[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 217 (Friday, November 8, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67090-67098]
[FR Doc No: 2013-26850]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0564; FRL-9902-56-Region 4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Florida: Non-
interference Demonstration for Removal of Federal Low-Reid Vapor
Pressure Requirement

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the State of Florida's August 15,
2013, State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to the State's approved
maintenance plans addressing the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS). Specifically, Florida's revision, including
updated modeling, shows that the Southeast Florida, Tampa Bay and
Jacksonville areas would continue to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard if the currently applicable Federal Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP)
standard for gasoline of 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) was modified
to a less stringent standard of 9.0 psi for Broward, Dade, Duval,
Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas Counties (hereafter also referred
to as ``Maintenance Plan Areas'') during the high-ozone season. Also,
based on a request by the State on November 29, 2012, EPA is proposing
to remove the existing SIP references related to the previously-
implemented inspection and maintenance programs in the Maintenance Plan
Areas. The State has included a technical demonstration with the August
15, 2013, SIP revision which demonstrate that the less-stringent RVP
standard and the absence of an inspection and maintenance program in
these areas would not interfere with continued maintenance of the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS or any other applicable standard. Approval of this
SIP revision is a prerequisite for EPA's consideration of an amendment
to the regulations to remove the Maintenance Plan Areas from the list
of areas that are currently subject to the Federal 7.8 psi RVP
requirements. The specific elements of the maintenance plan modeling
that EPA is proposing update for the Maintenance Plan Areas are the
ozone maintenance plan attainment inventories, emissions projections
and air quality monitoring data. The revised modeling utilizes updated
models to calculate the mobile source emissions. EPA has preliminarily
determined that Florida's August 15, 2013, SIP revision with respect to
the changes to the modeling and associated technical demonstration
associated with the State's request for the removal of the Federal RVP
requirements, and with respect to the use of updated models, is
consistent with the applicable provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA or
Act). Should EPA decide to remove the subject portions of the
Maintenance Plan Areas from those areas subject to the 7.8 psi Federal
RVP requirements, such action will occur in a subsequent rulemaking.
EPA has also preliminarily determined that removal of the regulatory
provisions associated with the previously-implemented inspection and
maintenance programs from the Maintenance Plan Areas is consistent with
the applicable provisions of the CAA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 9, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R04-OAR-2013-0564 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: EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0564, Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief,
Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. 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 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2013-0564. 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. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    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 the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,

Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. 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 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman of the Regulatory
Development Section, in the Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr.
Lakeman may be reached by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or via electronic
mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What is being proposed?
II. What is the background of the areas?
III. What is the history of the gasoline volatility requirement?
IV. What is the history of the Motor Vehicle Inspection Program in
the areas?
V. What are the section 110(l) requirements?
VI. What is EPA's analysis of Florida's submittal and request?
VII. Proposed Action
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is being proposed?

    Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas
counties in Florida are currently designated attainment for the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. As discussed further below, these counties were
previous nonattainment areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS but were
subsequently redesignated from nonattainment to attainment for this
NAAQS, and as such, these counties were required to implement a
``110(a)(1) ozone Maintenance Plan'' for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.\1\ This rulemaking proposes to approve a revision to the
110(a)(1) ozone Maintenance Plans for the Maintenance Plan Areas
submitted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP).
Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve changes to the previously-
approved 110(a)(1) ozone Maintenance Plans, including updated modeling,
that show that the Maintenance Plan Areas can continue to maintain the
1997 8-hour ozone standard without reliance on emissions reductions
from inspection and maintenance programs previously implemented in
these Areas,\2\ and without the use of gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi
in any of the Maintenance Plan Areas during the high ozone season--June
1 through September 15.\3\ EPA is also proposing to conclude that the
new modeling associated with these changes demonstrates that the
Maintenance Plan Areas would continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS without the implementation of an inspection and maintenance
program and with the use of gasoline with an RVP of 9.0 psi throughout
the Maintenance Plan Areas during the high ozone season. Consistent
with section 110(l) of the Act, EPA also proposes to conclude that the
removal of the regulatory references in the Florida SIP to the
previously-implemented inspection and maintenance programs in the
Maintenance Plan Areas, and the use of gasoline with an RVP of 9.0 psi
throughout the Maintenance Plan Areas during the high ozone season
would not interfere with other applicable requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Per the Phase 1 final rule to implement the 1997 8-hour
Ozone standard, anti-backsliding provisions--codified at 40 CFR
51.905(a)(4)--require maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone
standard designated attainment/unclassifiable for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard to submit a maintenance plan under section 110(a)(1)
of the CAA demonstrating maintenance out to 10 years after
designation. See 69 FR 23996 (Apr. 30, 2004).
    \2\ On August 2, 2001 (66 FR 40137), and August 15, 2002 (67 FR
53314), EPA removed the emission reductions attributable to the
Motor Vehicle Inspection Program in the ozone maintenance plans for
the Jacksonville (i.e., Duval County), Southeast Florida (i.e.,
Broward, Dade and Palm Beach Counties) and Tampa (i.e,. Hillsborough
and Pinellas Counties) areas. However, in those rulemakings, EPA did
not remove Florida Code Annotated Section 62-242 from the table of
EPA-approved rules at 40 CFR 52.520. EPA is now proposing to remove
these rules from the Florida SIP.
    \3\ As discussed further below, a separate rulemaking is
required for relaxation of the current requirement to use gasoline
with an RVP of 7.8 psi in the Area. While EPA evaluates the
approvability of Florida's revision to the maintenance plan pursuant
to section 110(l), the decision regarding removal of Federal RVP
requirements pursuant to section 211(h) in the Area is made at the
discretion of the Administrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the new modeling conducted by Florida to account for
the proposed relaxation of the applicable RVP standard in the
Maintenance Plan Areas results in changes to the on-road mobile and
non-road emissions associated with the maintenance plans.\4\ This
modeling also accounts for the absence of the previously-implemented
inspection and maintenance programs in the Maintenance Plan Areas. As
such, the Florida SIP revision updates the on-road mobile and non-road
source emissions for the Areas. EPA is also proposing approval of these
changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In addition to a less stringent RVP standard, the new
modeling also utilizes updated models for on-road and off-road
mobile emission sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This preamble is hereafter organized into six parts. Section II
provides the background of the designation status for the Maintenance
Plan Areas with respect to the various ozone NAAQS. Section III
describes the applicable history of Federal gasoline regulation.
Section IV includes the history of the inspection and maintenance
programs in the Maintenance Areas. Section V provides the Agency's
policy regarding relaxation of the volatility standards. Section VI
provides EPA's analysis of the information submitted by Florida to
support: (1) The removal of the regulatory references to the
previously-implemented inspection and maintenance programs in the
Maintenance Plan Areas, and a relaxation of the more stringent
volatility standard in the Areas; (2) changes to the on-road mobile and
non-road source emissions associated with the 110(a)(1) Maintenance
Plan for the Areas; and (3) provides EPA's analysis regarding the
proposed change.

