[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 157 (Monday, August 15, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 54082]
[FR Doc No: 2016-19327]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC16-163-000.
    Applicants: Bucksport Mill LLC, Bucksport Generation LLC.
    Description: Application under FPA Section 203 for Authorization of
Intracorporate Transfer of Jurisdictional Assets, et al. of Bucksport
Mill LLC.
    Filed Date: 8/5/16.
    Accession Number: 20160805-5244.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/26/16.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG16-132-000.
    Applicants: Desert Wind Farm LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Desert Wind Farm LLC.
    Filed Date: 8/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160808-5129.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/16.

    Docket Numbers: EG16-133-000.
    Applicants: Innovative Solar 31, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Innovative Solar 31, LLC.
    Filed Date: 8/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160808-5185.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/16.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER16-1649-005.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Compliance filing: 2016-08-05 Petition for Extension
of Ltd Tariff Waiver to Suspend Effective Date to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 8/5/16.
    Accession Number: 20160805-5192.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/26/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2372-001.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Errata to Filing of Master Joint Use
Pole Agreement to be effective 10/4/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160808-5154.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2387-000.
    Applicants: Bounce Energy NY, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Cancellation to be effective 8/
31/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/5/16.
    Accession Number: 20160805-5197.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/26/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2388-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Filing of Notice of
Termination of ITC Midwest RS 139 to be effective 7/15/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160808-5146.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2389-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: First Amended CLGIA and
First Amended Svc Agmt for Windhub Solar Project to be effective 8/9/
2016.
    Filed Date: 8/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160808-5150.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2390-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2016-08-08 SA 2933
ITCTransmission-Michigan Wind 3 GIA (J321) to be effective 8/9/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160808-5152.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2391-000.
    Applicants: ANP Marketing Company.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of ANP Marketing Company.
    Filed Date: 8/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160808-5181.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2392-000.
    Applicants: Sierra Pacific Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Rate Schedule No. 69--
Concurrence SPPC RS 69 to SCE RS 310 to be effective 8/5/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160808-5190.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2393-000.
    Applicants: Innovative Solar 31, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Innovative Solar 31, LLC MBR
Tariff to be effective 8/9/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/8/16.
    Accession Number: 20160808-5195.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/16.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:
    Docket Numbers: ES16-46-000.
    Applicants: Community Wind North, LLC.
    Description: Request for Waivers and Blanket Authorization.
    Filed Date: 7/22/16.
    Accession Number: 20160722-5206.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: ES16-50-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Application of Southwest Power Pool, Inc. Under
Section 204 of the Federal Power Act for an Order Authorizing the
Issuance of Securities.
    Filed Date: 8/5/16.
    Accession Number: 20160805-5217.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/26/16.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 8, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-19327 Filed 8-12-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 137 (Wednesday, July 19, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 33201]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15157]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2017-51]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Rolls-Royce
plc

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

ACTION: Notice of Petition for Exemption Received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR). The purpose of this notice is to improve the public's
awareness of, and participation in, the FAA's exemption process.
Neither publication of this notice nor the inclusion or omission of
information in the summary is intended to affect the legal status of
the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before August 8, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2017-0647
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tara Fitzgerald, Federal Aviation
Administration, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Standards Staff, ANE-
112, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803-5229; (781)
238-7130; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on July 6, 2017.
Carlos Pestana,
Acting Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2017-0647.
    Petitioner: Rolls-Royce plc.
    Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 33.27(f)(6).
    Description of Relief Sought: Rolls-Royce plc petitions for
exemption from Sec.  33.27 (f)(6) for the Trent XWB-97 engine model to
exclude the entire high-pressure shaft system from failure
consideration in determining the highest overspeed that would result
from a complete loss of load on a turbine rotor.

[FR Doc. 2017-15157 Filed 7-18-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: December 28, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 248)]
[Notices]
[Page 73802]
[DOCID:fr28de07-85]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2004-0109; FRL-8346-5]

Draft List of Initial Pesticide Active Ingredients and Pesticide
Inerts to be Considered for Screening under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; third extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice in the Federal Register of June 18, 2007,
concerning the draft list of the first group of chemicals that will be
screened in the Agency's Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP).
The draft list was produced using the approach described in the
September 2005 notice, and includes chemicals that the Agency, in its
discretion, has decided should be tested first, based upon exposure
potential.The June 18, 2007 Federal Register notice provided for a 90-
day public comment period. EPA extended the comment period an
additional 60 days in the Federal Register of September 12, 2007, and
later extended the comment period for 45 days in the Federal Register
of November 15, 2007. This document is extending the comment period for
a third time for an additional 42 days. The new comment period closes
February 11, 2008.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-
HQ-OPPT-2004-0109 must be received on or before February 11, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions as provided under ADDRESSES
in the Federal Register document of June 18, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Phillips, Office of Science
Coordination and Policy (7203M), Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and
Toxic Substances, 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?

    The Agency included in the June 18, 2007 notice a list of those who
may be potentially affected by this action. If you have 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?

    When preparing comments follow the procedures and suggestions given
in Unit I.B. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION of the June 18,
2007Federal Register notice.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?

    To submit comments, or access the public docket, please follow the
detailed instructions as provided in Unit I.B.3. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION of the June 18, 2007 Federal Register notice. If you have
questions, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

II. What Action is EPA Taking?

    This document extends the public comment period that was originally
established in the Federal Register of June 18, 2007 (72 FR 33486)
(FRL-8129-3), and was extended in the Federal Register of September 12,
2007 (72 FR 52108) (FRL-8146-3), and November 15, 2007 (72 FR 64218)
(FR-8156-9).In the Federal Register notice of June 18, 2007, EPA
announced the draft list of the first group of chemicals that will be
screened in the Agency's EDSP. The draft list was developed using the
approach described in the Federal Register notice of September 27, 2005
(70 FR 56449) (FRL-7716-9). As required by the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), all pesticides must eventually be screened under
the EDSP, and this first group is simply a starting point. Because EPA
developed this draft list of chemicals based upon exposure potential,
it should not be construed as a list of known or likely endocrine
disruptors, and it would be inappropriate to do so. Following
consideration of comments on this draft list of chemicals, EPA will
issue a Federal Register notice containing the final list of chemicals.
EPA is hereby extending the comment period, which was set to end on
December 31, 2007 to February 11, 2008.

III. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    Section 408(p) of FFDCA requires EPA to ``develop a screening
program, using appropriate validated test systems and other
scientifically relevant information, to determine whether certain
substances may have an effect in humans that is similar to an effect
produced by a naturally occurring estrogen, or such other endocrine
effect as [EPA] may designate.'' (21 U.S.C. 346a(p)). The statute
generally requires EPA to ``provide for the testing of all pesticide
chemicals.'' (21 U.S.C. 346a(p)(3)). However, EPA is authorized to
exempt a chemical, by order upon a determination that ``the substance
is anticipated not to produce any effect in humans similar to an effect
produced by a naturally occurring estrogen.'' (21 U.S.C. 346a(p)(4)).
``Pesticide chemical'' is defined as ``any substance that is a
pesticide within the meaning of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act, including all active and inert ingredients of such
pesticide.'' (21 U.S.C. 321(q)(1)).

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Endocrine disruptors,
Pesticides.

