[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 206 (Thursday, October 24, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56961-56964]
[FR Doc No: 2019-22910]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0432; FRL-10001-28-Region 9]

Air Plan Approval; California; Santa Barbara County Air Pollution
Control District; Stationary Source Permits and Exemptions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control
District's (SBAPCD or ``the District'') portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern the District's New
Source Review (NSR) permitting program for new and modified sources of
air pollution under the Clean Air Act (CAA). This action updates the
SBAPCD's applicable SIP with current permitting rules. We are taking
comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by November 25, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2019-0432 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be removed or edited from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eugene Chen, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street (AIR 3-2), San Francisco, CA 94105,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rules did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of these rules?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates
they were adopted by the SBAPCD and submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB). These rules represent portions of the SBAPCD's
current program for preconstruction review and permitting of new or
modified stationary sources under its jurisdiction. The rule revisions
that are the subject of this action are intended to satisfy the general
preconstruction review requirements under section 110(a)(2)(C) of the
Act (minor NSR) and the NSR program requirements contained in 40 CFR
51.160 through 164. The rules also include revisions to the SBAPCD's
current preconstruction review and permitting program. The SBAPCD is
not required to implement a nonattainment NSR program because Santa
Barbara County is classified as attainment or unclassifiable for all
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The SBAPCD implements a
SIP-approved prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permitting
program that was approved into the SIP on November 12, 2015.\1\ The
SBAPCD has not submitted any rule revisions in this action that affect
the PSD program. Therefore, we are not evaluating whether this SIP
submittal satisfies NSR program requirements at 40 CFR 51.165
(Nonattainment NSR) or 51.166 (PSD), as none of the rules or rule
revisions in this submittal address these NSR program requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 80 FR 69880.

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Adopted/amended
                  Rule No.                             Rule title                  date          Submitted date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
102........................................  Definitions..................          8/25/2016         10/18/2016
105........................................  Applicability................          8/25/2016         10/18/2016
202........................................  Exemptions to Rule 201.......          8/25/2016         10/18/2016
204........................................  Applications.................          8/25/2016         10/18/2016
205........................................  Standards for Granting                 4/17/1997          3/10/1998
                                              Permits.
809........................................  Federal Minor New Source               8/25/2016         10/18/2016
                                              Review.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These submitted rules must be determined to meet the completeness
criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V before commencement of formal EPA
review. The EPA deemed these rules to be complete by operation of law
to meet the completeness criteria on October 18, 2016 (for Rules 102,
105, 202, 204, and 809) and on March 10, 1998 (for Rule 205).

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    The EPA last approved significant revisions or updates to the
SBAPCD's SIP-approved NSR program on February 9, 2016, and November 12,
2015. The existing SIP-approved NSR minor source program for new or
modified stationary sources under the SBAPCD's jurisdiction generally
consists of the versions of the rules identified below in Table 2.

                                       Table 2--Current SIP Approved Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Federal Register
                  Rule No.                             Rule title           SIP approval date       citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
102........................................  Definitions..................          4/11/2013        78 FR 21545
105........................................  Applicability................           6/3/1999        64 FR 29790
201........................................  Permits Required.............           2/9/2016         81 FR 6758
202........................................  Exemptions to Rule 201.......           5/5/1982        47 FR 19330
203........................................  Transfer.....................           2/9/2016         81 FR 6758
204........................................  Applications.................           2/9/2016         81 FR 6758
205........................................  Standards for Granting                  5/5/1982        47 FR 19330
                                              Applications.
206........................................  Conditional Approval of                 2/9/2016         81 FR 6758
                                              Authority to Construct or
                                              Permit to Operate.
212........................................  Emission Statements..........          5/26/2004        69 FR 29880
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Collectively, these regulations establish the NSR requirements
currently in place for minor stationary sources under the SBAPCD's
jurisdiction in California. If the EPA finalizes the action proposed
herein, the submitted versions of the rules listed in Table 1 will
replace their respective rule versions listed in Table 2.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?