II. What is the background of the areas?

    On November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694), EPA designated the Southeast
Florida area (i.e., Broward, Dade and Palm Beach counties) as Moderate;
the Jacksonville area (i.e., Duval County) as Transitional; and the
Tampa area (i.e., Hillsborough and Pinellas counties) as Marginal
nonattainment areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. Among the requirements
applicable to nonattainment areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was the
requirement to meet certain volatility standards (known as Reid Vapor
Pressure or RVP) for gasoline sold commercially. See 55 FR 23658 (June
11, 1990). As discussed in greater detail below, as part of the RVP
requirements associated with its nonattainment designation, gasoline
sold in the 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas could not exceed 7.8 psi
RVP during the high-ozone season months.
    Following implementation of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement in the
Southeast Florida, Jacksonville and Tampa areas, each area was
redesignated to attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (60 FR 41
(January 3, 1995); 60 FR 10326 (February 24, 1995); and 60 FR 62748
(December 7, 1995), respectively).
    Included with Florida's redesignation requests, the State submitted
the required 1-hour ozone monitoring data and maintenance plans
ensuring that these areas would remain in attainment of the 1-hour
ozone standard for at least a period of 10 years (consistent with CAA
175A(a)). The maintenance plans submitted by Florida followed EPA
guidance for maintenance areas subject to section 175A of the CAA.
Florida later updated all three maintenance plans, in accordance with
section

175(A)(b) to extend the maintenance plans to cover additional years
such that the entire maintenance period was for at least 20 years after
the initial redesignation of these areas to attainment for the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS.
    These 1-hour ozone maintenance plan requirements remained in place
for the Maintenance Plan Areas when they were subsequently designated
unclassifiable/attainment for the subsequent 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
\5\ and then designated unclassifiable/attainment for the revised 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088, May 21, 2012. However, the
Maintenance Plan Areas were required to submit a 10-year maintenance
plan under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.\6\ As
required, these 110(a)(1) maintenance plans provide for continued
attainment and maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least
10 years from the effective date of these areas' designation as
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These plans also include
components demonstrating how each area will continue to attain the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS, and provide contingency measures should an area
violate the NAAQS. Florida's ozone redesignation requests and
maintenance plans for the Maintenance Plan Areas did not remove the 7.8
psi RVP standard, and as such, these areas remain subject to the 7.8
psi RVP standard per the terms of their approved respective 110(a)(1)
maintenance plans. However, Florida did submit, and EPA subsequently
approved, maintenance plans to remove the emission reductions
attributable to the previously-implemented inspection and maintenance
in the Maintenance Plan Areas. More discussion on the history of the
gasoline volatility requirement, and the history of the previously-
implemented inspection and maintenance programs in the Maintenance Plan
Areas, is provided below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Effective June 15, 2004, Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough,
Palm Beach and Pinellas Counties in Florida were designated
unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 69 FR
23857. The same counties were designated as unclassifiable/
attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088.
    \6\ As noted above, maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone
standard designated attainment/unclassifiable for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard are required to submit a maintenance plan under
section 110(a)(1) of the CAA demonstrating maintenance out to 10
years after designation. See 69 FR 23996 (Apr. 30, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What is the history of the gasoline volatility requirement?

    On August 19, 1987 (52 FR 31274), EPA determined that gasoline
nationwide had become increasingly volatile, causing an increase in
evaporative emissions from gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment.
Evaporative emissions from gasoline, referred to as volatile organic
compounds (VOC), are precursors to the formation of tropospheric ozone
and contribute to the nation's ground-level ozone problem. Exposure to
ground-level ozone can reduce lung function (thereby aggravating asthma
or other respiratory conditions), increase susceptibility to
respiratory infection, and may contribute to premature death in people
with heart and lung disease.
    The most common measure of fuel volatility that is useful in
evaluating gasoline evaporative emissions is RVP. Under section 211(c)
of CAA EPA promulgated regulations on March 22, 1989 (54 FR 11868),
that set maximum limits for the RVP of gasoline sold during the high
ozone season. These regulations constituted Phase I of a two-phase
nationwide program, which was designed to reduce the volatility of
commercial gasoline during the high ozone season. On June 11, 1990 (55
FR 23658), EPA promulgated more stringent volatility controls as Phase
II of the volatility control program. These requirements established
maximum RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi (depending on the State,
the month, and the area's initial ozone attainment designation with
respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS during the high ozone season).
    The 1990 CAA Amendments established a new section, 211(h), to
address fuel volatility. Section 211(h) requires EPA to promulgate
regulations making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, dispense,
supply, offer for supply, transport, or introduce into commerce
gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 9.0 psi during the high ozone
season. Section 211(h) prohibits EPA from establishing a volatility
standard more stringent than 9.0 psi in an attainment area, except that
we may impose a lower (more stringent) standard in any former ozone
nonattainment area redesignated to attainment.
    On December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), EPA modified the Phase II
volatility regulations to be consistent with section 211(h) of the CAA.
The modified regulations prohibited the sale of gasoline with an RVP
above 9.0 psi in all areas designated attainment for ozone, beginning
in 1992. For areas designated as nonattainment, the regulations
retained the original Phase II standards published on June 11, 1990 (55
FR 23658).
    As stated in the preamble to the Phase II volatility controls and
reiterated in the proposed change to the volatility standards published
in 1991, EPA will rely on states to initiate changes to EPA's
volatility program that they believe will enhance local air quality
and/or increase the economic efficiency of the program within the
limits of CAA section 211(h).\7\ In those rulemakings, EPA explained
that the Governor of a State may petition EPA to set a volatility
standard less stringent than 7.8 psi for some month or months in a
nonattainment area. The petition must demonstrate such a change is
appropriate because of a particular local economic impact and that
sufficient alternative programs are available to achieve attainment and
maintenance of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. A current listing of the RVP
requirements for states can be found on EPA's Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/gasolinefuels/volatility/standards.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990), 56 FR 24242 (May 29, 1991)
and 56 FR 64704 (Dec. 12, 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in the December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), Phase II
rulemaking, EPA believes that relaxation of an applicable RVP standard
in a nonattainment area is best accomplished in conjunction with the
redesignation process. In order for an ozone nonattainment area to be
redesignated as an attainment area, section 107(d)(3) of the Act
requires the state to make a showing, pursuant to section 175A of the
Act, that the area is capable of maintaining attainment for the ozone
NAAQS for ten years after redesignation. Depending on the Area's
circumstances, this maintenance plan will either demonstrate that the
area is capable of maintaining attainment for ten years without the
more stringent volatility standard or that the more stringent
volatility standard may be necessary for the area to maintain its
attainment with the ozone NAAQS. Therefore, in the context of a request
for redesignation, EPA will not relax the volatility standard unless
the state requests a relaxation and the maintenance plan demonstrates,
to the satisfaction of EPA, that the area will maintain attainment for
ten years without the need for the more stringent volatility standard.
As noted above, however, Florida did not request relaxation of the
applicable 7.8 psi RVP standard when the Area was redesignated to
attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. Rather, Florida is now seeking
to relax the 7.8 psi RVP

standard after the Area has been redesignated to attainment for the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS. Accordingly, the original modeling and maintenance
demonstration supporting the section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plans
must be revised to reflect continued attainment under the relaxed 9.0
psi RVP standard that the State has requested.

