[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 199 (Monday, October 17, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62926-62927]
[FR Doc No: 2022-22481]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Hazardous Materials: Notice of Applications for Modification of
Special Permits

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: List of applications for modification of special permits.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations, notice is hereby given
that the Office of Hazardous Materials Safety has received the
application described herein.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 1, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation Washington, DC 20590.
    Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include
a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Burger, Chief, Office of
Hazardous Materials Safety General Approvals and Permits Branch,
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department
of Transportation, East Building, PHH-13, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
Southeast, Washington, DC 20590-0001,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each mode of transportation for which a
particular special permit is requested is indicated by a number in the
``Nature of Application'' portion of the table below as follows: 1--
Motor vehicle, 2--Rail freight, 3--Cargo vessel, 4--Cargo aircraft
only, 5--Passenger-carrying aircraft.
    Copies of the applications are available for inspection in the
Records Center, East Building, PHH-13, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
Southeast, Washington, DC or at http://regulations.gov.
    This notice of receipt of applications for special permit is
published in accordance with part 107 of the Federal hazardous
materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5117(b); 49 CFR 1.53(b)).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 6, 2022.
Donald P. Burger,
Chief, General Approvals and Permits Branch.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Nature of the special permits
       Application No.                 Applicant          Regulation(s)  affected             thereof
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              SPECIAL PERMITS DATA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14227-M......................  Aluminum Tank             177.834(h),               To modify the special permit
                                Industries, Inc.          178.700(c)(1).            to authorize an additional
                                                                                use of the packaging. (mode
                                                                                1)
20418-M......................  Hanwha Cimarron LLC.....  173.302(a)..............  To modify the special permit
                                                                                to remove the 49 CFR Part
                                                                                451 requirement in paragraph
                                                                                7.d.(3). (modes 1, 2, 3)
20482-M......................  Solid Power Operating,    173.35(e)...............  To modify the special permit
                                Inc.                                                to exempt the grantee from
                                                                                <IP_ADDRESS>.1 of the IMDG Code.
                                                                                (mode 3)
20907-M......................  Versum Materials US, LLC  171.23(a)(1),             To modify the special permit
                                                          171.23(a)(3).             to remove the limitation on
                                                                                the number of cylinders
                                                                                imported per month or to
                                                                                increase the number of
                                                                                cylinders imported per month
                                                                                to 250. (modes 1, 3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-22481 Filed 10-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4909-60-P


are anticipating being ahead or behind schedule. If the facility is
behind schedule, the discussion would be required to indicate what
steps are necessary to either catch up to the approved schedule or if
they are expecting to ask for an extension, how much more time is
needed. The third subsection would discuss whether any problems were
encountered, and a description of the actions taken to resolve those
problems. This subsection could potentially tie in to the previous
subsection's discussion of if the project is on track. It is possible a
problem arose causing a delay in the schedule; such problems would need
to be discussed in detail in this section. This could include a delay
of delivery of equipment, severe weather, delay of a permit, etc. There
would need to be a thorough discussion of what caused the problem, the
effects of the problem, and the plan to resolve the problem. It is also
possible problems were encountered that did not result in a delay of
the schedule; these too should be discussed in this subsection. This
demonstrates that the facility is able to resolve problems quickly
without affecting the project's deadline. The last subsection would
discuss the goals for the next 6 months and major milestones to be
achieved. This subsection makes the public and EPA aware of the
progress the facility plans on achieving in the coming months, up until
the next semi-annual progress report is due.
    The EPA is seeking comment regarding whether a facility that is
fully on schedule or ahead of schedule with the approved timeline from
their demonstration and no significant problems have arisen or changes
in operational status, should be afforded a relaxation of the reporting
requirements to complete the first two subsections of the first section
of the semi-annual progress reports. In the semi-annual progress
reports the facility would indicate the stage they are currently on (as
specified in Sec.  257.103(f)(1)(ix)(A)(1)) and they are fully on
schedule or ahead of schedule (as specified in Sec.
257.103(f)(1)(ix)(A)(2)). The reports for the facility on schedule or
ahead of schedule should be significantly more condensed than the full
reporting requirements. The EPA believes facilities should be focusing
on obtaining alternate capacity rather than completing progress
reports, especially for the facilities that are on schedule with little
to report.
    The second section of the progress reports would discuss any
planned operation changes of the facility. It is possible while the
facility is working to achieve alternate capacity, a decision is made
to either permanently shut down the plant or switch to an alternate
fuel source such as natural gas or biomass. Any such decisions would be
indicated in this section of the semi-annual progress report.
    The EPA is proposing that the semi-annual reports be completed and
placed in the facility's operating record and posted on the facility's
CCR web page on April 1st and October 1st of each year until the
alternate compliance deadline. The first report will be due on
whichever posting deadline is soonest after approval of the alternate
compliance deadline is granted. The most current progress report should
not replace any previous version of the semi-annual progress report on
the facility's website. Therefore, the facility is expected to maintain
the previous reports on their website. The EPA seeks comment on whether
the dates of April 1 and October 1 are appropriate or whether alternate
months should be selected. The RIA which accompanies this proposed
rulemaking action estimates the cost associated with the additional
documentation required by the rule's provisions in Chapter 3.
(e) Procedures for Approval and Implementation
    The EPA is proposing that the demonstrations for further time under
Sec.  257.103(f)(1) be submitted to EPA or the Participating State
Director for approval no later than June 30, 2020, or 2 months prior to
the facility's deadline to cease receiving waste. This deadline would
also apply to any extensions requested under Sec.  257.103(f)(1)(iii).
Two months should normally provide sufficient time for EPA to evaluate
the request and complete its review process. The EPA acknowledges that
the review