    Dated: December 19, 2007.
James B. Gulliford.
Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances.
[FR Doc. E7-25106 Filed 12-27-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 192 (Friday, October 2, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62297-62298]
[FR Doc No: 2020-21828]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER20-2978-000]

Catalyst Power REPCo LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Catalyst Power REPCo LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is October 19, 2020.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 28, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-21828 Filed 10-1-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 143 (Monday, July 27, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44302-44303]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17929]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 101

[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-1210]
RIN 0910-AF22

Food Labeling: Revision of the Nutrition and Supplement Facts
Labels; Reopening of the Comment Period as to Specific Documents

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of comment period as to specific
documents.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is reopening, as
to specific documents, the comment period regarding our proposed rule
to revise the Nutrition Facts and Supplement Facts labels. We are
reopening the comment period for 60 days for the sole purpose of
inviting public comments on two consumer studies being added to the
administrative record. The consumer studies pertained to proposed
changes to the Nutrition Facts label formats.

DATES: The comment period for the proposed rule published March 3, 2014
(79 FR 11879), is reopened for the limited purpose described in this
document. Submit either electronic or written comments by September 25,
2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Written Submissions

    Submit written submissions in the following ways:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper submissions):
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
(FDA-2012-N-1210) for this rulemaking. All comments received may be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For additional information on submitting
comments, see the ``Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number(s), found in brackets in the heading of this document,
into the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the
Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip L. Chao, Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition (HFS-24), Food and Drug Administration, 5100
Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of March 3, 2014 (79 FR 11879), we
published a proposed rule to amend our labeling regulations for
conventional foods and dietary supplements to provide updated nutrition
information on the label to assist consumers in maintaining healthy
dietary practices. The proposed rule would update the list of nutrients
that are required or permitted to be declared; provide updated Daily
Reference Values and Reference Daily Intake values that are based on
current dietary recommendations from consensus reports; amend
requirements for foods represented or purported to be specifically for
children under the age of 4 years and pregnant and lactating women and
establish nutrient reference values specifically for these population
subgroups; and revise the format and appearance of the Nutrition Facts
label. In the preamble to the proposed rule (79 FR 11879 at 11905,
11947 to 11948, 11952), we indicated that we intended to conduct
consumer studies related to proposed changes to the format of the
Nutrition Facts label and that we might use the results of the studies
to help inform our future actions on certain label-related issues. We
also indicated that we would publish the results of the studies when
they became available (79 FR 11879 at 11952), and we invited comment on
the use of an alternative format design and other format-related issues
(79 FR 11879 at 11961).
    We recently completed two consumer studies and, as a result, are
adding two documents pertaining to those studies to the administrative
record and providing an opportunity for public comment. We believe that
a public comment period of 60 days is adequate in this case because we
are specifically limiting the reopened comment period to comments on
the two consumer studies. Comments are invited, and will be considered,
only to the extent that they are focused on the two consumer studies
being added to the record. These two consumer studies (Refs. 1 and 2)
being added to the record are as follows:

1. FDA, Eye-Tracking Experimental Study on Consumer Responses to
Modifications to the Nutrition Facts Label Outlined in the Food and
Drug Administration's Proposed Rulemaking, June 2015. This was a
study in which 160 participants participated in a computer-based
research of the potential effects of several possible changes to the
label on consumer viewing and use of the label.
2. FDA, Experimental Study of Proposed Changes to the Nutrition
Facts Label Formats, June 2015. This was a Web-based experiment,
involving more than 5,000 participants, designed to explore whether
modifications to the format of the Nutrition Facts label would
affect consumers' interpretation of information on the Nutrition
Facts label.

After reviewing the comments on the proposed rule, we have tentatively
concluded that we do not intend to further consider the alternative
format for the Nutrition Facts label. A review of the results of the
consumer research made available in this document has not provided
information to change our planned approach. Therefore, interested
persons who intend to submit comments may wish to focus on the study
results relevant to the current and proposed formats.

II. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
the guidance to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

III. References

    The following references have been placed on display in the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) and may be seen by
interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
and are available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov.

1. FDA, Eye-Tracking Experimental Study on Consumer Responses to
Modifications to the Nutrition Facts Label Outlined in the Food and
Drug Administration's Proposed Rulemaking, June 2015.
2. FDA, Experimental Study of Proposed Changes to the Nutrition
Facts Label Formats, June 2015.

    Dated: July 17, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-17929 Filed 7-24-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: June 16, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 116)]
[Notices]
[Page 34910-34911]
[DOCID:fr16jn06-86]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

June 7, 2006.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC06-126-000; ES06-50-000.
    Applicants: Commonwealth Electric Company; Cambridge Electric Light
Company; Commonwealth Electric Company; Canal Electric Company; Boston
Edison Company.
    Description: NSTAR Operating Companies submits an application under
Section 203 of the Federal Power Act to merge & consolidate their
facilities & Boston Edison Company to increase its authorization to
issue short-term debt.
    Filed Date: 5/26/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060602-0329.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, June 16, 2006.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER96-1551-016; EL05-2-000; ER01-615-012.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Public Service Company of New Mexico submits its
compliance filing pursuant to the Commission's Order issued 4/21/06.
    Filed Date: 5/30/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060602-0333.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 20, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER01-2562-004.
    Applicants: Competitive Energy Services, LLC.
    Description: Competitive Energy Services LLC submits its revised
market-based rate tariff designated as Revised Rate Schedule 1.
    Filed Date: 5/3/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060530-0041.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, June 14, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER02-2134-004.
    Applicants: Just Energy, LLC.
    Description: Just Energy, LLC submits a supplemental triennial
market analysis filing.
    Filed Date: 5/23/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060601-0069.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 13, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER04-954-001.
    Applicants: Ritchie Energy Products, L.L.C.
    Description: Ritchie Energy Products, LLC submits a notification of
a non-material change in status relating to its authorization to sell
power at market-based rates.
    Filed Date: 5/26/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060605-0297.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, June 16, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-973-000.
    Applicants: West Penn Power Company; Monongahela Power Company; The
Potomac Edison Company.
    Description: Allegheny Power submits a withdrawal of its Notice of
Cancellation filed 5/8/06 in reference to a Power Supply Agreement with
Baltimore Gas & Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 5/30/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060530-5006.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 20, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-977-000.
    Applicants: West Penn Power Company; Monongahela Power Company; The
Potomac Edison Company.
    Description: Allegheny Power submits a withdrawal of its Notice of
Cancellation filed 5/8/06 in reference to a Power Supply Agreement with
Delmarva Power & Light Company.
    Filed Date: 5/30/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060530-5007.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 20, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-978-000.
    Applicants: West Penn Power Company; Monongahela Power Company; The
Potomac Edison Company.
    Description: Allegheny Power submits a withdrawal of its Notice of
Cancellation filed 5/8/06 in reference to a Power Supply Agreement with
Philadelphia Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 5/30/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060530-5008.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 20, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-980-000.
    Applicants: West Penn Power Company; Monongahela Power Company; The
Potomac Edison Company.
    Description: Allegheny Power submits a withdrawal of its Notice of
Cancellation filed 5/8/06 in reference to a Power Supply Agreement with
Public Service Electric & Gas Company.
    Filed Date: 5/30/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060530-5009.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 20, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-982-000.
    Applicants: West Penn Power Company; Monongahela Power Company; The
Potomac Edison Company.
    Description: Allegheny Power submits withdrawal of its Notice of
Cancellation filed 5/8/06 in reference to a Power Supply Agreement with
Pennsylvania Power and Light Company.
    Filed Date: 5/30/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060530-5011.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 20, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1017-000.