IV. What is the history of the Motor Vehicle Inspection Program in the
areas?

    The State of Florida previously implemented a motor vehicle
inspection and maintenance program in the Jacksonville, Southeast
Florida and Tampa areas as part of the State's strategy to meet the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS. This program was referred to as the Motor Vehicle
Inspection Program (MVIP). On July 1, 2000, the Florida legislature
terminated the MVIP for Jacksonville, Southeast Florida and Tampa, and
removed the program's statutory authority. As a consequence of this
repeal, FDEP developed and submitted SIP revisions to remove the
emissions reductions attributable to this program in the aforementioned
areas from the Florida SIP. Specifically, on December 10, 1999, FDEP
submitted a revision to the SIP for the ozone air quality maintenance
plans for the Jacksonville and Southeast Florida areas, and on August
29, 2000, for the Tampa, Florida area. FDEP's submissions requested the
removal of the emission reduction credits attributable to the MVIP from
the future year emission projections contained in those plans and
provided a demonstration that such removals would not interfere with
any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress, or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. At the time,
however, Florida did not also explicitly request removal from its SIP
of the regulatory references to the MVIP program. Subsequently, in
EPA's final rulemakings, published August 2, 2001 (66 FR 40137), and
August 15, 2002 (67 FR 53314), the Agency approved the SIP revisions
removing the emissions reductions that were attributable to the
inspection and maintenance program in the Maintenance Plan Areas, but
the regulatory references to the MVIP program remained.
    In summary, Florida's December 10, 1999, and August 29, 2000, SIP
revisions demonstrated that the Maintenance Plan Areas could maintain
the ozone NAAQS without the implementation of the MVIP. EPA reviewed
the State's emissions inventory and modeling analyses and found that
they met the applicable guidance and requirements. Therefore, the State
made the necessary demonstration that the MVIP was not necessary to
maintain the ozone NAAQS and that attainment of the NAAQS for any other
pollutant would not be affected by removing the MVIP from the SIP.
However, in EPA's final rulemakings related to Florida's December 10,
1999, and August 29, 2000, SIP revisions, EPA did not remove Florida
Code Annotated Section 62-242 from the table of EPA-approved rules at
40 CFR 52.520. On November 29, 2012, FDEP submitted a letter to EPA
requesting that EPA remove Rules 62-242.100 through 62.242.900 (i.e.,
entire Chapter 62-242) from the Florida SIP. In its letter, the State
noted that these rules relate to the defunct MVIP, and also noted EPA's
previous rulemakings to remove the emissions reductions attributable to
this program in its SIP. Today's proposed action is being taking in
response to FDEP's request in the November 29, 2012, letter.
    EPA notes that the MVIP was terminated over 12 years ago and as
mentioned above, on August 15, 2013, FDEP submitted revisions to the
110(a)(1) maintenance plans for the same counties formerly subject to
the MVIP. EPA also notes that Florida's August 15, 2013, SIP revision
included a technical demonstration supporting the State's request to
relax the applicable RVP standard in the Maintenance Plan Areas. That
demonstration provides that, were the Maintenance Plan Areas subject to
the less stringent RVP standard, continued maintenance is demonstrated
and the ambient air quality standard should not be violated in the
future. This demonstration of continued maintenance is premised upon
the absence of the previously-implemented MVIP in the Maintenance Plan
Areas, and as such, is consistent with the previous analysis
demonstrating that discontinuing the MVIP in the Maintenance Plan Areas
would not interfered with the continued maintenance in these Areas.

V. What are the section 110(l) requirements?

    Section 110(l) of the CAA requires that a revision to the SIP not
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress (RFP) (as defined in section 171), or any
other applicable requirement of the Act. EPA's criterion for
determining the approvability of Florida's August 15, 2013, SIP
revision is whether the requested action complies with section 110(l)
of the CAA. Because the modeling associated with the current
maintenance plans for Florida are premised in part upon the 7.8 psi RVP
requirements, a request to revise the maintenance plan modeling to no
longer rely on the 7.8 psi RVP requirement is subject to the
requirements of CAA section 110(l). Therefore, the State must
demonstrate that its August 15, 2013, SIP revision will not interfere
with the attainment or maintenance of any of the NAAQS or any other
applicable requirement of the CAA. As discussed above, it should also
be noted that Florida's technical demonstration in its August 15, 2013,
SIP revision accounts for the absence of the previously-implemented
inspection and maintenance programs in the Maintenance Plan Areas.
    The section 110(l) non-interference demonstration is a case-by-case
determination based upon the circumstances of each SIP revision. EPA
interprets 110(l) as applying to all NAAQS that are in effect,
including those that have been promulgated, but for which the EPA has
not yet made designations. The specific elements of the 110(l) analysis
contained in the SIP revision depend on the circumstances and emissions
analyses associated with that revision. EPA's analysis of Florida's
August 15, 2013, SIP revision, including review of section 110(l)
requirements, is provided below.
    Finally, EPA notes that this rulemaking is only proposing to
approve the State's revision to its existing maintenance plans for the
Maintenance Plan Areas showing that the areas can continue to maintain
the standard without the emission reductions attributable to the
previously-implemented inspection and maintenance program, and without
relying upon gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi being sold in the Areas
during the high ozone season. Consistent with CAA section 211(h) and
the Phase II volatility regulations, a separate rulemaking is required
for relaxation of the current requirement to use gasoline with an RVP
of 7.8 psi in the Area.

VI. What is EPA's analysis of Florida's submittal and request?

a. Overall Preliminary Conclusions for Non-Interference Analyses for
Florida's Request for Removal of the Federal RVP Requirement

    On August 15, 2013, FDEP submitted revisions to the 110(a)(1)
maintenance plans for the Maintenance Plan Areas. The submission
modifies the existing 110(a)(1) maintenance plans to account for a less
stringent applicable RVP gasoline requirement of 9.0 psi for these