time is shorter than normal; however, this is a unique circumstance
where the Agency needs to establish a new compliance deadline for the
facility. Although two months prior to the current deadline is the
latest date to submit a request, EPA would encourage submissions at the
earliest point at which the facility knows further time to complete its
arrangements is needed. By contrast, requests for additional time to
operate a CCR surface impoundment under paragraph Sec.  257.103(f)(2)
must be submitted to EPA for approval no later than May 15, 2020. The
decision to shut down a boiler is not reached quickly and can require
approvals from (or at least coordination with) state regulatory
officials, among others. The EPA, therefore, expects that facilities
know now (or will decide shortly) whether they will seek to rely upon
the proposed provisions in Sec.  257.103(f)(2).
    Upon receiving the demonstration for an alternate compliance
deadline, EPA or the Participating State Director will evaluate the
demonstration and could ask for additional information to complete its
review and/or discuss the demonstration with the facility. Submission
of a complete demonstration will toll, or to suspend, the facility's
deadline to cease receipt of waste until issuance of a final decision.
This ensures that a facility that has submitted a package in good faith
would not be penalized by any inadvertent administrative delays.
However incomplete submissions will not toll the facility's deadline;
here the equities lie squarely against granting any more time.
    When the owner or operator submits the demonstration to EPA or the
Participating State Director for approval, the owner or operator must
prepare and place into the facility's operating record and on their CCR
website a notice of intent of applying for the site-specific
alternative to cease receipt of waste. The EPA or the Participating
State Director will then post the proposed decision to grant or deny
the request in whole or in part on EPA's website for public notice and
comment. The public will have 15 days to comment on the proposed
decision. If the demonstration is particularly complex, EPA or the
Participating State Director will provide a longer comment period of 20
to 30 days. The EPA acknowledges that the comment period is shorter
than normal; however, this is a unique circumstance where the Agency
needs to establish a new compliance deadline for the facility. The EPA
or the Participating State Director will evaluate the comments and
amend its decision accordingly. The EPA will post the final decision on
the demonstrations on EPA's website.
    The EPA or the Participating State Director will finalize the
decision on the alternate compliance deadline no later than 4 months
after receiving a complete demonstration. This is the longest amount of
time EPA expects it should take to issue a final decision, although as
noted above, EPA believes it should normally take less time. If no
substantive comments are received on a proposed decision, it will
become effective 5 days from the close of the comment period.
    The facility must post an approved or denied demonstration and
alternate compliance deadline decision on the facility's public CCR
website. The EPA is seeking comment on whether a Participating State
Director (i.e., a state director with an approved State CCR Permit
Program) should also have the authority to grant approvals. If a
facility completes the necessary alternate capacity prior to approval
from EPA, then the facility should notify EPA and withdraw their
demonstration.
4. Conforming Amendments to Sec. Sec.  257.103(a), (b), and (c)
    To create a consistent framework for all CCR impoundments, EPA is
also proposing a series of amendments to the Sec.  257.103 introductory
paragraph and at Sec. Sec.  257.103(a), (b), and (c). Amending these
sections of Sec.  257.103, will simplify the framework for units that
require more time to the cease receipt of waste deadline triggered by
either Sec. Sec.  257.101(a), (b)(1), or (d). Additionally, EPA is
proposing to amend Sec. Sec.  257.103(a) and (b) to only be applicable
to CCR landfills.
(a) Amendments to Sec. Sec.  257.103(a) and (b)
    The EPA is proposing to revise the introductory paragraph to Sec.
257.103 to add the phrase ``and/or non-CCR wastestreams'' and to add
references to the proposed new paragraphs (e) and (f) to Sec.  257.103
for the short-term alternative and the alternate compliance deadline
respectively. The introductory paragraph would read as: ``The owner or
operator of a CCR landfill, CCR surface impoundment, or any lateral
expansion of a CCR unit that is subject to closure pursuant to
257.101(a), (b)(1), or (d) may continue to receive CCR and/or non-CCR
in the unit provided the owner or operator meets the requirements of
either paragraph (a), (b), (e), or (f) of this section.''
    The EPA is proposing conforming revisions to Sec. Sec.  257.103(a)
and (b) to reflect the proposals discussed above. The current
Sec. Sec.  257.103(a) and (b) apply to both CCR landfills and CCR
surface impoundments undergoing closure under Sec.  257.101 that need
additional time to find alternate capacity only for CCR wastestreams.
To be consistent with the proposals in Sec. Sec.  257.103 (e) and (f),
EPA is proposing to amend Sec. Sec.  257.103(a) and (b) to only apply
to CCR landfills. Some facilities have posted certifications under the
current Sec.  257.103(a) and (b) to allow continued receipt of CCR into
their surface impoundment. For these facilities, EPA will either
implement a transition period to allow sufficient time to complete the
documentation that may be required under Sec. Sec.  257.103 (e) or (f)
for their CCR surface impoundments, or, for those facilities that need
to continue to receive only CCR into the impoundment, a system that
would grandfather these units in. The EPA asks for comment on each of
these options. To reflect this proposed change the references to Sec.
257.101(a) and (b)(1) are being removed, as those sections apply only
to CCR surface impoundments. Additionally, EPA is proposing to revise
the term ``CCR unit'' to ``CCR landfill'' to ensure clarity that
Sec. Sec.  257.103(a) and (b) apply only to CCR landfills.
(b) Amendments to Sec.  257.103(c)
    When EPA amended the cease receipt of waste date in the July 2018
rule in Sec. Sec.  257.101(a) and (b)(1), EPA neglected to make the
conforming changes to the notification requirements in Sec.
257.103(c). Therefore, EPA is proposing to amend the notification
requirements in Sec.  257.103(c) with the necessary conforming changes
due to the change in the cease receipt of waste date and in light of
the USWAG decision. The current text of Sec.  257.103(c)(1) requires
the owner or operator to prepare a notification within six months of
becoming subject to closure pursuant to Sec.  257.101(a), (b)(1), or
(d). In light of the USWAG decision and the change of date for cease
receipt of waste, this language no longer makes sense. The EPA is
proposing to amend Sec.  257.103(c)(1) by adding new paragraphs (i)
through (iii) for CCR units closing pursuant to Sec. Sec.  257.101(a),
(b)(1), and (d), respectively. Each respective subparagraph then
requires the owner or operator to prepare the notification no later
than the cease receipt of waste date according to Sec. Sec.
257.101(a), (b)(1), and (d).

VI. The Projected Economic Impacts of This Action

A. Introduction

    The EPA estimated the costs and benefits of this action in an
Economic Analysis (EA) which is available in the

docket for this action. The EA estimates the incremental costs and cost
savings attributable to the provisions of this action, against the
baseline costs and practices in place as a result of the 2015 CCR final
rule and, the 2018 CCR Phase 1 final rule.
    EPA updates the 2015 CCR final rule baseline to account for two
developments. These are the availability of new publicly accessible
universe data and the effect of the 2018 court decisions. These updates
increase the baseline costs estimated for the CCR program against which
the RIA estimates the incremental effects of this proposed rulemaking
action.
    The RIA estimates that the net annualized impact of this proposed
regulation will be annual cost savings of $39.5 million. This action is
not considered an economically significant action under Executive Order
12866.

B. Affected Universe

    The proposed rule affects coal fired electric utility plants
(assigned to the utility sector North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) code 22). The rule is estimated to potentially impact
522 units at 230 facilities.

C. Costs and Cost Savings of the Proposed Rule

    The costs attributable to this proposed rule are reporting and
documentation that must be completed by regulated entities and
submitted to EPA in order to qualify for some of the closure deadline
extension provisions of the rule as well as other reporting
requirements related to the closure of CCR units. These costs are
estimated to amount to an annualized $0.204 million per year when
discounting at 7%.
    The cost savings attributable to this proposed rule include cost
savings from extending the deadlines by which units must cease
receiving waste and initiate closure. Cost savings also follow from the
avoided cost of new unit construction for CCR units associated with
qualified coal fired boilers which are closing by 2023 or 2028.
Overall, the proposed rule is expected to result in net cost savings of
an annualized $39.5 million when discounting at 7%.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order (E.O.) Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This is a significant regulatory action that was submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review because it raises
novel legal or policy issues. Any changes made in response to OMB
recommendations have been documented in the docket. The EPA prepared an
analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with this
action. This analysis is available in the docket and is summarized in
section VI of this preamble.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs

