[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 139 (Thursday, July 21, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43412-43420]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15517]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 61 and 63

[EPA-R06-OAR-2020-0086; FRL-8847-02-R6]

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants;
Delegation of Authority to Oklahoma

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) has
submitted updated regulations for receiving delegation and approval of
its program for the implementation and enforcement of certain National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for all
sources (both part 70 and non-part 70 sources), as provided for under
previously approved delegation mechanisms. The updated state
regulations incorporate by reference certain NESHAP promulgated by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at parts 61 and 63, as they
existed through June 30, 2019. The EPA is providing notice that it is
taking final action to approve the delegation of certain NESHAP to
ODEQ. The proposed delegation of authority under this action applies to
sources located in certain areas of Indian country as discussed herein.

DATES: This rule is effective on August 22, 2022.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-2020-0086. All documents in the docket are
listed on the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the EPA Region 6, 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas,
Texas 75270.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Rick Barrett, EPA Region 6 Office,
ARPE,<PHONE_NUMBER>; [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. What does this action do?
III. What is the authority for delegation?
IV. What criteria must Oklahoma's program meet to be approved?
V. How did ODEQ meet the NESHAP program approval criteria?
VI. What is being delegated?
VII. What is not being delegated?
VIII. How will statutory and regulatory interpretations be made?
IX. What authority does the EPA have?
X. What information must ODEQ provide to the EPA?
XI. What is the EPA's oversight role?
XII. Should sources submit notices to the EPA or ODEQ?
XIII. How will unchanged authorities be delegated to ODEQ in the
future?
XIV. Impact on Areas of Indian Country
XV. Final Action
XVI. Environmental Justice Considerations
XVII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    The background for this action is discussed in detail in our August
30, 2021, proposal (86 FR 48363). In that document we proposed to
approve a request from the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
(ODEQ) to update its existing NESHAP regulations for receiving
delegation and approval of its program for the implementation and
enforcement of certain National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for all sources (both part 70 and non-part 70
sources), as provided for under previously approved delegation
mechanisms. We received one citizen public comment and one anonymous
public comment on the proposed rulemaking action. The comments are
posted to the docket (EPA-R06-OAR-2020-0086). These two comments are
considered positive and within the scope of this specific rulemaking
action. We thank the two commenters for their input and acknowledge
their participation in the process. Since these comments are not
adverse to the specific action which EPA proposed, the EPA will not be
responding further to these comments or making any changes to our
proposed rulemaking.

II. What does this action do?

    The EPA is providing notice that it is taking final action to
approve ODEQ's request updating the delegation of certain NESHAP. With
this delegation, ODEQ has the primary responsibility to implement and
enforce the delegated standards. See sections VI and VII, below, for a
discussion of which standards are being delegated and which are not
being delegated.

III. What is the authority for delegation?

    Section 112(l) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and 40 CFR part 63,
subpart E, authorize the EPA to delegate authority for the
implementation and enforcement of emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants to a State or local agency that satisfies the statutory and
regulatory requirements in subpart E. The hazardous air pollutant
standards are codified at 40 CFR parts 61 and 63.

IV. What criteria must Oklahoma's program meet to be approved?

    Section 112(l)(5) of the CAA requires the EPA to disapprove any
program submitted by a State for the delegation of NESHAP standards if
the EPA determines that:
    (A) the authorities contained in the program are not adequate to
assure compliance by the sources within the State with respect to each
applicable standard, regulation, or requirement established under
section 112;
    (B) adequate authority does not exist, or adequate resources are
not available, to implement the program;
    (C) the schedule for implementing the program and assuring
compliance by affected sources is not sufficiently expeditious; or
    (D) the program is otherwise not in compliance with the guidance
issued by the EPA under section 112(l)(2) or is not likely to satisfy,
in whole or in part, the objectives of the CAA.

    In carrying out its responsibilities under section 112(l), the EPA
promulgated regulations at 40 CFR part 63, subpart E setting forth
criteria for the approval of submitted programs. For example, in order
to obtain approval of a program to implement and enforce Federal
section 112 rules as promulgated without changes (straight delegation)
for part 70 sources, a State must demonstrate that it meets the
criteria of 40 CFR 63.91(d). 40 CFR 63.91(d)(3) provides that interim
or final Title V program approval will satisfy the criteria of 40 CFR
63.91(d).\1\ The NESHAP delegation for Oklahoma, as it applies to both
part 70 and non-part 70 sources, was most recently approved on October
22, 2018 (83 FR 53183).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Some NESHAP standards do not require a source to obtain a
title V permit (e.g., certain area sources that are exempt from the
requirement to obtain a title V permit). For these non-title V
sources, the EPA believes that the State must assure the EPA that it
can implement and enforce the NESHAP for such sources. See 65 FR
55810, 55813 (Sept. 14, 2000). EPA previously approved Oklahoma's
program to implement and enforce the NESHAP as they apply to non-
part 70 sources. See 66 FR 1584 (Jan. 9, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. How did ODEQ meet the NESHAP program approval criteria?

    As to the NESHAP standards in 40 CFR parts 61 and 63, as part of
its Title V submission ODEQ stated that it intended to use the
mechanism of incorporation by reference to adopt unchanged Federal
section 112 into its regulations. This commitment applied to both
existing and future standards as they applied to part 70 sources. The
EPA's final interim approval of Oklahoma's Title V operating permits
program delegated the authority to implement certain NESHAP, effective
March 6, 1996 (61 FR 4220, February 5, 1996). On December 5, 2001, the
EPA promulgated full approval of the State's operating permits program,
effective November 30, 2001 (66 FR 63170). These interim and full Title
V program approvals satisfy the up-front approval criteria of 40 CFR
63.91(d). Under 40 CFR 63.91(d)(2), once a State has satisfied up-front
approval criteria, it needs only to reference the previous
demonstration and reaffirm that it still meets the criteria for any
subsequent submittals for delegation of the section 112 standards. ODEQ
has affirmed that it still meets the up-front approval criteria. With
respect to non-part 70 sources, the EPA has previously approved
delegation of NESHAP authorities to ODEQ after finding adequate
authorities to implement and enforce the NESHAP for such sources. See
66 FR 1584 (January 9, 2001).

VI. What is being delegated?

    By letter dated December 23, 2019, ODEQ requested the EPA to update
its existing NESHAP delegation. With certain exceptions noted in
section VII of this document, Oklahoma's request included NESHAP in 40
CFR part 61 and 40 CFR part 63. ODEQ's request included newly
incorporated NESHAP promulgated by the EPA and amendments to existing
standards currently delegated, as amended between September 1, 2016,
and June 30, 2018, as adopted by the State.
    More recently, by letter dated March 23, 2021, the EPA received a
request from ODEQ to update its existing NESHAP delegation. With
certain exceptions noted in section VII of this document, ODEQ's
request includes certain NESHAP in 40 CFR parts 61 and 63. ODEQ's
request included newly incorporated NESHAP promulgated by the EPA and
amendments to existing standards currently delegated, as amended
between June 30, 2018, and June 30, 2019, as adopted by the State.