areas. Florida's August 15, 2013, SIP revision includes an evaluation
of the impact that the removal of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement would
have on maintenance of the 1997 and 2008 ozone standards and on other
the applicable NAAQS. Florida's August 15, 2013, SIP revision also
includes an update to the attainment inventory, emissions projections
and air quality data which continues to account for the absence of the
previously-implemented inspection and maintenance programs, and the 7.8
psi RVP requirements for the Maintenance Plan Areas.
    For the purposes of these changes, EPA is making the preliminary
determination that the applicable NAAQS \8\ of interest for the non-
interference demonstration required by section 110(l) of the CAA are
the ozone, particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
standards. VOC and NOx emissions are precursors for ozone and
particulate matter (PM), and NO2 is a component of NOx.
There are no emissions reductions attributable to the emissions of
lead, sulfur dioxide (SO2), or carbon monoxide (CO) from RVP
requirements. As a result, there is no information indicating the
proposed SIP revision would have any impact on those NAAQS. Therefore,
EPA's analysis below focuses on the impact of Florida's changes to the
RVP requirements on the ozone, particulate matter and NO2
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The six NAAQS for which EPA establishes health and welfare
based standards are CO, lead, NO2, ozone, PM, and
SO2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Florida's August 15, 2013, SIP revision, includes revised mobile
source emissions modeling using EPA's approved models--Motor Vehicle
Emissions Simulator (MOVES) and NONROAD2008--to support the request to
modify the RVP gasoline requirement from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi, and
accounts for the removal of the previously-implemented inspection and
maintenance program for the Areas. In that technical demonstration,
FDEP provided information regarding the emissions trends from the
maintenance plans for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. To determine these
emissions, FDEP's maintenance demonstration compared the 2002 baseline
emissions inventory to the 2018 projected emissions inventory for each
Maintenance Plan Area. FDEP used 7.8 RVP for model years 2002, 2009 and
2011 and 9.0 RVP for model year 2014 and 2018, and did not include
inspection and maintenance programs in any of the Areas. FDEP concluded
that if projected emissions remain at or below the baseline emissions,
continued maintenance is demonstrated and the ambient air quality
standard should not be violated in the future. In addition to comparing
the final year of the plan, all of the interim years are compared to
the 2002 baseline to demonstrate that these years are also expected to
show continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS as shown below in
tables 1 and 2.
    While the remainder of this rulemaking is focused on the emission
impacts related to the potential relaxation of the Federal RVP
requirements from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi in the Maintenance Plan Areas, it
should be noted that since the time that EPA removed the emission
reductions attributable to the previously-implemented inspection and
maintenance programs in the areas, no credit for inspection and
maintenance programs has been taken in the Florida SIP. Only the
residual regulatory citation and language remained in the Florida SIP.
Today's action is proposing to remove this residual regulatory citation
and language from the Florida SIP based on the technical demonstration
that accounts for the absence of the inspection and maintenance
programs in the Maintenance Plan Areas.
    Relaxation of the RVP standard from 7.8 to 9.0 psi revealed a
slight increase in NOx and VOC emissions. Notwithstanding this slight
increase, EPA believes the most appropriate analysis for purposes of
evaluating non-interference is whether total area emissions in the
future years would remain at or below the level determined to be
consistent with maintenance of the NAAQS. The State's emission analysis
is comprised of two different man-made emission inventory source
classifications; (1) on-road mobile and (2) off-road mobile, which are
each discussed below.
    On-road mobile sources are those vehicles that travel on the
roadways. The MOVES model uses the road class vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) and other operating conditions as input parameters to generate an
output file that contain estimated emissions. For the projected years'
inventories, the on-road mobile sources emissions are calculated using
the MOVES mobile model for the future year with the projected VMT to
generate emissions that take into consideration expected Federal
tailpipe standards, fleet turnover and new fuel standards.
    Off-road mobile sources are equipment that can move but do not use
the roadways (i.e., lawn mowers, construction equipment, railroad
locomotives, aircraft). With the exception of the railroad locomotives
and aircraft engines, the emissions from this category are calculated
using the EPA's NONROAD2008 non-road mobile model. The railroad
locomotive and aircraft engine emissions are estimated by taking an
activity and multiply by an emission factor. Total off-road mobile
source emissions represent the sum of emissions generated by the
NONROAD 2008 model and emissions calculated for aircraft and railroad
locomotives.
    As noted above, although the revised emissions analysis showed
slight increases in NOX and VOC emissions for on-road and
off-road mobile sources when the less-stringent RVP standard was used,
the Maintenance Plan Areas nonetheless continue to demonstrate a
downward trend in NOX and VOC emissions through all future
years. Tables 1 and 2 below provide the emission analysis results for
total on-road, area, point and non-road emissions in the Maintenance
Plan Areas using a less-stringent RVP standards of 9.0 psi for years
2014 and 2018. Tables 3 and 4 below show a comparison of VOC and
NOX estimates for 2009 and projected emissions for 2018 if
the 7.8 psi RVP remained in place.

                                Table 1--Total Man-Made VOC Emissions (tons per day (tpd)) for the Maintenance Plan Areas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         County                                2002            2005            2008            2011            2014            2018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Jacksonville Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duval...................................................           138.9           127.4           116.0           107.3           104.2           103.9
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                 Southeast Florida Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broward.................................................           207.6           191.6           175.6           165.6           162.4           165.2
Dade....................................................           276.7           257.4           238.0           224.4           218.7           219.9
Palm Beach..............................................           180.1           164.1           148.1           136.6           131.0           129.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Tampa Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hillsborough............................................           165.1           152.2           139.3           129.5           125.8           125.3
Pinellas................................................           135.1           124.7           114.3           106.7           104.3           104.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                       Table 2--Total Man-Made NOX Emissions (tpd) for the Maintenance Plan Areas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         County                                2002            2005            2008            2011            2014            2018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Jacksonville Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duval...................................................           259.4           188.2           127.1            90.5            64.3            62.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Southeast Florida Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broward.................................................           263.4           208.3           153.2           112.5            88.9            67.7
Dade....................................................           294.3           247.8           201.3           160.3           131.6           102.5
Palm Beach..............................................           189.7           154.1           118.5            89.1            71.2            56.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Tampa Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hillsborough............................................           315.5           230.4           145.2            99.0            82.5            66.4
Pinellas................................................           152.4           122.0            91.6            68.1            55.3            44.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

           Table 3--Total Man-Made VOC Emissions (tons per summer day) for the Maintenance Plan Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       2009                    2018
                             County                              -----------------------------------------------
                                                                      7.8 RVP         7.8 RVP         9.0 RVP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Jacksonville Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duval...........................................................           112.1           103.1           103.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Southeast Florida Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broward.........................................................           170.1           164.1           165.2
Dade............................................................           231.6           218.3           219.9
Palm Beach......................................................           142.9           128.3           129.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Tampa Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hillsborough....................................................           135.0           124.3           125.3
Pinellas........................................................           110.9           103.9           104.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

           Table 4--Total Man-Made NOX Emissions (tons per summer day) for the Maintenance Plan Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       2009                    2018
                             County                              -----------------------------------------------
                                                                      7.8 RVP         7.8 RVP         9.0 RVP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Jacksonville Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duval...........................................................           106.6            62.2            62.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Southeast Florida Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broward.........................................................           134.8            67.6            67.7
Hillsborough....................................................           116.8            66.3            66.4
Dade............................................................           185.8           102.3           102.5
Palm Beach......................................................           106.6            56.4            56.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Tampa Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hillsborough....................................................           116.8            66.3            66.4

Pinellas........................................................            81.4            44.5            44.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As Tables 1 and 2 indicate, NOX and VOC emissions in the
Maintenance Plan Areas will continue to decrease, even with the
increase in high ozone season fuel RVP to 9.0 psi. The slight increase
in emissions as shown in Tables 3 and 4 is being mitigated area-wide by
a steady decrease in tailpipe emissions, which is the result of a
cleaner new vehicle fleet replacing the older fleet and other Federal
and State emissions reduction programs. As discussed below, based on
this data, together with air quality data, and maintenance
demonstrations and attainment designations for the NAAQS, EPA is making
the preliminary determination that the slight increase in
NOX and VOC emissions resulting from this change will not
interfere with the Maintenance Plan Areas' ability to maintain the
NAAQS, or any other applicable requirement. More details on the
individual non-interference analyses for the ozone, PM, and
NO2 NAAQS are provided below.

