[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 13030]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04793]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-54, OMB Control No. 3235-0056]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Form 8-A

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Form 8-A (17 CFR 249.208a) is a registration statement used to
register a class of securities under Section 12(b) or Section 12(g) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78l(b) and 78l(g))
(``Exchange Act''). Section 12(a) (15 U.S.C. 78l(a)) of the Exchange
Act makes it unlawful for any member, broker, or dealer to effect any
transaction in any security (other than an exempted security) on a
national securities exchange unless such security has been registered
under the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.). Exchange Act Section
12(b) establishes the registration procedures. Exchange Act Section
12(g) requires an issuer that is not a bank or bank holding company to
register a class of equity securities (other than exempted securities)
within 120 days after its fiscal year end if, on the last day of its
fiscal year, the issuer has total assets of more than $10 million and
the class of equity securities is ``held of record'' by either (i)
2,000 persons, or (ii) 500 persons who are not accredited investors. An
issuer that is a bank or a bank holding company, must register a class
of equity securities (other than exempted securities) within 120 days
after the last day of its first fiscal year ended after the effective
date of the JOBS Act if, on the last day of its fiscal year, the issuer
has total assets of more than $10 million and the class of equity
securities is ``held of record'' by 2,000 or more persons. Form 8-A
takes approximately 3 hours to prepare and is filed by approximately
1,376 respondents for a total annual reporting burden of 4,128 hours (3
hours per response x 1,376 responses).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden imposed by the collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected;
and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication by May 9, 2022.
    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 control number.
    Please direct your written comment to David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o John
Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an email to:
[email protected].

    Dated: March 2, 2022.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-04793 Filed 3-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST RENEWAL

FOR THE NOx BUDGET TRADING PROGRAM TO REDUCE THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OF
OZONE

July 8, 2010

INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST RENEWAL

FOR THE NOx BUDGET TRADING PROGRAM TO REDUCE THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OF
OZONE

(JUNE 2010 THROUGH DECEMBER 2012)

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

EPA ICR No. 1857.05, OMB Control No. 2060-0445

1.  IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

1(a) Background

	This Information Collection Request (ICR) addresses the labor hour
burden and costs of State reporting requirements contained in the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) rule to control regional
transport of ozone season NOx emissions contributing to exceedances of
the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) in the eastern
United States which was published on October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57350).
This rule is known informally as the NOx SIP Call.  These provisions are
incorporated in 40 CFR 51.121 and 51.122.  The reporting requirements of
this rule under §51.122 are imposed directly on the States, not on
industry.  However, in order to meet the requirements of this rule,
States will of necessity have to impose requirements on industry for
installation of continuous emission monitors and for recordkeeping and
reporting.  Therefore, there will be an indirect record keeping and
reporting burden on industry as a result of this rule, and this ICR
estimates those burden hours and costs incurred by industry.

The focus of this ICR is the monitoring and reporting burden for States
and sources that remain affected by the NOx SIP Call, and that are not
subject to subsequent rulemaking and addressed in other ICRs.  The rule
originally encouraged an emissions trading program for fossil fuel-fired
NOx sources serving electrical generators (EGUs) with a nameplate
capacity greater than 25 MW or boilers, combustion turbines, or combined
cycle units with maximum design heat input greater than 250 mm BTU/hr.
Under the SIP call, many States elected to meet much of the required
emission reductions through the federally administered emissions trading
program.  Most of the units that originally participated in that NOx
Budget Trading Program (NBP) now participate in an expanded emissions
trading program established in conjunction with the Clean Air Interstate
Rule (CAIR), and the burdens and costs for those units is covered under
EPA ICR #2152.04.  The only units still subject to this ICR are certain
non-EGUs that participated in the NBP but are not participating in CAIR.

	In addition to the NOX SIP Call burdens,  this ICR retains legacy the
paperwork burden and costs that would be included if the trading program
was reinstated.  These costs are related to:  (1) transferring and
tracking allowances; (2) the allocation of allowances to affected units;
(3) permitting; (4) annual year end compliance certification; and (5)
meeting the monitoring and reporting requirements of the program.  These
obsolete historical emissions trading burden sections are identified as
“Not Active” and represented in the document as tables with the
respondent numbers and burden hours listed but calculated as zero.  EPA
has ongoing rulemaking related to CAIR court cases (most recently, the
December 23, 2008 DC Circuit Court of Appeals case No. 05-1244, which
remanded the previous decision vacating CAIR).  As a result, the Agency
may, at some future time, reinstitute the NBP.  For example, this might
happen if both the CAIR and CAIR replacement rules were vacated by the
Court.

As part of the NOx SIP Call, States are required to report certain data
to EPA on an annual or triennial basis.  However, both the AERR and CAIR
include similar reporting requirements, and all State burdens associated
with this type of reporting are now addressed in the either the AERR and
CAIR ICR’s.  Thus, the only burdens and costs addressed in this ICR
are for the non-trading units discussed above in this section.

1(b) Information to be Collected

	To meet the emissions monitoring recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, the former NBP trading units are required to:  (1) submit
a monitoring plan and certification of monitors; (2) record hourly
pollutant and flow monitor data; and (3) submit electronic quarterly
reports of their emissions data to EPA.

	The respondent reporting burden for the NOx SIP Call collection of
information is estimated to be 41,875 hours each year for the years 2010
through 2012.  The burden to EPA is estimated to be 848 hours in each
year for the years 2010 through 2012.

Emissions Trading Program (Not Active)

	As discussed in Section 1(a), background information related to NBP
allowance trading, are retained in this ICR in order to account for the
costs of ongoing trading programs (now regulated under CAIR) if needed
in the future.  The ability to buy and sell (or transfer) allowances
provides substantial economic benefits, by encouraging the greatest
emissions reductions where costs of reductions are lowest.  This concept
of allowance transfers cannot be implemented, however, unless
regulations governing emissions monitoring and permitting of sources are
in place as well.  To ensure compliance with the emissions reduction
requirements and to provide the region wide consistency needed to foster
the allowance market, the designated representative of the owners and
operators of each source with affected units is required to obtain an
operating permit for the affected source and to certify that an approved
emissions monitoring system has been installed and is properly operated
at each affected unit's source of emissions.

Allowance Transfers (Not Active)

	Participants in the allowance transfer system have two options for
submitting transfers:  submit electronically using the internet to
record their own allowance transfers, either by entering the data on
screen or by submitting an XML file; or complete a paper form and send
it the Agency.  Participants in the transfer system that are not
affected sources under Title IV are also required to file a onetime
account information application using a paper form to establish an
account in the Allowance Tracking System (ATS).  As part of the annual
compliance determination process, designated representatives have the
option of submitting an allowance deduction form to identify specific
serial numbered allowances to be deducted for annual compliance.

Emissions Monitoring

	To meet the emissions monitoring record-keeping and reporting
requirements, affected units are required to:  (1) submit a monitoring
plan and certification of monitors; (2) record hourly pollutant and flow
monitor data; and (3) submit electronic quarterly reports of their
emissions data to EPA.  Operators of new electric generating units of 25
megawatts (MW) capacity or less may receive a CEMS exception if they
certify their use of very-low-sulfur fuel.

Submissions Purposes and Procedures (Not Active)

	Allowance transfer notifications may be submitted to EPA electronically
or on paper.  Emissions reports must be submitted electronically.