VII. What is not being delegated?

    All authorities not affirmatively and expressly delegated by this
action are not delegated. These include the following part 61
authorities listed below:
     40 CFR part 61, subpart B (National Emission Standards for
Radon Emissions from Underground Uranium Mines);
     40 CFR part 61, subpart H (National Emission Standards for
Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy
Facilities);
     40 CFR part 61, subpart I (National Emission Standards for
Radionuclide Emissions from Federal Facilities Other Than Nuclear
Regulatory Commission Licensees and Not Covered by Subpart H);
     40 CFR part 61, subpart K (National Emission Standards for
Radionuclide Emissions from Elemental Phosphorus Plants);
     40 CFR part 61, subpart Q (National Emission Standards for
Radon Emissions from Department of Energy facilities);
     40 CFR part 61, subpart R (National Emission Standards for
Radon Emissions from Phosphogypsum Stacks);
     40 CFR part 61, subpart T (National Emission Standards for
Radon Emissions from the Disposal of Uranium Mill Tailings); and
     40 CFR part 61, subpart W (National Emission Standards for
Radon Emissions from Operating Mill Tailings).
    In addition, the EPA regulations provide that we cannot delegate to
a State any of the Category II Subpart A authorities set forth in 40
CFR 63.91(g)(2). These include the following provisions: Sec.  63.6(g),
Approval of Alternative Non-Opacity Standards; Sec.  63.6(h)(9),
Approval of Alternative Opacity Standards; Sec.  63.7(e)(2)(ii) and
(f), Approval of Major Alternatives to Test Methods; Sec.  63.8(f),
Approval of Major Alternatives to Monitoring; and Sec.  63.10(f),
Approval of Major Alternatives to Recordkeeping and Reporting. Also,
some part 61 and part 63 standards have certain provisions that cannot
be delegated to the States. Furthermore, no authorities are delegated
that require rulemaking in the Federal Register to implement, or where
Federal overview is the only way to ensure national consistency in the
application of the standards or requirements of CAA section 112.
Finally, this action does not delegate any authority under section
112(r), the accidental release program.
    All inquiries and requests concerning implementation and
enforcement of the excluded standards in the State of Oklahoma should
be directed to the EPA Region 6 Office.
    The EPA is making a determination that the NESHAP program submitted
by Oklahoma meets the applicable requirements of CAA section 112(l)(5)
and 40 CFR part 63, subpart E.

VIII. How will statutory and regulatory interpretations be made?

    In approving the NESHAP delegation, ODEQ will obtain concurrence
from the EPA on any matter involving the interpretation of section 112
of the CAA or 40 CFR parts 61 and 63 to the extent that implementation
or enforcement of these provisions have not been covered by prior EPA
determinations or guidance.

IX. What authority does the EPA have?

    We retain the right, as provided by CAA section 112(l)(7) and 40
CFR 63.90(d)(2), to enforce any applicable emission standard or
requirement under section 112. In addition, the EPA may enforce any
federally approved State rule, requirement, or program under 40 CFR
63.90(e) and 63.91(c)(1)(i). The EPA also has the authority to make
certain decisions under the General Provisions (subpart A) of parts 61
and 63. We are delegating to the ODEQ some of these authorities, and
retaining others, as explained in sections VI and VII above. In
addition, the EPA may review and disapprove State determinations and
subsequently require corrections. See 40 CFR 63.91(g)(1)(ii). The EPA
also has

the authority to review ODEQ's implementation and enforcement of
approved rules or programs and to withdraw approval if we find
inadequate implementation or enforcement. See 40 CFR 63.96.
    Furthermore, we retain any authority in an individual emission
standard that may not be delegated according to provisions of the
standard. Also, listed in footnote 2 of the part 63 delegation table at
the end of this rule are the authorities that cannot be delegated to
any State or local agency which we therefore retain.
    Finally, we retain the authorities stated in the original
delegation agreement. See ``Provisions for the Implementation and
Enforcement of NSPS and NESHAP in Oklahoma,'' effective March 25, 1982,
a copy of which is included in the docket for this action. A table of
currently delegated NESHAP standards and the final updated NESHAP
delegation may be found in the Technical Support Document (TSD)
included in the docket for this action. The table also shows the
authorities that cannot be delegated to any state or local agency.

X. What information must ODEQ provide to the EPA?

    ODEQ must provide any additional compliance related information to
EPA, Region 6, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance within 45
days of a request under 40 CFR 63.96(a). In receiving delegation for
specific General Provisions authorities, ODEQ must submit to EPA Region
6 on a semi-annual basis, copies of determinations issued under these
authorities. See 40 CFR 63.91(g)(1)(ii). For part 63 standards, these
determinations include: Sec.  63.1, Applicability Determinations; Sec.
63.6(e), Operation and Maintenance Requirements--Responsibility for
Determining Compliance; Sec.  63.6(f), Compliance with Non-Opacity
Standards--Responsibility for Determining Compliance; Sec.  63.6(h),
Compliance with Opacity and Visible Emissions Standards--Responsibility
for Determining Compliance; Sec.  63.7(c)(2)(i) and (d), Approval of
Site-Specific Test Plans; Sec.  63.7(e)(2)(i), Approval of Minor
Alternatives to Test Methods; Sec.  63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f), Approval of
Intermediate Alternatives to Test Methods; Sec.  63.7(e)(iii), Approval
of Shorter Sampling Times and Volumes When Necessitated by Process
Variables or Other Factors; Sec.  63.7(e)(2)(iv), (h)(2) and (3),
Waiver of Performance Testing; Sec.  63.8(c)(1) and (e)(1), Approval of
Site-Specific Performance Evaluation (Monitoring) Test Plans; Sec.
63.8(f), Approval of Minor Alternatives to Monitoring; Sec.  63.8(f),
Approval of Intermediate Alternatives to Monitoring; Sec. Sec.  63.9
and 63.10, Approval of Adjustments to Time Periods for Submitting
Reports; Sec.  63.10(f), Approval of Minor Alternatives to
Recordkeeping and Reporting; and Sec.  63.7(a)(4), Extension of
Performance Test Deadline.

XI. What is the EPA's oversight role?

    The EPA oversees ODEQ's decisions to ensure the delegated
authorities are being adequately implemented and enforced. We will
integrate oversight of the delegated authorities into the existing
mechanisms and resources for oversight currently in place. If, during
oversight, we determine that ODEQ made decisions that decreased the
stringency of the delegated standards, then ODEQ shall be required to
take corrective actions and the source(s) affected by the decisions
will be notified, as required by 40 CFR 63.91(g)(1)(ii) and (b). Our
oversight authorities allow us to initiate withdrawal of our approval
of the program or delegated rule if the corrective actions taken are
insufficient. See 51 FR 20648 (June 6, 1986).

XII. Should sources submit notices to the EPA or ODEQ?

    For the delegated NESHAP standards and authorities covered by this
action, sources would submit all of the information required pursuant
to the general provisions and the relevant subpart(s) of the delegated
NESHAP (40 CFR parts 61 and 63) directly to the ODEQ at the following
address: State of Oklahoma, Department of Environmental Quality, Air
Quality Division, P.O. Box 1677, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73101-1677.
The ODEQ is the primary point of contact with respect to delegated
NESHAP. Sources do not need to send a copy to the EPA. The EPA Region 6
waives the requirement that notifications and reports for delegated
standards be submitted to the EPA in addition to ODEQ in accordance
with 40 CFR 63.9(a)(4)(ii) and 63.10(a)(4)(ii).\2\ For those standards
and authorities not delegated as discussed above, sources must continue
to submit all appropriate information to the EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This waiver only extends to the submission of copies of
notifications and reports; the EPA does not waive the requirements
in delegated standards that require notifications and reports be
submitted to an electronic database (e.g., 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHHHH).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