b. Non-Interference Analysis for the Ozone NAAQS

    As described above, each of the Maintenance Plan Areas was
redesignated to attainment for purposes of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
These redesignations were based upon Florida redesignation requests for
each Maintenance Plan Area which included the required 1-hour ozone
monitoring data and maintenance plans ensuring the areas would remain
in attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for at least a period of 10
years (consistent with CAA 175A(a)). These maintenance plan
requirements remained in place for the counties when they were
subsequently designated unclassifiable/attainment on April 30, 2004,
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (69 FR 23858) effective June 15, 2004.
However, because these 1997 8-hour ozone unclassifiable/attainment
areas had existing maintenance plans pursuant to the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS, they were required to submit a 10-year 110(a)(1) maintenance
plan for purposes of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As required,
110(a)(1) maintenance plans provide for continued attainment and
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years from
the effective date of these areas' designation as unclassifiable/
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As a previous 1-hour ozone
nonattainment areas, the Maintenance Plan Areas were already subject to
the Federal RVP requirements for high ozone season gasoline. Although
originally implemented for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, these Federal RVP
requirements continued to apply to the Maintenance Plan Areas per the
110(a)(1) maintenance plans required to show continued attainment and
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    The Maintenance Plan Areas are continuing to meet the 1-hour and
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,\9\ and are meeting the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, based on recent air quality monitoring data. The 2008 ozone
NAAQS is met when the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average concentration, averaged over 3 years is 0.075 parts per million
(ppm) or less. The current design values for ozone for the Maintenance
Plan Areas are shown in Table 5 with the highest design value in the
Area being 0.072 ppm in 2012. EPA also evaluated the potential increase
in the VOC and NOX precursor emissions, and whether it is
reasonable to conclude that the requested change to RVP requirements in
the Areas during the high ozone season would cause the Maintenance Plan
Areas to be out of compliance with the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The air quality design value for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS is
the 3-year average of the annual 4th highest daily maximum 8-hour
ozone concentration. The level of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is
0.075 ppm. The 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is not met when the design
value is greater than 0.075 ppm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 5 below show the design value (DV) for the Maintenance Plan
Areas currently show attainment of the 2008 8-hour NAAQS based upon the
most recent design values.

                                                               Table 5--Area Design Values
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           2005-2007 DV    2006-2008 DV    2007-2009 DV    2008-2010 DV    2009-2011 DV    2010-2012 DV
                         County                                (ppm)           (ppm)           (ppm)           (ppm)           (ppm)           (ppm)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Jacksonville Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duval...................................................           0.077           0.075           0.070           0.068           0.067           0.065
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Southeast Florida Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broward.................................................           0.067           0.068           0.063           0.062           0.060           0.059
Dade....................................................           0.074           0.074           0.069           0.068           0.065           0.065
Palm Beach..............................................           0.065           0.067           0.065           0.065           0.063           0.063
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Tampa Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hillsborough............................................           0.081           0.081           0.079           0.075           0.073           0.072
Pinellas................................................           0.072           0.072           0.069           0.067           0.066           0.067
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the current designations, monitoring and emissions
trend data showing attainment and the submitted modeling, including the
fact that the NOX emissions inventories are projected

to continue to significantly decrease,\10\ EPA has preliminarily
determined that the revised modeling associated with Florida's
technical demonstration related to the State's request to change to the
RVP requirement for the Maintenance Plan Areas will not interfere with
continued attainment of the ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Future decreases in the inventory are an order of magnitude
greater than the increases associated with the change in RVP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Non-Interference Analysis for the PM NAAQS

    The precursors for fine particulate matter less than 2.5
micrometers (PM2.5) are NOX, SO2, VOC
and ammonia. As mentioned earlier in this rulemaking, the RVP
requirements result in emissions benefits for VOC and NOX,
accordingly EPA focused on these precursors for the analysis of the
potential impact of Florida's requested SIP change.
    On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), EPA established an annual
PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\)
based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations. At that time, EPA also established a 24-hour NAAQS of
65 [mu]g/m\3\. See 40 CFR 50.7. On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA
retained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\
based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations, and promulgated a new 24-hour NAAQS of 35 [mu]g/m\3\
based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations. On January 15, 2013 (78 FR 3086), EPA established an
annual primary PM2.5 NAAQS at 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a 3-
year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. At that
time, EPA retained the 2006 24-hour NAAQS at 35 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a
3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ EPA also retained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS of
15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ as a secondary NAAQS to protect against certain
welfare effects and EPA retained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS of 65 [mu]g/m\3\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944), all counties in the Maintenance
Plan Areas were designated unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997
annual PM2.5 standards, and on November 13, 2009 (74 FR
58688), all counties in the Areas were designated unclassifiable/
attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. As Table 6
indicates the PM2.5 annual and 24-hour design values
demonstrate attainment of the respective NAAQS for the Maintenance Plan
Areas.

                                          Table 6--PM2.5 Design Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Year                               2007-2009    2008-2010    2009-2011    2010-2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Annual Design Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Jacksonville Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duval.......................................................          9.0          8.6          8.4          8.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Southeast Florida Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broward.....................................................          7.3          7.0          6.8          6.7
Dade........................................................          8.0          7.8          7.5          7.5
Palm Beach..................................................          6.5          6.3          6.3          7.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Tampa Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pinellas....................................................          8.2          7.9          7.7          7.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              24-Hour Design Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Jacksonville Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duval.......................................................           21           18           22           21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Southeast Florida Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broward.....................................................           18           16           15           15
Dade........................................................           18           16           14           14
Palm Beach..................................................           17           14           14           16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Tampa Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pinellas....................................................           18           16           16           16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, although the revised emissions analysis showed
slight increases in the PM precursor emissions (NOX and VOC)
associated with the less-stringent RVP standard, the Maintenance Plan
Areas nonetheless continue to demonstrate a downward trend in
NOX and VOC emissions through all future years. Therefore,
EPA does not expect the RVP revision to have a significant effect on
continued maintenance of the PM NAAQS. EPA has preliminarily determined
that a change to the Federal RVP requirement the Areas will not
interfere with the Areas maintaining the 1997 PM2.5 annual
or the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.

d. Non-Interference Analysis for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS

    On February 17, 2012 (77 FR 9532), EPA finalized designations for
the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. All counties in Florida, were designated
unclassifiable/attainment for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. Based on
Florida's August 15, 2013, SIP revision, EPA has evaluated the
potential increase in the NOx emissions (between June 1st and September
15th) associated with the proposed less-stringent 9.0 psi RVP
requirement to determine whether this change would cause the
Maintenance Plan Areas to violate the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. This
evaluation indicates that the slight

increase in NOX emissions associated with the less-stringent
RVP requirement would be mitigated by a steady decrease in tailpipe
emissions, which is the result of cleaner new light- and heavy-duty
vehicle fleets replacing the older fleets. See Tables 2 and 4 above.
    In light of the current designation, including the fact that NOx
emissions inventories are projected to continue to significantly
decrease, EPA has preliminarily determined that a change to the Federal
RVP requirements for the Maintenance Plan Areas would not interfere
with the continued decline in NOX emissions, nor with
attainment or maintenance of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.