	The allowance transfer submittal is used to record allowance transfers
for compliance purposes and to track the disposition of all allowances
in the system.

The designated representative certification, which designates a
responsible official through whom the owners and operators of each
affected source and each affected unit can trade allowances and obtain
and maintain permits, serves to remove EPA from involvement in disputes
between owners and operators of affected units.

(i)  Capital/Start-up Costs

	While many sources have already installed necessary emissions
monitoring equipment due to requirements under other regulations, some
sources will need to either install new monitors or upgrade existing
monitors.  Capital costs also usually include the cost of initial
certification of new or upgraded monitors as part of start-up costs.

(ii)  Emissions Monitoring

	Emissions monitoring and reporting is the foundation upon which the
allowance trading system is based.  EPA will use the data contained in
the reports to verify actual emissions.  Without accurate monitoring and
reporting of emissions, the integrity of the allowance system would be
undermined, and there would be no assurance that emissions had been
reduced.  To meet the emissions monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, affected units are required to:  (1) submit a monitoring
plan and certification reports for each monitoring system; (2) record
hourly emissions data; and (3) submit reports of their emissions data to
EPA.

(iii)  Year-end Compliance Certifications (Not Active)

	Each source is required to submit an annual statement providing
information on which allowances are to be deducted and certifying that
the unit is in compliance with emission limitations and monitoring and
reporting requirements.

1(c) Terms of Clearance

Below are the Terms of Clearance for the previous ICR renewal:

●	None.

2.  NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

	This section describes EPA's need for the information collections
described above and the legal authority for conducting collections.  The
users of collected information are also described.

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

The State reporting requirements included in the NOx SIP Call are
necessary for EPA to carry out properly its evaluation of each State's
compliance with its ozone season NOx emissions budget.  The legal
authority for the reporting requirements resides in Sections 110(a) and
301(a) of the Clean Air Act.  Specifically, the requirement in Section
110(a)(2)(D) that SIPs include "adequate provisions" to mitigate certain
transport effects on other States implicitly authorizes emissions
inventory reporting to EPA, as needed and appropriate to verify that a
State is in fact meeting its NOx budget.  Section 110(a)(2)(F) provides
additional authority for requiring that SIP call submissions include
provisions for emissions reporting by sources to a State, correlation of
source information by the State, and steps by the State to make the
correlated information available to the public.  Section 110(a)(2)(K),
in turn, requires a State to submit to EPA as requested data related to
modeling the effect of NOx and other emissions on ambient air quality.
The reported emissions inventory data will be used by EPA in air quality
modeling to assess the effectiveness of the transport rulemaking's
regional strategy.  Finally, Section 301(a) grants EPA broad authority
to prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out its
functions under the Clean Air Act.

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

	The EPA believes it is essential that compliance with the regional
control strategy be verified.  Tracking emissions is the principal
mechanism to ensure compliance with the budget and to assure the
downwind affected States and EPA that the ozone transport problem is
being mitigated.

	If tracking and periodic reports indicate that a State is not
implementing all of its NOx control measures or is off track to meet its
statewide budget, EPA will work with the State to determine the reasons
for noncompliance and what course of remedial action is needed.  The EPA
will expect the State to submit a plan showing what steps it will take
to correct the problems.  Noncompliance with the NOx transport SIP may
lead EPA to make a finding of failure to implement the SIP and
potentially to implement sanctions, if the State does not take
corrective action within a specified time period.

Emissions Trading Program (Not active)

(i)  Year-end Compliance Certification (Not Active)

	This information will be used by EPA to determine annual compliance and
to verify that the monitoring plan for the unit continues to be
accurate.

(ii)  Allowance Transfers and Tracking (Not Active)

	Information collected on allowance transfers would be used by EPA or
its designated agent to track allowances for the purpose of determining
compliance with the NOx Trading Program.  Information on allowance
transfers would also be used by participants in the allowance market and
the public to evaluate the activities of affected sources and by EPA for
program evaluation.

	Together, the allowance trading system, operating permits, and
emissions data would help to provide the accountability to allow the NOx
Trading Program to function without more stringent command and control
approaches.

	The information collected by the industry sources subject to this ICR
provide necessary input data to the State emission inventory tracking
for regional control strategy compliance.

3.  NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

	This section describes:  (1) efforts by EPA to learn whether the
information requested is available from other sources; (2) consultations
with respondents and data users to plan collections, monitor their
usefulness, and minimize the collection burden; (3) effects of less
frequent collections; and (4) justification for deviations from OMB's
general guidelines.

3(a) Nonduplication

To minimize the reporting burden on State agencies, the reporting
requirements for 40 CFR 51.122 are based on existing annual and periodic
emission inventory reporting requirements as much as possible.  In large
part, the emission inventory requirements under the NOx SIP Call are now
met through the comparable requirements associated with CAIR, and the
direct State burdens associated with inventory reporting for the
regional control program is now included in the CAIR ICR.  The only
burdens remaining under this ICR reflect emissions reporting for sources
not covered under CAIR that are part of the SIP Call control strategy.

	Almost all information requested from respondents under this ICR
renewal is not available from other sources.  Where EPA needs
information that has already been submitted, EPA is simply requiring a
photocopy of the prior submittal or the retransmission of stored
electronic data.

3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

	For the renewal ICR, a public notice was published in the Federal
Register on March 25, 2010 on availability of the draft supporting
statement for the ICR renewal.  A 60 day comment period for public
comments was provided in the notice.  EPA received no comments in
response to the public notice that was published in the Federal Register
(see Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-2006-0947, which is available for   SEQ
CHAPTER \h \r 1 online viewing at  HYPERLINK
"http://www.regulations.gov" www.regulations.gov ,   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1
or in person viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket in the EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW,
Washington, DC).

3(c) Consultations

	No consultations specific to this ICR renewal were held.  However, EPA
held numerous consultations during initial development of the NOx SIP
Call, during development of CAIR, and during the ongoing development of
a replacement rule for CAIR.  The reduced burdens accounted for under
this renewal ICR reflect that most of the burden under the NOx SIP Call
is now addressed under CAIR (or its replacement rule in the future).

For the initial rule development, on January 13, 1998, EPA held a
one-day pre-proposal workshop with the States to discuss tracking
issues.  The objective of the workshop was to determine what type and
frequency of inventory reporting is feasible for the different source
sectors (power generating sources, other point sources, area sources,
nonroad mobile, and highway mobile sources), to identify key reporting
issues related to each sector, and to develop recommendations on
reporting requirements to ensure compliance with the NOx budgets.  The
goal was to share information and ideas rather than to reach consensus.
A summary of the meeting is contained in the docket (docket no. A-96-56,
item V-B-18) for the NOx SIP Call rulemaking.  The reporting
requirements included in 40 CFR 51.122 are based, in part, on the
suggestions of participants in the workshop.

	The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in §51.122 were included
in the supplemental proposal (63 FR 25902, May 11, 1998) on which public
comments were solicited.  Comments received were reviewed and where
appropriate were incorporated into the rule requirements as currently
given in 40 CFR 51.122.

	FinallyAlso, as part of updating the ICR for the Acid Rain Program
(Part 75) monitoring requirements, EPA contacted various affected
parties to gather information on CEM capital costs, CEM operation and
maintenance costs, fuel meter capital costs, and CEM/fuelmeter testing
costs.  That information has been used in this ICR where appropriate.