    Applicants: West Penn Power Company; Monongahela Power Company; The
Potomac Edison Company.
    Description: Allegheny Power submits withdrawal of its Notice of
Cancellation filed 5/8/06 in reference to a Power Supply Agreement with
Atlantic City Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 5/30/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060530-5013.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 20, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1056-000.
    Applicants: Wisconsin Electric Power Company.
    Description: Wisconsin Electric Power Co submits proposed
amendments to its Metering Service Agreement with Wisconsin Public
Power Inc, FERC Tariff 115.
    Filed Date: 5/31/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060602-0336.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, June 21, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1057-000.
    Applicants: WPS Resources Operating Companies.
    Description: WPS Resources Operating Companies, on behalf of
Wisconsin Public Service Corp and Upper Peninsula Power Company,
submits an executed service agreement with Wisconsin Public Power Inc.
    Filed Date: 5/30/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060602-0335.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 20, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1058-000.
    Applicants: New Covert Generating Company, LLC.
    Description: New Covert Generating Company, LLC submits its
proposed FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 2 and supporting cost
data under which it specifies its revenue requirement for providing
cost-based reactive supply and voltage control.
    Filed Date: 5/31/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060605-0098.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, June 21, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1059-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator Inc
submits executed Large Generator Interconnection Agreement among Ameren
Services Co et al.
    Filed Date: 5/31/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060602-0334.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, June 21, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1060-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool Inc submits executed
interconnection agreement with Associated Electric Cooperative Inc and
Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company designated as Service Agreement No.
1249.
    Filed Date: 5/31/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060602-0337.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, June 21, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1061-000.
    Applicants: American Electric Power Service Corporation.
    Description: American Electric Power Service Corp on behalf of AEP
Eastern Operating Companies submits proposed revisions to Second
Amended and Restated PJM Services and Cost Allocation Agreement.
    Filed Date: 5/31/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060602-0338.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, June 21, 2006.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov.
 To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet

access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-9369 Filed 6-15-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION III

	1650 Arch Street

	Philadelphia, Pennsylvania  19103

DATE:

SUBJECT:	Technical Support Document for Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
–Pennsylvania -Clean Air Interstate Rule NOx and SO2 Trading Programs;
NOx SIP Call Rule; and Amendments to NOx Control Rules

FROM:	Marilyn Powers, Environmental Engineer   /s/   9/1/2009

Air Quality Planning Branch

TO:		File

THRU:	Cristina Fernandez  /s/   9/1/2009

		Chief, Air Quality Planning Branch

A.  BACKGROUND

EPA promulgated new, more protective national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for 8-hour ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
in July 1997.  States were required to submit SIP revisions for the new
standards three years after promulgation.  In June 2004, EPA designated
the areas that are not attaining the new ozone standard, and in December
2004 designated the areas that are not attaining the new PM2.5 standard.
 However, EPA determined that transported emissions from upwind states
constitute a major fraction of the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 problem in the
eastern portion of the United States.  Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the Clean
Air Act requires that States eliminate transported emissions that are
significantly contributing to or interfering with maintenance of
nonattainment areas in downwind states.  As in the NOx SIP Call (63 FR
57356 dated October 27, 1998), eliminating significant contribution is
not designed to eliminate all contributions to transport, but rather to
balance the burden for achieving attainment between regional-scale and
local-scale control programs.

The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) was published by EPA on May 12,
2005 (70 FR 25162).  In this rule, EPA, based on air quality modeling
analyses and cost analyses, determined that 28 States, including
Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia contribute significantly to
nonattainment and interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS for PM2.5 and
/or 8-hour ozone in downwind States in the eastern part of the country.
As a result, EPA required those upwind States to revise their State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) to include control measures that reduce
emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) which is a precursor to PM2.5
formation, and/or nitrogen oxides (NOx), which is a precursor to both
ozone and PM2.5 formation.  For jurisdictions that contribute
significantly to downwind PM2.5 nonattainment, CAIR sets annual
State-wide emission reduction requirements for SO2 and annual State-wide
emission reduction requirements for NOx, from which State budgets are
calculated.  Similarly, for jurisdictions that contribute significantly
to 8-hour ozone nonattainment, CAIR sets State-wide emission reduction
requirements for NOX for the ozone season (May 1st to September 30th).
These emission reductions were established using an approach based on
application of controls that EPA has determined to be highly cost
effective.   For CAIR, EPA has determined that highly cost effective
controls are available on electric generating units (EGUs).  This
approach for determining the state budgets was used in the NOx SIP Call,
a program that has proven to be a successful program for addressing
regional emissions.

Under CAIR, States may implement these reduction requirements by
participating in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs or by
adopting any other control measures.  CAIR lays out to subject States
what must be included in SIPs to address the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) with regard to interstate
transport with respect to the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS.

  EPA made national findings, effective on May 25, 2005, that the States
had failed to submit SIPs meeting the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D).  The SIPs were due in July 2000, 3 years after the
promulgation of the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS.  These findings
started a 2-year clock for EPA to promulgate a Federal Implementation
Plan (FIP) to address the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D).  Under
CAA section 110(c)(1), EPA may issue a FIP anytime after such findings
are made and must do so within two years unless a SIP revision
correcting the deficiency is approved by EPA before the FIP is
promulgated.

	On April 28, 2006, EPA promulgated FIPs for all States covered by CAIR
in order to ensure the emissions reductions required by CAIR are
achieved on schedule.  Each CAIR State is subject to the FIPs until the
State fully adopts, and EPA approves, a SIP revision meeting the
requirements of CAIR.  The CAIR FIPs require EGUs to participate in the
EPA-administered CAIR SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season trading
programs, as appropriate.  The CAIR FIP SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone
season trading programs impose essentially the same requirements as, and
are integrated with, the respective CAIR SIP trading programs.  The
integration of the FIP and SIP trading programs means that these trading
programs will work together to create effectively a single trading
program for each regulated pollutant (SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone
season) in all States covered by the CAIR FIP or SIP trading program for
that pollutant.  The CAIR FIPs also allow States to submit abbreviated
SIP revisions that, if approved by EPA, will automatically replace or
supplement certain CAIR FIP provisions (e.g., the methodology for
allocating NOX allowances to sources in the State), while the CAIR FIP
remains in place for all other provisions.

On April 28, 2006, EPA published two additional CAIR-related final rules
that added the States of Delaware and New Jersey to the list of states
subject to CAIR for PM2.5 and announced EPA’s final decisions on
reconsideration of five issues, without making any substantive changes
to the CAIR requirements.

EPA was sued by a number of parties on various aspects of CAIR, and on
July 11, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit issued its decision to vacate both CAIR and the associated CAIR
FIP in their entirety. North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836 (D.C. Cir.
2008).  In response to EPA's petition for rehearing, the Court issued an
order remanding CAIR to EPA without vacating either CAIR or the CAIR
FIP.  North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836, 2008 WL 533481 (D.C. Cir.
Dec. 23, 2008). The Court thereby left CAIR provisions in place in order
to “temporarily preserve the environmental values covered by CAIR”
until EPA replaces it with a rule consistent with the Court’s opinion.
 The Court directed EPA to "remedy the CAIR flaws" consistent with its
July 11, 2008 opinion, but declined to impose a schedule on EPA for
completing that action.  Therefore, CAIR and the CAIR FIP are currently
in effect in Pennsylvania.

B.  EPA REQUIREMENTS

CAIR establishes State-wide emission budgets for SO2 and NOX and is to
be implemented in two phases.  The first phase of NOX reductions starts
in 2009 and continues through 2014, while the first phase of SO2
reductions starts in 2010 and continues through 2014.  The second phase
of reductions for both NOX and SO2 starts in 2015 and continues
thereafter.  CAIR requires States to implement the budgets by either:
(1) requiring EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs; or (2) adopting other control measures of the State's choosing
and demonstrating that such control measures will result in compliance
with the applicable State SO2 and NOX budgets.