    This action is expected to be an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory
action. Details on the estimated costs of this proposed rule can be
found in EPA's analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated
with this action.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    The information collection activities in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the PRA. The Information Collection Request (ICR) document
that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 1189.32. You can
find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is briefly
summarized here.
    The information to be collected as a part of this rule includes
applications for the two alternatives to cease receipt or waste
deadlines. These applications are to ensure that the alternatives are
used only by facilities for which the August 31, 2020 cease receipt of
waste date is technically unfeasible.
    Applications for the short term alternative deadline must certify
the following: (1) No alternative disposal capacity is available on-
site or off-site (an increase in costs or inconvenience is not
sufficient support); (2) The owner or operator has made and continues
to make efforts to obtain additional capacity; and (3) The owner or
operator is (and must remain) in compliance with all other requirements
of part 257. A brief narrative of each component of the certification
would be required to explain why a three-month extension is necessary.
    Applications for the site specific alternative deadline must
certify the following: (1) A demonstration of the lack of alternate
capacity available on-site or off-site; (2) a demonstration that CCR
and/or non-CCR wastestreams must continue to be managed in the CCR
surface impoundment due to the technical infeasibility of obtaining
alternate capacity prior to November 30, 2020; this demonstration must
include an analysis of the adverse impact to plant operations if the
CCR surface impoundment in question were to no longer be available for
use; (3) a detailed workplan on obtaining alternate capacity for CCR
and/or non-CCR wastestreams; and (4) a narrative on how the owner or
operator will continue to maintain compliance with all other aspects of
the CCR rule. Facilities that intend to continue to generate
electricity from their coal fired boilers must also post semi-annual
progress reports on obtaining alternative capacity on their publicly
available website, while facilities with coal fired boilers closing by
a date certain must submit a plan to EPA to mitigate any potential
risks to human health and the environment from their CCR surface
impoundment.
    Respondents/affected entities: Coal-fired electric utility plants
that will be affected by the rule.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: The recordkeeping,
notification, and posting are mandatory as part of the minimum national
criteria being promulgated under Sections 1008, 4004, and 4005(a) of
RCRA
    Estimated number of respondents: 300.
    Frequency of response: The frequency of response varies.
    Total estimated burden: 21,476 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $4,257,909 (per year), includes $21,408
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    Submit your comments on the Agency's need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden to the EPA using the docket identified at
the beginning of this rule. You may also send your ICR-related comments
to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention: Desk Officer for the EPA. Since
OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60
days after receipt, OMB must receive comments no later than January 2,
2020. The EPA will

respond to any ICR-related comments in the final rule.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. This action is expected to result in net
cost savings of an annualized $39.5 million per year. These cost
savings will accrue to all regulated entities. We have therefore
concluded that this action will relieve regulatory burden for all
directly regulated small entities. EPA requests comment on the effect
of this rule on regulated small entities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 million
or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action imposes
no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments or the
private sector. The costs involved in this action are imposed only by
participation in a voluntary federal program. UMRA generally excludes
from the definition of ``federal intergovernmental mandate'' duties
that arise from participation in a voluntary federal program.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. For the ``Final Rule: Hazardous and Solid Waste
Management System; Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric
Utilities'' published April 17, 2015 (80 FR 21302), EPA identified
three of the 414 coal-fired electric utility plants (in operation as of
2012) as being located on tribal lands; however, they are not owned by
tribal governments. These are: (1) Navajo Generating Station in
Coconino County, Arizona, owned by the Arizona Salt River Project; (2)
Bonanza Power Plant in Uintah County, Utah, owned by the Deseret
Generation and Transmission Cooperative; and (3) Four Corners Power
Plant in San Juan County, New Mexico owned by the Arizona Public
Service Company. The Navajo Generating Station and the Four Corners
Power Plant are on lands belonging to the Navajo Nation, while the
Bonanza Power Plant is located on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation of
the Ute Indian Tribe. Under the WIIN Act, EPA is the permitting
authority for CCR units located in Indian Country. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risk and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health risks or
safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk
to children. This action's health and risk assessments are contained in
the document titled ``Human and Ecological Risk Assessment of Coal
Combustion Residuals,'' which is available in the docket for the final
rule as docket item EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11993.
    As ordered by E.O. 13045 Section 1-101(a), for the ``Final Rule:
Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System; Disposal of Coal
Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities'' published April 17, 2015
(80 FR 21302), EPA identified and assessed environmental health risks
and safety risks that may disproportionately affect children in the
revised risk assessment. The results of the screening assessment found
that risks fell below the criteria when wetting and run-on/runoff
controls required by the rule are considered. Under the full
probabilistic analysis, composite liners required by the rule for new
waste management units showed the ability to reduce the 90th percentile
child cancer and non-cancer risks for the groundwater to drinking water
pathway to well below EPA's criteria. Additionally, the groundwater
monitoring and corrective action required by the rule reduced risks
from current waste management units. This action does not adversely
affect these requirements and EPA believes that this rule will be
protective of children's health.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution or use of energy. For the 2015 CCR rule, EPA analyzed the
potential impact on electricity prices relative to the ``in excess of
one percent'' threshold. Using the Integrated Planning Model (IPM), EPA
concluded that the 2015 CCR Rule may increase the weighted average
nationwide wholesale price of electricity between 0.18 percent and 0.19
percent in the years 2020 and 2030, respectively. As the proposed rule
represents a cost savings rule relative to the 2015 CCR rule, this
analysis concludes that any potential impact on wholesale electricity
prices will be lower than the potential impact estimated of the 2015
CCR rule; therefore, this proposed rule is not expected to meet the
criteria of a ``significant adverse effect'' on the electricity markets
as defined by Executive Order 13211.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The
documentation for this decision is contained in EPA's Regulatory Impact
Analysis (RIA) for the CCR rule which is available in the docket for
the 2015 CCR final rule as docket item EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-12034.
    The EPA's risk assessment did not separately evaluate either
minority or low-income populations. However, to evaluate the
demographic characteristics of communities that may be affected by the
CCR rule, the RIA compares the demographic characteristics of
populations surrounding coal-fired electric utility plants with broader
population data for two geographic areas: (1) One-mile radius from CCR
management units (i.e., landfills and impoundments) likely to be
affected by groundwater releases from both landfills and impoundments;
and (2) watershed catchment areas

downstream of surface impoundments that receive surface water run-off
and releases from CCR impoundments and are at risk of being
contaminated from CCR impoundment discharges (e.g., unintentional
overflows, structural failures, and intentional periodic discharges).
    For the population as a whole 24.8 percent belong to a minority
group and 11.3 percent falls below the Federal Poverty Level. For the
population living within one mile of plants with surface impoundments
16.1 percent belong to a minority group and 13.2 percent live below the
Federal Poverty Level. These minority and low-income populations are
not disproportionately high compared to the general population. The
percentage of minority residents of the entire population living within
the catchment areas downstream of surface impoundments is
disproportionately high relative to the general population, i.e., 28.7
percent, versus 24.8 percent for the national population. Also, the
percentage of the population within the catchment areas of surface
impoundments that is below the Federal Poverty Level is
disproportionately high compared with the general population, i.e.,
18.6 percent versus 11.3 percent nationally.
    Comparing the population percentages of minority and low income
residents within one mile of landfills to those percentages in the
general population, EPA found that minority and low-income residents
make up a smaller percentage of the populations near landfills than
they do in the general population, i.e., minorities comprised 16.6
percent of the population near landfills versus 24.8 percent nationwide
and low-income residents comprised 8.6 percent of the population near
landfills versus 11.3 percent nationwide. In summary, although
populations within the catchment areas of plants with surface
impoundments appear to have disproportionately high percentages of
minority and low-income residents relative to the nationwide average,
populations surrounding plants with landfills do not. Because landfills
are less likely than impoundments to experience surface water run-off
and releases, catchment areas were not considered for landfills.
    The CCR rule is risk-reducing with reductions in risk occurring
largely within the surface water catchment zones around, and
groundwater beneath, coal-fired electric utility plants. Since the CCR
rule is risk-reducing and this action does not add to risks, this
action will not result in new disproportionate risks to minority or
low-income populations.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 257

    Environmental protection, Waste treatment and disposal.