	In addition to the historical consultations performed during the
initial rule development and subsequent similar rulemakings, EPA
contacted via telephone three affected sources for comment on the
respondent costs/burdens detailed in this ICR renewal.  Specifically,
EPA contacted Spring O’Mara with the Conoco Philips Trainer Refinery
at<PHONE_NUMBER>,  Jennifer Marshall with the Tate and Lyle Facility at
217-421-2620, and Catherine Lanter with the Conoco Philips Wood River
Refinery at<PHONE_NUMBER>.  Spring O’Mara and Jennifer Marshall
responded and were provided a copy of the ICR supporting statement for
review.  Neither Jennifer Marshall nor Spring O’Mara had any comments
regarding the costs/burdens detailed in this ICR renewal. No response
was received from Catherine Lanter.

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

	If this information collection were not carried out annually for
sources being controlled to meet the NOx budgets, EPA would not be able
to verify that NOx emission reductions necessary to meet each State's
NOx emission budget were being achieved.

	Quarterly collection of emissions data for the former NBP units allows
the opportunity to check data for errors and provide rapid feedback on
needed adjustments to data collection systems, and thereby promoted
accurate and reliable emissions data.  For this same reason, existing
Federal and State emission monitoring programs often require quarterly
reporting, or in some cases, monthly.  Less frequent collection, such as
semi-annually or annually, would increase the amount of preparation and
review time at the end of the reporting period both for regulated
sources and for EPA.  This would slow down the process for the
verification of compliance.

	As an option for this program, EPA will allow for ozone season
reporting instead of quarterly reports for the entire calendar year.
Under this option, units would only be required to submit two reports
per year (covering the second and third calendar quarters).  However,
because the Agency believes that full-year quarterly reporting will be
beneficial for both the source and the Agency, this ICR assumes most
units will elect to comply with the standard quarterly reporting
requirement.

3(e) General Guidelines

	This ICR does not violate any of OMB's guidelines for information
collections.

3(f) Confidentiality

	As required by Section 114 of the Clean Air Act, estimates or
measurements of emissions must be treated as nonconfidential.  Under
Agency procedures, data items relating to the computation of emissions
may be identified as sensitive by a State and are then treated as
"State-sensitive" by EPA.  The potentially State-sensitive items include
the following:  process rate, boiler design capacity, emission
estimation codes, percent space heat, operating rate, and maximum
operation rate/hour.  Where Federal and State requirements are
inconsistent, EPA Regional Office should be consulted for final
reconciliation.

3(g) Sensitive Questions

Not applicable.  This information collection does not ask any questions
concerning sexual behavior or attitudes, religious beliefs, or other
matters usually considered private.

4.  THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

	This section lists the major categories of businesses that participate
in the NOx Budget Trading Program, the data items requested from program
participants, and the activities in which the participants must engage
to assemble or submit the required data items.

4(a) Respondents/SIC Codes

This ICR estimates the burden for affected industry sources to monitor
NOx mass emissions so that states and EPA can track compliance with
state emission budgets and NOx control measures.  Sources may report
data directly to EPA if a source is required to meet the monitoring and
reporting requirements of Subpart H of Part 75.  Electric utility
combustion sources are generally classified as either SIC 4911 -
Electric Services, or 4931 - Electric and Other Services Combined [NAICS
221112 Electric Power Distribution].    Large industrial combustion
sources (e.g., boilers, turbines, and internal combustion engines) are
expected to fall under SIC codes for the manufacturing sector, i.e., SIC
Major Groups 29-40 [NAICS 31-33 Manufacturing].

4(b) Information Requested

This section describes the industry reporting requirements needed to
enable state agencies to meet their reporting and recordkeeping
requirements in §51.122.  States must report NOx emissions data as
specified in 40 CFR §51.122.

(i)  Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements

	The former NBP units that are not participating in CAIR will continue
to monitor NOx mass emissions, and record and report emissions data
using the requirements of 40 CFR Part 75.  The emissions monitoring
requirements specify that affected sources must:  (1) submit a
monitoring plan for each affected unit at a source; (2) submit data for
certification of each monitor; and (3) record hourly operational,
pollutant monitor, and flow monitor data for each affected unit and
submit quarterly reports of their emissions data to EPA.  Appendices A
and B to the CAIR ICR (EPA ICR # 2152.04) contain a list of the data
items required by the recordkeeping and reporting provisions of Part 75.

	Respondents are required by 40 CFR 75.64 to submit the quarterly NOx
mass emissions data electronically, by direct electronic submission to
EPA, and must also include a certification statement by the designated
representative of the unit.  All monitoring records are to be kept for
three years, with one possible exception under a voluntary option for
fuel flowmeter calibration testing.

(ii)  Respondent Activities

	  The former NBP units will (1) complete and submit appropriate
monitoring plan forms for each affected source and each affected unit at
a source; (2) conduct tests to certify the operation of monitors, and
submitting test results to EPA; (3) record hourly emissions data (this
activity generally is performed electronically); (4) conduct operation
and maintenance activities associated with the monitoring, including
quality assurance activities; (5) assure data quality, prepare quarterly
reports of emissions data and submit these reports to EPA; and (6)
respond to error messages generated by EPA.  In addition, respondents
will have to purchase the necessary monitoring hardware and purchase the
electronic data reporting software (or software upgrades).

Emissions Trading Program (Not Active)

	This section describes the data items requested from affected sources
to facilitate an emissions trading program if active.

Allowance Tracking

	There are several data items required for allowance tracking
activities.  First, the utility must submit account certificates of
representation for the NOx authorized account representative and (if
desired) alternate NOx authorized account representative.  This
documentation, found in 40 CFR §96.13, must include:

●	Identification of the source and unit;

●	Name and contact information for the NOx authorized account
representative and alternate;

●	A list of the owners and operators of each source and unit; and

●	A certification statement and signature of the NOx authorized
account representative and alternate.

Certification applications are to be kept for a period of five years
pursuant to the general requirements imposed for Title V permitted
facilities.

Year-end Compliance Certifications

On or before November 30 of each year, the NOx authorized account
representative for each source must submit a compliance certification
report covering
al湵瑩⁳瑡琠敨猠畯捲⹥†湕敤⁲〴䌠剆꜠㘹㌮ⰰ琠
敨爠灥牯⁴畭瑳椠据畬敤琠敨映汯潬楷杮ഺ

●	Identification of each unit;

●	Serial numbers of each NOx allowance to be deducted from the unit's
compliance account (Optional);

●	For units sharing a common stack, the percentage of allowances to be
deducted from the unit's compliance account (Optional); and

●	Compliance certification, including certification that the unit was
operated in accordance with the emission limitation, verification that
the monitoring plan is complete and accurate, a statement that all NOx
emissions have been monitored and reported appropriately, and whether
the basis for certification has changed (and, if so, details of the
change).

5.  THE INFORMATION COLLECTED -- AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

	The first part of this section describes Agency (EPA) activities
related to the acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the
information collected from sources that are required to submit
monitoring and test data; the second part describes the information
management techniques employed to increase the efficiency of
collections.  The third part discusses the burden or benefits of the
collection activities described in this ICR to small entities.  The last
part outlines the schedule for collecting information.