The May 12, 2005 and April 28, 2006 CAIR rules provide model rules that
States must adopt (with certain limited changes, if desired) if they
want to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs.  The model
rules apply to stationary fossil fuel-fired boilers or stationary fossil
fuel-fired turbines serving at any time, since the start-up of the
unit’s combustion chamber, a generator with a nameplate capacity of
more than 25 megawatt (MWe) producing electricity for sale.  They also
apply to units that qualify as cogeneration units that serve at any time
a generator with a 25 MWe capacity and supplying more than one-third of
the unit’s potential electric output capacity or 219,000 MWe,
whichever is greater, to any utility power distribution system.

With two exceptions, only States that choose to meet the requirements of
CAIR through methods that exclusively regulate EGUs are allowed to
participate in the EPA-administered trading programs.  One exception is
for States that adopt the opt-in provisions of the model rules to allow
non-EGUs individually to opt into the EPA-administered trading programs.
 The other exception is for States that include all non-EGUs from their
NOX SIP Call trading programs in their CAIR NOX ozone season trading
programs.

States have the flexibility to choose the type of control measures they
will use to meet the requirements of CAIR.  All States are meeting  the
CAIR requirements through an option that requires EGUs to participate in
the EPA-administered CAIR cap-and-trade programs.  For such States, EPA
has provided two approaches for submitting and obtaining approval for
CAIR SIP revisions.  States may submit full SIP revisions that adopt the
model CAIR cap-and-trade rules.  If approved, these SIP revisions will
fully replace the CAIR FIPs.  Alternatively, States may submit
abbreviated SIP revisions.  These SIP revisions will not replace the
CAIR FIPs - however, the CAIR FIPs provide that, when approved, the
provisions in these abbreviated SIP revisions will be used instead of or
in conjunction with, as appropriate, the corresponding provisions of the
CAIR FIPs (e.g., the NOX allowance allocation methodology).

A State submitting a full SIP revision may either adopt regulations that
are substantively identical to the model rules or incorporate by
reference the model rules.  CAIR provides that States may only make
limited changes to the model rules if the States want to participate in
the EPA-administered trading programs.  A full SIP revision may change
the model rules only by altering their applicability and allowance
allocation provisions to:

Include NOX SIP Call trading sources that are not EGUs under CAIR in the
CAIR NOX ozone season trading program;

Provide for State allocation of  NOX annual or ozone season allowances
using a methodology chosen by the State;

Provide for State allocation of  NOX annual allowances from the
compliance supplement pool (CSP) using the State’s choice of  allowed,
alternative methodologies; and

Allow units that are not otherwise CAIR units to opt individually into
the CAIR SO2, NOX annual, or NOX ozone season trading programs under the
opt-in provisions in the model rules.

An approved CAIR full SIP revision addressing EGUs’ SO2, NOX annual,
or NOX ozone season emissions will replace the CAIR FIP for that State
for the respective EGU emissions.  EPA’s approval, without any
conditions, of a CAIR full SIP revision causes the CAIR FIP to be
automatically withdrawn.

The CAIR NOX annual and ozone season budgets were developed from
historical heat input data for EGUs.  Using these data, EPA calculated
annual and ozone season regional heat input values, which were
multiplied by 0.15 lb/mmBtu, for Phase 1, and 0.125 lb/mmBtu, for Phase
2, to obtain regional NOX budgets for 2009-2014 and for 2015 and
thereafter, respectively. EPA derived the State NOX annual and ozone
season budgets from the regional budgets using State heat input data
adjusted by fuel factors.

	The CAIR State SO2 budgets were derived by discounting the tonnage of
emissions authorized by annual allowance allocations under the Acid Rain
Program under title IV of the CAA.  Under CAIR, each allowance allocated
in the Acid Rain Program for the years in phase 1 of CAIR (2010 through
2014) authorizes 0.5 ton of SO2 emissions in the CAIR trading program,
and each Acid Rain Program allowance allocated for the years in phase 2
of CAIR (2015 and thereafter) authorizes 0.35 ton of SO2 emissions in
the CAIR trading program.

C.  STATE’S SUBMITTAL

On May 23, 2008, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP) submitted a SIP revision comprised of amendments to Pennsylvania
regulations codified at 25 Pa. Code Chapters 121, 129, and 145.  These
amendments were adopted by the Commonwealth primarily to implement the
requirements of CAIR, sunset the Commonwealth’s NOx Budget Trading
Program after 2008, to require NOx emission limits for the non-EGUs that
were trading sources in the NOx Budget Trading Program, to revise
provisions relating to the use of allowances by non-CAIR sources and
emission reduction credits.  The revisions, established in
Pennsylvania’s CAIR NOx Ozone Season trading program, supersede the
Commonwealth’s existing NOx Budget Trading Program. The non-EGU NOx
Budget Trading Program budget serves as a Statewide ozone season
emissions cap for new and existing non-EGUs as well as for EGUs that
were subject to the NOx Budget Trading Program, but not subject to CAIR.
 The Pennsylvania SIP revisions related to the State’s CAIR
regulations notably include provisions for the allocation of NOx
allowances to certain CAIR units that did not receive SO2 allowances
under the Acid Rain Program and provides for the allocation of CAIR NOx
annual allowances and CAIR NOx ozone season allowances to qualifying
renewable energy and energy efficiency units.   Additional these SIP
revisions extend existing NOx emission limits for certain boilers,
stationary combustion turbines and stationary internal combustion
engines, and transition existing programs that allowed limited use of
NOx SIP Call allowances to instead allow limited use of CAIR allowances.
 The revision also addresses the interaction between emission reduction
credits and CAIR allowances.  The revisions are made to the following
sections of Chapters 121, 129, and Subchapters A, B, and C of Chapter
145.  Subchapter D of Chapter 145 was added to establish the
requirements for the Commonwealth’s CAIR trading programs.

Chapter 121 – General Provisions

§ 121.1. Definitions – Revision of definition for vintage or vintage
year, as used in the trading program.

Chapter 129 – Standards for Sources, Additional NOx Requirements

§ 129.201 – Boilers

§ 129.202 – Stationary combustion turbines

§ 129.204 – Emission accountability

Chapter 145 – Interstate Pollution Transport Reduction

Subchapter A - NOx Budget Trading Program

§145.8 – Transition to CAIR NOx Trading Programs

Subchapter B - Emissions of NOx From Stationary Internal Combustion
Engines

§145.113 – Standard Requirements

Subchapter C - Emissions of NOx From Cement Manufacturing

§145.143 – Standard Requirements

Subchapter D - CAIR NOx and SO2 Trading Programs

Pennsylvania CAIR Trading Programs established by 25 Pa. Code Chapter
145, Subchapter D

Pennsylvania’s CAIR trading programs for NOx annual, NOx ozone season,
and SO2 emissions set forth by 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145 largely
incorporates by reference (IBR) the CAIR model rules established by EPA
in 40 CFR 96.101 – 188, 40 CFR 96.201 – 288, and 40 CFR 96.301 -
388.  The IBR includes appendices, amendments, and supplements to the
CAIR regulations.  Subchapter D also includes definitions associated
with its CAIR trading programs that pertain to allocations for renewable
energy sources, which are not part of the CAIR model rules and
provisions for the interaction of emission reduction credits with CAIR.

