[Federal Register: September 29, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 189)]
[Notices]
[Page 57507-57508]
[DOCID:fr29se06-78]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0785; FRL-8094-1]

Notice of Filing of a Pesticide Petition for Establishment of
Tolerances for Residues of the Herbicide Pyroxsulam on Wheat, Hay, and
Straw

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide
petition proposing the establishment of regulations for residues of the
herbicide pyroxsulam on wheat, hay, and straw.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 30, 2006.

ADDRESSES:  Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0785 and pesticide petition number
PP6F7101, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal:  http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Public Regulatory
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Public Regulatory Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2006-0785. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The Federal regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made
available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI 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 in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov
, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP

Public Regulatory Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this
Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is (703) 305-
5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joanne I. Miller, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

     1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then

identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version
of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the
comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be
submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
     2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is printing a summary of a pesticide petition received under
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a, proposing the establishment of regulations in 40 CFR part
180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various food
commodities. EPA has determined that this pesticide petition contains
data or information regarding the elements set forth in FFDCA section
408(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the
submitted data at this time or whether the data support granting of the
pesticide petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on
this pesticide petition.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of the petition included in
this notice, prepared by the petitioner along with a description of the
analytical method available for the detection and measurement of the
pesticide chemical residues is available on EPA's Electronic Docket at
http://www.regulations.gov. To locate this information on the home page

of EPA's Electronic Docket, select ``Quick Search'' and type the OPP
docket ID number. Once the search has located the docket, clicking on
the ``Docket ID'' will bring up a list of all documents in the docket
for the pesticide including the petition summary.

New Tolerances

    PP 6F7101. Dow AgroSciences LLC, 9330 Zionsville Road,
Indianapolis, IN 46268-1054, proposes to establish tolerances for
residues of the herbicide pyroxsulam, N-(5,7-
dimethoxy[1,2,4]triazolo[1,5-a]pyrimidin-2-yl)-2-methoxy-4-
(trifluoromethyl)-3-pyridinesulfonamide in or on the food/feed
commodities wheat, forage at 0.04 parts per million (ppm); wheat, grain
at 0.01 ppm; wheat, hay at 0.01 ppm; and wheat, straw at 0.01 ppm. An
analytical method was developed to measure the pyroxsulam in wheat by
liquid chromatography with positive-ion electrospray ionization (ESI)
tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS).

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: September 25, 2006.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 06-8383 Filed 9-28-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 244 (Thursday, December 19, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69739-69740]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27322]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC19-31-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-547); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission
or FERC) is soliciting public comments on the currently approved
information collection, FERC-547 (Gas Pipeline Rates: Refund Report
Requirements) and submitting the information collection to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Any interested person may
file comments directly with OMB and should address a copy of those
comments to the Commission as explained below.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by January 21,
2020.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified by the OMB Control No.
1902-0084, should be sent via email to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission Desk Officer.
    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Commission, in
Docket No. IC19-31-000, by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Website: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or viewing/downloading comments and issuances
in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and by fax at
(202) 273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-547, Gas Pipeline Rates: Refund Report Requirements.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0084.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-547 information
collection requirements with no changes to the reporting requirements.
    Abstract: The Commission uses FERC-547 (Gas Pipeline Rates: Refund
Report Requirements) to implement the statutory refund provisions
governed by sections 4, 5 and 16 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA).\1\
Sections 4 and 5 authorize the Commission to order a refund (with
interest) for any portion of a natural gas company's increased rate or
charge found to be unjust or unreasonable. Refunds may also be
instituted by a natural gas company as a stipulation to a Commission-
approved settlement agreement or a provision under the company's
tariff. Section 16 of the NGA authorizes the Commission to prescribe
rules and regulations necessary to administer its refund mandates. The
Commission's refund reporting requirements are in 18 Code of Federal
Regulation (CFR) 154.501 and 154.502.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 717-717w.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission uses the data to monitor refunds owed by natural gas
companies to ensure that the flow-through of refunds owed by these
companies are made as expeditiously as possible and to assure that
refunds are made in compliance with the Commission's regulations.

    On July 30, 2019 (84 FR 41708), the Commission published a Notice
in the Federal Register in Docket No. IC19-31-000 requesting public
comments. The Commission received no comments and is noting that in the
related submittal to OMB.
    Type of Respondents: Jurisdictional natural gas companies.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: 2 The Commission estimates
the annual public reporting \3\ burden and cost \4\ for the information
collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``Burden'' is defined as 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. For further explanation of what is included in the
information collection burden, refer to 5 Code of Federal
Regulations 1320.3.
    \3\ The change in number of respondents is an update due to
normal industry fluctuations. The changes to the estimated numbers
for frequency of filing and burden per filing are due to improved
estimates.
    \4\ The Commission staff estimates that industry is similarly
situated in terms of hourly cost (for wages plus benefits). Based on
the Commission's FY (Fiscal Year) 2019 average cost (for wages plus
benefits), $80.00/hour is used.