5(a) Agency Activities

	The tasks that will be performed by EPA include processing, reviewing,
and evaluating emissions data reports submitted by the former NBP units,
and conducting appropriate audit activities to verify the information
provided.

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

	Several computer systems and associated databases have been developed
to record quarterly emissions monitoring data under Part 75. ; The
systems and databases are designed to coordinate the information for
easy access and use by the Agency, States, regulated community, and the
public.

	The EPA also has established a Clean Air Markets Home Page on the
internet, which includes detailed information collected from emissions
reports.  The Data and Maps section of the EPA's Clean Air Markets Home
Page on the internet includes detailed information collected from
emissions reports, and facility or source data.  Those without access to
the Internet may use the  Clean Air Markets Hotline to request
information.

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

	The rulemaking, which EPA published by notice in 63 FR 57356
(October 8, 1998), would simply require States to develop, adopt, and
submit SIP revisions.  Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), in the rulemaking,
the Administrator certified that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

	In addition, under Part 75, there are options for reduced monitoring
that may assist smaller sources.  The low mass emitter exception (40 CFR
75.19), allows optional reduced monitoring, quality assurance, and
reporting requirements for units that combust natural gas and/or fuel
oil and that emit no more than 50 tons of NOx annually (or, at the
source's election, 25 tons per ozone season) and that calculate no more
than the same amount based on specified procedures for calculating and
reporting emissions.  Qualifying sources are not required to keep
monitoring equipment installed on (or conduct fuel sampling for) low
mass emissions units, nor are they required to perform quality assurance
or quality control tests.  Moreover, emissions reporting requirements
are significantly simplified for these units.

	Even if a gas- or oil-fired unit does not qualify for the "low mass
emissions unit" exception, the monitoring provisions of Part 75 do allow
for the use of alternative methods to determine emissions.  As discussed
in the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) of the final Acid Rain
Implementation Regulations (October 19, 1992), smaller utilities are
more likely to be dependent on these oil- and gas-fired units,
especially very small utilities (see p. 5–14 of that RIA document).

5(d) Collection Schedule

	Former NBP trading units conduct ongoing monitoring, with quarterly
reporting.

6.  ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF COLLECTIONS

6(a) Determining Federal Wage Rates

	  In estimating labor costs for industry, EPA used the following
amounts:  $91.94 per hour for managers and $63.74 per hour for
technicians.  These rates were used in the existing Acid Rain Program
(EPA ICR Number 1633.15) and are the consistent with the Current
Employment Cost Index year 2009.

	Federal Agency labor rates were assumed to be $49.38 per hour.  This
labor rate was derived from the Federal government's 2009 U.S. Office of
Personnel Management General Schedule "Salary Table 2009-GS"
(http://opm.gov/oca/09tables/html/gs.asp) using the factors in the
following table.

Table 6-1:  Determination of Federal Wage Rates

Annual Salary of Technical Staff, GS 11, Step 3

$52,846

Annual Cost of Supervisory Staff, GS 13, Step 3 	$75,323

	Factor (1/11) 	0.09

$6,779

Annual Cost of Support Staff, GS 6, Step 6 	$35,145

	Factor (1/8)	0.13

	$4,569

Annual Applicable Salary of Permit Staff

$64,194

Benefits	1.6

	Total Cost per FTE

$102,710

Total Hourly Cost (total per FTE dividend divided by 2,080 hours per
year)

$49.38

6(b) Estimating Respondent Burden for Former NBP Units Not Covered under
CAIR

This section estimates the paperwork burden and cost of submitting
monitoring plans, obtaining certification of each monitoring system,
conducting monitor quality assurance activities, and recording and
reporting data from CEM systems (or approved alternatives), and other
ancillary activities (such as responding to EPA generated error
messages, or responding to EPA audits).  This applies to the former NBP
units that continue to monitor in accordance with Part 75 under the NOx
SIP Call.

To estimate the burden and/or cost, EPA has relied on the estimates
included in the most recent Acid Rain Program ICR renewal for labor hour
estimates of each activity.  In addition, the hourly labor rates for
managerial, technical, and clerical staff reflect the labor rates used
in the Acid Rain ICR in 2009 dollars, consistent with Agency ICR
guidance.

Affected sources are required to complete and submit a monitoring plan
and obtain certification of each monitor (on standard forms) for each
affected unit at the source.  These plans and certifications, which are
only submitted once, have already been submitted for most units.
Sources, however, may need to submit revised plans or even recertify if
they change some aspect of their existing plan.  New units will still
need to submit plans and certifications for the first time.  In
addition, all affected units are required to submit quarterly reports of
their emissions data to EPA; these reports include much of the basic
monitoring plan data as well.

To develop this renewal ICR, EPA relied primarily on the extensive
efforts to identify and calculate burdens for the prior two ICR renewals
and the CAIR ICR.

Estimating Respondent Burden

The primary tasks performed by owners and operators of affected units
are:  (1) reviewing the regulations, forms and instructions;
(2) responding to EPA generated error messages and audits;
(3) reprogramming a DAHS and debugging the software; (4) completing
and submitting monitoring plans for each unit at the source;
(5) performing appropriate tests and providing test results to certify
each monitor; (6) performing quality assurance testing and maintenance
upon monitors; (7) assuring the quality of emissions data, preparing
quarterly reports of emissions data, and submitting reports to EPA; and
(8) fuel sampling.

(i)  Regulatory Review.

The estimate for time to review instructions and requirements remains
consistent with the labor estimates used in previous ICRs (four manager
hours and four technician hours) where no substantial changes have been
made to the Rule.  EPA continues to make available online fully
searchable versions of the Part 75 Emissions Monitoring Policy Manual
and the Electronic Data Reporting Instructions (Versions 2.1 and 2.2),
and is in the process of adding a fully searchable unofficial version of
Part 75 to this integrated search Webpage.  In addition, EPA in 2005
posted online a text version of its Plain English Guide to Part 75.

(ii)  Response to Error Messages/Audits.

The EPA provides feedback to sources so that suspected errors in
submissions by sources are noted and corrected.  With the use of the
ECMPS software, EPA believes that the burdens for this activity have
decreased over time.  At the same time, however, EPA has increased its
audit oversight and expects to conduct a number of electronic and field
audits of facilities over the next few years.  In particular, EPA
anticipates making significant use of electronic audits as a means to
provide continuous data quality improvement.  This effort will result in
increased burdens for respondents.

(iii)  DAHS Debugging.

Each source must purchase (or create) and install computer software
designed to implement the electronic data reporting (EDR) formats
required under the Acid Rain Program.  EPA promulgated revisions to Part
75 in late 2007 to accommodate changes in EPA's data systems that manage
the data submitted by respondents.  These data system changes were
necessary to modernize EPA's data systems, and over time should
streamline reporting.  The costs of the required upgrade were analyzed
in a separate ICR that was issued in conjunction with the Part 75
revisions.  For the time period of this ICR, 2010-2012, no other changes
would require a DAHS upgrade and therefore there are no burden hours for
this activity.

(iv)  Monitoring Plans.

Consistent with the existing ICR, completing and submitting monitoring
plans is estimated to require an average of about 20 hours per unit
initially.  For existing units, initial monitoring plan submissions will
be received prior to the time period covered in this renewal ICR, and,
consistent with the existing ICR, EPA does not include burden hours for
existing units under this initial monitoring plan development task area
during 2010 – 2012.  The burden associated with revising the
monitoring plan is included in the time for preparing and submitting
each quarterly emissions report.