    Dated: November 4, 2019.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, EPA proposes to amend
title 40, chapter I, of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 257--CRITERIA FOR CLASSIFICATION OF SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
FACILITIES AND PRACTICES

0
1. The authority citation for part 257 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6907(a)(3), 6912(a)(1), 6944(a), 6945(d);
33 U.S.C. 1345(d) and (e).

0
2. Amend Sec.  257.71 by:
0
a. Removing and reserving paragraph (a)(1)(i); and
0
b. Revising paragraphs (a)(3)(i) and (ii).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  257.71  Liner design criteria for existing CCR surface
impoundments.

    (a) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) The owner or operator of the CCR unit determines that the CCR
unit is not constructed with a liner that meets the requirements of
paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) or (iii) of this section; or
    (ii) The owner or operator of the CCR unit fails to document
whether the CCR unit was constructed with a liner that meets the
requirements of paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) or (iii) of this section.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec.  257.91 by removing and reserving paragraph (d)(2).

Sec.  257.91  [Amended]

0
4. Amend Sec.  257.101 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (b)(1) to read
as follows:

Sec.  257.101  Closure or retrofit of CCR units.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Except as provided by paragraph (a)(3) of this section, no
later than August 31, 2020, an owner or operator of an existing unlined
CCR surface impoundment must cease placing CCR and non-CCR wastestreams
into such CCR surface impoundment and either retrofit or close the CCR
unit in accordance with the requirements of Sec.  257.102.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1)(i) Location standard under Sec.  257.60. Except as provided by
paragraph (b)(4) of this section, the owner or operator of an existing
CCR surface impoundment that has not demonstrated compliance with the
location standard specified in Sec.  257.60(a) must cease placing CCR
and non-CCR wastestreams into such CCR unit no later than August 31,
2020 and close the CCR unit in accordance with the requirements of
Sec.  257.102.
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec.  257.103 by:
0
a. Revising introductory text;
0
b. Revising paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text, (2) and (3);
0
c. Revising paragraph (b)(1) introductory text;
0
d. Removing and reserving paragraphs (b)(2) and (3);
0
e. Revising paragraph (c)(1); and
0
f. Adding paragraphs (e) and (f).
    The additions and revisions read as follows:

Sec.  257.103  Alternate closure requirements.

    The owner or operator of a CCR landfill, CCR surface impoundment,
or any lateral expansion of a CCR unit that is subject to closure
pursuant to Sec.  257.101(a), (b)(1), or (d) may continue to receive
CCR and/or non-CCR wastestreams in the unit provided the owner or
operator meets the requirements of either paragraph (a), (b), (e), or
(f) of this section.
    (a)(1) No alternative CCR disposal capacity. Notwithstanding the
provisions of Sec.  257.101(d), a CCR landfill may continue to recieve
CCR if the owner or operator of the CCR landfill certifies that the CCR
must continue to be managed in that CCR landfill due to the absence of
alternative disposal capacity both on-site and off-site of the
facility. To qualify under this paragraph, the owner or operator of the
CCR landfill must document that all of the following conditions have
been met:
* * * * *
    (2) Once alternative capacity is available, the CCR landfill must
cease receiving CCR and initiate closure following the timeframes in
Sec.  257.102(e) and (f).
    (3) If no alternative capacity is identified within five years
after the initial certification, the CCR landfill must cease receiving
CCR and close in accordance with the timeframes in Sec.  257.102(e) and
(f).
    (b)(1) Permanent cessation of a coal-fired boiler(s) by a date
certain. Notwithstanding the provisions of Sec.  257.101(d), a CCR
landfill may continue to receive CCR if the owner or operator certifies
that the facility will cease operation of the coal-fired boilers within
the timeframes specified in