                                                FERC-547--Gas Pipeline Rates: Refund Report Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total annual
                                              Number of      Annual number     Total number of     Average burden      burden hours &        Cost per
                                             respondents      of responses        responses        hrs. & cost ($)    total annual cost   respondent ($)
                                                             per respondent                         per response             ($)
                                                      (1)              (2)     (1) * (2) = (3)                 (4)     (3) * (4) = (5)        (5) / (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural Gas Pipelines....................              19                2                  38        2 hrs.; $160     76 hrs.; $6,080             $160
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: December 12, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-27322 Filed 12-18-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 57 (Friday, March 26, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16173-16176]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05870]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R08-OAR-2021-0187; FRL-10021-36-Region 8]

Approval and Promulgation of State Plans for Designated
Facilities and Pollutants; North Dakota; Control of Emissions From
Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills; Control of Emissions From
Existing Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units;
Negative Declaration of Existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste
Incineration Units

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the ``Act''),
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the ``Agency'') is
proposing approval of a CAA section 111(d) plan submitted by the North
Dakota Department of Environmental Quality (NDDEQ or the
``Department'') on July 28, 2020 to regulate landfill gas and its
components from existing municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills. The EPA
is also proposing approval of a CAA section 111(d)/129 plan submitted
by the Department on the same date to regulate air pollutants from
existing commercial and industrial solid waste incineration (CISWI)
units and air curtain incinerators (ACI). These plans provide for the
State's implementation and enforcement of the federal emission
guidelines (EG) for existing MSW landfills, CISWI units and ACI in
North Dakota. The EPA with this proposed rule is also notifying the
public that the Agency has received a request from the State of North
Dakota, dated May 8, 2019, for withdrawal of a previously approved CAA
section 111(d)/129 plan for hospital/medical/infectious waste
incineration (HMIWI) units and for Agency approval of a negative
declaration of such units within the State. Approval of this negative
declaration will stand in lieu of a North Dakota CAA section 111(d)/129
plan for HMIWI units.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 26, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2021-0187, to the Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
www.regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available electronically at
www.regulations.gov. To reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission, for
this proposed action we do not plan to offer hard copy review of the
docket. Please email or call the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section if you need to make alternative
arrangements for access to the docket.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Lohrke, Air and Radiation
Division, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8P-ARD, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202-1129,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' means the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. MSW Landfill 111(d) State Plan
    B. CISWI 111(d)/129 State Plan
    C. HMIWI Negative Declaration of Sources
II. EPA's Submittal Analysis
    A. MSW Landfill State Plan
    B. CISWI State Plan
    C. HMIWI Negative Declaration
III. Proposed Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Review

I. Background

A. MSW Landfill 111(d) State Plan

    CAA section 111(d) requires the EPA Administrator to establish a
procedure under which each state shall submit to the Agency a plan that
establishes standards of performance for any `existing' source for any
air pollutant for which air quality criteria have not been issued or
which is not included on a list published under CAA section 108 or
emitted from a source category regulated under section 112 of the Act,
but to which a standard of performance under section 111 would apply if
such existing source were considered a `new' source. The EPA
established such a procedure by promulgating general guidelines for the
adoption and submittal of state plans for existing affected facilities
in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B. The EPA publishes specific state plan
requirements for designated source categories in 40 CFR part 60. State
plan requirements for such source categories are known as emission
guidelines and compliance times for designated facilities (EG or the
``emission guidelines''). These EGs are promulgated following, or
concurrent with, the publication of new source performance standards
(NSPS) for the affected source category. Each EG requires each state
with designated facilities in its jurisdiction to develop and submit to
the EPA an approvable state plan that implements and enforces the
performance standards and compliance times found within the particular
EG.
    On August 29, 2016, the EPA finalized revised NSPS for new MSW
landfills and revised EG for existing MSW landfills in 40 CFR part 60,
subparts XXX and Cf, respectively. See 81 FR 59332 (Aug. 29, 2016) and
81 FR 59313 (Aug. 29, 2016). In this set of actions an MSW landfill for
which construction, reconstruction or modification was commenced on or
before July 17, 2014 is considered an existing facility and subject to
either a future 111(d) state plan adhering to the requirements of 40
CFR part 60, subpart Cf or a future federal plan for designated MSW
landfills promulgated in 40 CFR part 62. The 2016 MSW landfills EG
updates the control requirements and monitoring, reporting and
recordkeeping provisions for existing MSW landfill sources. MSW
landfills which commenced construction, reconstruction or modification
after July 17, 2014 are considered new affected facilities subject to
the NSPS in 40 CFR part 60, subpart XXX.
    North Dakota submitted a 111(d) State plan for existing MSW
landfills (the ``MSW landfill plan'') on July 28, 2020. The MSW
landfill plan was submitted to fulfill requirements of 40 CFR part 60,
subparts B and Cf. The EPA must now propose approval or disapproval of
the State's submittal with reference to the general provisions for plan
approval in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B and the requirements specific to
plans for existing MSW landfills found in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf.
    Approval of North Dakota's MSW landfill plan submitted in 2020
would replace the currently approved plan for landfill gas emissions
from existing MSW landfills, found at 40 CFR 62.8600-8602. That State
plan was submitted to EPA in 1997 to comply with the old State plan
requirements of the EG for existing MSW landfills in 40 CFR part 60,
subpart Cc, finalized by EPA on March 12, 1996 (61 FR 9919). All
existing North Dakota MSW landfills subject to the old EG are now
designated facilities as defined by 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf and will
be subject to the new MSW landfill plan if approved.