VII. Proposed Action

    First, EPA is proposing to approve the State of Florida's August
15, 2013, SIP revision to its 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 110(a)(1)
Maintenance Plans for the Maintenance Plan Areas. Specifically, EPA is
proposing to approve the State's showing that the Maintenance Plan
Areas can continue to maintain the 1997 ozone standard without
emissions reductions associated with both the previously-implemented
MVIP, and the use of gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi during the high
ozone season--June 1 through September 15 in the Maintenance Plan
Areas. Second, EPA is proposing to approve updated attainment
inventories, emissions projections and air quality monitoring which are
associated with updated and revised modeling related to the proposed
change in the applicable RVP standard, and the absence of the
previously-implemented inspection and maintenance programs for the
Maintenance Plan Areas. The models used to calculate these projections
for mobile sources also have been updated to the most currently-
approved versions. Third, EPA is proposing to remove the Florida Code
Annotated Section 62-242, which pertains to the previously-implemented
MVIP, from the Florida SIP.
    EPA has preliminarily determined that Florida's August 15, 2013 SIP
revision, including the technical demonstration associated with the
State's request for the removal of the Federal RVP requirements, and
the updated attainment inventory, emissions projections and air quality
monitoring data, are consistent with the applicable provisions of the
CAA. Should EPA decide to remove the subject portions of the
Maintenance Plan Areas from those areas subject to the 7.8 psi Federal
RVP requirements, such action will occur in a separate, subsequent
rulemaking.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submittal that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, October 7, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed 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, Intergovernmental
relations, Lead, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: October 28, 2013.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2013-26850 Filed 11-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 77 (Friday, April 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24614-24615]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08443]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10852-01-R6]

Underground Injection Control Program; Hazardous Waste Injection
Restrictions; Petition for Exemption Reissuance--Class I Hazardous
Waste Injection; Lyondell Channelview Plant, Texas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of a final decision on a no migration petition
reissuance.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a reissuance of an exemption to
the land disposal restrictions, under the 1984 Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, has
been granted to Lyondell Chemical Company for three Class I hazardous
waste injection wells at the Lyondell Channelview Plant located in
Channelview, Texas.

DATES: This action was effective as of December 13, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition reissuance and all pertinent
information relating thereto are on file at the following location:
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 6, Water Division, Safe
Drinking Water Branch (6WD-D), 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas,
Texas 75270-2102.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ian Ussery, Physical Scientist, Ground
Water/UIC Section, EPA--Region 6, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As required by 40 CFR part 148, Lyondell has
adequately demonstrated to the satisfaction of the EPA by the petition
reissuance application and supporting documentation that, to a
reasonable degree of certainty, there will be no migration of hazardous
constituents from the injection zone for as long as the waste remains
hazardous. This final decision allows the underground injection by the
Lyondell Channelview Plant, of the specific restricted hazardous wastes
identified in this exemption reissuance, into Class I hazardous waste
injection Wells WDW-148, WDW-162, and WDW-438 when it is drilled in the
future, until December 31, 2050, unless EPA moves to terminate this
exemption under provisions of 40 CFR 148.24. Additional conditions
included in this final decision may be reviewed by contacting the
Region 6 Ground Water/UIC Section. As required by 40 CFR 148.22(b) and
124.10, a public notice was issued September 13, 2022. The public
comment period closed on October 28, 2022. No comments were received.
This decision constitutes final Agency action, and there is no
Administrative appeal.

    Dated: April 17, 2023.
Charles W. Maguire,
Director, Water Division, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2023-08443 Filed 4-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES Memorandum SUBJECT: BEAD Preliminary Assessment of the Impacts of Extending Restricted Entry Intervals for Methyl Parathion Use on Cotton, Field Corn, Rice, Soybean, Sunflower, Sweet Corn, Sweet Potato, and Walnuts FROM: David W. Brassard, Senior Entomologist Herbicide and Insecticide Branch THRU: Arnet Jones, Chief Herbicide and Insecticide Branch TO: Laura Parsons, Chemical Review Manager Susan Lewis, Chief Reregistration Branch 2 Special Review and Reregistration Division ( 7508C)

PRP REVIEW DATE: December 4, 2002 Background and Summary The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the impacts of extending restricted entry intervals ( REI's) for the use of methyl parathion on cotton, field corn, rice, soybean, sunflower, sweet corn, sweet potato, and walnuts. The impact characterizations contained in the table were summarized from BEAD's impact assessments for methyl parathion conducted on these crops ( see list of references). Because these analyses focused primarily on the impacts associated with the unavailability of methyl parathion, there was often little or no analysis conducted on the impacts of extending REI's. In some cases, additional information and characterizations were obtained from auxiliary notes and personal communications provided from the authors of these analyses and from crop timelines. The following impact estimates are based on target REI's ( i. e. the number of days required to elapse after application to achieve a Margin of Exposure of 100) provided by the Health Effects Division. BEAD primarily focused on impacts associated with the most commonly used formulation on each crop ( which generally accounted for 96 to100% of the usage on these crops).

The impacts of extending the REI are estimated to be minor for cotton, rice, soybeans, and 2 sunflower due to the brief target REI's ( 4 6 days) associated with the use of emulsifiable concentrate ( EC) formulations. In these crops growers would continue to use methyl parathion and would experience only minor inconveniences in conducting cultural activities required to maintain their crops. The impacts of extending the REI would be major for field corn, sweet corn, and walnuts due to the longer REI's ( 14 52 days) associated with the use of microencapsulated ( Mcap) formulations. These impacts would occur as a result of a long REI interfering with critical cultural activities and growers would most likely switch to cost effective alternative insecticides which have shorter reentry intervals. For sweet potato, the impacts of extending the REI would be minor as long as scouting and irrigation pipe maintenance activities are exempt from the 14 day REI; otherwise impacts would be major. Since there are no cost effective alternatives to methyl parathion for use on sweet potatoes, growers would suffer major losses if the REI's were extended and scouting and irrigation pipe maintenance activities were not exempted.

Table 1. Impacts of Extending Restricted Entry Intervals ( REI's) for the Most commonly Used Formulation Crop target REI* Most common form (% of total crop usage) Impact of Extending Restricted Entry Intervals Impacts of substitution of alternatives** EC Mcap EC form Mcap formulation cotton 6 11 EC ( 99%) Minor Disruptive to some growers low field corn 5 52 Mcap ( 97%) Minor Same as cancellation low rice 4 31 EC ( 99%) minor Same as cancellation high soybeans 4 31 EC minor Same as cancellation low sunflower 4  EC ( 100%) minor  low sweet corn 5 39*** Mcap ( 96%) minor Same as cancellation low sweet potato  14 Mcap ( 100%)  Minor if scouting/ irrigation pipe maintenance are exempt; otherwise impacts are major. High walnut  25 Mcap ( 100%)  Major for applications made in June, July, and August; minor for applications made in April and May. low  not registered * target REI is the number of days required to elapse after application to achieve a Margin of Exposure of 100 ** Impacts of substitution of alternatives refer to economic impacts if growers switched to alternative insecticides *** BEAD estimated the Target REI for sweet corn by extrapolating from field corn and reducing the REI proportional 3 to the reduction in application rates.