For new units, EPA has used an estimated number of new units as a
projection for the average number of new units expected in 2010 –
2012.  These units have a separate line item for initial monitoring plan
preparation.

(v)  Monitor Certification.

For existing units, only recertifications are included in the estimated
activities for 2010 – 2012.  The Agency estimates a labor burden of 50
hours and a contractor cost of $3,400 per respondent.  The cost and
burden figures exclude the costs and burdens associated with conducting
a RATA as part of the recertification process because those costs are
incorporated within the annual QA costs for previously certified
monitoring systems.

Under Part 75, sources are required to recertify the monitoring systems
whenever the source makes a replacement, modification, or change in a
certified CEMS or continuous opacity monitoring system that may
significantly affect the ability of the system to accurately measure or
record the NOx concentration, stack gas volumetric flow rate, NOx
emission rate, percent moisture, or to meet the QA and QC requirements.
Recertification is also necessary whenever the source makes a
replacement, modification, or change to the flue gas handling system or
the unit operation that may significantly change the flow or
concentration profile. Examples of changes which require recertification
include: replacement of the analyzer, change in location or orientation
of the sampling probe or site; and complete replacement of an existing
CEMS or continuous opacity monitoring system.

For new units, the monitor certification costs are included in the
capital/startup costs.

(vi)  Quality Assurance.

Quality assurance (QA) testing and maintenance upon monitoring systems
is the largest burden item under the monitoring, reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.  The requirements include daily, quarterly
and annual QA requirements, depending on the monitoring approach being
used.  For reporting units that use flow and NOx CEMS, the Agency has
developed a per unit labor burden based primarily on information
gathered from affected sources.    For units that rely on the excepted
methods under both Appendix D and E (i.e., units without CEMS), the
burden estimates are reduced further because no CEMS QA is required.
For the relatively small number of units that require moisture
correction, labor burdens for moisture monitoring QA activities have
been added based on information supplied by an affected utility (see
Docket A-97-35, Item II-D-94).

(vii)  Quarterly Reports.

Tasks performed by utilities in preparing quarterly reports include:
(1) assuring the quality of the data; (2) preparing the quarterly
report; (3) revising the monitoring plan, if necessary;
(4) preparation of hard copy documentation accompanying the quarterly
reports; and (5) managerial review.  EPA has been improving electronic
file transfer procedures over the past few years and has been developing
automated tools that allow sources to quality assure their reports.  EPA
believes these efforts have reduced the average burdens per report over
time.  In addition, because the program is maturing, the respondents
have developed procedures and methods to increase their efficiency with
reporting.

Estimating Respondent Costs

Table 6-4 summarizes the annual respondent costs.  The following
discussion describes how those costs were derived.

(i)  Estimating Total Capital and Annual Operations and Maintenance
Costs

Capital/start-up costs include the cost of installing required CEMS or
alternatives.  The Agency developed the capital cost estimates for the
CEM and other equipment based on EPA CEM cost models, existing ICRs, and
comments from various affected utilities.  The cost estimates vary
depending on the number and type of monitors that are required.  These
annualized capital costs are from the Rule to Reduce Interstate
Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate
Rule) EPA ICR #2152.04.  The annualized costs ranged from $28,879 for
units with a full set of CEMS, to $18,750 for a unit that uses NOx CEMS
and Appendix D methods, to $2,250 for units that use both Appendix D and
Appendix E methods without any CEMS.  There are no capital/start-up
costs for LME units.  A discussion of how the capital/start-up costs
were annualized follows in Section (iii), below.

In addition to capital/start-up costs, respondents incur operation and
maintenance costs (exclusive of labor costs) that reflect ongoing costs
to a unit.  These costs include both contractor costs for the required
recertification, diagnostic, and quality assurance (QA) testing, and
other direct maintenance-related expenses (e.g., spare parts and
calibration gases).  The cost estimates used in this renewal ICR are
generally the same as the Rule to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine
Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule) EPA ICR
#2152.04, and have been derived from EPA CEM cost models, existing ICRs,
Agency staff experience under the Acid Rain Program, information
gathered during development of the 1999 and 2002 Part 75 revisions, and
supplemental estimates provided by affected utilities and others related
to the various cost items (see, e.g., EPA Air Docket A-97-35, Item
II-D-48).  The total cost for these operation and maintenance cost items
(other than fuel sampling) is estimated at $31,200 for a unit with a
full set of CEMS, while units that use alternate methodologies have
reduced costs.

Note that testing contractor costs for certification, recertification,
and annual RATAs also are presented as other direct costs and are not
converted to equivalent source labor hours.  This approach is consistent
with the common business practice for obtaining outside contractors to
conduct certification/recertification tests and annual relative accuracy
test audits.  For initial certification, the certification test costs
are commonly bundled with equipment purchase contracts, according to
information provided by a range of CEMS equipment vendors.  For RATAs
that are conducted either as part of the annual quality assurance
requirements or as part of recertification, industry contacts have
indicated that RATA testing is usually performed under a fixed price
contract basis, except for travel costs that may be billed on an hourly
basis beyond the basic contract cost.  For annual RATAs, the sources
indicated that an annual contract between a testing company and utility
is often used.  One municipal utility representative indicated that the
applicable municipal regulations required that outside contracts be on a
flat fee, not hourly, basis.

(ii)  Capital/Start-up vs. Operating and Maintenance (O & M) Costs

Capital costs reflect one-time costs for purchase of equipment which
will be used over a period of years.  Conversely, operating and
maintenance costs are those costs which are incurred on an annual or
other scheduled basis.  For instance, costs associated with quality
assurance activities, such as spare parts or contractor costs for work,
will be incurred on an annual basis.

(iii)  Annualizing Capital Costs

The relevant capital costs for the emissions trading portion of this ICR
were annualized at a rate of seven percent (i.e., the annualized capital
cost was calculated assuming money to purchase the capital equipment was
borrowed at a seven percent annual interest rate).  The cost of the loan
was amortized over the life of the loan to repay original borrowed
amount plus interest.  The result is the annualized capital cost
reported.)  The annualized cost of the necessary capital purchases
varies from $2,250 to $ 28,879, per year, per unit, depending on the
type of monitoring methodology.  Exhibit 1 contains a breakdown of
annual costs by monitoring methodology.  The capital costs are from the
Rule to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone
(Clean Air Interstate Rule) EPA ICR #2152.02.

(iv)  Fuel Sampling

To calculate heat input where the source is using the fuel flowmeter
option for an oil or gas-fired unit, the source must obtain gross
calorific value data from sampling in accordance with Appendix D of Part
75.  For purposes of this ICR, it is assumed that the GCV data would be
collected as part of standard business operating procedures to assure
compliance with contractual specifications.  Thus no additional fuel
sampling burdens or costs should be incurred.  This is consistent with
the Rule to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and
Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule) EPA ICR #2152.04.

Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs for Former
NBP Units

EPA estimates that there are 122 former NBP units that will continue to
conduct monitoring in accordance with Part 75 solely under the NOx SIP
call. Table 6-4 shows the total burden and total cost for this
respondent universe.

Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

The tasks that will be performed by EPA include processing, reviewing,
and evaluating emissions data reports submitted by the former NBP units,
and conducting appropriate audit activities to verify the information
provided.  Assuming that the former NBP units will submit an average of
106 emission reports to EPA per quarter, the total annual burden
incurred by the Agency will be 976 hours.  (The annual total of 424
emissions reports is based on 90 quarterly reporting and an additional
32 Ozone Season only reporting facility counts.) The total annual cost
to EPA for processing, reviewing, and evaluating these quarterly
emissions reports will be approximately $48,195.  Table 6-5 summarizes
the Agency burden and costs associated with emissions reporting.

TABLE 6-4:  ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN/COST ESTIMATES FOR FORMER NBP
UNITS

Information Collection Activity	Mgr. $91.94/ Hour	Tech. $63.74/ Hour
Respondent Hours/Year	Labor Cost/Year	Cont./ O&M Cost	Capital/ Startup
Cost	Number of Respondents	Total Hours/

Year	Total Cost/Year

1.  Review Instructions and Requirements	4	4	8	$623 	$0 	$0 	53	424
$33,004

2.  Respond to EPA Generated Error Messages, Field Audits	6	18	24	$1,699
	$0 	$0 	122	2,928	$207,273

3.  DAHS Debugging	4	12	16	$1,133 	$0 	$0 	122	1,952	$138,182

4.  New Unit Monitoring Plans	10	10	20	$1,557 	$0 	$0 	12	2740	$18,682

5.  Recertify Monitors	38	12	50	$4,259 	$3,400 	$0 	12	600	$51,103

6.  Startup/Capital Items and Perform QA Testing and Maintenance

(a)  NOx and Flow CEMS	50	480	530	$35,192 	$31,200 	$28,879 	0	0	$0

(b)  NOx CEM and Fuelmeter	20	375	395	$25,741 	$17,400 	$18,750 	101
39,895	$2,599,871

(c)  App. E and Fuelmeter	5	30	35	$2,372 	$1,800 	$2,250 	21	735	$49,810

7.  Assure Data Quality, Prepare Reports (inc. monitor plan update),
Submit Reportsa	20	82	102	$7,065 	$0 	$0 	122	10,812	$748,890

TOTAL:	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	57,586	$3,689,951

a  Based on an assumption of 90 annual reporting and 32 Ozone Season
only reporting facilities.

TABLE 6-5:  ANNUAL AGENCY BURDEN/COST ESTIMATES

FOR FORMER NBP UNITS

Tasks	Quarterly Burden Hours per Report	Quarterly Cost per Reporta
Number of Reportsb	Total Burden per Year (hours)

(2010–2012)	Total Cost

Process, review, and evaluate quarterly report and issue feedback
letter.	2	$98.76 	424	848	$41,875

a  Based on an average total compensation rate of $49.38 per hour.

b  Based on an assumption of 90 annual reporting and 32 Ozone Season
only reporting facilities.

6(c) Emissions Trading Program Burdens (Not Active)

	The following sections contain exhibits and text covering the burdens
associated with the NBP Emissions Trading Program, but zeros out those
values that are now covered under other ICRs.  This option will
facilitate a possible revision to the ICR to include the costs of the
trading process and monitoring requirements, in case those costs become
reassociated with the NOx SIP Call program in the future.

	Under the NOx Budget Trading Program (NBP), EPA estimated the burden
and/or cost of each incidence of the various proposed rule revisions,
EPA had available prior estimates of the costs of various activities,
estimates provided by affected utilities in comments to the Agency, and
estimates based on the Agency's experience in implementing the existing
trading programs.

	The NBP required all affected sources to install a NOx emission rate
(or concentration) CEM and a flow CEM (or approved alternative).
Affected gas- and oil-fired units could elect to use a NOx emissions
rate CEM and a fuel flowmeter.  In addition, peaking units that burn
natural gas and/or fuel oil could use an alternative method for
calculating NOx emission rates.  EPA also allowed certain low mass
emissions units to use assumed emissions factors together with
operational data to calculate emissions.

Tracking, Transferring, and Deducting Allowances

	Labor burden and costs for collections associated with tracking and
transferring allowances are functions of the number of transfers
anticipated, and were estimated based on the number of transfers
recorded by EPA in the previous year.

	Affected units had the option of identifying specific serial numbered
allowances to be deducted by EPA.  Based on past experience, EPA assumed
that approximately one fifth of all affected units would submit an
optional allowance deduction form each year.

Estimate of Respondent Burden and Costs for Transfers and Deductions

	Table 6-7 presents the annual burden and costs to participants in
allowance transfers and deductions that would be incurred should the NBP
be reinstated.  Participants that were not affected units would be
required to negotiate an agreement, to designate an authorized account
representative, and to file a new account application.  These activities
would be required only one time, prior to or simultaneous with the
participant's first transfer of allowances.  All participants would be
required to complete and submit allowance transfer information for each
transfer of allowances.  Under the NBP, EPA estimated about 10 hours to
designate an authorized account representative and to open a general
account, about two hours to prepare and submit information for an
allowance transfer, and about three hours to prepare and submit an
optional allowance deduction.

	TABLE 6-6:  ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN/COST ESTIMATES FOR ALLOWANCE
TRANSFERS AND DEDUCTIONS

Tasks	Burden Hours per Occurrence	Cost per Occurrencea	Total Burdenb
Total Cost

Designate an authorized account representative and file new account
application

     Managerial	3

	     Technical	7

	Prepare and submit allowance transfer information

	     Managerial	1

	     Technical	1

	Allowance deduction form (optional)

	     Managerial	1

	     Technical	2

	TOTAL

a  Insert dollar year.

b Assumes 0 participants file new account applications, 0 transfers are
made, and 0 optional deduction forms are submitted.

Estimate of Agency Burden and Costs for Transfers

	Agency burden and costs would be divided into those costs associated
with enhancing a tracking system, and those associated with transferring
and deducting allowances.

Allowance Tracking System

	Under the NBP, the allowance system regulations set the general
requirements for the tracking system, which was developed by EPA.  In
order to track allowances, the allowance tracking system required
information on:  (1) allowance allocations for each affected facility;
(2) allowance transfers and deductions; and (3) allowance holders.  EPA
made the information compiled in the allowance tracking system publicly
available in several formats on the internet and worked to continually
improve electronic access.

Allowance Transfer System

	Under the NBP, EPA estimated that it would require an average of one
hour for each transfer notification on paper.  Upon receipt of an
optional allowance deduction form, in hard copy, EPA recorded the data
into the EPA data system.  This was estimated to take about 30 minutes
per form.  Table 6-8 summarizes Agency burden and cost estimates for
recording and transferring allowances.

TABLE 6-7:  ANNUAL AGENCY BURDEN/COST ESTIMATES

FOR ALLOWANCE TRANSFERS

Tasks	Burden Hours Per Occurrence	Cost Per Occurrencea	Total Burdenb
(Hours)	Total Cost

Review allowance transfer information, record transfer, and notify
transfer participants.	1

	Enter deduction data and deduct allowances.	0.5

	TOTAL

	a Insert dollar year.

b Assumes 0 transfers and 0 optional deduction forms are submitted
annually.

Annual Compliance Certifications

Respondent Burden and Cost Estimates for Annual Compliance

	When the trading program was in place, each year between October 1 and
November 30, annual compliance certification was required from all
affected sources.  Each authorized representative was required to submit
one annual compliance certification report that included a list of all
affected units he or she represents.  Table 6-9 presents respondent
burden and costs for annual compliance certification.