XIII. How will unchanged authorities be delegated to ODEQ in the
future?

    As stated in previous NESHAP delegation actions, the EPA has
approved Oklahoma's mechanism of incorporation by reference of NESHAP
standards into ODEQ regulations, as they apply to both part 70 and non-
part 70 sources. See, e.g., 61 FR 4224 (February 5, 1996) and 66 FR
1584 (January 9, 2001). Consistent with the EPA regulations and
guidance,\3\ ODEQ may request future updates to Oklahoma's NESHAP
delegation by submitting a letter to the EPA that appropriately
identifies the specific NESHAP which have been incorporated by
reference into state regulations, reaffirms that it still meets up-
front approval delegation criteria for part 70 sources, and
demonstrates that ODEQ maintains adequate authorities and resources to
implement and enforce the delegated NESHAP requirements for all
sources. We will respond in writing to the request stating that the
request for delegation is either granted or denied. A Federal Register
action will be published to inform the public and affected sources of
the updated delegation, indicate where source notifications and reports
should be sent, and amend the relevant portions of the Code of Federal
Regulations identifying which NESHAP standards have been delegated to
the ODEQ.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Harardous Air Pollutants: Amendments to the Approval of
State Programs and Delegation of Federal Authorities, Final Rule (65
FR 55810, September 14, 2000); and ``Straight Delegation Issues
Concerning Sections 111 and 112 Requirements and Title V,'' by John
S. Seitz, Director of Air Qualirty Planning and Standards, EPA,
dated December 10, 1993.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

XIV. Impact on Areas of Indian Country

    As stated in the proposed action, following the U.S. Supreme Court
decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma, 140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020), the Governor of
the State of Oklahoma requested approval under Section 10211(a) of the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of
2005: A Legacy for Users, Pubic Law 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1937
(August 10, 2005) (``SAFETEA''), to administer in certain areas of
Indian country (as defined at 18 U.S.C. 1151) the State's environmental
regulatory programs that were previously approved by the EPA outside of
Indian country.\4\ The State's request excluded certain areas of Indian
country further described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A copy of the Governor's July 22, 2020 request can be found
in the docket for this final rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 1, 2020, the EPA approved Oklahoma's SAFETEA request to
administer all of the State's EPA-approved environmental regulatory
programs, including the delegated portions of the NESHAP program, in
the

requested areas of Indian country.\5\ As requested by Oklahoma, the
EPA's approval under SAFETEA does not include Indian country lands,
including rights-of-way running through the same, that: (1) qualify as
Indian allotments, the Indian titles to which have not been
extinguished, under 18 U.S.C. 1151(c); (2) are held in trust by the
United States on behalf of an individual Indian or Tribe; or (3) are
owned in fee by a Tribe, if the Tribe (a) acquired that fee title to
such land, or an area that included such land, in accordance with a
treaty with the United States to which such Tribe was a party, and (b)
never allotted the land to a member or citizen of the Tribe
(collectively ``excluded Indian country lands'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A copy of EPA's October 1, 2020 approval can be found in the
docket for this final rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's approval under SAFETEA expressly provided that to the
extent the EPA's prior approvals of Oklahoma's environmental programs
excluded Indian country, any such exclusions are superseded for the
geographic areas of Indian country covered by the EPA's approval of
Oklahoma's SAFETEA request.\6\ The approval also provided that future
revisions or amendments to Oklahoma's approved environmental regulatory
programs would extend to the covered areas of Indian country (without
any further need for additional requests under SAFETEA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ EPA's prior approvals relating to Oklahoma's NESHAP
delegation frequently noted that the NESHAP delegation was not
approved to apply in areas of Indian country located in the State.
See, e.g., 83 FR 53183 (October 22, 2018). Such prior expressed
limitations are superseded by the EPA's approval of Oklahoma's
SAFETEA request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained above, the EPA is approving an update to the Oklahoma
NESHAP delegation. Consistent with the EPA's October 1, 2020 SAFETEA
approval, Oklahoma's delegation of the NESHAP program will apply to all
areas of Indian country within the State of Oklahoma, other than the
excluded Indian country lands.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ On December 22, 2021, the EPA proposed to withdraw and
reconsider the October 1, 2020 SAFETEA approval. See https://www.epa.gov/ok/proposed-withdrawal-and-reconsideration-and-supporting-information. The EPA expects to have further discussions
with tribal governments and the State of Oklahoma as part of this
reconsideration. The EPA also notes that the October 1, 2020
approval is the subject of a pending challenge in federal court.
Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma v. Regan, No. 20-9635 (10th Cir.). The EPA
may make further changes to the approved Oklahoma NESHAP delegation
to reflect the outcome of the proposed withdrawal and
reconsideration of the October 1, 2020 SAFETEA approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

XV. Final Action

    The EPA is taking final action to approve an update to the Oklahoma
NESHAP delegation that would provide ODEQ with the authority to
implement and enforce certain newly incorporated NESHAP promulgated by
the EPA, and amendments to existing standards currently delegated, as
they existed though June 30, 2019. This final delegation to ODEQ
extends to sources and activities located in certain areas of Indian
country, as explained in section XIV above.

XVI. Environmental Justice Considerations

    Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
The EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' The EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean
that ``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.'' \8\ The EPA is
providing additional analysis of environmental justice associated with
this action for the purpose of providing information to the public, not
as a basis of our final action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental-justice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA reviewed demographic data, which provides an assessment of
individual demographic groups of the populations living within
Oklahoma.\9\ The EPA then compared the data to the national average for
each of the demographic groups.\10\ The results of the demographic
analysis indicate that, for populations within Oklahoma, the percent
people of color (persons who reported their race as a category other
than White alone (not Hispanic or Latino)) is less than the national
average (35 percent versus 40 percent). Within people of color, the
percent of the population that is Black or African American alone is
lower than the national average (7.8 percent versus 13.4 percent) and
the percent of the population that is American Indian/Alaska Native is
significantly higher than the national average (9.4 percent versus 1.3
percent). The percent of the population that is two or more races is
higher than the national averages (6.3 percent versus 2.8 percent). The
percent of people living below the poverty level in Oklahoma is higher
than the national average (14.3 percent versus 11.4 percent). The
percent of people over 25 with a high school diploma in Oklahoma is
similar to the national average (88.6 percent versus 88.5 percent),
while the percent with a bachelor's degree or higher is below the
national average (26.1 percent versus 32.9 percent). These populations
and others residing in Oklahoma may be vulnerable and subject to
disproportionate impacts within the meaning of the executive order
described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See the United States Census Bureau's QuickFacts on Oklahoma
at https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/OK,US/PST045221.
    \10\ See the United States Census Bureau's QuickFacts on
Oklahoma at https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/OK,US/PST045221.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The authorities contained in the Oklahoma air program to implement
and enforce Federal section 112 rules as promulgated, without changes
for both part 70 and non-part 70 sources, are adequate to assure
compliance by sources within the State with respect to each applicable
standard, regulation, or requirement established under section 112.
This final action approves the requests from the state to update its
NESHAP delegation under section 112 of the CAA. Final approval of the
updated NESHAP delegation is necessary for the State of Oklahoma to
implement federal requirements that ensure control strategies and
permitting that will achieve emissions reductions and contribute to
reduced environmental and health impacts on those residing, working,
attending school, or otherwise present in vulnerable communities in
Oklahoma. This final rule is not anticipated to have disproportionately
high or adverse human health or environmental effects on communities
with environmental justice concerns because it should not result in or
contribute to emissions increases in Oklahoma.