B. CISWI 111(d)/129 State Plan

    CAA section 129 requires the EPA Administrator to establish
performance standards and other requirements pursuant to section 111 of
the Act for each source category of solid waste incineration units
enumerated under that section of the Act. CAA section 111(a)(1)(D)
establishes CISWI units as a source category subject to NSPS and EG
development requirements, as outlined in the CAA section 111(d)
description in section I.A of this document.
    On March 21, 2011, the EPA finalized regular review and revisions
to the NSPS and EG for new and existing CISWI units in 40 CFR part 60,
subparts CCCC and DDDD, respectively (76 FR 15704). The most recent
amendments of these subparts were finalized on April 16, 2019 (84 FR
15846). The EG at 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD required submittal of a
CAA section 111(d)/129 state plan by August 7, 2013 from any state with
operational existing CISWI or ACI units as they are defined by the
subpart.
    North Dakota's most recent approved CAA section 111(d)/129 State
plan for CISWI and ACI units was approved on April 25, 2018 (83 FR
17923). North Dakota completed a transfer of implementing and
enforcement authorities to a new State department of environmental
quality since that approval. Revisions to State administrative code,
creation of the NDDEQ and transfer of implementing and enforcing
authorities to the Department necessitated a new approval of the
State's CISWI plan. North Dakota submitted a new 111(d)/129 plan for
existing CISWI units (the ``CISWI plan'') on July 28, 2020. The EPA
must now propose approval or disapproval of the State's submittal with
reference to the general provisions for plan approval in 40 CFR part
60, subpart B and the requirements specific to plans for existing CISWI
units found in 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD.

C. HMIWI Negative Declaration of Sources

    CAA section 129 authorizes the EPA to require states to submit a
plan for the control of air pollutants from existing solid waste
incineration units enumerated by that section according to emission
guidelines and compliance times promulgated in 40 CFR part 60 by the
EPA under the authority of CAA section 111(d). CAA section 129(a)(1)(C)
requires the EPA's promulgation of an EG for HMIWI units and a state's
submittal of a control plan for such units. The EG for existing HMIWI
units may be found at 40 CFR part 60, subpart

Ce. However, 40 CFR 60.23(b) says that, ``if no designated facility is
located within a State, the State shall submit a letter of
certification to that effect to the Administrator [. . .]. Such
certification shall exempt the State from the requirements of [the
general provisions for adoption and submittal of state plans].''
    North Dakota submitted a letter making a negative declaration of
existing HMIWI units within the State (the ``negative declaration'') on
May 8, 2019. The letter requests withdrawal of the State's previously
approved CAA section 111(d)/129 HMIWI plan (40 CFR 62.8610) and
approval of the negative declaration in lieu of a state plan. The EPA
must now propose approval or disapproval of the State's negative
declaration with reference to the general provisions for plan submittal
in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B and the general provisions for plan
approval in 40 CFR part 62, subpart A.

II. EPA's Submittal Analysis

A. MSW Landfill State Plan

    The EPA has reviewed the North Dakota 111(d) MSW Landfill State
plan submittal in the context of the plan completeness and
approvability requirements found in 40 CFR part 60, subparts B and Cf.
The EPA is proposing with this action to determine that the submitted
section 111(d) plan meets the above cited requirements. The North
Dakota plan submittal package includes all materials necessary to be
deemed administratively and technically complete according to the
criteria of the general provisions for adoption and submittal of state
plans found in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B. North Dakota has chosen to
author a State plan document and provide all implementation and
enforcement authority for all State plan requirements through revisions
to the North Dakota Administrative Code (NDAC) and existing portions of
the North Dakota Century Code (NDCC). Specifically, the State has
appropriately incorporated all EG performance standards and other
source requirements in NDAC section 33.1-15-12-02, subpart Cf. Legal
authority to implement and enforce the incorporated source requirements
and State plan document is found in NDCC chapter 23.1-06. The State
plan document, the relevant NDAC and NDCC sections, and all other
relevant plan submittal materials may be found in the docket for
today's action. A complete analysis of the State's legal authority to
implement and enforce the plan and source requirements, the submittal's
completeness and the approvability of the State plan document and
incorporation of source requirements can be found in the technical
support document (TSD) for this action. The TSD is available for review
and may be found in the docket associated with this proposed rule. In
this action, EPA is also proposing to incorporate by reference (IBR)
Title 33.1, Article 15, Chapter 12, section 2, subparts A and Cf of the
NDAC, effective as amended on July 1, 2020. This NDAC chapter includes
the relevant source requirements specific to existing MSW landfills.