Pennsylvania’s CAIR rules differ from the model rules in only one of
the four areas for which states have flexibility to deviate, while still
participating in the EPA-administered CAIR trading program.
Pennsylvania has chosen to replace the model rule provisions of 40 CFR
96.141 and  96.341, pertaining to the timing of allocations for the
CAIR NOx annual trading program and the CAIR NOx ozone season trading
program, with modified requirements.  In addition, the provisions of 40
CFR 96.142 and 96.342 that pertain to the allocation process and new
unit set aside are modified. The Commonwealth’s allocation methodology
and timing, as set forth in the SIP revision, meet the minimum
requirements and flexibilities of the CAIR trading program.

25 Pa. Code §145.211 (Timing Requirements for NOx Annual Trading
Program) and §145.221 (Timing Requirements for NOx Ozone Season Trading
Program) sets forth the timing requirements for issuance of allocations
to existing CAIR sources.  In both of these trading programs, allowances
for 2010 through 2012 will be submitted to the Administrator by April
30, 2008, allowances for 2013 will be submitted by April 30, 2009, and
allowances for each subsequent year will be submitted on April 30 of the
year four years prior to the respective control period.  CAIR timing
requirements for issuance of allowances are found in 40 CFR
51.123(o)(2)(ii)(B) for the NOx annual trading program and 40 CFR
51.123(aa)(2)(ii)(C) for the NOx ozone season trading program. The
requirement that allocations be made by the Commonwealth four years in
advance of the control period for which allowances are issued meets
these CAIR requirements.

The allocations for new units will be based on actual emissions in the
calendar year preceding the year the application for allowances is
submitted.  These new units may also receive an allocation based on
qualifying converted baseline heat input.  The allowances allocated to
the new units, will be issued for the fifth year after the year of the
new unit’s NOx emissions.  CAIR timing requirements for issuance of
new unit allowances are found in 40 CFR 51.123(o)(2)(ii)(C) for the NOx
annual trading program and 40 CFR 51.123(aa)(2)(ii)(D) for the NOx ozone
season trading program.  These require that the EPA be notified of the
amount of allowances to be allocated to new units by October 31 and July
31 of the year of the allocation for the NOx annual trading program and
the NOx ozone season trading program, respectively.  The new unit
allocation requirements in §145.211 and §145.221 meet the timing
requirements of CAIR.

Additionally, Pennsylvania has chosen not to use a “set-aside” for
allocations to new units.  Instead, as set forth in 145.212(c), existing
units, new units, and qualifying resources will be allocated from the
same allowance pool.  Allocation priority is given to new units, after
which existing units and qualifying resources will receive allocations.
A unit may receive a new unit allocation in the same year it receives an
allocation based on qualifying converted baseline heat input,with
concurrent allocations continuing each year until the new unit no longer
qualifies for new unit allocations.  The new unit will no longer qualify
as a new unit five years after the unit’s first NOx emissions.  Such a
methodology avoids oversubscription of a set-aside (in which case
allowances are prorated and new units do not receive all of its
requested allowances), allows new sources to be integrated into the
allowance pool, and allows qualifying resources a more equitable share
of allowances.

“Qualifying resources” is a term used by the Commonwealth that
refers to energy efficiency or renewable energy sources that meet the
Commonwealth’s requirements for allocation of allowances.
§145.212(f) stipulates that the number of allocations will be
determined by converting the certified quantity of electric energy
production, useful thermal energy and energy equivalent value of the
measures approved under the Pennsylvania Alternative Energy Portfolio
Standard to equivalent thermal energy.

Pennsylvania has also chosen to allocate up to 1.3 percent of its CAIR
NOx annual trading budget in each control period to certain facilities
that were exempted from the Acid Rain Program.  Because they were exempt
from the Acid Rain Program, they did not receive SO2 allowances under
that program.  These facilities are now subject to CAIR and would
receive NOx annual and NOx ozone season allowances..  §145.212(f) sets
forth the requirements for a source to qualify to receive additional
CAIR NOx allowances  Sources that qualify will receive additional NOx
allowances at a ratio of one CAIR NOx allowance for every eight tons of
SO2 emitted.  This ratio is derived from historical price data for NOx
and SO2 allowances.  These sources may also choose to opt in to the Acid
Rain Program to receive SO2 allowances in that program, in which case
the number of additional NOx allowances received under this provision
would be adjusted downward to reflect the difference between its Acid
Rain Program SO2 allowances and its SO2 emissions.

Sunset of Pennsylvania NOx Budget Trading Program and Transition of
Non-EGUs that were formerly trading sources

	This SIP revision terminates Pennsylvania’s NOx Budget Trading
Program after the 2008 control period.  §145.8 specifically retires
allowances for both EGUs and non-EGUs allocated for 2009 and beyond that
were issued under the NOx Budget Trading Program, and requires the EGUs
that were trading sources in this program to comply with the
requirements of Subchapter D, for CAIR NOx and SO2 Trading Programs.

	Pennsylvania has opted not to include in its CAIR ozone season trading
program the non-EGUs that participated in the NOx Budget Trading
Program.  Pennsylvania is therefore required to meet the requirements of
40 CFR 51.121(f)(2) and (i)(4) for these non-EGUs, which require that a
State impose a NOx mass emissions cap on each source, impose a NOx
emissions rate limit on each source and assume maximum operating
capacity for purposes of estimating mass NOx emissions, or impose any
other regulatory requirement which can be demonstrated to provide
emission reductions that for the source to comply with its 2007 ozone
season NOx budget.  A State must also impose enforceable mechanisms to
assure that collectively all such sources, including new or modified
units, will not exceed the total NOx emissions projected for its 2007
budget.  40 CFR 51.121(i)(4) requires that these sources must also
comply with the monitoring provisions of 40 CFR 75, subpart H.

	Pennsylvania has added new subsection §145.8(d) to transition these
units from the NOx Budget trading program, and to meet the requirements
of 40 CFR 51.121(f)(2) and (i)(4).  These units will be required to
comply with an emissions cap to meet their continuing requirements under
the NOx SIP Call.  The non-EGU emissions trading budget under the NOx
SIP Call totals 3,619 tons of NOx.  Pennsylvania uses 3,438 tons as a
State-wide ozone season emission limitation for these units. Each unit
has an allowable emission rate, calculated by January 31 of each year,
that is equivalent to its share of the previous ozone season’s total
heat input for all non-EGUs subject to these requirements multiplied by
3,438 tons.  Continuous emissions monitoring (CEMS) in accordance with
40 CFR Part 75 is required for these units.

	Also, this subsection sets forth a requirement that if the statewide
cap is exceeded, those units that exceed their individual caps must
surrender to the Commonwealth one CAIR NOx ozone season allowance and
one CAIR NOx annual allowance for each ton of emissions over its cap.
This provision is discussed in more detail in item 4 below.
Pennsylvania has set aside five percent (181 tons) of the NOx SIP Call
non-EGU budget, 76 tons of which will be retired each year to compensate
for sources that were exempted under the “twenty-five ton exemption”
 in §145.4(b).  The balance of tons remaining in the set aside is
available to Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
annually for accounting purposes.