paragraphs (b)(2) through (4) of this section, but in the interim
period (prior to closure of the coal-fired boiler), the facility must
continue to use the CCR unit due to the absence of alternative disposal
capacity both on-site and off-site of the facility. To qualify under
this paragraph, the owner or operator of the CCR unit must document
that all of the following conditions have been met:
* * * * *
    (2) [Reserved]
    (3) [Reserved]
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) The owner or operator must prepare and place in the facility's
operating record a notification of intent to comply with the
alternative closure requirements of this section. The notification must
describe why the CCR unit qualifies for the alternative closure
provisions under either paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, in
addition to providing the documentation and certifications required by
paragraph (a) or (b) of this section. The deadlines to prepare the
notification are specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iii) of
this section.
    (i) If the CCR unit is closing pursuant to Sec.  257.101(a)(1), the
owner or operator must prepare the notification no later than August
31, 2020.
    (ii) If the CCR unit is closing pursuant to Sec.  257.101(b)(1),
the owner or operator must prepare the notification no later than
August 31, 2020.
    (iii) If the CCR unit is closing pursuant to Sec.  257.101(d)(1),
the owner or operator must prepare the notification no later than six
months after the date it is determined that the CCR unit is not in
compliance with the requirements of Sec.  257.64(a).
* * * * *
    (e)(1) Short-Term Alternate to Initiation of Closure.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Sec.  257.101(a), or (b)(1), a CCR
surface impoundment may continue to recieve CCR and/or non-CCR
wastestreams if the owner or operator of the CCR surface impoundment
certifies that the CCR and/or non-CCR wastestreams must continue to be
managed in that CCR surface impoundment to allow the facility to
complete the measures necessary to provide alternative disposal
capacity, either on-site or off-site of the facility. Qualification
under this paragraph lasts only until alternative capacity is available
or until November 30, 2020, whichever is sooner. To qualify under this
paragraph, the owner or operator of the CCR surface impoundment must
document that all of the following conditions have been met:
    (i) No alternative disposal capacity is available on-site or off-
site. An increase in costs or the inconvenience of existing capacity is
not sufficient to support qualification under this section;
    (ii) The owner or operator has made, and continues to make, efforts
to obtain additional capacity that will become available no later than
November 30, 2020. Once alternative capacity is identified, the owner
or operator must arrange to use such capacity as soon as feasible; and
    (iii) The owner or operator must remain in compliance with all
other requirements of this subpart, including the requirement to
conduct any necessary corrective action. The owner or operator at all
times bears responsibility for demonstrating qualification under this
section. Failure to remain in compliance with any of the requirements
of this subpart could result in the automatic loss of authorization
under this section.
    (2) Once alternative capacity is available, the CCR surface
impoundment must cease receiving CCR and non-CCR wastestreams and
initiate closure following the timeframes in Sec.  257.102(e) and (f).
    (3) If no alternative capacity is identified by November 30, 2020,
the CCR surface impoundment must cease recieving CCR and non-CCR
wastestreams and close in accordance with the timeframes in Sec.
257.102(e) and (f).
    (4) An owner or operator of a CCR surface impoundment that closes
in accordance with paragraphs (e) of this section must complete the
notices as specified in paragraphs (d) and (e)(4)(i) through (ii) of
this section.
    (i) No later than August 31, 2020 the owner or operator must
prepare and place in the facility's operating record a notification of
intent to comply with alternative closure requirements of this section.
The notification must describe the factual basis to support the
facility's conclusion that the CCR unit qualifies for the alternative
closure provisions under this paragraph, in addition to providing the
documentation and certifications required by this paragraph.
    (ii) An owner or operator of a CCR surface impoundment must also
prepare the notification of intent to close a CCR unit as required by
Sec.  257.102(g).
    (f) Site Specific Alternate to Initiation of Closure Deadline.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Sec.  257.101(a), and (b)(1), a CCR
surface impoundment may continue to recieve CCR and/or non-CCR
wastestreams if the owner or operator of the CCR surface impoundment
demonstrates to the Administrator or the Participating State Director
that the CCR and/or non-CCR wastestreams must continue to be managed in
that CCR surface impoundment either: Because it was infeasible to
complete the measures necessary to provide alternative disposal
capacity on-site or off-site of the facility by November 30, 2020; or
because the owner or operator certifies that the facility will
permanently cease operation of the coal-fired boilers within the
timeframes specified in paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this section.
Authorization under this paragraph is not available for units that have
continued operation pursuant to Sec.  257.103(e). The demonstration
must be submitted to the Administrator or the Participating State
Director no later than the relevant deadline in paragraph (f)(3) of
this section and will act on the submission in accordance with the
procedures in paragraph (f)(3) of this section.
    (1) Development of Alternative Capacity Infeasible.
    (i) To obtain approval under this paragraph, the owner or operator
of the CCR surface impoundment must submit a demonstration that
includes documents all of the following:
    (A) Documentation that no alternative disposal capacity is
available on-site or off-site. An increase in costs or the
inconvenience of existing capacity is not sufficient to support
qualification under this section;
    (B) A certification from the owner or operator of the CCR surface
impoundment that CCR and/or non-CCR wastestreams must continue to be
managed in that CCR surface impoundment because it was infeasible to
complete the measures necessary to obtain alternative disposal capacity
either on-site or off-site of the facility by November 30, 2020;
    (C) A certification from the owner or operator of the CCR surface
impoundment that the facility is in compliance with all of the
requirements of this Subpart;
    (D) A workplan that contains the following elements:
    (1) A narrative discussing the approach selected to obtain
alternative capacity for CCR and/or non-CCR wastestreams;
    (2) A detailed schedule of the fastest feasible time to complete
the measures necessary for alternate capacity to be available including
a visual timeline representation;
    (3) A narrative discussion of the schedule and visual timeline
representation; and
    (4) A narrative discussion of the progress the owner or operator
has made

to obtain alternative capacity for the CCR and/or non-CCR wastestreams;
    (5) A narrative discussion of the strategy the owner or operator
will utilize to remain in compliance with all other requirements of
this subpart, including the requirement to conduct any necessary
corrective action;
    (ii) Once alternative capacity for a CCR or non-CCR wastestream is
available, the existing CCR surface impoundment must cease receiving
that CCR or non-CCR wastestream. The new alternate capacity must be
utilized as soon as available. Once the existing CCR surface
impoundment ceases receipt of all CCR and/or non-CCR wastestreams, the
existing CCR surface impoundment must initiate closure following the
timeframes in 257.102(e) and (f).
    (iii) An owner or operator may seek additional time beyond the time
granted in the initial approval by making the showing in paragraph
(f)(1)(i) of this section, provided that no facility may be granted
time to operate the impoundment beyond October 15, 2023. No later than
October 15, 2023, all CCR surface impoundments covered by this section
must cease receiving CCR and non-CCR wastestreams and close in
accordance with the timeframes in Sec.  257.102(e) and (f).
    (iv) The owner or operator at all times bears responsibility for
demonstrating qualification under this section. Failure to remain in
compliance with any of the requirements of this subpart will result in
the automatic loss of authorization under this section.
    (v) An owner or operator of a CCR surface impoundment that closes
in accordance with paragraph (f)(1) of this section must complete the
notices and progress reports as specified in paragraphs (d) and
(f)(1)(vi) through (xi) of this section.
    (vi) Upon submission of the demonstration to the Administrator or
the Participating State Director the owner or operator must prepare and
place in the facility's operating record a notification of submitting
the demonstration.
    (vii) Upon approval or denial from the Administrator or the
Participating State Director the owner or operator must prepare and
place in the facility's operating record the notification of approval
or denial and the approved or denied demonstration required by
paragraph (f)(1) of this section.
    (viii) If at any time after approval, the owner or operator
discovers the need to seek additional time due to infeasibility to
achieve cease receipt of waste prior to the granted alternative
deadline under paragraph (f)(1)(iii) of this section, the owner or
operator must submit a notification to the Administrator or the
Participating State Director as soon as possible. The owner or operator
must prepare and place the notification in the facility's operating
record.
    (ix) The owner or operator must prepare semi-annual progress
reports. The semi-annual progress reports are to contain the following:
    (A) Discussion on progress obtaining alternative capacity,
including:
    (1) Discussion on the current stage of obtaining the capacity in
reference to the timeline required under paragraph (f)(1)(i)(D)(2) of
this section;
    (2) Discussion on if the owner or operator is on schedule for
obtaining alternative capacity;
    (3) Discussion of any problems encountered, and a description of
the actions taken to resolve the problems; and
    (4) Discussion of the goals for the next 6 months and major
milestones to be achieve for obtaining alternative capacity; and
    (B) Discussion of any planned operational changes at the facility.
    (x) The progress reports are to be completed according to the
following schedule:
    (A) The semi-annual progress reports are to be prepared and posted
on April 1 and October 1 of each year for the duration of the alternate
cease receipt of waste deadline.
    (B) The first semi-annual progress report is to be prepared and
posted by whichever date, April 1 or October 1, is soonest after
receiving approval from the Administrator or the Participating State
Director; and
    (C) The owner or operator has completed the progress reports
specified in paragraph (f)(1)(ix) of this section when the reports are
placed in the facility's operating record as required by Sec.
257.105(i)(17).
    (xi) An owner or operator of a CCR surface impoundment must also
prepare the notification of intent to close a CCR unit as required by
Sec.  257.102(g).
    (2) Permanent cessation of a coal-fired boiler(s) by a date
certain.
    (i) Notwithstanding the provisions of Sec.  257.101(a), and (b)(1),
a CCR surface impoundment may continue to receive CCR and non-CCR
wastestreams if the owner or operator certifies that the facility will
cease operation of the coal-fired boilers and complete closure of the
impoundment within the timeframes specified in paragraphs (f)(2)(ii) of
this section, but in the interim period (prior to closure of the coal-
fired boiler), the facility must continue to use the CCR unit due to
the absence of alternative disposal capacity both on-site and off-site
of the facility. To qualify under this paragraph, the owner or operator
of the CCR unit must submit a demonstration to the Administrator or
Participating State Director that contains all of the following:
    (A) Documentation that no alternative disposal capacity is
available on-site or off-site. An increase in costs or the
inconvenience of existing capacity is not sufficient to support
qualification under this section.
    (B) A plan to mitigate potential risks to human health and the
environment from the CCR surface impoundment;
    (C) Certification that the owner or operator remains in compliance
with all other requirements of this subpart, including the requirement
to conduct any necessary corrective action; and
    (D) Documentation that the coal-fired boilers and closure of the
impoundment will be completed within the timeframes specified in
paragraphs (f)(2)(ii) of this section.
    (ii) Timeframes
    (A) For a CCR surface impoundment that is 40 acres or smaller, the
coal-fired boiler must cease operation and the CCR surface impoundment
must have completed closure no later than October 17, 2023.
    (B) For a CCR surface impoundment that is larger than 40 acres, the
coal-fired boiler must cease operation, and the CCR surface impoundment
must complete closure no later than October 17, 2028.
    (iii) The owner or operator at all times bears responsibility for
demonstrating qualification for authorization under section. Failure to
remain in compliance with any of the requirements of this subpart will
result in the automatic loss of authorization under this section.
    (iv) An owner or operator of a CCR surface impoundment that closes
in accordance with paragraph (f)(2) of this section must complete the
notices and progress reports as specified in paragraphs (d) and
(f)(2)(v) through (vii) of this section.
    (v) Upon submission of the demonstration to the Administrator or
the Participating State Director the owner or operator must prepare and
place in the facility's operating record a notification of submitting
the demonstration.
    (vi) Upon approval or denial from the Administrator or the
Participating State Director the owner or operator must prepare and
place in the facility's operating record the notification of approval
or denial and the approved or denied demonstration required by
paragraph (f)(2) of this section.
    (vii) The owner or operator must prepare an annual progress report