XVII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator has the authority to approve
section 112(l) submissions that comply with the provisions of the Act
and applicable Federal regulations. In reviewing section 112(l)
submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,

provided that they meet the criteria and objectives of the CAA and of
the EPA's implementing regulations. Accordingly, this final action
merely approves the State's request as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this final action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    This final action will apply to certain areas of Indian country as
discussed above in section XIV, and therefore has tribal implications
as specified in E.O. 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). However,
this action will neither impose substantial direct compliance costs on
federally recognized tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. This
action will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on federally
recognized tribal governments because no actions will be required of
tribal governments. This action will also not preempt tribal law as no
Oklahoma tribe implements a regulatory program under the CAA, and thus
does not have applicable or related tribal laws. Consistent with the
EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes (May 4,
2011), on July 16, 2021, the EPA offered consultation to all 38 tribal
governments whose lands are located within the exterior boundaries of
the State of Oklahoma. One tribe requested consultation which was
initiated on December 21, 2021, and concluded on July 6, 2022.
    This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and the EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    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 September 19, 2022. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 61

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Arsenic, Benzene, Beryllium, Hazardous
substances, Mercury, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Vinyl chloride.

40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: July 15, 2022.
Dzung Ngo Kidd,
Acting Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region 6.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, 40 CFR parts 61 and 63 are
amended as follows:

PART 61--NATIONAL EMISSON STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 61 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--General Provisions

0
2. Section 61.04 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(38) and
(c)(6)(iv) to read as follows:

Sec.  61.04  Address.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (38) State of Oklahoma, Oklahoma Department of Environmental
Quality, Air Quality Division, P.O. Box 1677, Oklahoma City, OK 73101-
1677. For a list of delegated standards for Oklahoma see paragraph
(c)(6) of this section.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (6) * * *
    (iv) Oklahoma. The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
(ODED) has been delegated the following part 61 standards promulgated
by EPA, as amended in the Federal Register through June 30, 2019. The
(X) symbol is used to indicate each subpart that has been delegated.

   Delegation Status for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
 Pollutants (Part 61 Standards) for Oklahoma Department of Environmental
                                 Quality
     [Applies to sources located in certain areas of Indian Country]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Subpart                  Source category             ODEQ \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A......................  General Provisions............               X
B......................  Radon Emissions From            ...............
                          Underground Uranium Mines.
C......................  Beryllium.....................               X
D......................  Beryllium Rocket Motor Firing.               X
E......................  Mercury.......................               X
F......................  Vinyl Chloride................               X

G......................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
H......................  Emissions of Radionuclides      ...............
                          Other Than Radon From
                          Department of Energy
                          Facilities.
I......................  Radionuclide Emissions From     ...............
                          Federal Facilities Other Than
                          Nuclear Regulatory Commission
                          Licensees and Not Covered by
                          Subpart H.
J......................  Equipment Leaks (Fugitive                    X
                          Emission Sources) of Benzene.
K......................  Radionuclide Emissions From     ...............
                          Elemental Phosphorus Plants.
L......................  Benzene Emissions From Coke By-              X
                          Product Recovery Plants.
M......................  Asbestos......................               X
N......................  Inorganic Arsenic Emissions                  X
                          From Glass Manufacturing
                          Plants.
O......................  Inorganic Arsenic Emissions                  X
                          From Primary Copper Smelters.
P......................  Inorganic Arsenic Emissions                  X
                          From Arsenic Trioxide and
                          Metallic Arsenic Production
                          Facilities.
Q......................  Radon Emissions From            ...............
                          Department of Energy
                          Facilities.
R......................  Radon Emissions From            ...............
                          Phosphogypsum Stacks.
S......................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
T......................  Radon Emissions From the        ...............
                          Disposal of Uranium Mill
                          Tailings.
U......................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
V......................  Equipment Leaks (Fugitives                   X
                          Emission Sources).
W......................  Radon Emissions From Operating  ...............
                          Mill Tailings.
X......................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
Y......................  Benzene Emissions From Benzene               X
                          Storage Vessels.
Z-AA...................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
BB.....................  Benzene Emissions From Benzene               X
                          Transfer Operations.
CC-EE..................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
FF.....................  Benzene Waste Operations......               X
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Program delegated to Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
  (ODEQ).

* * * * *

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSON STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

0
3. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart E--Approval of State Programs and Delegation of Federal
Authorities

0
4. Section 63.99 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(37)(i) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.99  Delegated Federal authorities.

    (a) * * *
    (37) * * *
    (i) The following table lists the specific part 63 standards that
have been delegated unchanged to the Oklahoma Department of
Environmental Quality for all sources. The ``X'' symbol is used to
indicate each subpart that has been delegated. The delegations are
subject to all of the conditions and limitations set forth in Federal
law, regulations, policy, guidance, and determinations. Some
authorities cannot be delegated and are retained by EPA. These include
certain General Provisions authorities and specific parts of some
standards. Any amendments made to these rules after June 30, 2019, are
not delegated.

       Delegation Status for Part 63 Standards--State of Oklahoma
     [Applies to sources located in certain areas of Indian Country]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Subpart                  Source category           ODEQ \1\ \2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A......................  General Provisions............               X
F......................  Hazardous Organic NESHAP                     X
                          (HON)--Synthetic Organic
                          Chemical Manufacturing
                          Industry (SOCMI).
G......................  HON--SOCMI Process Vents,                    X
                          Storage Vessels, Transfer
                          Operations and Wastewater.
H......................  HON--Equipment Leaks..........               X
I......................  HON--Certain Processes                       X
                          Negotiated Equipment Leak
                          Regulation.
J......................  Polyvinyl Chloride and                   (\3\)
                          Copolymers Production.
K......................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
L......................  Coke Oven Batteries...........               X
M......................  Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning               X
N......................  Chromium Electroplating and                  X
                          Chromium Anodizing Tanks.
O......................  Ethylene Oxide Sterilizers....               X
P......................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
Q......................  Industrial Process Cooling                   X
                          Towers.
R......................  Gasoline Distribution.........               X
S......................  Pulp and Paper Industry.......               X
T......................  Halogenated Solvent Cleaning..               X
U......................  Group I Polymers and Resins...               X
V......................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
W......................  Epoxy Resins Production and                  X
                          Non-Nylon Polyamides
                          Production.