    As noted above and described in further detail below, the submitted
rules are intended to satisfy the minor NSR requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C), as well as to implement certain other updates to the NSR
program, such as reorganization and renumbering of certain rule
references, revisions to certain rule text to improve clarity, and
other such revisions. Minor NSR requirements are generally applicable
for SIPs in all areas, regardless of attainment status, and California
is required to adopt and implement these requirements as part of a SIP-
approved NSR permitting program.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?

    The EPA has evaluated the submitted rules for compliance with
applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) and associated
regulations at 40 CFR 51.160-164. We have also reviewed the rules for
consistency with other CAA general requirements for SIP submittals,
including requirements at section 110(a)(2) regarding rule
enforceability, and requirements at sections 110(l) and 193 for SIP
revisions.
    Section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act requires each SIP to include a
program

to regulate the modification and construction of any stationary source
within the areas covered by the SIP as necessary to assure attainment
and maintenance of the NAAQS. The EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.160-
51.164 provide general programmatic requirements to implement this
statutory mandate. These requirements, commonly referred to as the
``minor NSR'' or ``general NSR'' program, apply generally to both major
and non-major stationary sources and modifications and in both
attainment and nonattainment areas. There are additional statutory and
regulatory requirements specifically for PSD and nonattainment NSR
permitting programs at 40 CFR 51.165-166 that apply to major sources in
nonattainment and attainment areas, respectively. The submitted rules
are not relevant to or affect PSD or nonattainment NSR program specific
requirements.
    Section 110(a)(2)(A) of the Act requires that regulations submitted
to the EPA for SIP approval must be clear and legally enforceable.
Section 110(l) of the Act prohibits the EPA from approving any SIP
revisions that would interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP) or any
other applicable requirement of the CAA. Section 193 of the Act
prohibits the modification of a SIP-approved control requirement in
effect before November 15, 1990, in a nonattainment area, unless the
modification ensures equivalent or greater emission reductions of the
relevant pollutant(s). With respect to procedures, CAA sections 110(a)
and 110(l) require that a state conduct reasonable notice and hearing
before adopting a SIP revision.

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    The EPA finds that the submitted rules satisfy the applicable CAA
and regulatory requirements. Accordingly, we are proposing to fully
approve them under CAA section 110(k)(3). Below, we discuss generally
our evaluation of the submitted rules. The technical support document
(TSD) included in the docket for this proposed rulemaking contains a
more detailed analysis of each submitted rule.
    We find that the submitted rules satisfy the minor NSR
requirements. The rules clearly identify the kinds of projects subject
to review under the District's program, include legally enforceable
procedures to ensure that construction will not violate the state's
control strategy or interfere with attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS, provide for public availability of relevant information, and
meet other requirements of the minor NSR regulations at 40 CFR 51.160-
164.
    The submitted rules comply with the substantive and procedural
requirements of CAA section 110(l). With respect to the procedural
requirements, based on our review of the public process documentation
included with the submitted rules, we find that the SBAPCD has provided
sufficient evidence of public notice and opportunity for comment and
public hearings prior to submittal of this SIP revision and has
satisfied these procedural requirements under CAA section 110(l). With
respect to the substantive requirements of CAA section 110(l), we have
determined that our approval of the submitted rules would either
strengthen the applicable SIP, or at a minimum make it no less
stringent. As a whole, we have determined that our approval of this SIP
submittal would not interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and RFP or any other applicable requirement of
the Act.
    CAA section 193 includes a savings clause, pertaining to
nonattainment areas, that precludes modifications to certain control
requirements unless equivalent or greater emission reductions are
achieved. The provisions of section 193 do not apply to this SIP
revision because Santa Barbara County is currently classified
attainment or unclassifiable for all NAAQS.
    The submitted rules are otherwise consistent with criteria for the
EPA's approval of regulations submitted for inclusion in the SIP,
including the requirement at CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) that submitted
regulations be clear and legally enforceable. For the reasons stated
above and explained further in our TSD, we find that the submitted NSR
rules satisfy the applicable CAA and regulatory requirements for minor
NSR programs under CAA section 110(a)(2)(C).