TABLE 6-8:  ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN/COST ESTIMATES FOR ANNUAL
COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION

Tasks	Burden Hours Per Occurrence	Cost Per Occurrencea	Total Burden
(Hours)	Total Cost

Annual compliance certification reportb

        Managerial	1

	        Technical	4

	Common stack allowance Deduction formc

	         Managerial	0.5

	          Technical	2

	TOTAL

	a Insert dollar year.

b Assumes 0 reports covering 0 affected units are submitted.

c Assumes 0 optional common stack allowance deduction forms are
submitted.

Estimate of Agency Burden and Costs for Annual Compliance

	Under the NBP Emissions Trading Program, the three primary tasks
performed by the Agency during annual compliance certification were;
reviewing and processing the annual form submissions, calculating and
deducting and sending out allowance deduction or reconciliation reports
to the source designated representatives.  Table 6-10 presents the
Agency's annual burden and cost for annual compliance certification.

TABLE 6-9:  ANNUAL AGENCY BURDEN/COSTS FOR ANNUAL

COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION

Tasks	Burden Hours Per Occurrence	Cost Per Occurrencea	Total Burden
(Hours)	Total Cost

Review and process annual compliance certification submissionsb	 1

Common stack allowance Deduction form b	 0.5

         Send allowance reconciliation reports b	0.5

	TOTAL

a  Insert dollar year.

b  Assumes 0 reports covering 0 affected units are submitted.

6(d) Summary of Burden Hours and Costs

Table 6-10 summarizes the annual aggregate burden and cost estimates to
both the respondents and the agency for the period of 2010 through 2012.

TABLE 6-10:  AGGREGATE ANNUAL RESPONDENT AND AGENCY BURDEN AND COST OF
COLLECTIONS (2010 – 2012)

Program	Total Annual Burden (Hours)	Total Annual Costsa

Annual Industry Respondent Burden	57,586	   $3,689,951

Annual Agency Burden 	                          848 	 $41,875

TOTAL	58,434	   $3,731,826

a  2009 dollars.

6(e) Reasons for Change in Burden

Hourly burden estimates in this ICR renewal are reduced from those in
the previous ICR.  Decreases are due to the shift of trading activity
from the NOx Budget Trading Program to the CAIR NOx trading programs.

6(f) Burden Statement

The respondent reporting burden for this collection of information is
estimated to be 57,586 hours for each year, 2010 through 2012.  The
burden to EPA is estimated to be 848 hours for each year, 2010 through
2012.

	The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this
collection of information is estimated to average 41 hours per response.
 Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply
with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.  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 EPA's regulations are
listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

¿

À

&

&

&

&

x

z

{

„

ô

õ

q

w

{

Œ

Ž

»

¼

ho

&

&

&

&

☊ଌF㄀Ĥ摧㡻½	ԀĤ␆㄁Ĥ摧禂t

☊ଌFༀ킄ᄂ预ㇾĤ葞ː葠ﺘ摧£6

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

@

&

&

@

&

1$

&

&

&

ho

⑛尀$葠ː摧䙔îᔀ

@

옍)

鐇ȶ혈r렅滿ℍ嬕褚䠞$똇

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

옍)

&

&

&

&

옍)

㄀Ĥ摧⇠଀, which is available for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air and Radiation
docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.  The EPA Docket Center Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation
docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  An electronic version of the public docket is
available at www.regulations.gov.  This site can be used to submit or
view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the
public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that
are available electronically.  When in the system, select "search," then
key in the Docket ID Number identified above.  Also, you can send
comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503,
Attention:  Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID
Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0947 and OMB Control Number 2060-0445 any
correspondence.

DRAFT SS

July 8, 2010

Page   PAGE   \* MERGEFORMAT  18

July 8, 2010


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 10, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30122-30123]
[FR Doc No: 2023-09978]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP23-753-000.
    Applicants: Portland Natural Gas Transmission System.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Irving Oil Name Change--NR
Amendment to be effective 5/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 5/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230501-5303.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 5/15/23.

    Docket Numbers: RP23-754-000.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rates--Various
Releases eff 5-1-23 to be effective 5/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 5/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230501-5366.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 5/15/23.

    Docket Numbers: RP23-756-000.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Compliance filing: 20230501 Winter PRA Filing to be
effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 5/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230501-5369.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 5/15/23.

    Docket Numbers: RP23-757-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rates--Nextera to
TVA perm rel eff 5-1-23 to be effective 5/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 5/2/23.
    Accession Number: 20230502-5000.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 5/15/23.

    Docket Numbers: RP23-758-000.
    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    Description: Annual Report of Operational Purchases and Sales of
Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    Filed Date: 5/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230501-5519.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 5/15/23.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP12-609-000.
    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Report Filing: 2022 Operational Purchases and Sales
Report Filing to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 5/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230501-5061.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 5/15/23.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-212-000.
    Applicants: Boardwalk Storage Company, LLC.
    Description: Report Filing: 2022 Operational Purchases and Sales
Report Filing to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 5/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230501-5058.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 5/15/23.

    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 2, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-09978 Filed 5-9-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 21 (Wednesday, February 1, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 5087]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2180]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2011-48]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of title 14 CFR. The purpose of this notice
is to improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this
aspect of FAA's regulatory activities. Neither publication of this
notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary is
intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final
disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before February 21, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2011-
1233 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
(202) 493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Staples,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Keira
Jones,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Tyneka L. Thomas,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of
Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 26, 2012.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.
PETITION FOR EXEMPTION
Docket No.: FAA-2011-1233
Petitioner: PHI Air Medical, LLC
Section of 14 CFR Affected:
    14 CFR Sec. Sec.  135.293, 135.297, 135.299, and 135.343
Description of Relief Sought: PHI Air Medical, LLC requests an
exemption to permit Air Medical to use pilots previously qualified
under PHI, Inc.'s part 119 air carrier certificate number HEEA617E to
serve as pilots operating under Air Medical's certificate.

[FR Doc. 2012-2180 Filed 1-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 159 (Friday, August 18, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 56635]
[FR Doc No: 2023-17746]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2023-P-1549]

Determination That BORTEZOMIB (Bortezomib) Solution, 2.5
Milligrams/Milliliter and 3.5 Milligrams/1.4 Milliliter (2.5
Milligrams/Milliliter), Was Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of
Safety or Effectiveness

