'') into the
transportation conformity process.
    For application of EMFAC2017 at the project level, the application
of EMFAC2017 and the model's overall design and interface are similar
to EMFAC2014. As a result, project sponsors developing future hot-spot
analyses for projects that require such analyses in CO and PM
nonattainment and maintenance areas that have already used EMFAC2014
should not need significant time to familiarize themselves with this
model.\8\ In addition, the fact that time may be needed for revising
SIPs or transportation plans/TIPs due to the emissions factor changes
in EMFAC2017 is irrelevant for hot-spot analyses, because hot-spot
analyses do not rely upon such planning documents. But while
EMFAC2017's model design and interface has not significantly changed
from EMFAC2014, project

sponsors may still need some time to familiarize themselves with CARB's
updated EMFAC2017-PL handbook and consider technical resource
allocation issues to incorporate EMFAC2017 into any future hot-spot
analyses in multiple CO, PM10, and PM2.5
nonattainment and maintenance areas across California.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ EPA is not providing new or updated hot-spot training or
guidance for hot-spot analyses due to EMFAC2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, it is appropriate to set a one-year grace period to
allow all areas in California to incorporate EMFAC2017 in conformity
hot-spot analyses for required project types and apply the updated
planning assumptions incorporated in EMFAC2017 in a timely manner. In
the interim, new PM and CO hot-spot analyses that are started prior to
the end of the EMFAC2017 grace period can be based on (40 CFR
93.111(c)).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See web page http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/projectlevel-hotspot.htm#pm-hotspot for latest guidance
documents and information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When the regional emissions analysis grace period ends on August
16, 2021, EMFAC2017 will become the only approved motor vehicle
emissions model for all new regional transportation conformity analyses
in California for meeting the requirement to use the latest emissions
information in conformity analyses. In general, this means that all new
HC, NOX, PM10, PM2.5, and CO regional
conformity analyses started after the end of the two-year grace period
must be based on EMFAC2017, even if the SIP is based on an earlier
version of the EMFAC model.
    In addition, in most cases, if an area revises previously approved
EMFAC2014-based SIP budgets using EMFAC2017, the revised EMFAC2017
budgets would be used for conformity purposes once the EPA approves the
SIP revision. In general, the EPA will not make adequacy findings for
these SIPs because submitted SIPs cannot supersede approved budgets
until they are approved. However, 40 CFR 93.118(e)(1) allows an
approved budget to be replaced by an adequate budget if the EPA's
approval of the initial budgets specifies that the budgets being
approved may be replaced in the future by new adequate budgets. This
flexibility has been used in limited situations in the past, such as
during the transition from EMFAC7F and EMFAC7G to EMFAC2002.\10\ In
such cases, the EMFAC2017-based budgets would be used for conformity
purposes once they have been found adequate. California air agencies
should consult with the EPA as needed to determine if this flexibility
applies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 67 FR 46618 (July 16, 2002); 67 FR 69139 (November 15,
2002); and 68 FR 15720 (April 1, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When the hot-spot analysis grace period ends on August 17, 2020,
EMFAC2017 will become the only approved motor vehicle emissions model
for all new hot-spot transportation conformity analyses for required
project types across California for meeting the requirement to use the
latest emissions information in conformity. In general, this means that
all new CO, PM10, and PM2.5 hot-spot analyses
started after the end of the one-year grace period must be based on
EMFAC2017 rather than EMFAC2014.

F. Can areas use EMFAC2014 during the grace period?

    The conformity rule provides some flexibility for regional
emissions analyses that are started before the end of the grace period.
Analyses that begin before or during the grace period may continue to
rely on EMFAC2014. The inter-agency consultation process should be used
if it is unclear if an EMFAC2014-based analysis was begun before the
end of the 24-month grace period. When the grace period ends, EMFAC2017
will become the EPA-approved motor vehicle emissions model for regional
emissions analyses for transportation conformity in California.
    CO, PM10, and PM2.5 hot-spot analyses for
project-level conformity determinations can be based on EMFAC2014 if
the analysis was begun before the end of the 12-month grace period, and
if the final environmental document for the project is issued no more
than three years after the issuance of the draft environmental
document.\11\ Quantitative analysis already underway that was started
before the end of the grace period using EMFAC2014 can be completed as
long as 40 CFR 93.111(c) is satisfied. The inter-agency consultation
process should be used if it is unclear whether an EMFAC2014-based
analysis is covered by the circumstances described in the
transportation conformity rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 40 CFR 93.111(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Future Updates to EMFAC