Discussion of Crop Specific Worker Activities and Impacts of Extending REI's Cotton Worker activities during the growing season include scouting, irrigation, some occasional hand weeding, tillage, spraying, and harvesting. Insects are scouted throughout the growing season, generally twice a week. Scouts come into direct contact with foliage as they go through the fields. Irrigation involves some worker activity in the fields. After tillage is complete, the irrigation pipes are assembled in the fields and must be removed before harvest. Some entry into the fields may also be necessary for repairs or to manage the irrigation. Most of the irrigation occurs in the Southwestern and Western U. S. Although hand weeding is infrequent, it may occur when workers are spot spraying a field and can involve direct contact with the plants. Tillage, spraying, and harvesting all occur using machinery, with the worker often in an enclosed cab.

The impact of extending the REI from 4 ( or 5 in areas of less than 25" of rainfall annually) to 6 days for the EC formulation ( which accounts for 99% of methyl parathion usage on cotton) would be minor. Extending the REI to 11 days for the microencapsulated formulation ( which accounts for 1% of methyl parathion usage on cotton) is likely to result in some disruptions to worker activities in the field and would likely cause some growers to substitute the EC formulation or other cost effective alternatives. ( Gross, Mosz, and Kiely, 2002)

Field Corn Worker activities during the growing season include scouting, irrigation, tillage, spraying, and harvesting. Insects are scouted throughout the growing season. Scouts come into direct contact with foliage as they go through the fields. Irrigation involves some worker activity in the fields. After tillage is complete, the irrigation systems are assembled in the fields and must be removed before harvest. Some entry into the fields may also be necessary for repairs or to manage the irrigation. Tillage, spraying, and harvesting all occur using machinery, usually with the worker in an enclosed cab. BEAD believes that these activities are not likely to result in workers physically contacting the plants.

The impact of extending the REI to 5 days for the EC formulation ( which accounts for 97% of methyl parathion usage on field corn) would be minor. Extending the REI to 52 days for the microencapsulated formulation ( which accounts for 3% of methyl parathion usage on field corn) would result in major disruptions to worker activities in the field and would cause growers to substitute the EC formulation or other cost effective alternatives. ( Brassard and Alsadek, 2002)

Rice Methyl parathion is generally applied toward the end of the season for control of the rice stink 4 bug, a late season pest. Worker activities during the growing season include scouting, irrigation, spraying, and harvesting. Scouting is generally conducted by walking the levees or driving ATV's ( all terrain vehicles) along the levee. Scouts will sometimes enter fields to check out a problem more closely. Workers also maintain irrigation in rice fields by managing or maintaining the floodwater. This is accomplished through pumping coupled with ditch, canal, and levee management. Farm workers frequently walk on the levees or in the fields to monitor water levels. Spraying, and harvesting all occur using machinery, usually with the worker in an enclosed cab. BEAD believes that spraying and harvesting activities are not likely to result in workers physically contacting the plants.

The impact of extending the REI to 4 days for the EC formulation ( which accounts for 99% of methyl parathion usage on rice) would be minor. Extending the REI to 31 days for the microencapsulated formulation ( which accounts for 1% of methyl parathion usage on rice) would result in major disruptions to worker activities in the field and would cause growers to substitute the EC formulation. ( Cook, 2002; Shipp, 2002).

Soybeans Worker activities during the growing season include scouting, some occasional irrigation and hand weeding. The impact of extending the REI to 4 days for the EC formulation would be minor. Extending the REI to 31 days for the microencapsulated formulation would result in major disruptions to worker activities in the field and would cause growers to substitute the EC formulation or other costeffective alternatives. ( Gross and Kiely, 2002)

Sunflower Worker activities during the growing season include scouting and some occasional irrigation. The impact of extending the REI to 4 days for the EC formulation would be minor ( Brassard and Alsadek, 2002).

Sweet Corn BEAD estimated the Target REI for sweet corn by extrapolating from field corn and reducing the REI proportional to the reduction in application rates. Worker activities are more intense in sweet corn than in field corn. Worker activities during the growing season include scouting, irrigation, tillage, spraying, and harvesting. Insects are scouted throughout the growing season at least once a week. Scouts come into direct contact with foliage as they go through the fields. Irrigation involves some worker activity in the fields. After tillage is complete, the irrigation systems are assembled in the fields and must be removed before harvest. Some entry into the fields may also be necessary for repairs or to manage the irrigation. Tillage and spraying operations employ machinery, usually with the worker in an enclosed cab. BEAD believes that Tillage and spraying are not likely to result in workers physically contacting the plants. 5 Agricultural workers also come in contact with the sweet corn crop during harvest, which is usually done by hand in the field. Currently, over 90 percent of sweet corn is hand harvested. The harvest workers wear gloves and dress in long sleeve shirts and pants due to the abrasive nature of the corn foliage. Since sweet corn is planted at staggered dates within different regions of Florida, harvest occurs over an extended eight month period during the year. ( Mossler, 2002)

The impact of extending the REI to 5 days for the EC formulation ( which accounts for 4% of methyl parathion usage on sweet corn) would be minor. Extending the REI to 39 days for the microencapsulated formulation ( which accounts for 96% of methyl parathion usage on sweet corn) would result in major disruptions to worker activities in the field and would cause growers to substitute the EC formulation or other cost effective alternatives ( Atwood and Kiely, 2002).

Sweet Potatoes The only formulation used on sweet potatoes is the microencapsulated Penncap M. Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas are the only states with with a Penncap M label for sweet potato. Scouting is the main activity in fields during the time of application which typically occurs from May to July. There are two types of irrigation systems used: overhead and polypipe. Overhead irrigation systems ( with a reel gun or pivot system) are placed in the field by a single person, driving an enclosed tractor. Polypipe is laid across the field rows from the head land and not moved into the field. ( Hammond, 2002; Poret, 2002).

The impact of extending the REI to 14 days would be minor if scouting/ irrigation pipe maintenance are exempt; otherwise impacts are major. Extending the REI to 14 days for the microencapsulated formulation ( which accounts for 100% of methyl parathion usage on sweet potato) would result in major disruptions to worker activities in the field and would cause growers to substitute other alternatives. Since existing alternatives have constraints that limit their usefulness in replacing methyl parathion, extending the REI's could result in major economic impacts to sweet potato growers ( Mallampali, 2002).

Walnuts Activities in the orchard during the summer months include mowing, training young trees, vertebrate pest and weed control, irrigation maintenance, and harvest. Pruning occurs between October and January, and mummy nut removal takes place in the February time frame.

The impact of extending the REI to 25 days for the microencapsulated formulation ( which accounts for 100% of methyl parathion usage on walnuts) would result in major disruptions to worker activities in the field if applications of methyl parathion are made in June, July, and August Applications made in April and May will result in minor disruptions to cultural activities. Irrigation should not require routine entry into the field, except to monitor performance of the system. However, scouting could be 6 impacted, even with early season applications, unless all scouts are certified and can be exempted under the WPS. ( Cimino et al, 2001; Atwood and Alsadek, 2002; Mosz, 2002). Insecticide applications for codling moth control usually begin in late April and are applied at 2 to 4 week intervals until Early August ( Arthropod Management Tests, 1999 + 2000).

References Arthropod Management Tests, 1999 + 2000. Review 5 Efficacy Tests for Application Dates for Codling Moth Control.( Volume 24: D17; Volume 25: D11 14).