X......................  Secondary Lead Smelting.......               X
Y......................  Marine Tank Vessel Loading....               X
Z......................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
AA.....................  Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing                X
                          Plants.
BB.....................  Phosphate Fertilizers                        X
                          Production Plants.
CC.....................  Petroleum Refineries..........               X
DD.....................  Off-Site Waste and Recovery                  X
                          Operations.
EE.....................  Magnetic Tape Manufacturing...               X
FF.....................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
GG.....................  Aerospace Manufacturing and                  X
                          Rework Facilities.
HH.....................  Oil and Natural Gas Production               X
                          Facilities.
II.....................  Shipbuilding and Ship Repair                 X
                          Facilities.
JJ.....................  Wood Furniture Manufacturing                 X
                          Operations.
KK.....................  Printing and Publishing                      X
                          Industry.
LL.....................  Primary Aluminum Reduction                   X
                          Plants.
MM.....................  Chemical Recovery Combustion                 X
                          Sources at Kraft, Soda,
                          Sulfide, and Stand-Alone
                          Semichemical Pulp Mills.
NN.....................  Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing                X
                          at Area Sources.
OO.....................  Tanks-Level 1.................               X
PP.....................  Containers....................               X
QQ.....................  Surface Impoundments..........               X
RR.....................  Individual Drain Systems......               X
SS.....................  Closed Vent Systems, Control                 X
                          Devices, Recovery Devices and
                          Routing to a Fuel Gas System
                          or a Process.
TT.....................  Equipment Leaks--Control Level               X
                          1.
UU.....................  Equipment Leaks--Control Level               X
                          2 Standards.
VV.....................  Oil--Water Separators and                    X
                          Organic--Water Separators.
WW.....................  Storage Vessels (Tanks)--                    X
                          Control Level 2.
XX.....................  Ethylene Manufacturing Process               X
                          Units Heat Exchange Systems
                          and Waste Operations.
YY.....................  Generic Maximum Achievable                   X
                          Control Technology Standards.
ZZ-BBB.................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
CCC....................  Steel Pickling--HCI Process                  X
                          Facilities and Hydrochloric
                          Acid Regeneration.
DDD....................  Mineral Wool Production.......               X
EEE....................  Hazardous Waste Combustors....               X
FFF....................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
GGG....................  Pharmaceuticals Production....               X
HHH....................  Natural Gas Transmission and                 X
                          Storage Facilities.
III....................  Flexible Polyurethane Foam                   X
                          Production.
JJJ....................  Group IV Polymers and Resins..               X
KKK....................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
LLL....................  Portland Cement Manufacturing.               X
MMM....................  Pesticide Active Ingredient                  X
                          Production.
NNN....................  Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing.               X
OOO....................  Amino/Phenolic Resins.........               X
PPP....................  Polyether Polyols Production..               X
QQQ....................  Primary Copper Smelting.......               X
RRR....................  Secondary Aluminum Production.               X
SSS....................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
TTT....................  Primary Lead Smelting.........               X
UUU....................  Petroleum Refineries--                       X
                          Catalytic Cracking Units,
                          Catalytic Reforming Units and
                          Sulfur Recovery Plants.
VVV....................  Publicly Owned Treatment Works               X
                          (POTW).
WWW....................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
XXX....................  Ferroalloys Production:                      X
                          Ferromanganese and
                          Silicomanganese.
AAAA...................  Municipal Solid Waste                        X
                          Landfills.
CCCC...................  Nutritional Yeast                            X
                          Manufacturing.
DDDD...................  Plywood and Composite Wood               \4\ X
                          Products.
EEEE...................  Organic Liquids Distribution..               X
FFFF...................  Misc. Organic Chemical                       X
                          Production and Processes
                          (MON).
GGGG...................  Solvent Extraction for                       X
                          Vegetable Oil Production.
HHHH...................  Wet Formed Fiberglass Mat                    X
                          Production.
IIII...................  Auto & Light Duty Truck                      X
                          (Surface Coating).
JJJJ...................  Paper and other Web (Surface                 X
                          Coating).
KKKK...................  Metal Can (Surface Coating)...               X
MMMM...................  Misc. Metal Parts and Products               X
                          (Surface Coating).
NNNN...................  Surface Coating of Large                     X
                          Appliances.
OOOO...................  Fabric Printing Coating and                  X
                          Dyeing.
PPPP...................  Plastic Parts (Surface                       X
                          Coating).
QQQQ...................  Surface Coating of Wood                      X
                          Building Products.
RRRR...................  Surface Coating of Metal                     X
                          Furniture.
SSSS...................  Surface Coating for Metal Coil               X
TTTT...................  Leather Finishing Operations..               X
UUUU...................  Cellulose Production                         X
                          Manufacture.

VVVV...................  Boat Manufacturing............               X
WWWW...................  Reinforced Plastic Composites                X
                          Production.
XXXX...................  Tire Manufacturing............               X
YYYY...................  Combustion Turbines...........               X
ZZZZ...................  Reciprocating Internal                       X
                          Combustion Engines (RICE).
AAAAA..................  Lime Manufacturing Plants.....               X
BBBBB..................  Semiconductor Manufacturing...               X
CCCCC..................  Coke Ovens: Pushing, Quenching               X
                          and Battery Stacks.
DDDDD..................  Industrial/Commercial/                   \5\ X
                          Institutional Boilers and
                          Process Heaters Major Sources.
EEEEE..................  Iron Foundries................               X
FFFFF..................  Integrated Iron and Steel.....               X
GGGGG..................  Site Remediation..............               X
HHHHH..................  Miscellaneous Coating                        X
                          Manufacturing.
IIIII..................  Mercury Cell Chlor-Alkali                    X
                          Plants.
JJJJJ..................  Brick and Structural Clay                \6\ X
                          Products Manufacturing.
KKKKK..................  Clay Ceramics Manufacturing...           \6\ X
LLLLL..................  Asphalt Roofing and Processing               X
MMMMM..................  Flexible Polyurethane Foam                   X
                          Fabrication Operation.
NNNNN..................  Hydrochloric Acid Production,                X
                          Fumed Silica Production.
OOOOO..................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
PPPPP..................  Engine Test Facilities........               X
QQQQQ..................  Friction Products                            X
                          Manufacturing.
RRRRR..................  Taconite Iron Ore Processing..               X
SSSSS..................  Refractory Products                          X
                          Manufacture.
TTTTT..................  Primary Magnesium Refining....               X
UUUUU..................  Coal and Oil-Fired Electric              \7\ X
                          Utility Steam Generating
                          Units.
VVVVV..................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
WWWWW..................  Hospital Ethylene Oxide                      X
                          Sterilizers.
XXXXX..................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
YYYYY..................  Electric Arc Furnace                         X
                          Steelmaking Area Sources.
ZZZZZ..................  Iron and Steel Foundries Area                X
                          Sources.
AAAAAA.................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
BBBBBB.................  Gasoline Distribution Bulk                   X
                          Terminals, Bulk Plants, and
                          Pipeline Facilities.
CCCCCC.................  Gasoline Dispensing Facilities               X
DDDDDD.................  Polyvinyl Chloride and                       X
                          Copolymers Production Area
                          Sources.
EEEEEE.................  Primary Copper Smelting Area                 X
                          Sources.
FFFFFF.................  Secondary Copper Smelting Area               X
                          Sources.
GGGGGG.................  Primary Nonferrous Metals Area               X
                          Source: Zinc, Cadmium, and
                          Beryllium.
HHHHHH.................  Paint Stripping and                          X
                          Miscellaneous Surface Coating
                          Operations at Area Sources.
IIIIII.................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
JJJJJJ.................  Industrial, Commercial, and                  X
                          Institutional Boilers Area
                          Sources.
KKKKKK.................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
LLLLLL.................  Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers                X
                          Production Area Sources.
MMMMMM.................  Carbon Black Production Area                 X
                          Sources.
NNNNNN.................  Chemical Manufacturing Area                  X
                          Sources: Chromium Compounds.
OOOOOO.................  Flexible Polyurethane Foam                   X
                          Production and Fabrication
                          Area Sources.
PPPPPP.................  Lead Acid Battery                            X
                          Manufacturing Area Sources.
QQQQQQ.................  Wood Preserving Area Sources..               X
RRRRRR.................  Clay Ceramics Manufacturing                  X
                          Area Sources.
SSSSSS.................  Glass Manufacturing Area                     X
                          Sources.
TTTTTT.................  Secondary Nonferrous Metals                  X
                          Processing Area Sources.
UUUUUU.................  (Reserved)....................  ...............
VVVVVV.................  Chemical Manufacturing Area                  X
                          Sources.
WWWWWW.................  Plating and Polishing                        X
                          Operations Area Sources.
XXXXXX.................  Metal Fabrication and                        X
                          Finishing Area Sources.
YYYYYY.................  Ferroalloys Production                       X
                          Facilities Area Sources.
ZZZZZZ.................  Aluminum, Copper, and Other                  X
                          Nonferrous Foundries Area
                          Sources.
AAAAAAA................  Asphalt Processing and Asphalt               X
                          Roofing Manufacturing Area
                          Sources.
BBBBBBB................  Chemical Preparation Industry                X
                          Area Sources.
CCCCCCC................  Paints and Allied Products                   X
                          Manufacturing Area Sources.
DDDDDDD................  Prepared Feeds Areas Sources..               X
EEEEEEE................  Gold Mine Ore Processing and                 X
                          Production Area Sources.
FFFFFFF-GGGGGGG........  (Reserved)....................  ...............
HHHHHHH................  Polyvinyl Chloride and                       X
                          Copolymers Production Major
                          Sources.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Program delegated to Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
  (ODEQ).
\2\ Authorities which may not be delegated include: Sec.   63.6(g),
  Approval of Alternative Non-Opacity Emission Standards; Sec.
  63.6(h)(9), Approval of Alternative Opacity Standards; Sec.
  63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f), Approval of Major Alternatives to Test
  Methods; Sec.   63.8(f), Approval of Major Alternatives to Monitoring;
  Sec.   63.10(f), Approval of Major Alternatives to Recordkeeping and
  Reporting; and all authorities identified in the subparts (e.g., under
  ``Delegation of Authority'') that cannot be delegated.