C. Proposed Action and Public Comment

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA may approve
a plan revision in whole or in part if it meets all applicable
requirements. Based on our evaluation of the submitted rules, the EPA
is proposing to fully approve the SBAPCD's October 18, 2016 submittal
(consisting of Rules 102, 105, 202, 204, and 809) and March 10, 1998
submittal (consisting of Rule 205).
    The intended effect of our proposed approval action is to update
the applicable SIP with the SBAPCD rules described above. If we
finalize this action as proposed, our action would be codified through
revisions to 40 CFR 52.220 (Identification of plan--in part).
    We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until
November 25, 2019.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the SBAPCD rules described in Table 1 of this preamble. The
EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials available
through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this preamble for more information).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the EPA Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Act. 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 Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental protection,
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide,
Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: October 8, 2019.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2019-22910 Filed 10-23-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 6 (Monday, January 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1286-1287]
[FR Doc No: 2016-262]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2016-0001]

Establishment of an Emergency Relief Docket for Calendar Year
2016

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of establishment of public docket (Notice).

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

SUMMARY: This Notice announces the establishment of FRA's emergency
relief docket (ERD) for calendar year 2016. The designated ERD for
calendar year 2016 is Docket Number FRA-2016-0001.

ADDRESSES: See Supplementary Information section for further
information regarding submitting petitions and/or comments to Docket
No. FRA-2016-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 19, 2009, FRA published a direct
final rule addressing the establishment of ERDs and the procedures for
handling

petitions for emergency waivers of safety rules, regulations, or
standards during an emergency situation or event. 74 FR 23329. That
direct final rule became effective on July 20, 2009, and made minor
modifications to Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 211.45,
Petitions for emergency waiver of safety rules, in FRA's Rules of
Practice, published at 49 CFR part 211, Rules of Practice. Title 49 CFR
211.45, Paragraph (b) provides that each calendar year, FRA will
establish an ERD in the publicly accessible DOT docket system
(available at http://www.regulations.gov). Title 49 CFR 211.45,
Paragraph (b) further provides that FRA will publish a notice in the
Federal Register identifying, by docket number, the ERD for that year.
As noted in the rule, FRA's purpose for establishing the ERD and
emergency waiver procedures is to provide an expedited process for FRA
to address the needs of the public and the railroad industry during
emergency situations or events. This Notice announces that the
designated ERD for calendar year 2016 is Docket Number FRA-2016-0001.
    As detailed in 49 CFR 211.45, if the FRA Administrator determines
that an emergency event as defined in 49 CFR 211.45(a) has occurred, or
that an imminent threat of such an emergency occurring exists, and
public safety would benefit from providing the railroad industry with
operational relief, the emergency waiver procedures of 49 CFR 211.45
will go into effect. In such an event, the FRA Administrator will issue
a statement in the ERD indicating that the emergency waiver procedures
are in effect and FRA will make every effort to post the statement on
its Web site at http://www.fra.dot.gov/. Any party desiring relief from
FRA regulatory requirements as a result of the emergency situation
should submit a petition for emergency waiver in accordance with 49 CFR
211.45(e) and (f). Specific instructions for filing petitions for
emergency waivers in accordance with 49 CFR 211.45 are found at 49 CFR
211.45(f). Specific instructions for filing comments in response to
petitions for emergency waivers are found at 49 CFR 211.45(h).
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its processes. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.
See also http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice for the privacy
notice of regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Robert C. Lauby,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016-262 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44827-44828]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20581]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3387-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]

Georgia; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of an Emergency Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for
the State of Georgia (FEMA-3387-EM), dated September 8, 2017, and
related determinations.

DATES:  This amendment was issued September 11, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and

Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of an emergency declaration for
the State of Georgia is hereby amended to include the following areas
among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the
event declared an emergency by the President in his declaration of
September 8, 2017.