3)  Other Provisions Related to CAIR allowances

Chapter 129 applies to owners and operators of small sources of NOx in
the five counties that comprise the Pennsylvania portion of the
Philadelphia non-attainment area.  The affected sources - boilers,
stationary combustion turbines and stationary internal combustion
engines - are subject to emission limits set forth in §129.201 through
§129.203.   §129.204 requires that these sources surrender NOx SIP
Call allowances to the Commonwealth if they exceed their NOx emission
limits.  These provisions were approved by EPA into the Pennsylvania SIP
on September 29, 2006 (71 FR 57428).  Because the NOx SIP Call trading
program has been discontinued, this SIP revision transitions the
allowances from NOx SIP Call allowances to CAIR NOx allowances.

25 Pa. Code §145.113 and §145.143 set forth the emission limitations
for large stationary internal combustion engines and large cement kilns
that are subject to the NOx SIP Call.  These requirements were approved
into the Pennsylvania SIP by the September 29, 2006 rulemaking. Like the
small sources of NOx above, these sources are required to surrender NOx
SIP Call allowances to the Commonwealth if they exceed their NOx
emission limits.  Similarly, this SIP revision transitions the
allowances from NOx SIP Call allowances to CAIR NOx allowances.

25 Pa. Code §145.205 includes additional requirements related to
Chapter 127 - Emission Reduction Credit (ERC) Provisions.  This section
requires a CAIR unit that generates ERCs to surrender CAIR allowances
equal to the amount of ERC credits relied upon by the trade authorized
under Chapter 127.  A similar provision was approved into
Pennsylvania’s SIP on August 21, 2001 (66 FR 43795) as part of the
Commonwealth’s NOx Budget Trading Program.  This provision updates the
requirements for EGUs that generate ERCs from NOx SIP Call allowances to
CAIR NOx allowances.

4)  EPA analysis of use of CAIR allowances

EPA reviewed the requirement for non-EGUs under §129.204 and §145.113
and §145.143, discussed above, to surrender CAIR allowances to assure
that its use in the Commonwealth is very limited and will not
significantly impact the CAIR trading market.  The number of allowances
surrendered has varied from 1 allowance to 325.   These amounts would
constitute a fraction of one percent of the Commonwealth’s total CAIR
NOx budget in 2009.  (For example, 325 allowances are 0.33 percent and
0.77 percent of the CAIR annual budget and ozone season budget,
respectively.  A summary of the allowances actually surrendered under
the existing provisions are shown below.

Vintage Year		Allowances Surrendered

2003			17

2004			1

2005			278

2006			244

2007			221

2008			325

These units have to comply with either a cap or an emission rate, but
have the option to surrender allowances when the cap or rate is
exceeded.  Pennsylvania believes that the majority of sources’
preference will be to control rather than to purchase allowances.
Through 2007, the sources having the surrender option have controlled
about 10,000 tons of NOx per ozone season, and have surrendered an
average of 247 tons per ozone season, or about 2.5% of the amount
controlled.

As described in (2) above, Pennsylvania has added the new subsection
§145.8(d) to address requirements for units subject to the NOx Budget
Trading Program, but not subject to the CAIR NOx Ozone Season trading
Program.  Beginning with the 2009 ozone season, these units will be
required to meet a State-wide ozone season emissions cap.  Each unit
also has an allowable emission rate.  If the combined NOx ozone season
emissions from all the units subject to subsection §145.8(d) exceed the
statewide ozone season emissions cap, the units that exceed their
individual allowable emissions for that ozone season must surrender one
CAIR NOx ozone season allowance and one CAIR NOx annual allowance for
each ton of emissions over the individual unit’s allowable emission
limit. The following list shows the total number of emissions from all
non-EGUs in Pennsylvania for the control periods in 2003 through 2007
under the NOx SIP Call, taken from the Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD)
website that posts data related to trading programs.  This data shows
emissions ranging from 65.4% of the NOx SIP Call emissions budget in
2006 to 80.5% in 2004.

Ozone Season       Total non-EGU emissions

2003 		 2,768.3

2004		 2,912.0

2005		 2,723.7

2006 		 2, 367.5

2007 		 2,512.4

Because the surrender provision is only triggered if the statewide cap
is exceeded, this data suggests that the impact to the CAIR trading
program and allowance market would be minimal. Thus, the impact from
these sources will likely be insignificant.

5.  Additional Analysis/Clarifications Pertaining to the NOx SIP Call
Non-EGUs

	25 Pa. Code 145.8(c) establishes that the requirements that pertain to
units subject to the NOx SIP Call trading program, as set forth in
Subchapter A, are replaced with the new requirements for the CAIR ozone
season trading program set forth in Subchapter D, starting with the 2010
control period.  Although this provision is a blanket reference to the
NOx Budget Trading Program (which includes both EGUs and non-EGUs), it
applies only to the EGUs that are trading sources under the Pennsylvania
CAIR provisions found in Subchapter D.  The remaining NOx SIP Call
trading program units not subject to CAIR (non-EGUs) are regulated under
§145.8(d).  The Commonwealth’s NOx SIP Call requirements are fully
addressed by the combination of these two rules.

	Section 145.8(d)(12) sets aside 181 tons of the non-EGU NOx budget for
“accounting corrections.”  If unused, this NOx tonnage will be
retired by Pennsylvania annually.  It provides a buffer for assuring
that the non-EGU budget is met (e.g., units meeting the 25 ton exemption
in the NOx Budget Trading Program).

D.  CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED AGENCY ACTION

Pennsylvania has adopted amendments to its existing rules that establish
NOx annual, NOx ozone season, and SO2 annual trading programs meeting
the requirements of CAIR.  Pennsylvania has largely incorporated by
reference the EPA model rules and includes modifications to the model
rules that are consistent with the limited changes allowed by CAIR in
order for a State to participate in the EPA-administered CAIR trading
program. The SIP revision, which meets the requirements of CAIR and
strengthens the SIP, is recommended for approval.

 The Court also determined that the CAIR trading programs were unlawful
(id. at 906-8) and that the treatment of title IV allowances in CAIR was
unlawful (id. at 921-23).  For the same reasons that EPA is approving
the provisions of Pennsylvania’s SIP revision that use the SO2 and NOX
budgets set in CAIR, EPA is also approving, Pennsylvania’s SIP
revision, including the provisions addressing applicability, allowance
allocations, and use of title IV allowances.

 Pennsylvania anticipated that its CAIR SIP would be in effect by April
30, 2008 in time to issue the allocations for 2010 through 2012.
Because the Pennsylvania CAIR SIP was not in effect at that time, the
2009 allocations for sources in Pennsylvania were issued under the FIP.
Allocations for 2010 will be issued in accordance with the
Commonwealth’s CAIR SIP when finally approved.