\3\ The ODEQ has adopted this subpart unchanged and applied for
  delegation of the standard. The subpart was vacated and remanded to
  the EPA by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of
  Columbia Circuit. See, Mossville Environmental Action Network v. EPA,
  370 F. 3d 1232 (D.C. Cir. 2004). Because of the D.C. Court's holding,
  this subpart is not delegated to ODEQ at this time.
\4\ This subpart was issued a partial vacatur by the United States Court
  of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. See 72 FR 61060
  (October 29, 2007).
\5\ Final rule. See 76 FR 15608 (March 21, 2011), as amended at 78 FR
  7138 (January 31, 2013); 80 FR 72807 (November 20, 2015).
\6\ Final promulgated rule adopted by the EPA. See 80 FR 65470 (October
  26, 2015). Part 63 Subpart KKKKK was amended to correct minor
  typographical errors at 80 FR 75817 (December 4, 2015).
\7\ Final Rule. See 77 FR 9304 (February 16, 2012), as amended 81 FR
  20172 (April 6, 2016). Final Supplemental Finding that it is
  appropriate and necessary to regulate HAP emissions from Coal- and Oil-
  fired EUSGU Units. See 81 FR 24420 (April 25, 2016).

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2022-15517 Filed 7-20-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 2 (Tuesday, January 5, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 283-286]
[FR Doc No: 2015-33114]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76787; File No. SR-NSCC-2015-009]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Adjust Fees Related to Automated Customer Account
Transfer Service, Obligation Warehouse, Fund/SERV[supreg], Insurance
and Retirement Processing Services, and Alternative Investment Product
Services

December 29, 2015.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 16, 2015, National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by NSCC. NSCC filed the
proposed rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder.\4\ The proposed rule change was effective
upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change consists of changes to Addendum A (Fee
Structure) of the Rules & Procedures (``Rules'') of NSCC in order to
adjust fees related to NSCC's Automated Customer Account Transfer
Service, Obligation Warehouse, Fund/SERV[supreg], Insurance and
Retirement Processing Services, and Alternative Investment Product
Services, as more fully described below.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Terms not otherwise defined herein have the meaning set
forth in the Rules, available at http://dtcc.com/~/media/Files/
Downloads/legal/rules/nscc_rules.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, NSCC included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements

may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. NSCC has
prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the
most significant aspects of such statements.

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
Fee Changes for Automated Customer Account Transfer Service
    The proposed rule change would adjust fees associated with NSCC's
Automated Customer Account Transfer Service (``ACATS'') in order to
align these fees with the costs of providing these services. ACATS is a
non-guaranteed service offered by NSCC that enables its Members to
effect automated transfers of customer accounts among themselves.\6\
Currently, the anticipated revenue for ACATS for 2016, based on revenue
for the service in 2015 and the existing fee structure, is not expected
to meet the budgeted expenses associated with providing this service.
The proposed fee adjustments would allow NSCC to meet expenses
associated with this service, which include costs of maintenance,
future development projects, and amortization of past enhancements to
the service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Rule 50 (Automated Customer Account Transfer Service) of
NSCC's Rules, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, NSCC is proposing to increase the following fees: (1)
Fee for transfer initiation input, per submission, from $0.15 to $0.18;
(2) settling fee for assets received, per item settled, from $0.05 to
$0.06; (3) fee for adding, changing or deleting assets from a record,
per asset entered, from $0.05 to $0.06; (4) fee for each receive/
deliver instruction, per instruction issued, from $0.10 to $0.12; and
(5) fee for each account transfer reject, per full account per side,
from $1.00 to $1.20.
Fee Changes for Obligation Warehouse
    The proposed rule change would also adjust fees associated with
NSCC's Obligation Warehouse (``OW''), a non-guaranteed, automated
service that tracks, stores, and maintains unsettled ex-clearing and
failed obligations, as well as obligations exited from NSCC's
Continuous Net Settlement (``CNS'') system, non-CNS ACATS Receive and
Deliver Instructions, Balance Orders, and Special Trades, as such terms
are defined in the Rules.\7\ The OW service provides transparency,
serves as a central storage of open (i.e., failed or unsettled) broker-
to-broker obligations, and allows users to manage and resolve
exceptions in an efficient and timely manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Rule 51 (Obligation Warehouse) and Procedure IIA
(Obligation Warehouse), supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC is proposing to adjust the fee for matching within OW to align
this fee with the fees charged for matching through NSCC's Real Time
Trade Matching platform through which fixed income securities
(corporate and municipal bonds, and unit investment trusts) are
validated and matched.\8\ Therefore, NSCC is proposing to increase the
fee for matching within OW from $0.75 to $0.85.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Section C of Procedure II (Trade Comparison and
Recording Service), supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC is also proposing to align the fees associated with closing
obligations from OW. Obligations that are identified as eligible for
NSCC's CNS service may be closed from OW to be processed through CNS,
for a fee of $0.20. Obligations may also be closed from OW as a result
of the Reconfirmation and Pricing Service (``RECAPS''), for a fee of
$0.20. Obligations may also be closed from OW if paired off with other
obligations in the same CUSIP, pursuant to NSCC's Pair Off function,
for a $1.50 fee.\9\ Finally, obligations may be closed from OW if they
are settled through NSCC's Envelope Settlement Service, and currently
no fee is charged for this service.\10\ Therefore, NSCC is proposing to
align each of these fees by (1) increasing the fees for closing
obligations that are processed through CNS or as a result of RECAPS
processing from $0.20 to $0.35, (2) decreasing the fee for closing
obligations in connection with the OW Pair Off service from $1.50 to
$0.35, and (3) adding a fee for closing obligations that settle through
its Envelope Settlement Service for $0.35.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Section E of Procedure IIA (Obligation Warehouse), supra
note 5.
    \10\ See Rule 9 (Envelope Settlement Service) and Procedure IIA
(Obligation Warehouse), supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, NSCC is proposing to adjust the fee charged to the
recipient of a delivery notification request advisory that informs the
recipient that the submitting party has acknowledged that an OW
obligation between those parties has settled, if that notification is
aged two days or older (``Aged Delivery Advisories''); and the fee
charged to the recipient of a pending cancel request advisory that
requests that the recipient cancel a previously compared OW obligation,
if that request is aged two days or older (``Aged Cancel Advisories'').
NSCC is proposing to increase these fees from $2.00 to $2.50. NSCC is
also proposing to adjust the fee charged to the recipient of a
comparison advisory that requests that the recipient affirm the
comparison of an obligation, if that advisory is aged five days or
older (``Aged Comparison Advisories''). NSCC is proposing to increase
this fee from $5.00 to $5.50.
    The proposed increase in fees for Aged Delivery Advisories, Aged
Cancel Advisories, and Aged Comparison Advisories would encourage more
timely action by the recipients of these advisories, which, in turn,
would reduce the frequency of these fees and align the fees associated
with the OW service with the costs of delivering that service to NSCC's
Members.
Fee Changes for Fund/SERV
    The proposed rule change would also reduce the transaction fees
associated with NSCC's Fund/SERV (``Fund/SERV'') service, a non-
guaranteed service offering within NSCC's Mutual Fund Services that
enables its members to process and settle mutual fund transactions
through automated, standardized formats and a centralized platform.\11\
NSCC is proposing to reduce Fund/SERV transaction fees from $0.07 to
$0.06, per side, per order or transfer request, as it has determined
that the reduction aligns these fees with the costs of providing this
service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Rule 52 (Mutual Fund Services), A (Fund/Serv), and
Addendum D (Statement of Policy/Envelope Settlement Service, Mutual
Fund Services, Insurance and Retirement Processing Services and
Other Services Offered by the Corporation), supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fee Changes for Insurance and Retirement Processing Services
    The proposed rule change would also adjust the fee schedule, as
well as introduce new fees, associated with NSCC's Insurance and
Retirement Processing Services (``I&RS''), as more fully described
below. NSCC's I&RS is a suite of non-guaranteed services that enables
its members to exchange information, and settle payments, with respect
to insurance products, retirement plans or programs, and other benefit
plans or programs.\12\ NSCC proposes the following changes for the
reasons described below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Rule 57 (Insurance and Retirement Processing Services)
and Addendum D (Statement of Policy/Envelope Settlement Service,
Mutual Fund Services, Insurance and Retirement Processing Services
and Other Services Offered by the Corporation), supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Implement Monthly Membership Fee--NSCC proposes to introduce a $250
minimum monthly account fee for all I&RS accounts. NSCC would waive
this minimum fee if the aggregate transaction and other service fees
attributable to I&RS activity in a given month equals or exceeds $250.
The proposed change is intended to