    On January 31, 2006, CARB submitted a letter to the EPA and to the
California Division of the FHWA indicating the State's intention to
make future revisions to update EMFAC. These EMFAC updates would
reflect, among other new information, updated vehicle fleet data every
three years. In California, MPOs and Air Districts cannot update
vehicle fleet data embedded into EMFAC, only CARB can update the fleet
data with each new EMFAC update because of the model design. The EPA's
July 2004 final rule (69 FR 40004) states that new vehicle registration
data must be used when it is available prior to the start of new
conformity analyses and that states and MPOs are strongly encouraged to
update the data at least every five years as described in guidance
issued December 2008 by the EPA and DOT.\12\ CARB's next update to the
planning assumptions in EMFAC is expected in 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For more information on qualitative PM hot-spot analyses,
see the EPA and DOT's joint ``Guidance for The Use of Latest
Planning Assumptions in Transportation Conformity Determinations''
(EPA420-B-08-901, December 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of EPA Actions

    As described in this notice, the EPA is approving and announcing
the availability of EMFAC2017 as submitted by CARB on July 20, 2018
with the following limitations and conditions:
    (1) The approval is limited to California,
    (2) The approval is Statewide and applies to estimation of
emissions of HC, CO, NOX, PM10, PM2.5,
and sulfur oxides. In addition, EMFAC2017 will be used in
transportation conformity regional emissions analyses for pollutants
and precursors that are applicable in a given nonattainment or
maintenance area. The EPA is approving the emissions factor elements of
EMFAC2017, but not the associated default travel activity (e.g. Vehicle
Miles Traveled).
    (3) A 24-month statewide transportation conformity regional grace
period will be established beginning August 15, 2019 and ending August
16, 2021 for the transportation conformity uses described in (2) above.
    (4) The EPA is also approving EMFAC2017's Emission Rate Mode that
allows the model to estimate project-level emissions for CO,
PM10, and PM2.5 conformity hot-spot analyses.
    (5) A 12-month statewide transportation conformity hot-spot grace
period will be established beginning August 15, 2019 and ending August
17, 2020 for the transportation conformity uses described in (4) above.

    Dated: August 6, 2019.
Michael Stoker,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2019-17476 Filed 8-14-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 29, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74184-74185]
[FR Doc No: 2021-28235]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 34451; File No. 812-15228]

FMI Funds, Inc., et al.

December 22, 2021.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of an application for an order under section 6(c) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption from sections
2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d) and 22(e) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the
Act, and under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from
sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act.
    Applicants: FMI Funds, Inc. (``Company''), Fiduciary Management,
Inc. (the ``Initial Adviser'') and Foreside Financial Services, LLC
(the ``Distributor'', and, together with the Company, and the Adviser,
the ``Applicants'').
    Summary of Application: Applicants request an order (``Order'')
that permits: (a) The Funds (defined below) to issue shares
(``Shares'') redeemable in large aggregations only (``creation
units''); (b) secondary market transactions in Shares to occur at
negotiated market prices rather than at net asset value; (c) certain
Funds to pay redemption proceeds, under certain circumstances, more
than seven days after the tender of Shares for redemption; and (d)
certain affiliated persons of a Fund to deposit securities into, and
receive securities from, the Fund in connection with the purchase and
redemption of creation units. The relief in the Order would incorporate
by reference terms and conditions of the same relief of a previous
order granting the same relief sought by applicants, as that order may
be amended from time to time (``Reference Order'').\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Natixis ETF Trust II, et al., Investment Company Act Rel.
Nos. 33684 (November 14, 2019) (notice) and 33711 (December 10,
2019) (order). Applicants are not seeking relief under section
12(d)(1)(J) of the Act for an exemption from sections 12(d)(1)(A)
and 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act (the ``Section 12(d)(1) Relief''), and
relief under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption
from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act relating to the
Section 12(d)(1) Relief, as granted in the Reference Order.
Accordingly, to the extent the terms and conditions of the Reference
Order relate to such relief, they are not incorporated by reference
into the Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Filing Date: The application was filed on May 5, 2021, and amended
on July 30, 2021.
    Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by emailing the Commission's
Secretary at [email protected] and serving Applicants with a
copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be
received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on January 17, 2022, and should
be accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of an
affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to rule
0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing
on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested.
Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification
by emailing the Commission's Secretary at [email protected].