 PAGE  1


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40050-40051]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17805]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81414; File No. SR-ICC-2017-009]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of
Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule
Change To Provide for the Clearance of Additional Credit Default Swap
Contracts

August 17, 2017.
    On June 13, 2017, ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act (``Act'') \1\ and Rule
19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to provide for the
clearance of additional credit default swap contracts (File No. SR-ICC-
2017-009). The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on July 3, 2017.\3\ To date, the Commission has not
received comments on the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-81029 (June 27,
2017), 82 FR 30931 (July 3, 2017) (SR-ICC-2017-008) (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that within 45 days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period

to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission shall
either approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule
change, or institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved. The 45th day from the publication of
notice of filing of this proposed rule change is August 17, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is extending the 45-day time period for Commission
action on the proposed rule change. ICC's proposes to revise the ICC
Rulebook to provide for the clearance of Standard Asia Corporate Single
Name CDS contracts, Standard Asia Financial Corporate Single Name CDS
contracts, and Standard Emerging Market Corporate Single Name CDS
contracts. The Commission finds it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that
it has sufficient time to consider ICC's proposed rule change.
    Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) \5\ of
the Act, designates October 1, 2017, as the date by which the
Commission should either approve or disapprove, or institute
proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed rule
change (File No. SR-ICC-2017-009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-17805 Filed 8-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Cooling Water Intake Structure ( CWIS) Information Data Required Rig Information Rig Name ENSCO 55 Rig Type Jackup F& G L780 II C Total Installed Power Generation Capacity 4950 hp Number of Cooling Water Intake Structures ( CWISs) 4 Brief description of each CWIS ( e. g., sea chest, simple pipe) Sea chest, raw water tower deep well pumps Rough dimensions of each CWIS and indicate whether onboard CWIS has an existing flange 3 raw water tower pumps, 2 stage w/ 75 hp motors pump rated 1200 gpm 1 Sea chest used only while under tow Screen type ( e. g., strainer, wedge wire) with mesh size Basket Strainers, ¼ " Mesh on pump itself Total Design Specifications for Daily Maximum Water Intake Volume of each CWIS 1,727,964 gals ( 41,142 bbls)

Total Daily Water Intake Volume of each CWIS ( Set up/ Drilling) 1,727,964 gals ( 41,142 bbls)

Design Specs for Through Screen Velocity of each CWIS ( i. e., Q= V* A) ( Set up/ Drilling) 13.33 ft/ second List of Purposes of Cooling Water Intakes ( e. g., cool crude oil, produced water, power generators, drill pipe brakes) Brake water cooling List of Purposes of Non cooling Water Intakes ( e. g., fire water, hotel loads) Water makers, fire main, sanitary, pre load, jet spud cans, mud pits, shakers Total Volume of Water Intake for Ballasting, Duration of the Ballast intake, and the Through Screen Velocity of the Ballast intake 2,677,500 gals ( 63,750 bbls) Duration = time on location. Through Screen Velocity = 13.33 ft. Per second Mitigation Measures for reducing Exotic Species Migration through Ballast water The rig does not carry much ballast water from location to location. It is taken on and dumped at the same location. Mitigation Measures for reducing Impingement and Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms, as well as Bio fouling Prevention Measures Sea chest screens, and baskets, cathodic protection Is the Rig equipped with a Radiator Cooling System for the Main Engines? Yes, 3 Radiators for the engines


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 13, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14712-14715]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6030]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2012-0076; A-1-FRL-9646-2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Massachusetts; Determination of Attainment of the 1997 Ozone Standard
for the Eastern Massachusetts Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing two separate and independent
determinations regarding the Boston-Lawrence-Worcester (Eastern
Massachusetts) moderate 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. First,
based on complete, quality-assured and certified air monitoring data
for 2007-2009, EPA is proposing to determine that the Eastern
Massachusetts nonattainment area attained the 1997 8-hour National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone as of the area's
applicable attainment date, June 15, 2010. Second, EPA is proposing to
determine that Eastern Massachusetts has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, based upon complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air
monitoring data that show the area monitored attainment of the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS for the 2008-2010 and 2009-2011 monitoring periods. If
this latter proposed determination is made final, under the provisions
of EPA's ozone implementation rule, the requirements for this area to
submit an attainment demonstration, a reasonable further progress plan,
contingency measures, and other planning State Implementation Plans
related to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS shall be suspended
for so long as the area continues to attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS. EPA
is proposing these determinations under the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 12, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R01-OAR-2012-0076 by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``Docket Identification Number EPA-R01-OAR-2012-0076,''
Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (mail code: OEP05-2),
Boston, MA 02109-3912.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: Anne Arnold,
Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office,
5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109-3912. Such deliveries
are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday
through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-
2012-0076. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
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 through www.regulations.gov, or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The www.regulations.gov Web site 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 email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public 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 electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office
Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible,
you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard P. Burkhart, Air Quality
Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109-
3912, telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. What actions is EPA taking?
II. What is the effect of these actions?
III. What is the background for these actions?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the relevant air quality data?
V. Proposed Actions
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What actions is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing two separate and independent determinations.
First,

pursuant to section 181(b)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), and based
upon complete, quality assured and certified air monitoring data for
2007-2009, EPA is proposing to determine that the Boston-Lawrence-
Worcester (Eastern Massachusetts) moderate 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area (hereafter ``the Eastern Massachusetts area'') attained the 1997
8-hour NAAQS for ozone by its applicable attainment date, June 15,
2010. The Eastern Massachusetts nonattainment area consists of
Barnstable, Bristol, Dukes, Essex, Middlesex, Nantucket, Norfolk,
Plymouth, Suffolk and Worcester Counties. Second, EPA is proposing to
determine that the area has attained the 1997 8-hour standard based
upon complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air monitoring
data showing attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS for the 2008-2010 and
2009-2011 monitoring periods.

II. What is the effect of these actions?

    First, under section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA and the provisions of
EPA's ozone implementation rule (see 40 CFR Section 51.902(a)), EPA is
proposing to determine that the Eastern Massachusetts area attained the
1997 ozone NAAQS by its applicable attainment date of June 15, 2010.
The effect of a final determination of attainment by the area's
attainment date would be to discharge EPA's obligation under section
181(b)(2)(A), and to establish that, in accordance with that section,
the area would not be reclassified for failure to attain by its
applicable attainment date. Second, EPA is proposing to determine that
the area continues to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard based on
the most recent three years of complete, quality-assured monitoring
data.
    If this latter proposed determination is made final, under the
provisions of EPA's ozone implementation rule (see 40 CFR Section
51.918), the requirements for the Eastern Massachusetts moderate ozone
nonattainment area to submit an attainment demonstration, a reasonable
further progress plan, section 172(c)(9) contingency measures, and any
other planning State Implementation Plans (SIPs) related to attainment
of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS would be suspended for so long as the
area continues to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This proposed
action, if finalized, would not constitute a redesignation to
attainment under the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 107(d)(3), because we
would not yet have an approved maintenance plan for the area as
required under section 175A of the CAA, nor a determination that the
area has met the other requirements for redesignation. The
classification and designation status of the area would remain moderate
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS until such time as EPA
determines that the area meets the CAA requirements for redesignation
to attainment.
    If this determination of attainment is finalized and EPA
subsequently determines, after notice-and-comment rulemaking in the
Federal Register, that the area has violated the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard, the basis for the suspension of these requirements would no
longer exist, and the area would thereafter have to address the
pertinent CAA requirements.

III. What is the background for these actions?

    On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857), EPA designated as nonattainment
any area that was violating the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, based on the
three most recent years (2001-2003) of air quality data. The Eastern
Massachusetts area was designated as a moderate ozone nonattainment
area. Recent air quality data indicate that the Eastern Massachusetts
area is attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of the relevant air quality data?

    The EPA has reviewed the ambient air monitoring data for ozone,
consistent with the requirements contained in 40 CFR Part 50 and
recorded in the Air Quality Data System (AQS) database, for Eastern
Massachusetts, from 2007 through 2011.
    Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR Part 50, the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard is attained at a site when the 3-year average of the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations at an
ozone monitor is less than or equal to 0.08 parts per million (ppm)
(i.e., 0.084 ppm, based on the rounding convention in 40 CFR Part 50,
Appendix I). This 3-year average is referred to as the design value.
When the design value is less than or equal to 0.084 ppm at each
monitoring site within the area, then the area is meeting the NAAQS.
Also, the data completeness requirement is met when the 3-year average
of the percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is more than
90%, and no single year has less than 75% data completeness as
determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR Part 50.
    Table 1 shows the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentrations for the fourteen Eastern Massachusetts area monitors for
the years 2007-2009, and the ozone design values for these same
monitors based on 2007-2009. Tables 2 and 3 show similar data for the
2008-2010 and 2009-2011 monitoring periods.