encourage I&RS activity with respect to dormant I&RS accounts.
    Implement Multiple Destination Fee--NSCC proposes to charge members
directing NSCC to deliver I&RS files to more than two destinations an
additional monthly fee. NSCC members directing NSCC to deliver I&RS
files to three or four destinations would be charged an additional $50
per month, per I&RS product. NSCC members directing NSCC to deliver
I&RS files to five or more destinations would be charged an additional
$100 per month, per I&RS product. The proposed change would align the
fees charged with the cost of providing these products and services to
members with multiple file destinations.
    In Force Transactions (``IFT'') Adjustments--IFT is an I&RS
offering that automates data processing with respect to ``in force''
policy transactions among participating NSCC members. In force policy
transactions are transactions that take place after the underlying
insurance contract has become effective. NSCC proposes the following
adjustments to the IFT product offering:

     Eliminate Broker Identification Number (``BIN'')/
Representative of Record (``REP'') Incentives. Currently, NSCC
members who utilize IFT's BIN/REP product are given a monthly credit
of up to $350 toward their BIN/REP charges, as well as a 30% credit
of their BIN/REP transaction costs to be applied to NSCC fees with
respect to other I&RS products. These BIN/REP credit programs were
originally implemented in 2009 to encourage growth and adoption of
the BIN/REP product. As BIN/REP is now widely utilized, the proposed
change would eliminate these incentive credits.
     Reduce REP Change Request Fee. The current fee for REP
change requests is $0.65, per transaction, per side. The proposed
change would reduce this fee to $0.35, per transaction, per side.
The proposed change is consistent with the fees currently charged
for similar I&RS transactions.
     Introduce New IFT Transaction Functionality Fees. NSCC
proposes to introduce the fees applicable to three new IFT
transaction functionalities: Policy Administration Inquiries would
be $0.35 (per inquiry/per side); Policy Administration Requests
would be $1.25 (per inquiry/per side); and Death Notification
Requests would be $1.25 (per request/per side).

    Implement IFT Tiered Pricing Program (other than BIN/REP). NSCC
proposes to implement a new tiered pricing program, which includes
member directed activity level designations correlating to identified
monthly minimum fees. The proposed change is intended to incentivize
greater use of the IFT product by discounting transaction fees after
once [sic] the chosen level's minimum monthly fee has been met for
higher activity level designations. Set forth below are the transaction
fees that would apply to IFT transactions (not including BIN/REP) until
the Minimum Monthly Fee is met for the chosen Activity Level (as
reflected in the chart below). Thereafter, the transaction fees would
be as reflected in the chart. Thus, the transaction fees applicable to
Level 1 designations are the same whether before meeting the Minimum
Monthly Fee of $1,000 or after. However, Level 2 or Level 3
designations will benefit from discounted fees per transaction once
their Minimum Monthly Fee is met.

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

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Values Inquiry..................................  $0.35 (per inquiry, per side).
Policy Administration Inquiry...................  $0.35 (per inquiry, per side).
Policy Administration Request...................  $1.25 (per request, per side).
Death Notification Request......................  $1.25 (per request, per side).
Fund Transfer...................................  $1.25 (per request, per side).
Withdrawals.....................................  $1.25 (per request, per side).
Arrangements....................................  $1.25 (per request, per side).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Fee per
                                    Minimum monthly    transaction over
         Activity level                   fee         minimum  requests/
                                                           inquiries
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1.........................              $1,000         $1.25/$0.35
Level 2.........................               3,000         $1.00/$0.28
Level 3.........................               5,000         $0.75/$0.21
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fee Changes for Alternative Investment Product Services
    The proposed rule change would also adjust the fee schedule
associated with NSCC's Alternative Investment Product (``AIP'')
Services, a non-guaranteed processing platform for the exchange of
information and settlement of payments with respect to alternative
investment products such as hedge funds, funds of hedge funds,
commodities pools, managed futures, and real estate investment
trusts.\13\ NSCC proposes the following changes for the reasons
described below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Rule 53 (Alternative Investment Product Services and
Members) and Addendum D (Statement of Policy/Envelope Settlement
Service, Mutual Fund Services, Insurance and Retirement Processing
Services and Other Services Offered by the Corporation), supra note
5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Reduce Fee for Higher Volume Eligible AIP Product Account
Transfers--Currently, there is no transaction activity with respect to
higher volume Eligible AIP Product transfers. To encourage activity,
NSCC proposes to reduce higher volume Eligible AIP Product transfer
fees from $1.50 per transaction to $0.50 per transaction.
    Reduce Fee for Lower Volume Eligible AIP Product Fee Trades--
Currently, there is no transaction activity with respect to lower
volume Eligible AIP Product trades. To encourage activity, NSCC
proposes to reduce lower volume Eligible AIP Product trade fees from
$30 per trade to $10 per trade.
    Increase AIP Distributor Cap--The AIP Distributor cap of $50,000
per calendar year with respect to certain Eligible AIP Product
transactions was initially introduced to encourage AIP adoption by
broker/dealers and has been successful. The cap continues to be an
effective enticement for additional activity, but NSCC believes it
should be increased to align AIP fees with the cost of providing the
service. Accordingly, NSCC is proposing to increase the AIP Distributor
cap from $50,000 per calendar year to $250,000 per calendar year.
    No other changes to the Rules are contemplated by this proposed
rule change. The proposed changes would take effect on January 1, 2016.
2. Statutory Basis
    Section 17A(b)(3)(D) of the Act \14\ requires that NSCC's Rules
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable

dues, fees, and other charges among its participants. The proposed rule
changes would align NSCC's fees with the costs of delivering services
to NSCC members, and would allocate those fees equitably among the NSCC
members that use those services. Further, the proposed increase to fees
for Aged Delivery Advisories, Aged Cancel Advisories, and Aged
Comparison Advisories would encourage more timely action by the
recipients of these advisories, which, in turn, would reduce the
frequency of these fees and align the fees associated with the OW
service with the costs of delivering that service to NSCC's Members.
Therefore, the proposed rule changes would comply with section
17A(b)(3)(D).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The proposed rule changes would not have any impact, or impose any
burden, on competition. As stated above, the proposed changes would
align NSCC's fees with the costs of delivering associated services to
its members, and would not disproportionally impact any NSCC members.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not yet
been solicited or received. NSCC will notify the Commission of any
written comments received by NSCC.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change, and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A) \16\ of the Act and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \17\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NSCC-2015-009 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2015-009. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of NSCC and on
DTCC's Web site (http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2015-009 and should be
submitted on or before January 26, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-33114 Filed 1-4-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


5635 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 23 / Tuesday, February 4, 2003 / Notices file a written statement with the Panel, you may do so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral statements regarding any of these items on the agenda, you should contact Bruce Strauss, 301   903   3705 or Bruce. Strauss@ science. doe. gov ( e mail). You must make your request for an oral statement at least 5 business days before the meeting. Reasonable provision will be made to include the scheduled oral statements on the agenda. The Chairperson of the Panel will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Public comment will follow the 10 minute rule. Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available for public review and copying within 30 days at the Freedom of Information Public Reading Room; Room 1E   190; Forrestal Building; 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a. m. and 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Issued at Washington, DC, on January 30, 2003. Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer. [ FR Doc. 03   2511 Filed 2   3   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450   01   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OECA   2002   0018; FRL   7447   2]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission of EPA ICR No. 0658.08, OMB Number 2060   0004 to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act ( 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that the following Information Collection Request ( ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) for review and approval: NSPS for Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label Surface Coating ( 40 CFR part 60, subpart RR), ( OMB Control No. 2060   0004, EPA ICR No. 0658.08). The ICR, which is abstracted below, describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated burden and cost. DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before March 6, 2003. ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leonard Lazarus, Compliance Assessment and Media Programs Division, Office of Enforcement and Compliance, Mailcode 2223A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: ( 202) 564   6369; fax number: ( 202) 564   0050; e mail address: lazarus. leonard@ epa. gov SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. On June 20, 2002 ( 67 FR 41981), EPA sought comments on this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8( d). EPA received no comments. EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. OECA   2002   0018, which is available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center ( ECDIC) in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. 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 ECDIC is ( 202) 566   1514. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Use EDOCKET 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. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified above. Any comments related to this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days of this notice, and according to the following detailed instructions: ( 1) Submit your comments to EPA online using EDOCKET ( our preferred method), by e mail to docket. oeca@ epa. gov, or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2201T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, and ( 2) Mail your comments to OMB at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget ( OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in EDOCKET as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in EDOCKET. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket. Although identified as an item in the official docket, information claimed as CBI, or whose disclosure is otherwise restricted by statute, is not included in the official public docket, and will not be available for public viewing in EDOCKET. For further information about the electronic docket, see EPA's Federal Register notice describing the electronic docket at 67 FR 38102 ( May 31, 2002), or go to http:// www. epa. gov./ edocket. Title: NSPS for Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label Surface Coating ( 40 CFR part 60, subpart RR) ( OMB Control No. 2060   0004, EPA ICR Number 0658.08). This is a request of an existing approved collection expiring January 31, 2003. Under the OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. Abstract: The New Source Performance Standards ( NSPS) for Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label Surface Coating, published at 40 CFR part 60, subpart RR were proposed on December 30, 1980, and promulgated on October 18, 1983. These regulations apply to each coating line used in the manufacture of pressure sensitive tape and label materials, and on which construction or reconstruction commenced after December 30, 1980. This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart RR. Facilities that input 45 Mg of volatile organic compounds ( VOC) or less per 12 month period are not subject to the emission limit established by the subpart. This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart RR. Owners and operators of the affected facilities must make the following onetime only reports: notification of the date of construction or reconstruction; notification of the anticipated and actual dates of initial startup; notification of any physical change to an existing facility that may increase the regulated pollutant emission rate; notification of initial performance test and the results of the initial performance test. Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 21: 08 Feb 03, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 04FEN1. SGM 04FEN1 5636 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 23 / Tuesday, February 4, 2003 / Notices system is inoperative. The recordkeeping requirements consist of the occurrence and duration of any start up and malfunctions as described. They include the initial performance test results including information necessary to determine conditions of the performance test; performance test measurements and results including, for affected facilities complying with the standard without the use of add on controls, a weighted average of the mass of solvent used per mass of coating solids applied; the weighted average mass of VOC per mass of coating solids applied at facilities controlled by a solvent recovery device; the weighted average mass of VOC per mass of coating solids applied being used at a facility controlled by a solvent destruction device; and the results of the monthly performance and records of operating parameters. 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, and are identified on the form and/ or instrument, if applicable. Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 35 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. Respondents/ Affected Entities: Owners/ Operators of coating lines used in the manufacture of pressure sensitive tape and label materials. Estimated Number of Respondents: 37. Frequency of Response: Semiannual for all, every other year for excess emission report. Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 3,179 hours. Estimated Total Annual Labor Cost: $ 71,800. Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 35,925 hours in the total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR Burdens. This decrease is the result of a search of the Agency's AFS database which identified a significantly lower number of respondents than was used in previous ICR burden estimates.

Dated: January 28, 2003. Oscar Morales, Director, Collection Strategies Division. [ FR Doc. 03   2537 Filed 2   3   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OECA   2002   0023; FRL   7447   3]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission of EPA ICR No. 0997.07 ( OMB No. 2060   0079) to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act ( 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that the following Information Collection Request ( ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) for review and approval: NSPS for Petroleum Dry Cleaners ( 40 CFR part 60, subpart JJJ) ( OMB Control No. 2060   0079, EPA ICR No. 0997.07) The ICR, which is abstracted below, describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated burden and cost. DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before March 6, 2003. ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joyce Chandler, Compliance Assistance and Sector Programs Divisions, Mailcode 2224A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202   564   7073; fax number: 202   564   0009; e mail address: chandler. joyce@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. On June 20, 2002 ( 67 FR 41981), EPA sought comments on this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8( d). EPA received no comments. EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. OECA   2002   0023, which is available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center ( ECDIC) in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. 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 Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center is ( 202) 566   1514. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Use EDOCKET 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. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified above. Any comments related to this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days of this notice, and according to the following detailed instructions: ( 1) Submit your comments to EPA online using EDOCKET ( our preferred method), by e mail to docket. oeca@ epa. gov, or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2201T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460, and ( 2) Mail your comments to OMB at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget ( OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503. EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in EDOCKET as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in EDOCKET. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket. Although identified as an item in the official docket, information claimed as CBI, or whose disclosure is otherwise restricted by statute, is not included in the official public docket, and will not be available for public viewing in EDOCKET. For further information about the electronic docket, see EPA's Federal Register notice describing the electronic docket at 67 FR 38102 ( May VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 21: 08 Feb 03, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 04FEN1. SGM 04FEN1