ADDRESSES: The Commission: [email protected]. Applicants: John
S. Brandser, Fiduciary Management, Inc., 100 East Wisconsin, Suite
2200, Milwaukee, WI 53202, [email protected]; Peter D. Fetzer, Foley &
Lardner LLP, 777 East Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53202,
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jessica Shin, Attorney-Adviser, at
(202) 551-3685 or Lisa Reid Ragen, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's website by searching for the file number, or for an
applicant using the Company name box, at https://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants

    1. The Company is a corporation organized under the laws of the
State of Maryland. The Company currently consists of four series, and
will consist of one or more series operating as a Fund. The Company is
registered as an open-end management investment company under the Act.
Applicants seek relief with respect to Funds (as defined below),
including an initial Fund (the ``Initial Fund''). The Funds will offer
exchange-traded shares utilizing active management investment
strategies as contemplated by the Reference Order.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ To facilitate arbitrage, among other things, each day a Fund
will publish a basket of securities and cash that, while different
from the Fund's portfolio, is designed to closely track its daily
performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The Initial Adviser, a Wisconsin corporation, will be the
investment adviser to the Initial Fund. Subject to approval by the
Funds' board of trustees, an Adviser (as defined below) will serve as
investment adviser to each Fund. The Initial Adviser is, and any other
Adviser will be, registered as an investment adviser under the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (``Advisers Act''). The Adviser may
enter into sub-advisory agreements with other investment advisers to
act as sub-advisers with respect to the Funds (each a ``Sub-Adviser'').
Any Sub-Adviser to a Fund will be registered under the Advisers Act.
    3. The Distributor, a Delaware limited liability company, is a
broker-dealer registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and will act as the distributor and principal underwriter of
Shares of the Funds. Applicants request that the requested relief apply
to any distributor of Shares, whether affiliated or unaffiliated with
the Adviser and/or Sub-Adviser. Any Distributor will comply with the
terms and conditions of the Order.

Applicants' Requested Exemptive Relief

    4. Applicants seek the requested Order under section 6(c) of the
Act for an exemption from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d) and 22(e)
of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act, and under sections 6(c) and
17(b) of the Act for an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2)
of the Act. The requested Order would permit applicants to offer Funds
that utilize the NYSE Proxy Portfolio