    Table 1--2007-2009 Fourth-High 8-Hour Average Ozone Concentrations and 2007-2009 Design Values (Parts per
                                   Million) in the Eastern Massachusetts Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Design
                 Site ID                         Site location         4th High   4th High   4th High    value
                                                                         2007       2008       2009     (07-09)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
250250041...............................  Boston-Long Island *......      0.072      0.072      0.075      0.073
250250042...............................  Boston-Roxbury............      0.071      0.062      0.062      0.065
250170009...............................  Chelmsford................      0.087      0.069      0.068      0.074
250051002...............................  Fairhaven.................      0.075      0.080      0.069      0.074
250095005...............................  Haverhill.................      0.089      0.073      0.070      0.077
250092006...............................  Lynn......................      0.088      0.078      0.073      0.079
250213003...............................  Milton....................      0.088      0.076      0.071      0.078
250094004...............................  Newbury *.................      0.086      0.075      0.068      0.076
250094005...............................  Newburyport **............  .........  .........  .........  .........
250070001...............................  Oak Bluffs-Martha's             0.077      0.083      0.071      0.077
                                           Vineyard *.
250171102...............................  Stow......................      0.086      0.074      0.071      0.077
250010002...............................  Truro.....................      0.082      0.075      0.071      0.076
250270024...............................  Uxbridge (site began in     .........  .........      0.071  .........
                                           2009).
250270015...............................  Worcester.................      0.089      0.081      0.077      0.082
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 2--2008-2010 Fourth-High 8-Hour Average Ozone Concentrations and 2008-2010 Design Values (Parts per
                                   Million) in the Eastern Massachusetts Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Design
                 Site ID                         Site location         4th High   4th High   4th High    value
                                                                         2008       2009       2010     (08-10)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
250250041...............................  Boston-Long Island *......      0.072      0.075      0.070      0.072
250250042...............................  Boston-Roxbury............      0.062      0.062      0.063      0.062
250170009...............................  Chelmsford................      0.069      0.068      0.069      0.068
250051002...............................  Fairhaven.................      0.080      0.069      0.077      0.075
250095005...............................  Haverhill.................      0.073      0.070      0.071      0.071
250092006...............................  Lynn......................      0.078      0.073      0.072      0.074
250213003...............................  Milton....................      0.076      0.071      0.073      0.073
250094004...............................  Newbury* (moved to              0.075      0.068  .........  .........
                                           Newburyport).
250094005...............................  Newburyport **............  .........  .........      0.066  .........
250070001...............................  Oak Bluffs-Martha's             0.083      0.071      0.080      0.078
                                           Vineyard *.
250171102...............................  Stow......................      0.074      0.071      0.069      0.071
250010002...............................  Truro.....................      0.075      0.071      0.078      0.074
250270024...............................  Uxbridge (site began in     .........      0.071      0.071  .........
                                           2009).
250270015...............................  Worcester.................      0.081      0.077      0.070      0.076
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 3--2009-2011 Fourth-High 8-Hour Average Ozone Concentrations and 2009-2011 Design Values (Parts per
                                   Million) in the Eastern Massachusetts Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Design
                 Site ID                         Site location         4th High   4th High   4th High    value
                                                                         2009       2010       2011     (09-11)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
250250041...............................  Boston-Long Island*.......      0.075      0.070      0.066      0.070
250250042...............................  Boston-Roxbury............      0.062      0.063      0.060      0.061
250170009...............................  Chelmsford................      0.068      0.069      0.064      0.067
250051002...............................  Fairhaven.................      0.069      0.077      0.076      0.074
250095005...............................  Haverhill.................      0.070      0.071      0.066      0.069
250092006...............................  Lynn......................      0.073      0.072      0.069      0.071
250213003...............................  Milton....................      0.071      0.073      0.073      0.072
250094004...............................  Newbury* (moved to              0.068  .........  .........  .........
                                           Newburyport).
250094005...............................  Newburyport **............  .........      0.066      0.066  .........
250070001...............................  Oak Bluffs-Martha's             0.071      0.080      0.078      0.076
                                           Vineyard *.
250171102...............................  Stow......................      0.071      0.069      0.063      0.067
250010002...............................  Truro.....................      0.071      0.078      0.068      0.072
250270024...............................  Uxbridge (site began in         0.071      0.071      0.068      0.070
                                           2009).
250270015...............................  Worcester.................      0.077      0.070      0.065      0.070
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Due to equipment malfunction at Oak Bluffs in 2009, sample collection error at Boston-Long Island in 2007 and
  monitor relocation at Newbury in 2009, the data capture percentages for these ozone monitors were below EPA
  data capture requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for those years. The Massachusetts Department of
  Environmental Protection performed a missing data analysis for each site with low data capture in accordance
  with the regulatory requirements of 40 CFR Part 50, Appendix I. The Massachusetts missing data analysis used a
  combination of meteorology and air quality data for ozone monitors near the sites with low data capture, for
  the unmonitored days, to decisively conclude that on the days with missing ozone data, the ozone levels, if
  captured, would have been below the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Thus, by rule, these days can be counted for the
  purpose of meeting the data completeness requirement. The missing data analysis for these sites was approved
  by EPA on December 15, 2011. The approval letter is in the Docket for this action.
** Newburyport began in 2009, but not enough data collected in 2009 to have a valid fourth high.

    EPA's review of these data indicates that the Eastern Massachusetts
area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and met its applicable
attainment deadline, based on 2007-2009 data. Our review also shows
that the area continues to attain the standard, based on complete,
quality-assured and certified data for the 2008-2010 and 2009-2011
monitoring periods.
    EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
notice or on other relevant matters pertaining to this rulemaking
action. These comments will be considered before EPA takes final
action. Interested parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking
procedure by submitting written comments to the EPA New England
Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal
Register.

V. Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing two separate and independent determinations.
First, under section 181(b)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act and the
provisions of EPA's ozone implementation rule (see 40 CFR Section
51.902(a)), based upon complete, quality-assured and certified data for
2007-2009, EPA is proposing to determine that the Eastern Massachusetts
1997 8-hour ozone moderate nonattainment area attained the 1997 ozone
NAAQS by its applicable attainment date of June 15, 2010. Second, EPA
is proposing to determine that the Eastern Massachusetts area has
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, based on complete, quality-
assured data for the 2008-2010, and 2009-2011 monitoring periods. As
provided in 40 CFR Section 51.918, if EPA finalizes this determination,
it would suspend the requirements for Massachusetts to submit planning
SIPs related to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for this
area, for so long as the area continues to attain the standard.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Massachusetts submitted an attainment demonstration and
contingency measures for this area on Jan. 31, 2008. EPA has not
taken action on the attainment demonstration, but has proposed
approval of the reasonable further progress plan and contingency
measures. (See 75 FR 57221, Sept. 10, 2010.)

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

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    These actions propose to make determinations of attainment based on
air quality, and would, if finalized, result in the suspension of
certain Federal requirements, and/or would not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, these
proposed actions:
     Are not ``significant regulatory actions'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are 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.);
     Do 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);
     Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Are not subject to the requirements of Section 12(d) of
the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) because application of those requirements would be
inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and
     Do 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, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: February 29, 2012.
 H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 2012-6030 Filed 3-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P