Atwood, D. W. and J. Alsadek. 2002. BEAD Benefits Assessment for Methyl Parathion Use on Walnuts. Internal Document, HIB/ BEAD/ OPP, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460, 8 pp.

Atwood, D. W. and T. Kiely. 2002. BEAD Benefits Assessment for Methyl Parathion Use on Sweet Corn. Internal Document, HIB/ BEAD/ OPP, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460, 16 pp.

Brassard, D. W. and J. Alsadek. 2002. BEAD Impact Assessment for the Use of Methyl Parathion on Field corn. Internal Document, HIB/ BEAD/ OPP, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460, 16 pp.

Brassard, D. W. and J. Alsadek. 2002. BEAD Impact Assessment for the Use of Methyl Parathion on Sunflowers. Internal Document, HIB/ BEAD/ OPP, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460, 14 pp.

Cimino, P., K. Davis, and D. Donaldson. 2001. Biological Benefits Assessment for Azinphos methyl and Phosmet on Walnuts. Internal Document, HIB/ BEAD/ OPP, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460, 9 pp.

Cook, C. 2002. Personal Communication with David W. Brassard ( 11/ 21/ 02). HIB/ BEAD/ OPP, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460.

Gross, W. and T. Kiely. 2002. Benefits assessment for methyl parathion use on soybeans. Internal Document, HIB/ BEAD/ OPP, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460.

Gross, W., N. Mosz, and T. Kiely. 2002. Benefits assessment for methyl parathion use in cotton. Internal Document, HIB/ BEAD/ OPP, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460.

Hammond, A. 2002. Personal Communication with Nikhil Mallampali.. Louisiana State University, 7 Baton Rouge, LA.

Mallampali, N. 2002. Note to David Brassard regarding impacts of altering sweet potato REI's ( 8 16 02). Internal Document, HIB/ BEAD/ OPP, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460.

Mossler, M. 2002. Florida Sweet Corn Timeline. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, 17 pp.

Mosz, N. 2002. Walnut Timeline. Internal Document, HIB/ BEAD/ OPP, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460, 10 pp.

Poret, R. 2002. Personal Communication with Nikhil Mallampali. President of the Louisiana Sweetpotato Growers Association.

Shipp, M. 2002. Rice Crop Timeline for the Southern States of Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 67 pp.


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 11 (Thursday, January 16, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2806-2807]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00597]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0898]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection:
Representatives of the Administrator

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The collection involves contact information along with the
education and experience of a person seeking to be appointed as an FAA
Designated Engineering Representative (DER). The information to be
collected will be used to determine the eligibility and qualifications
of the DER applicant.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by February 18, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be
addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget,

Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Geddie by email at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0033.
    Title: Renewal of an information collection.
    Form Numbers: FAA Form 8110-14.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on November 7, 2018 (84 FR 60136). Information in this
collection is voluntarily submitted by persons applying to become an
FAA Designated Engineering Representative (DER). DERs represent the FAA
on aircraft certification projects. They examine engineering design
data and determining whether aircraft built according to that data
comply with published FAA airworthiness standards. Collecting this
information allows the FAA to evaluate the eligibility and
qualifications of the DER applicant.
    This application form, 8110-14, Statement of Qualifications,
provides the FAA with contact information for the applicant, along with
the applicant's requested authorities. It outlines the applicant's
education and pertinent experience that, in conjunction with additional
narratives and other detailed information, allows the FAA to make an
informed decision whether to appoint the applicant as an FAA
representative.
    Respondents: Persons applying to become an FAA Designated
Engineering Representative.
    Frequency: One time submittal.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 1.5 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: One time submittal. No annual
burden.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Joy Wolf,
Directives & Forms Management Officer (DMO/FMO), Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-00597 Filed 1-15-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 172 (Thursday, September 5, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 54561]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21453]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 172 / Thursday, September 5, 2013 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0983; Directorate Identifier 2012-CE-001-AD;
Amendment 39-17457; AD 2013-10-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Piper Aircraft, Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting an airworthiness directive (AD) that
published in the Federal Register. That AD applies to all Piper
Aircraft, Inc. Models PA-31, PA-31-325, and PA-31-350 airplanes. Table
1 of paragraph (g) lists the incorrect model/part number for the Model
PA-31-350, tail pipe assembly, top. This document corrects that error.
In all other respects, the original document remains the same.

DATES: This final rule is effective September 5, 2013. The effective
date for AD 2013-10-04 (78 FR 35110, June 12, 2013) remains July 17,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Wechsler, Aerospace Engineer,
Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 1701 Columbia Avenue,
College Park, Georgia 30337; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (404) 474-
5606; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Airworthiness Directive 2013-10-04 (78 FR
35110, June 12, 2013), currently requires a detailed repetitive
inspection of the exhaust system, expanding the inspection scope to
include the entirety of each airplane exhaust system, and repair or
replacement of parts as necessary for all Piper Aircraft, Inc. Models
PA-31, PA-31-325, and PA-31-350 airplanes.
    As published, the part number for the tail pipe assembly, top;
under the Model PA-31-350; in Table 1 of paragraph (g) is incorrect.
    No other part of the preamble or regulatory information has been
changed; therefore, only the changed portion of the final rule is being
published in the Federal Register.
    The effective date of this AD remains July 17, 2013.

Correction of Regulatory Text

Sec.  39.13  [Corrected]

    In the Federal Register of June 12, 2013, AD 2013-10-04; Amendment
39-17457 is corrected as follows:
    On page 35114, we are revising Table 1 of paragraph (g)--Recurring
60-hour Inspections for Lycoming and Piper Exhaust System Parts, for
the entry ``tail pipe assembly, top'' in the third sub-column of column
3, Model/part number, remove ``40319-10'' and add ``40310-10'' in its
place.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on August 28, 2013.
Earl Lawrence,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-21453 Filed 9-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 135 (Thursday, July 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 45520]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16588]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4273-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2016-0001]

West Virginia; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of West Virginia (FEMA-4273-DR), dated June 25, 2016, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective June 29, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of West Virginia is hereby amended to include the
following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely
affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his
declaration of June 25, 2016.

    Pocahontas and Webster Counties for Individual Assistance.
    Pocahontas and Webster Counties for emergency protective
measures (Category B), including direct federal assistance, under
the Public Assistance program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2016-16588 Filed 7-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 78 (Tuesday, April 23, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 23940]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09480]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2012-D-0049]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office
of Management and Budget Approval; Reporting Harmful and Potentially
Harmful Constituents in Tobacco Products and Tobacco Smoke Under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
collection of information entitled ``Reporting Harmful and Potentially
Harmful Constituents in Tobacco Products and Tobacco Smoke Under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act'' has been approved by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Gittleson, Office of
Information Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr.,
PI50-400B, Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 1, 2012, the Agency submitted a
proposed collection of information entitled ``Reporting Harmful and
Potentially Harmful Constituents in Tobacco Products and Tobacco Smoke
Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act'' to OMB for review and
clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3507. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor,
and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now
approved the information collection and has assigned OMB control number
0910-0732. The approval expires on March 31, 2016. A copy of the
supporting statement for this information collection is available on
the Internet at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: April 15, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-09480 Filed 4-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P