documenting the continued lack of alternative capacity and the progress
towards the closure of the CCR surface impoundment.
    (3) Process to Obtain Authorization
    (i) Deadlines for Submission
    (A) The owner or operator must submit the demonstration required
under paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this section, for an alternative cease
receipt of waste deadline for a CCR surface impoundment pursuant to
paragraph (f)(1) of this section, to EPA for approval no later than 2
months prior to the unit's deadline to cease receiving waste.
    (B) An owner or operator may seek additional time beyond the time
granted in the initial approval, as allowed under paragraph (f)(1)(iii)
of this section, by submitting a new demonstration, as required under
paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this section, to EPA for approval. No facility
may be granted time to operate the impoundment beyond October 15, 2023.
    (C) The owner or operator must submit the demonstration required
under paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section, for an alternative cease
receipt of waste deadline for a CCR surface impoundment under paragraph
(f)(2) of this section, to EPA for approval no later than May 15, 2020.
    (ii) EPA will evaluate the demonstration and may request additional
information to complete its review. Submission of a complete
demonstration will toll the facility's deadline to cease receipt of
waste until issuance of a final decision under paragraph (f)(3)(iv) of
this section. Incomplete submissions will not toll the facility's
deadline.
    (iii) EPA will publish a proposed decision on EPA's website for a
15-day comment period. If the demonstration is particularly complex,
EPA will provide a comment period of 20 to 30 days.
    (iv) After consideration of the comments, EPA will issue its
decision on the alternate compliance deadline within 4 months of
receiving a complete demonstration. If no substantive comments are
received, the proposed decision will become effective 5 days from the
close of the comment period.
0
6. Amend Sec.  257.105 by adding paragraphs (i)(14) through (21).

Sec.  257.105  Recordkeeping requirements.

* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (14) The notification of intent to comply with the short-term
alternative to initiation of closure as required by Sec.
257.103(e)(4)(i).
    (15) The notification of intent to comply with the site-specific
alternative to initiation of closure due to development of alternate
capacity infeasible as required by Sec.  257.103(f)(1)(vi).
    (16) The approved or denied demonstration for the site-specific
alternative to initiation of closure due to development of alternate
capacity infeasible as required by Sec.  257.103(f)(1)(vii).
    (17) The notification for requesting additional time to the
alternative cease receipt of waste deadline as required by Sec.
257.103(f)(1)(viii).
    (18) The semi-annual progress reports as for the site-specific
alternative to initiation of closure due to development of alternate
capacity infeasible as required by Sec.  257.103(f)(1)(ix).
    (19) The notification of intent to comply with the site-specific
alternative to initiation of closure due to permanent cessation of a
coal-fired boiler(s) by a date certain as required by Sec.
257.103(f)(2)(v).
    (20) The approved or denied demonstration for the site-specific
alternative to initiation of closure due to permanent cessation of a
coal-fired boiler(s) by a date certain as required by Sec.
257.103(f)(2)(vi).
    (21) The annual progress report for the site-specific alternative
to initiation of closure due to permanent cessation of a coal-fired
boiler(s) by a date certain as required by Sec.  257.103(f)(2)(vii).
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec.  257.106 by adding paragraphs (i)(14) through (21).

Sec.  257.106  Notification requirements.

* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (14) Provide the notification of intent to comply with the short-
term alternative to initiation of closure as specified under Sec.
257.105(i)(14).
    (15) Provide the notification of intent to comply with the site-
specific alternative to initiation of closure due to development of
alternate capacity infeasible as specified under Sec.  257.105(i)(15).
    (16) Provide the approved or denied demonstration for the site-
specific alternative to initiation of closure due to development of
alternate capacity infeasible as required by as specified under Sec.
257.105(i)(16).
    (17) Provide the notification for requesting additional time to the
alternative cease receipt of waste deadline as required by Sec.
257.1035(i)(17).
    (18) The semi-annual progress reports as for the site-specific
alternative to initiation of closure due to development of alternate
capacity infeasible as specified under Sec.  257.105(i)(18).
    (19) Provide the notification of intent to comply with the site-
specific alternative to initiation of closure due to permanent
cessation of a coal-fired boiler(s) by a date certain as specified
under Sec.  257.105(i)(19).
    (20) Provide the approved or denied demonstration for the site-
specific alternative to initiation of closure due to permanent
cessation of a coal-fired boiler(s) by a date certain as required by
Sec.  257.105(i)(20).
    (21) The annual progress report for the site-specific alternative
to initiation of closure due to permanent cessation of a coal-fired
boiler(s) by a date certain as required by Sec.  257.105(i)(21).
* * * * *
0
8. Amend Sec.  257.107 by adding paragraphs (i)(14) through (21).

Sec.  257.107  Publicly accessible internet site requirements.

* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (14) The notification of intent to comply with the short-term
alternative to initiation of closure as specified under Sec.
257.105(i)(14).
    (15) The notification of intent to comply with the site-specific
alternative to initiation of closure due to development of alternate
capacity infeasible as specified under Sec.  257.105(i)(15).
    (16) The approved or denied demonstration for the site-specific
alternative to initiation of closure due to development of alternate
capacity infeasible as required by as specified under Sec.
257.105(i)(16).
    (17) The notification for requesting additional time to the
alternative cease receipt of waste deadline as required by Sec.
257.1035(i)(17).
    (18) The semi-annual progress reports as for the site-specific
alternative to initiation of closure due to development of alternate
capacity infeasible as specified under Sec.  257.105(i)(18).
    (19) The notification of intent to comply with the site-specific
alternative to initiation of closure due to permanent cessation of a
coal-fired boiler(s) by a date certain as specified under Sec.
257.105(i)(19).
    (20) The approved or denied demonstration for the site-specific
alternative to initiation of closure due to permanent cessation of a
coal-fired boiler(s) by a date certain as required by Sec.
257.105(i)(20).
    (21) The annual progress report for the site-specific alternative
to initiation of closure due to permanent cessation of a coal-fired
boiler(s) by a date certain as required by Sec.  257.105(i)(21).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-24927 Filed 11-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 41 (Friday, March 1, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6965-6966]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03615]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0787; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASW-12]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Coushatta, LA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at The Red River Airport, Coushatta, LA.
Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate new standard instrument
approach procedures developed at The Red River Airport, for the safety
and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, April 25, 2019. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1
Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11C at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Shelby, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface at The Red River Airport, Coushatta, LA, to support IFR
operations at the airport.

History

    On December 19, 2018, the FAA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking in the Federal Register (83 FR 65113) for Docket No. FAA-
2018-0787, to establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at The Red River Airport, Coushatta, LA. Interested
parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by
submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments
were received.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15,
2018. FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of The Red River Airport,
Coushatta, LA, to accommodate new standard instrument approach
procedures developed for the airport, for the safety and management of
instrument flight rules (IFR) operations.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    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, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that 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.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental

Impacts: Policies and Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5.a. 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.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and
effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASW LA E5 Coushatta, LA [New]

The Red River Airport, LA
    (Lat. 31[deg]59'25'' N, long 093[deg]18'40'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.5-mile radius of the Red River Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on February 21, 2019.
John Witucki,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2019-03615 Filed 2-28-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 102 (Friday, May 28, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28724-28726]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11231]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0387; Airspace Docket No. 21-AGL-24]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace, Revocation of
Class E Airspace and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Carbondale and
Marion, IL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend the Class D airspace and Class E
airspace at Carbondale, IL, and Marion, IL; revoke the Class E airspace
area designated as an extension to Class D airspace at Veterans Airport
of Southern Illinois, Marion, IL; and establish Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Southern Illinois
Airport, Carbondale/Murphysboro, IL. The FAA is proposing this action
as the result of airspace reviews caused by the decommissioning of the
Marion very high frequency (VHF) omnidirectional range (VOR) as part of
the VOR Minimal Operational Network (MON) Program. The names and
geographic coordinates of the airports would also be updated to
coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 12, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590; telephone
(202) 366-9826, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2021-0386/Airspace Docket No. 21-AGL-24 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at https://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the
proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in
the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except federal holidays.
    FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend the Class D airspace at Southern Illinois Airport,
Carbondale/Murphysboro, IL, and Veterans Airport of Southern Illinois,
Marion, IL; revoke the Class E airspace area designated as an extension
to Class D airspace at Veterans Airport of Southern Illinois; establish
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at
Southern Illinois Airport; and amend the Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface at Veterans Airport of Southern
Illinois to support instrument flight rule operations at these
airports.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2021-0387/
Airspace Docket No. 21-AGL-24.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic
Organization, Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective
September 15, 2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 by:
    Amending the Class D airspace to within a 4.2-mile (increased from
a 4.1-mile) radius of Southern Illinois Airport, Carbondale/
Murphysboro, IL; updating the header of the airspace legal description
from ``Carbondale, IL'' to ``Carbondale/Murphysboro, IL'' to coincide
with the FAA's aeronautical database; removing the city associated with
the airport to comply with changes to FAA Order 7400.2M, Procedures for
Handling Airspace Matter; updating the geographic coordinates of the
airport to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database; and replacing
the outdated term ``Airport/Facility Directory'' with ``Chart
Supplement'':
    Amending the Class D airspace to within a 4.4-mile (increased from
a 4.2-mile) radius of Veterans Airport of Southern Illinois, Marion,
IL; removing the city associated with the airport to comply with
changes to FAA Order 7400.2M; updating the name (previously Williamson
County Regional Airport) and geographic coordinates of the airport to
coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database; and replacing the
outdated term ``Airport/Facility Directory'' with ``Chart Supplement'';
    Revoking the Class E airspace area designated as an extension to
Class D airspace at Veterans Airport of Southern Illinois as it is no
longer required;
    Establishing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface within a 6.7-mile radius of Southern Illinois Airport; and
within 4 miles each side of the 181[deg] bearing of the airport
extending from the 6.7-mile radius to 11.8 miles south of the airport;
    And amending the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to within a 6.9-mile radius of Veterans Airport of
Southern Illinois; removing Southern Illinois Airport from the airspace
legal description as a

separate airspace legal description is being established for this
airspace; updating the name of the airport (previously Williamson
County Regional Airport) to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical
database; and removing the current airspace boundary to be replaced by
the radius from the airport.
    This action is necessary due to airspace reviews caused by the
decommissioning of the Marion VOR as part of the VOR MON Program.
    Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraph
5000, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11E, dated July
21, 2020, and effective September 15, 2020, which is incorporated by
reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and E airspace designation listed
in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    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, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and
effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

AGL IL D Carbondale/Murphysboro, IL [Amended]

Southern Illinois Airport, IL
    (Lat. 37[deg]46'41'' N, long. 89[deg]15'07'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
2,900 feet MSL within a 4.2-mile radius of the Southern Illinois
Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during specific
dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective dates and times will thereafter be continuously published
in the Chart Supplement.
* * * * *

AGL IL D Marion, IL [Amended]

Veterans Airport of Southern Illinois, IL
    (Lat. 37[deg]45'18'' N, long. 89[deg]00'40'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
3,000 feet MSL within a 4.4-mile radius of the Veterans Airport of
Southern Illinois. This Class D airspace area is effective during
the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to
Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously
published in the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to
a Class D or Class E Surface Area.