B. CISWI State Plan

    The EPA has reviewed the North Dakota 111(d) CISWI State plan
submittal in the context of the plan completeness and approvability
requirements found in 40 CFR part 60, subparts B and DDDD. The EPA is
proposing with this action to determine that the submitted section
111(d) plan meets the above cited requirements. The North Dakota plan
submittal package includes all materials necessary to be deemed
administratively and technically complete according to the criteria of
the general provisions for adoption and submittal of state plans found
in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B. North Dakota has chosen to author a State
plan document and provide all implementation and enforcement authority
for all State plan requirements through revisions to the NDAC and
existing portions of the NDCC. Specifically, the State has
appropriately incorporated all EG performance standards and other
source requirements in NDAC section 33.1-15-12-02, subpart DDDD. Legal
authority to implement and enforce the incorporated source requirements
and State plan document is found in NDCC chapter 23.1-06. The State
plan document, the relevant NDAC and NDCC sections, and all other
relevant plan submittal materials may be found in the docket for
today's action. A complete analysis of the State's legal authority to
implement and enforce the plan and source requirements, the submittal's
completeness and the approvability of the State plan document and
incorporation of source requirements can be found in the TSD for this
action. The TSD is available for review and may be found in the docket
associated with this proposed rule. In this action, EPA is also
proposing to incorporate by reference (IBR) Title 33.1, Article 15,
Chapter 12, section 2, subparts A and DDDD of the NDAC, effective as
amended on July 1, 2020. This NDAC chapter includes the relevant source
requirements specific to existing CISWI.

C. HMIWI Negative Declaration

    The EPA has reviewed the North Dakota negative declaration of
existing HMIWI units in the context of general submittal approvability
provisions found in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B and part 62, subpart A.
The EPA is proposing with this action to determine that the State's
negative declaration is approvable as it meets all negative declaration
requirements as set forth in the previously mentioned general
provisions. Analysis of the State's declaration can be found in the TSD
for this action. The TSD is available for review and may be found in
the docket associated with this proposed rule.

III. Proposed Action

    The EPA is proposing to approve the North Dakota section 111(d)
State plan for existing MSW landfills pursuant to 40 CFR part 60,
subparts B and Cf. We are also proposing to approve North Dakota's
section 111(d)/129 State plan for existing CISWI units pursuant to 40
CFR part 60, subparts B and DDDD. Finally, the EPA is also proposing to
approve the State's negative declaration of existing HMIWI units and to
publish this declaration in lieu of a state plan submitted pursuant to
40 CFR part 60, subpart Ce. Therefore, the EPA is proposing to amend 40
CFR part 62, subpart JJ to reflect these approval actions. These
approvals are based on the rationale provided in section II of this
preamble and discussed in detail in the TSD associated with this
rulemaking action. The scope of the proposed approval is limited to the
provisions of 40 CFR parts 60 and 62. The EPA's proposed approval of
the North Dakota MSW landfill plan is limited to those landfills that
meet the criteria established in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf. Our
proposed approval of the North Dakota CISWI plan is limited to those
incinerator units that meet the criteria established in 40 CFR part 60,
subpart DDDD.
    The EPA Administrator continues to retain authority for approval of
alternative methods to determine the nonmethane organic compound
concentration or a site-specific methane generation rate constant at
existing MSW landfills, as stipulated in 40 CFR 60.30f(c). With respect
to existing CISWI and ACI units, the Administrator also continues to
retain the several authorities listed under 40 CFR 60.2542.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference
NDDEQ rules regarding existing MSW landfills and CISWI units discussed
in

section II of this preamble (NDAC section 33.1-15-12-02, subparts A, Cf
and DDDD) in accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5. The EPA
has made, and will continue to make, these materials available through
the docket for this action, EPA-R08-OAR-2021-0187, at https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region VIII Office (please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve section
111(d) and section 111(d)/129 state plan submittals that comply with
the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C.
7411(d); 40 CFR part 60, subparts B, Cf and DDDD; and 40 CFR part 62,
subpart A. Thus, in reviewing CAA section 111(d) and section 111(d)/129
state plan submittals, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the approval criteria of the Act and
implementing regulations. Accordingly, this action merely approves
state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because this action is not significant under
Executive Order12866;
     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, described in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the CAA section 111(d) and section 111(d)/129 plans
are not approved to apply in Indian country, as defined at 18 U.S.C.
1151, located in the State. As such, this rule does not have tribal
implications, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), and it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Commercial and industrial solid waste
incineration, Hospital medical and infectious waste incineration,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Methane,
Municipal solid waste landfill, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

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

    Dated: March 15, 2021.
Debra H. Thomas,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2021-05870 Filed 3-25-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 115 (Tuesday, June 16, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34403-34407]
[FR Doc No: 2015-14792]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0803; FRL-9920-21-OW]