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) has
determined that BORTEZOMIB (bortezomib) solution, 2.5 milligrams (mg)/
milliliter (mL) and 3.5 mg/1.4 mL (2.5 mg/mL), was not withdrawn from
sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination will
allow FDA to approve abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) for
BORTEZOMIB (bortezomib) solution, 2.5 mg/mL and 3.5 mg/1.4 mL (2.5 mg/
mL), if all other legal and regulatory requirements are met.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Tran, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave.,
Bldg. 51, Rm. 6213, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 505(j) of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(j)) allows the submission of
an ANDA to market a generic version of a previously approved drug
product. To obtain approval, the ANDA applicant must show, among other
things, that the generic drug product: (1) has the same active
ingredient(s), dosage form, route of administration, strength,
conditions of use, and (with certain exceptions) labeling as the listed
drug, which is a version of the drug that was previously approved, and
(2) is bioequivalent to the listed drug. ANDA applicants do not have to
repeat the extensive clinical testing otherwise necessary to gain
approval of a new drug application (NDA).
    Section 505(j)(7) of the FD&C Act requires FDA to publish a list of
all approved drugs. FDA publishes this list as part of the ``Approved
Drug Products With Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,'' which is
known generally as the ``Orange Book.'' Under FDA regulations, drugs
are removed from the list if the Agency withdraws or suspends approval
of the drug's NDA or ANDA for reasons of safety or effectiveness or if
FDA determines that the listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons
of safety or effectiveness (21 CFR 314.162).
    A person may petition the Agency to determine, or the Agency may
determine on its own initiative, whether a listed drug was withdrawn
from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination
may be made at any time after the drug has been withdrawn from sale but
must be made prior to approving an ANDA that refers to the listed drug
(Sec.  314.161 (21 CFR 314.161)). FDA may not approve an ANDA that does
not refer to a listed drug.
    BORTEZOMIB (bortezomib) solution, 2.5 mg/mL and 3.5 mg/1.4 mL (2.5
mg/mL), is the subject of NDA 215441, held by Accord Healthcare Inc.,
and initially approved on July 26, 2022. BORTEZOMIB is indicated for
the treatment of adult patients with multiple myeloma or mantle cell
lymphoma.
    In a letter dated February 8, 2023, Accord Healthcare Inc. notified
FDA that BORTEZOMIB (bortezomib) solution, 2.5 mg/mL and 3.5 mg/1.4 mL
(2.5 mg/mL), was being discontinued, and FDA moved the drug product to
the ``Discontinued Drug Product List'' section of the Orange Book.
    Qilu Pharmaceutical (Hainan) Co., Ltd. submitted a citizen petition
dated April 19, 2023 (Docket No. FDA-2023-P-1549), under 21 CFR 10.30,
requesting that the Agency determine whether BORTEZOMIB (bortezomib)
solution, 2.5 mg/mL and 3.5 mg/1.4 mL (2.5 mg/mL), was withdrawn from
sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness.
    After considering the citizen petition and reviewing Agency records
and based on the information we have at this time, FDA has determined
under Sec.  314.161 that BORTEZOMIB (bortezomib) solution, 2.5 mg/mL
and 3.5 mg/1.4 mL (2.5 mg/mL), was not withdrawn for reasons of safety
or effectiveness. The petitioner has identified no data or other
information suggesting that BORTEZOMIB (bortezomib) solution, 2.5 mg/mL
and 3.5 mg/1.4 mL (2.5 mg/mL), was withdrawn for reasons of safety or
effectiveness. We have carefully reviewed our files for records
concerning the withdrawal of BORTEZOMIB (bortezomib) solution, 2.5 mg/
mL and 3.5 mg/1.4 mL (2.5 mg/mL), from sale. We have also independently
evaluated relevant literature and data for possible postmarketing
adverse events. We have found no information that would indicate that
this drug product was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or
effectiveness.
    Accordingly, the Agency will continue to list BORTEZOMIB
(bortezomib) solution, 2.5 mg/mL and 3.5 mg/1.4 mL (2.5 mg/mL), in the
``Discontinued Drug Product List'' section of the Orange Book. The
``Discontinued Drug Product List'' delineates, among other items, drug
products that have been discontinued from marketing for reasons other
than safety or effectiveness. ANDAs that refer to these drug products
may be approved by the Agency as long as they meet all other legal and
regulatory requirements for the approval of ANDAs. If FDA determines
that labeling for these drug products should be revised to meet current
standards, the Agency will advise ANDA applicants to submit such
labeling.

    Dated: August 14, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-17746 Filed 8-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: November 15, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 220)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 64156-64158]
[DOCID:fr15no07-18]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2007-1003; FRL-8492-3]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Imperial
County and Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control Districts

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the
Imperial County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) and the
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) portions
of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This action revises
and adds various definitions of terms used by the ICAPCD and MBUAPCD.
Under authority of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the
Act), we are approving local rules that are administrative and address
changes for clarity and consistency.

DATES: This rule is effective on January 14, 2008 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by December 17, 2007. If
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2007-1003, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow

the on-line instructions.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov,

including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.

http://www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not

know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region

IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents
in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material),
and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI).
To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment
during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia G. Allen, EPA Region IX, (415)
947-4120<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to 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. EPA's Evaluation and Action.
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public comment and final action.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they
were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Rule
               Local agency                             Rule title               Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICAPCD...................................       101   Definitions.....................     10/10/06     08/24/07
MBUAPCD..................................       101   Definitions.....................     02/21/07     08/24/07
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 17, 2007, these rules were found to meet the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V, which must be met
before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    We approved a version of these rules into the SIP on the dates
listed: ICAPCD Rule 101 on November 23, 2005 and MBUAPCD Rule 101 on
July 23, 2004.

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

    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations
that control volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen,
particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health
and the environment. These rules were developed as part of the local
agency's program to control these pollutants.
    Imperial Rule 101, Definitions, is amended by adding new
definitions associated with Rule 207.1, Federal Major Modification,
Rule 214.1, Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credit Banking, and Rule
217, Large Confined Animal Facilities. In addition, definitions that
became obsolete because of the newly adopted regulations were removed.
    Monterey Rule 101, Definitions, is amended by revising the
definition of `Exempt Compounds and Volatile Organic Compounds' to be
consistent with the federal definition and by updating the definition
of `Household Rubbish, Garbage, Trash' to match the definition in Rule
438, Open Outdoor Fires.
    EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information about
these rules.

II. EPA(s Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

    These rules describe administrative provisions and definitions that
support emission controls found in other local agency requirements. In
combination with the other requirements, these rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act) and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). EPA policy that we used to
help evaluate enforceability requirements consistently includes the
Bluebook ((Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies,
and Deviations, (EPA, May 25, 1988) and the Little

Bluebook ((Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies, (EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001). However, EPA approval of
these definitions in Rule 101 should not be interpreted as EPA approval
of the other rules in which these definitions are used.

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The TSDs have
more information on our evaluation.

C. Public comment and final action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we
receive adverse comments by December 17, 2007, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on January 14, 2008. This will incorporate these
rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
    Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.''

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    These rules do not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.)

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
    These rules will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and
subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any new
requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is already
imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not create
any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under
the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Under sections 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces
Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the
Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
    These rules 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132, because it
merely approves a State rule implementing a Federal standard, and does
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. Thus, the
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this
rule.

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This final rule does not have
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not
have

substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship
between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) Is
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under
Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or
safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate
effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the
Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the
planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible
alternatives considered by the Agency.
    These rules are not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a State rule implementing a
Federal standard.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    These rules are not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical.
    The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to
the use of VCS.

J. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will be effective December 17, 2007.

K. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 14, 2008. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: October 11, 2007.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(351) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (351) New and amended regulation for the following APCDs were
submitted on August 24, 2007, by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Imperial County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 101, Adopted 7/28/81; revised 9/14/99; 1/16/2001; 12/11/
2001; 08/13/02; 01/11/2005; 10/10/2006.
    (B) Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 101, Adopted 9-1-74; Revised 12-21-83; 12-13-84; 11-13-96;
11-12-98; and 12-15-1999; and 4-16-03; and 2-21-07.
* * * * *
 [FR Doc. E7-21811 Filed 11-14-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P