* * * * *

AGL IL E4 Marion, IL [Removed]

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AGL IL E5 Carbondale/Murphysboro, IL [Established]

Southern Illinois Airport, IL
    (Lat. 37[deg]46'41'' N, long. 89[deg]15'07'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.7-mile radius of the airport, and within 4 miles each
side of the 181[deg] bearing from the airport extending from the
6.7-mile radius to 11.8 miles south of the airport.
* * * * *

AGL IL E5 Marion, IL [Amended]

    Veterans Airport of Southern Illinois, IL
    (Lat. 37[deg]45'18'' N, long. 89[deg]00'40'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.9-mile radius of the airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on May 24, 2021.
Martin A. Skinner,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2021-11231 Filed 5-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 189 (Wednesday, September 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58796-58797]
[FR Doc No: 2015-24717]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75980; File No. 4-668]

Joint Industry Plan; Order Approving Amendment No. 2 to the
National Market System Plan Governing the Process of Selecting a Plan
Processor and Developing a Plan for the Consolidated Audit Trail by
BATS Exchange, Inc., BATS-Y Exchange, Inc., BOX Options Exchange LLC,
C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated, Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated, Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., EDGA Exchange, Inc., EDGX
Exchange, Inc., Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.,
International Securities Exchange, LLC, ISE Gemini, LLC, Miami
International Securities Exchange LLC, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX
PHLX LLC, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, National Stock Exchange, Inc.,
New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE MKT LLC, and NYSE Arca, Inc.

September 24, 2015.

I. Introduction

    On March 6, 2015, BATS Exchange, Inc., BATS-Y Exchange, Inc., BOX
Options Exchange LLC, C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated, Chicago Board
Options Exchange, Incorporated, Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., EDGA
Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange, Inc., Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc., International Securities Exchange, LLC, ISE Gemini,
LLC, Miami International Securities Exchange LLC, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.,
NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, National Stock
Exchange, Inc., New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE MKT LLC, and NYSE
Arca, Inc. (collectively, ``SROs'' or ``Participants'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'') pursuant
to Section 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\1\ and
Rule 608 thereunder,\2\ an amendment (``Amendment No. 2'') to the
National Market System (``NMS'') Plan Governing the Process of
Selecting a Plan Processor and Developing a Plan for the Consolidated
Audit Trail (``Selection Plan'').\3\ Amendment No. 2 was published for
comment in the Federal Register on June 23, 2015.\4\ The Commission
received no comment letters on this proposal. This Order approves
Amendment No. 2 to the Selection Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \3\ The Selection Plan is an NMS Plan approved by the Commission
pursuant to Section 11A of the Act and Rule 608 thereunder. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71596 (Feb. 21, 2014), 79 FR
11152 (Feb. 27, 2014) (``Order Approving Selection Plan''); see also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70892 (Nov. 15, 2013), 78 FR
69910 (Nov. 21, 2013) (``Notice of Selection Plan'').
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75193 (June 17,
2015), 80 FR 36006 (June 23, 2015) (``Notice of Amendment No. 2'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background and Description of the Proposal

A. Background

    The Commission adopted Rule 613 on July 11, 2012, to require the
SROs to jointly submit an NMS plan to create, implement, and maintain a
consolidated audit trail (``CAT NMS Plan'').\5\ In response, the SROs
engaged in a request for proposal (``RFP'') process to help them
develop an NMS Plan proposal and solicit bids (``Bids'') for the role
of Plan Processor \6\ to build, operate, administer, and maintain the
consolidated audit trail. The Selection Plan, which was approved by the
Commission on February 21, 2014, sets forth the process by which the
Participants will review, evaluate, and narrow down the Bids submitted
in response to the RFP to ``Shortlisted Bids,'' and ultimately select
the Plan Processor following Commission approval of the proposed CAT
NMS Plan.\7\ Amendment No.1 to the Selection Plan, which the Commission
approved on June 17, 2015, among other things, permits the SROs to vote
to narrow the set of Shortlisted Bids to an even shorter list prior to
Commission approval of the proposed CAT NMS Plan.\8\ The Selection
Plan, as amended, provides that the SROs' Selection Committee will vote
to select the Plan Processor from among the remaining bidders, using a
two-round voting process, within two months of Commission approval of
the proposed CAT NMS Plan.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67457 (July 18, 2012),
77 FR 45722 (Aug. 1, 2012).
    \6\ Unless otherwise noted, capitalized terms are used as
defined in Rule 613, in the Selection Plan, or in this Order.
    \7\ See Order Approving Selection Plan, supra note 3.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75192, 80 FR 36028
(June 23, 2015) (``Order Approving Amendment No. 1'').
    \9\ See Order Approving Selection Plan, supra note 3; Order
Approving Amendment No. 1, supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Description of the Proposal

    Amendment No. 1 included a provision providing that no SRO shall
vote in the process narrowing the set of Shortlisted Bidders if a Bid
submitted by the SRO or an Affiliate of the SRO is a Shortlisted Bid or
if the SRO or its Affiliate is included as a material subcontractor as
part of a Bid (a

``Bidding Participant'' \10\).\11\ The same recusal provision exists in
the second--but not the first--round of a two-round voting process by
the Selection Committee \12\ to select the Plan Processor from among
the Shortlisted Bidders.\13\ The SROs state that they included the
recusal provision to address potential conflicts of interest in
selecting the Plan Processor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Selection Plan defines ``Bidding Participant'' as a
Participant that: (1) Submits a Bid; (2) is an Affiliate of an
entity that submits a Bid; or (3) is included, or is an Affiliate of
an entity that is included, as a Material Subcontractor as part of a
Bid. See Notice of Selection Plan, supra note 3, Exhibit A, at 2.
    \11\ See Order Approving Amendment No. 1, supra note 8.
    \12\ The Selection Committee is composed of one senior officer
from each Participant. See Section V.A of the Selection Plan.
    \13\ This two-round voting process would take place after any
further narrowing of the Shortlisted Bids, if such narrowing were to
occur pursuant to Amendment No. 1. See Order Approving Amendment No.
1, supra note 8, at 36029 & n.21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Amendment No. 2, the SROs propose to modify the Selection Plan
to require that an SRO that is a Bidding Participant be recused from
voting in any round to select the Plan Processor in which a Bid from or
including such Bidding Participant or its Affiliate is being
considered.\14\ Amendment No. 2 therefore would extend to the first
selection round the recusal requirement that is currently only in place
for the second selection round and the vote, if any, that narrows the
list of Shortlisted Bidders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 4, at 36007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SROs reiterate that the Selection Plan balances the competing
goals of ensuring all SROs participate meaningfully in the process of
developing the CAT NMS Plan and mitigating potential conflicts of
interest related to the involvement of a bidding SRO through
information barriers and the voting limitations.\15\ The SROs state
that, based on their experience with these existing measures, the
Selection Plan adequately addresses the potential conflicts of interest
related to bidding SROs.\16\ Nonetheless, the SROs explain that
requiring recusal in all rounds of the selection process will further
the SROs' goal of ensuring the fair and impartial consideration and
selection of the CAT Plan Processor.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Id.
    \16\ Id.
    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    After careful review, the Commission finds that Amendment No. 2 is
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors and
the maintenance of fair and orderly markets, and to remove impediments
to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a national market system. By
extending the aforementioned recusal requirement to both selection
rounds, Amendment No. 2 adds an additional procedural safeguard that is
designed to further the fairness and impartiality of the Plan Processor
selection.

IV. Conclusion

    For the reasons discussed above, the Commission finds that
Amendment No. 2 is appropriate in the public interest, for the
protection of investors and the maintenance of fair and orderly
markets, and to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a
national market system, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 11A of the Act,\18\
and the rules thereunder, that Amendment No. 2 to the Selection Plan
be, and it hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.

    By the Commission.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-24717 Filed 9-29-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P