Final National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
General Permit for Stormwater Discharges From Industrial Activities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final permit issuance.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA's Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are issuing
their final 2015 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) general permit for stormwater discharges from industrial
activity, also referred to as the Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP).
This permit replaces the existing permit covering stormwater discharges
from industrial facilities in the EPA's Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, and
10 that expired September 29, 2013, and provides coverage for
industrial facilities in areas where the EPA is the NPDES permitting
authority in the EPA's Regions 7 and 8. The MSGP consists of 44
separate regional EPA general permits that may vary from each other
based on state or tribal certifications and water quality-based
requirements. As with earlier permits, this permit authorizes the
discharge of stormwater associated with industrial activities in
accordance with the terms and conditions described therein. Industrial
dischargers have the option to instead seek coverage under an
individual permit. An individual permit may be necessary if the
discharger cannot meet the terms and conditions or eligibility
requirements in this permit. The EPA is issuing this permit for five
years.

DATES: The permit became effective on June 4, 2015. This effective date
is necessary to provide dischargers with the immediate opportunity to
comply with Clean Water Act requirements in light of the expiration of
the 2008 MSGP on September 29, 2013. In accordance with 40 CFR part 23,
this permit shall be considered issued for the purpose of judicial
review on June 22, 2015. Under section 509(b) of the Clean Water Act,
judicial review of this general permit can be requested by filing a
petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals within 120
days after the permit is considered issued. Under section 509(b)(2) of
the Clean Water Act, the requirements in this permit may not be
challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings to enforce these
requirements. In addition, this permit may not be challenged in other
agency proceedings. Deadlines for submittal of

notices of intent are provided in Part 1.2 of the 2015 MSGP. The 2015
MSGP also provides additional dates for compliance with the terms of
these permits.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on the final
NPDES MSGP, contact the appropriate EPA Regional Office listed in
Section I.C., or Bryan Rittenhouse, EPA Headquarters, Office of Water,
Office of Wastewater Management at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This supplementary information is organized
as follows:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. How can I get copies of these documents and other related
information?
    C. Who are the EPA regional contacts for this final permit?
II. Background of Permit
III. Scope and Applicability of the Multi-Sector General Permit
    A. Geographic Coverage
    B. Categories of Facilities Covered
    C. Summary of Significant Changes From the 2008 Multi-Sector
General Permit
IV. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
V. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
VI. Analysis of Economic Impacts

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This MSGP regulates stormwater discharges from industrial
facilities in the 30 sectors shown below:

Sector A--Timber Products.
Sector B--Paper and Allied Products Manufacturing.
Sector C--Chemical and Allied Products Manufacturing.
Sector D--Asphalt Paving and Roofing Materials Manufactures and
Lubricant Manufacturers.
Sector E--Glass, Clay, Cement, Concrete, and Gypsum Product
Manufacturing.
Sector F--Primary Metals.
Sector G--Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing).
Sector H--Coal Mines and Coal Mining-Related Facilities.
Sector I--Oil and Gas Extraction.
Sector J--Mineral Mining and Dressing.
Sector K--Hazardous Waste Treatment Storage or Disposal.
Sector L--Landfills and Land Application Sites.
Sector M--Automobile Salvage Yards.
Sector N--Scrap Recycling Facilities.
Sector O--Steam Electric Generating Facilities.
Sector P--Land Transportation.
Sector Q--Water Transportation.
Sector R--Ship and Boat Building or Repairing Yards.
Sector S--Air Transportation Facilities.
Sector T--Treatment Works.
Sector U--Food and Kindred Products.
Sector V--Textile Mills, Apparel, and other Fabric Products
Manufacturing.
Sector W--Furniture and Fixtures.
Sector X--Printing and Publishing.
Sector Y--Rubber, Miscellaneous Plastic Products, and Miscellaneous
Manufacturing Industries.
Sector Z--Leather Tanning and Finishing.
Sector AA--Fabricated Metal Products.
Sector AB--Transportation Equipment, Industrial or Commercial
Machinery.
Sector AC--Electronic, Electrical, Photographic and Optical Goods.
Sector AD--Reserved for Facilities Not Covered Under Other Sectors and
Designated by the Director.

    Coverage under the 2015 MSGP is available to operators of eligible
facilities located in areas where the EPA is the permitting authority
and has made this general permit available for use. A list of eligible
areas is included in Appendix C of the 2015 MSGP.

B. How can I get copies of these documents and other related
information?

    1. Docket. The EPA has established an official public docket for
this action under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0803. The official
public docket is the collection of materials that are available for
public viewing at the Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC)
WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460. Although all documents in the docket are listed in an index,
some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Publicly available docket materials are available in hard
copy at the EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room, open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER> and the
telephone number for the Water Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    2. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the United States government on-line source for
federal regulations at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Electronic versions of the final permit and fact sheet are
available on the EPA's NPDES Web site at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/stormwater/EPA-Multi-Sector-General-Permit-MSGP.cfm.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through the
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may
use EPA Dockets at http://www.regulations.gov to view public comments,
access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket,
and to access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically. For additional information about the EPA's public
docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. Although not all docket materials may be available
electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available
docket materials at the EPA Docket Center.