    Banks, Barrow, Bartow, Butts, Carroll, Catoosa, Chattooga,
Cherokee, Clarke, Clayton, Cobb, Columbia, Coweta, Dade, Dawson,
DeKalb, Douglas, Elbert, Fannin, Fayette, Floyd, Forsyth, Franklin,
Fulton, Gilmer, Glascock, Gordon, Greene, Gwinnett, Habersham, Hall,
Hancock, Haralson, Hart, Heard, Henry, Jackson, Jasper, Lincoln,
Lumpkin, Madison, McDuffie, Morgan, Murray, Newton, Oconee,
Oglethorpe, Paulding, Pickens, Polk, Putnam, Rabun, Richmond,
Rockdale, Spalding, Stephens, Taliaferro, Towns, Union, Walker,
Walton, Warren, White, Whitfield, and Wilkes Counties for debris
removal and emergency protective measures (Categories A and B),
including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance
program.
    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-20581 Filed 9-25-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 5 (Monday, January 9, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 2426]
[FR Doc No: 2017-00102]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79726; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2016-101]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on Proceedings To
Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change
Relating to the Listing and Trading of Shares of SolidX Bitcoin Trust
Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.201

January 3, 2017.
    On July 13, 2016, NYSE Arca, Inc. filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to list and trade shares of the
SolidX Bitcoin Trust under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.201. The proposed
rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on August
2, 2016.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78426 (Jul. 27,
2016), 81 FR 50763 (Aug. 2, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 6, 2016, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\4\
the Commission designated a longer period within which to approve the
proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute
proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule
change.\5\ On October 27, 2016, the Commission instituted proceedings
to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule
change.\6\ The Commission has received seven comments on the proposed
rule change.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78770, 81 FR 62780
(Sept. 12, 2016).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79171, 81 FR 76400
(Nov. 2, 2016). Specifically, the Commission instituted proceedings
to allow for additional analysis of the proposed rule change's
consistency with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, which requires, among
other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be
``designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade,'' and
``to protect investors and the public interest.'' See id. at 76401.
    \7\ See Letters from Daniel H. Gallancy, CFA, SolidX Management
LLP (Nov. 23, 2016); Thaya B. Knight, Associate Director, Financial
Regulation Studies, The Cato Institute (Dec. 1, 2016); Jerry Brito,
Executive Director, Coin Center (Dec. 7, 2016); Joseph Colangelo,
President, Consumers' Research (Dec. 7, 2016); Denise Krisko, CFA,
President and Co-Founder, Vident Investment Advisory, LLC (Dec. 7,
2016); Balaji Srinivasan, Chief Executive Officer & Cofounder, 21,
et al. (Dec. 7, 2016); and Ken I. Maher (Dec. 8, 2016). All comments
on the proposed rule change are available on the Commission's Web
site at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2016-101/nysearca2016101.shtml.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \8\ provides that, after initiating
disapproval proceedings, the Commission shall issue an order approving
or disapproving the proposed rule change not later than 180 days after
the date of publication of notice of filing of the proposed rule
change. The Commission may extend the period for issuing an order
approving or disapproving the proposed rule change by not more than 60
days if the Commission determines that a longer period is appropriate
and publishes the reasons for such determination. The proposed rule
change was published for notice and comment in the Federal Register on
August 2, 2016. January 29, 2017 is 180 days from that date, and March
30, 2017 is 240 days from that date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds it appropriate to designate a longer period
within which to issue an order approving or disapproving the proposed
rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider this proposed
rule change. Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)
of the Act,\9\ designates March 30, 2017 as the date by which the
Commission should either approve or disapprove the proposed rule change
(File No. SR-NYSEArca-2016-101).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-00102 Filed 1-6-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 30 (Friday, February 13, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 8125]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03061]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Sixty-Fifth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 135, Environmental
Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Meeting Notice of RTCA Special Committee 135, Environmental
Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
Sixty-Fifth meeting of the RTCA Special Committee 135, Environmental
Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment.

DATES: The meeting will be held April 14-16, 2015 from 9:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held NIAR, 4004 N. Webb Rd., Wichita, KS
67226.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 330-
0652/(202) 833-9339, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org or Sophie Bousquet<EMAIL_ADDRESS>202-330-0663.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of Special Committee 135. The agenda will
include the following:

April 14-16

     Chairmen's Opening Remarks, Introductions.
     Approval of Summary from the Sixty-Fourth Meeting--(RTCA
Paper No. 021-15/SC135-700).
     Review Revised Terms of Reference.
     Review DO-160H/ED-14H Schedule.
     Present New Change Proposal Forms.
     Review Change New Proposals.
     Review Working Group Activities.
     New/Unfinished Business.
     Establish date/locations for Next SC-135 Meetings.
     Closing and Adjourn.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the ``FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT'' section. Members of the public
may present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 10, 2015.
Mohannad Dawoud,
Management Analyst, NextGen, Program Oversight and Administration,
Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-03061 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 207)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 60764-60765]
[DOCID:fr26oc07-5]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2006-25671; Airspace Docket No. 07-AWP-3]

Modification of Class D Airspace; Castle Airport, Atwater, CA

AGENCY:  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Final rule.