Methodology. Because the relief requested is the same as certain of the
relief granted by the Commission under the Reference Order and because
the Initial Adviser has entered into a licensing agreement with NYSE
Group, Inc. in order to offer Funds that utilize the NYSE Proxy
Portfolio Methodology,\3\ the Order would incorporate by reference the
terms and conditions of the same relief of the Reference Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The NYSE Proxy Portfolio Methodology (as defined in the
Reference Order) is the intellectual property of the NYSE Group,
Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Applicants request that the Order apply to the Initial Fund and
to any other existing or future registered open-end management
investment company or series thereof that: (a) Is advised by the
Initial Adviser or any entity controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with the Initial Adviser (any such entity, along with
the Initial Adviser, included in the term ``Adviser''); (b) offers
exchange-traded shares utilizing active management investment
strategies as contemplated by the Reference Order; and (c) complies
with the terms and conditions of the Order and the terms and conditions
of the Reference Order that are incorporated by reference into the
Order (each such company or series and the Initial Fund, a
``Fund'').\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ All entities that currently intend to rely on the Order are
named as applicants. Any other entity that relies on the Order in
the future will comply with the terms and conditions of the Order
and the terms and conditions of the Reference Order that are
incorporated by reference into the Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security or transaction, or any class of persons,
securities or transactions, from any provisions of the Act, if and to
the extent that such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the
purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act.
Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to exempt a proposed
transaction from section 17(a) of the Act if evidence establishes that
the terms of the transaction, including the consideration to be paid or
received, are reasonable and fair and do not involve overreaching on
the part of any person concerned, and the transaction is consistent
with the policies of the registered investment company and the general
purposes of the Act. Applicants submit that for the reasons stated in
the Reference Order the requested relief meets the exemptive standards
under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-28235 Filed 12-28-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: December 16, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 242)]
[Notices]
[Page 76366-76367]
[DOCID:fr16de08-64]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0628]

Microbiological Testing for Contact Lens Care Products; Public
Workshop

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice of public workshop.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public
workshop entitled ``Microbiological Testing for Contact Lens Care
Products.'' FDA is co-sponsoring the public workshop with the American
Academy of Ophthalmology, the American Academy of Optometry, the
American Optometric Association, and the Contact Lens Association of
Ophthalmologists. The purpose of the public workshop is to discuss test
method parameters for evaluating the activity of contact lens care
products against Acanthamoeba

and to discuss elements of microbiological test methods that simulate
``real world'' consumer use conditions.
    Date and Time: The public workshop will be held on January 22 and
23, 2009, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Participants are encouraged to arrive
by 7:30 a.m. to allow enough time for parking and security screening.
Security Screening will begin at 7 a.m.
    Location: The public workshop will be held at the Food and Drug
Administration, White Oak Conference Center, 10903 New Hampshire Ave.,
Bldg. 2 (Central Shared Use Building), Silver Spring, MD. Attendees
should follow the directions provided in the Registration Information
section of this document.
    Contact: Daryl L. Kaufman, Center for Devices and Radiological
Health (HFZ-460), Food and Drug Administration, 9200 Corporate Blvd.,
Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
    Marc Robboy, Center for Devices and Radiological Health (HFZ-460),
Food and Drug Administration, 9200 Corporate Blvd., Rockville, MD
20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Agenda: The purpose of the conference is to discuss test methods
for evaluating the anti-microbial activity of contact lens care
products.
    On January 22, 2008, we hope to reach consensus on critical test
method parameters for evaluating the activity of contact lens care
products against Acanthamoeba. These parameters include organism
species and strain, trophozoite culture and cyst production, microbial
challenge level, and assay method for survivors.
    On January 23, 2008, we hope to present and discuss critical
elements for new or modified disinfection efficacy test methods that
simulate ``real world'' consumer use conditions. These elements include
contact lens and lens case uptake of preservative and other solution
ingredients, solution evaporation, minimal consumer compliance, biofilm
formation and clinical isolates as challenge organisms.
    Background information on the public workshop, registration
information, the agenda, information about lodging, and other relevant
information will be posted on the Internet at www.jcahpo.org/clmw.
    Registration Information: Registration must be completed online at
www.jcahpo.org/clmw. Please pre-register no later than January 8, 2009
(see instructions in this paragraph). There will be no onsite
registration. Non-U.S. citizens are subject to additional security
screening and should pre-register at least 3 weeks in advance. There is
a registration fee of $250 for this workshop. Early registration is
recommended because seating is limited.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Ms. Janice Prestwood at<PHONE_NUMBER>, ext. 229 (toll free),
651-731-7229 (direct) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax) at least 7 days before the
public workshop. Lodging, travel, and security clearance information
are also available from the registration Web site. Persons without
Internet access may contact Ms. Janice Prestwood for help in completing
the registration form.

    Dated: December 9, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E8-29741 Filed 12-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S