C. Who are the EPA regional contacts for this final permit?

    For EPA Region 1, contact David Gray at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 2, contact Sergio Bosques at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 3, contact Kaitlyn Bendik at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 5, contact Brian Bell at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 6, contact Nasim Jahan at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 7, contact Mark Matthews at tel.<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 8, contact Gregory Davis at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 9, contact Eugene Bromley at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 10, contact Margaret McCauley at tel.: (206) 553-
1772 or email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
II. Background of Permit

    Section 405 of the Water Quality Act of 1987 added section 402(p)
of the Clean Water Act (CWA), which directed the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to develop a phased approach to regulate
stormwater discharges under the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) program. The EPA published a final
regulation on the first phase on this program on November 16, 1990,
establishing permit application requirements for ``stormwater
discharges associated with industrial activity.'' See 55 FR 48063. The
EPA defined the term ``stormwater discharge associated with industrial
activity'' in a comprehensive manner to cover a wide variety of
facilities. See 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14). The EPA is issuing

the MSGP under this statutory and regulatory authority. The 2015 MSGP
replaces the 2008 MSGP covering stormwater discharges from industrial
facilities in the EPA's Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9 and 10 that expired
September 29, 2013, and provides coverage for industrial facilities in
areas where the EPA is the NPDES permitting authority in the EPA's
Regions 7 and 8.
    Dischargers choosing to be covered by the MSGP must certify in
their Notice of Intent (NOI) that they meet the requisite eligibility
requirements described in Part 1 of the permit. In addition,
dischargers must install and implement control measures to meet the
effluent limits required in Part 2 and any sector-specific effluent
limits in Part 8, and develop a stormwater pollution prevention plan
(SWPPP) consistent with Part 5 describing their control measures used
to achieve the effluent limits. The MSGP requires dischargers to
conduct routine facility inspections (Part 3.1) and quarterly visual
assessments of stormwater discharges (Part 3.2). Dischargers are also
required to review and revise, as necessary, their SWPPP in order to
meet the permit's effluent limits when certain triggering conditions
occur (Part 4). Dischargers subject to benchmark monitoring are
required to submit to the EPA quarterly benchmark monitoring results
(Part 6.2.1). The EPA notes that Part 6.2.1 emphasizes that the
benchmark thresholds used for monitoring are not effluent limits
themselves, but rather information that is primarily for the use of the
industrial facility to determine the overall effectiveness of its
control measures and to assist in understanding when corrective
action(s) may be necessary. Where applicable, dischargers must also
submit to the EPA stormwater effluent data relating to impaired waters
(Part 6.2.4) and compliance with numeric effluent limitations
guidelines (Part 6.2.2). In addition, dischargers are required to
submit an annual report containing permit compliance information
generated from the past calendar year (Part 7.5).

III. Scope and Applicability of the Multi-Sector General Permit

A. Geographic Coverage

    The 2015 MSGP provides coverage for sectors of industrial point
source discharges that occur in areas not covered by an approved state
or tribal NPDES program. The geographic coverage of the 2015 MSGP is
listed in Appendix C of the permit, and includes the states of Idaho,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and New Mexico as well as all Indian
Country lands (except in Region 4), and facilities operated by a
federal operator in selected states. Permit coverage is also provided
in Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, and the Pacific Island
territories. The EPA notes that, unlike the 2008 MSGP, facilities
located in certain areas in the EPA's Regions 7 and 8 may be covered by
this permit.
    Because certifications required by Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act were not received in time, operators of industrial facilities in
the following areas are not yet eligible for coverage under the 2015
MSGP:
     The State of Idaho (except Indian country);
     The State of Washington (except Indian country) if
operated by a federal operator; and
     Spokane Tribe of Indians lands.
    The EPA will announce the availability of coverage under the 2015
MSGP for these areas in separate Federal Register notice(s) as soon as
possible after the certifications are completed. In the meantime,
existing dischargers in these areas that were authorized for coverage
under the 2008 MSGP will remain covered under the 2008 MSGP until the
2015 MSGP has been issued. Once the permit is available, existing
dischargers will be given 90 days to file an NOI for coverage under the
2015 MSGP.

B. Categories of Facilities Covered

    This permit regulates stormwater discharges from industrial
facilities in 30 sectors, as shown above in section I.A.