SUMMARY:  This rule modifies Class D airspace at Castle Airport,
Atwater, CA. This action lowers the ceiling of the Atwater, Castle
Class D airspace to below 2.000 feet mean sea level (MSL), changes the
southern boundary of the airspace and add an extension to the north.
FAA is taking this action to provide controlled airspace for the safety
of aircraft executing Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs)
and other Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at Castle Airport.
Except for editorial changes, this rule is the same as the Notice of
Proposed Rule Making.

DATES:  Effective Date: 0901 UTC, February 14, 2008. 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 7400.9 and publication of conforming
amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Larry Tonish, System Support
Specialists, Federal Aviation Administration, Western Service Area,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

     On May 29, 2007, the FAA proposed to amend Title 14 Code of the
Federal Regulations part 71 (14 CFR part 71) to modify Class D airspace
at Castle Airport, Atwater, CA (72 FR 29455). The proposal was the
result of an informal meeting on April 26, 2007 with representatives
from FAA, local and aviation communities at Atwater, CA. At that
meeting, the participants discussed various airspace alternatives
designed to accommodate IFR and Visual Flight Rules (VFR) operations in
and out of nearby Merced Airport located 6 miles to the south of Castle
Airport. The FAA, local and aviation communities agreed on an
alternative that would reduce the ceiling of Class D airspace, modify
the southern border, and add an extension on the north side of the
Class D for safety of aircraft executing SIAP's and other IFR
operations at Castle Airport. Class D airspace will be effective during
specified dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen.
The effective date and time will, thereafter, be published in the
Airport/Facility Directory.
    Interested parties were invited to participate in this rule making
proceeding by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA.
Eight comments were received, 5 positive and 3 negative. Of the three
negative comments, one commenter suggested no change. The no change
proposal was discussed at the April 26, 2007 meeting, considered by the
FAA and was not adopted because there were no landmarks to identify the
common Class D boundary with Merced Airport. The remaining two
commenters recommended that the Castle Class D airspace be truncated
along Highway 99. This recommendation was also considered by the FAA
and not adopted because it would not allow sufficient airspace to
conduct terminal operations at Castle Airport.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 modifies Class D airspace at
Castle Airport, Atwater, CA. An Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) is
being established at Castle Airport, Atwater, CA, which will meet
criteria for Class D airspace. Class D airspace areas are published in
Paragraph 5000 of FAA Order 7400.9R, dated August 15, 2007, and
effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1. The Class D airspace designations listed in this document
would be published subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. 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 provide
for the safety of aircraft operations at Castle airport.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND
CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; 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(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 the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9R, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 15, 2007, and effective

September 15, 2007, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace area.

* * * * *

AWP CA D Castle Airport, Atwater, CA [Modified]

Castle Airport, Atwater, CA
    (Lat. 37[deg]22'50'' N., long. 120[deg]34'05'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to but not
including 2,000 feet MSL beginning at lat. 37[deg]20'22'' N., long.
120[deg]38'49'' W., and extending clockwise around the 4.5-nautical
mile radius of the Castle Airport to lat. 37[deg]20'02'' N., long.
120[deg]29'39'' W., thence to the point of beginning; and within 1.9
miles each side of the El Nido VORTAC 320[deg] radial from the 4.5-
nautical mile radius to 17.6 miles from the El Nido VORTAC. This
Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and
times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective
dates and times will thereafter be continuously published in the
Airport/Facility Directory.
* * * * *

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on September 10, 2007.
Clark Desing,
Manager, System Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 07-5262 Filed 10-25-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M