C. Summary of Significant Changes from the 2008 Multi-Sector General
Permit

    The 2015 MSGP replaces the 2008 MSGP, which was issued for a five-
year term on September 29, 2008 (see 73 FR 56572) and expired September
29, 2013. The 2015 MSGP is similar to the 2008 MSGP, and is structured
in nine parts: General requirements that apply to all facilities (e.g.,
eligibility of discharges, effluent limitations, stormwater pollution
prevention plan (SWPPP) requirements, monitoring and reporting
requirements) (Parts 1-7), industrial sector-specific conditions (Part
8), and specific requirements applicable to facilities within
individual states or Indian country (Part 9). Additionally, the
appendices provide forms for the submittal of a paper Notice of Intent,
Notice of Termination, Conditional No Exposure Exclusion, Discharge
Monitoring Report, and annual report, as well as step-by-step
procedures for determining eligibility with respect to protecting
historic properties and threatened and endangered species, and for
calculating site-specific, hardness-dependent benchmarks.
    This 2015 MSGP includes several new or modified requirements from
the 2008 MSGP. These changes are summarized below and are discussed in
more detail in the 2015 MSGP fact sheet.
    1. NEPA Review for Dischargers Subject to any New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS). For the issuance of the 2015 MSGP, the
EPA prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA)/finding of no significant
impact (FONSI) that analyzed the potential environmental impacts of the
permit. The EA considered the potential environmental impacts from the
discharge of new source pollutants in stormwater discharges associated
with industrial facilities where the EPA is the permitting authority
(see the permit's docket for a copy of the EPA's EA and FONSI).
    2. Information Required for Notices of Intent. The 2015 MSGP
revises the information required in NOIs to provide the EPA with more
complete information to determine eligibility and to enable the EPA to
inform the operator of its specific monitoring requirements. Operators
now need to include in their NOI location information for each
stormwater outfall they discharge from, whether the facility discharges
to saltwater, the hardness of the receiving water (if subject to
benchmark monitoring for metals), whether the facility discharges to a
federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) site identified in Appendix P, as well as
general information from their SWPPP if the SWPPP is not posted online.
The EPA NPDES electronic Reporting Tool (NeT) will use latitude and
longitude information for each outfall to automatically determine the
receiving waters the facility discharges to and the receiving water's
or waters' impairment status.
    3. Electronic Reporting Requirements. Electronic reporting is
required in the 2015 MSGP. Electronic reporting will create
efficiencies and burden reduction regarding information submittal to
the Agency. Recognizing there may be cases that make electronic
submittals of information not possible, the EPA has included a waiver
that an operator can receive from their EPA Regional Office. Waivers
must be approved by the EPA Regional Office on a case-by-case basis and
are not intended to cover information submittals for the entire permit
term.

    4. Threatened and Endangered Species Requirements. The EPA has
finalized changes to the procedures operators must follow to establish
their eligibility with regard to protection of threatened and
endangered species and critical habitat (Appendix E) as a result of the
EPA's consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
These changes are necessary to ensure that the endangered and
threatened species eligibility criteria in Part <IP_ADDRESS> are adequately
protective of such species, and to ensure that operators are making
accurate determinations of which eligibility criterion they qualify
under.
    5. Effluent Limit Clarifications. Several of the effluent limits in
Part 2 of the 2015 MSGP include a greater level of specificity in order
to make the requirements more clear and transparent. These
clarifications will help permittees better understand how to comply
with the effluent limits. The effluent limits in Part 2 for which the
EPA has made clarifications include requirements for minimizing
exposure, good housekeeping, maintenance, spill prevention and response
procedures, and employee training.
    6. Inspections. The EPA has consolidated the comprehensive site
inspection and routine facility inspection procedures into one set of
procedures to eliminate redundancies.
    7. Corrective Actions. Although the 2008 MSGP required corrective
actions, the EPA has provided greater detail about how these actions
are to be handled. In the 2015 MSGP, the EPA clarified which conditions
require a SWPPP review, modified the deadlines to further specify the
EPA's expectations for what actions must be taken by the deadlines, and
rewrote and clarified the reporting requirements following corrective
actions.
    8. SWPPP Documentation. To reduce permittee burden, the EPA
identified the effluent limit requirements in Part 2.1.2 that are the
most straightforward, i.e., the ones that do not involve the site-
specific selection of a control measure or are specific activity
requirements (e.g., ``Plainly label containers . . . that could be
susceptible to spillage or leakage to encourage proper handling and
facilitate rapid response if spills or leaks occur''). Permittees can
comply with the documentation requirements regarding these particular
effluent limits by including the effluent limits verbatim in their
SWPPP without providing additional information, thereby reducing the
burden associated with SWPPP development (see Part 5.2.4). Requirements
that involve activities that are done infrequently or are direct and
simple may be identified in the SWPPP as written in the permit to be
executed effectively.
    9. SWPPP Availability. To provide greater access to the SWPPP for
the public, the EPA, and the Fish and Wildlife Service and National
Marine Fisheries Services (the Services), the 2015 MSGP requires that
permittees either provide a URL for their SWPPP on the NOI form, or
provide selected information from the SWPPP on the NOI form. The
selected information from the SWPPP that would have to be included in
the NOI form includes: Onsite industrial activities exposed to
stormwater, including potential spill and leak areas (see Parts
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS> and <IP_ADDRESS>); pollutants or pollutant constituents
associated with each industrial activity exposed to stormwater that
could be discharged in stormwater and any authorized non-stormwater
discharges listed in Part 1.1.3 (see Part <IP_ADDRESS>); control measures
employed to comply with the non-numeric technology-based effluent
limits required in Part 2.1.2 and Part 8, and any other measures taken
to comply with the requirements in Part 2.2 Water Quality-Based
Effluent Limitations (see Part 5.2.4); a schedule for good housekeeping
and maintenance (see Part <IP_ADDRESS>); and a schedule for all inspections
required in Part 3 (see Part <IP_ADDRESS>).
    10. Benchmark Monitoring. For the 2015 MSGP, the EPA has included
additional non-hardness dependent metals benchmarks for facilities that
discharge into saline waters. The addition of these benchmarks provide
an appropriate indicator of the performance of the measures taken to
meet the effluent limitations contained in the permit where stormwater
is discharged into saline waters. Benchmark values in the 2008 MSGP for
these metals were based on acute or chronic aquatic life freshwater
criteria. These additional saline benchmark values are based on
available acute ambient water quality criteria for arsenic, cadmium,
copper, cyanide, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver and zinc.
    11. Industry Sector-specific Requirements. The following changes
were made to Part 8 of the MSGP, which describes requirements specific
to particular industry sectors:
    Sector A, Timber Products--Discharges resulting from uncontaminated
spray down or intentional wetting of logs at wet deck storage areas is
an allowed non-stormwater discharge provided the effluent limitation in
Part 8.A.7 is met. To accommodate situations where facilities use water
from a waterbody that they intend to return to the waterbody following
spraying/wetting, the permit contains an allowance or credit for
pollutants originally in the waterbody prior to use and discharge.
    Sector G, Metal Mining--As with the 2008 MSGP, this permit provides
coverage to operators for earth-disturbing activities conducted prior
to active mining activities. Before 2008 those activities were required
to be covered separately under the Construction General Permit (CGP) or
an individual construction stormwater permit. To facilitate such
coverage, additional requirements have been added that are consistent
with limits from the Construction & Development (C&D) Effluent
Limitation Guideline (ELG) (for earth-disturbing activities associated
with the construction of staging roads and the construction of access
roads conducted prior to active mining), and for mine site preparation
earth disturbances, revised limits based on EPA's best professional
judgement (BPJ)).
    Sector H, Coal Mining--Additional requirements have been added that
are consistent with changes made to Sector G.
    Sector J, Mineral Mining and Dressing--Additional requirements have
been added that are consistent with changes made to Sector G.
    Sector S, Air Transportation--The EPA has added requirements based
on the final effluent limitation guidelines for airplane and airport
deicing operations. Also, the EPA has included clarifications regarding
airport operators' responsibilities and the permit requirements that
airport authorities may conduct on behalf of airport tenants.

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

    Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993))
this action is a ``significant regulatory action.'' Accordingly, the
EPA submitted this action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and any changes made
in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket
for this action.

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

    In compliance with Executive Order 13175, the EPA has consulted
with tribal officials to gain an understanding

of and, where necessary, to address tribal implications of the MSGP. In
the course of this consultation, the EPA undertook the following
activities:
     December 11, 2012--EPA presented an overview of the 2008
MSGP and potential changes for the renewal of the MSGP to the National
Tribal Caucus.
     December 12, 2012--EPA presented an overview of the
current MSGP and potential changes for the renewal of the MSGP to the
National Tribal Water Council.
     December 12, 2012--EPA mailed notification letters to
tribal leaders initiating consultation and coordination on the renewal
of the MSGP. The initiation letter was posted on the tribal portal Web
site at http://www.epa.gov/tribal/consultation.
     January 15, 2013--EPA held an informational teleconference
open to all tribal representatives, and reserved the last part of the
teleconference for official consultation comments. EPA also invited
tribes to submit written comments on the permit renewal. The
presentation was posted on the tribal portal Web site at http://www.epa.gov/tribal/consultation.

VI. Analysis of Economic Impacts

    The EPA expects the economic impact on entities covered under this
permit, including small businesses, to be minimal. A copy of the EPA's
economic analysis, titled, ``Cost Impact Analysis for the Multi-Sector
General Permit (MSGP)'' is available in the docket for this permit. The
economic impact analysis indicates that while there will be some
incremental increase in the costs of complying with the new permit,
these costs will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

    Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

    Dated: June 4, 2015.
Deborah Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
    Dated: June 4, 2015.
Jos[eacute] C. Font,
Director, Caribbean Environmental Protection Division, EPA Region 2.
    Dated: June 4, 2015.
Jon M. Capacasa,
Director, Water Protection Division, EPA Region 3.
    Dated: June 4, 2015.
Tinka G. Hyde,
Director, Water Division, EPA Region 5.
    Dated: June 4, 2015.
William K. Honker,
Director, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region 6.
    Dated: June 4, 2015.
Karen Flournoy,
Director, Water, Wetlands, and Pesticides Division, EPA Region 7.
    Dated: June 4, 2015.
Darcy O'Connor,
Acting Assistant Regional Administrator, EPA Region 8.
    Dated: June 4, 2015.
Nancy Woo,
Acting Director, Water Division, EPA Region 9.
    Dated: June 4, 2015.
Daniel D. Opalski,
Director, Office of Water and Watersheds, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2015-14792 Filed 6-15-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P