Production Area Loads Entering RF3 Network and Reductions for Large CAFOS Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 4 0 Dairy 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 1 0 Swine 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 4 0 Poultry 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 0 Poultry ( wet) 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 10 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 1 0 Dairy 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 0 Swine 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 0 0 Poultry 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 0 Poultry ( wet) 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 2 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 43 0 Dairy 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 4 0 Swine 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 0 0 Poultry 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 0 Poultry ( wet) 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 90 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 137 0 Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 375 0 Dairy 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 19 0 Swine 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 0 0 Poultry 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 0 Poultry ( wet) 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 56 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 451 0 Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 168 0 Dairy 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 9 0 Swine 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 4 0 Poultry 0 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 0 Poultry ( wet) 0 0 0 0 N/ A 0 120 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 301 0 Table A 7. Fecal streptococcus loads from Large CAFOs in 1019 colony forming units. Table A 3. Nitrogen loads from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Table A 4. Phosphorous loads from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Table A 5. Sediment loads from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Table A 6. Fecal coliform loads from Large CAFOs in 1019 colony forming units. Production Area Loads Entering RF3 Network and Reductions for Large CAFOS Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Dairy 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Swine 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.1 0.0 Poultry 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Poultry ( wet) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.2 0.0 Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 7.2 0.0 Dairy 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.8 0.0 Swine 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 1.1 0.0 Poultry 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Poultry ( wet) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 13.3 0.0 Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.4 0.0 Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A  4.1 0.0 Dairy 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A  1.3 0.0 Swine 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  4.4 0.0 Poultry 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Poultry ( wet) 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  10.4 0.0 Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0  20.3 0.0 Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A  1.2 0.0 Dairy 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A  0.2 0.0 Swine 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  0.5 0.0 Poultry 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Poultry ( wet) 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  2.3 0.0 Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0  4.1 0.0 Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A  43.4 0.0 Dairy 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A  3.8 0.0 Swine 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  0.1 0.0 Poultry 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Poultry ( wet) 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  89.6 0.0 Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0  136.8 0.0 Table A 8. Metals loads from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Table A X. BOD loads from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Table A 9. Nitrogen load reductions from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year. Numbers in ( ) indicate negative values.

Table A 10. Phosphorous load reductions from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Table A 11. Sediment load reductions from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year. Numbers in ( ) indicate negative values. Production Area Loads Entering RF3 Network and Reductions for Large CAFOS Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A  375.0 0.0 Dairy 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A  19.0 0.0 Swine 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  0.1 0.0 Poultry 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Poultry ( wet) 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  56.4 0.0 Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0  450.5 0.0 Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A  168.1 0.0 Dairy 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A  8.7 0.0 Swine 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  4.0 0.0 Poultry 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Poultry ( wet) 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  120.4 0.0 Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0  301.2 0.0 Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Dairy 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Swine 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  0.1 0.0 Poultry 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Poultry ( wet) 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  0.2 0.0 Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0  0.2 0.0 Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A  7.2 0.0 Dairy 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A  0.8 0.0 Swine 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  1.1 0.0 Poultry 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0 0.0 Poultry ( wet) 0.0 0.0 0.0 N/ A 0.0  13.3 0.0 Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0  22.4 0.0 Table A 13. Fecal streptococcus load reductions from Large CAFOs in 1019 colony forming units.

Table A Y. BOD load reductions from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year. Table A 12. Fecal coliform load reductions from Large CAFOs in 1019 colony forming units.

Table A 14. Metals load reductions from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year. Numbers in ( ) indicate negative values.


[Federal Register: May 8, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 90)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 26019-26025]
[DOCID:fr08my08-20]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2007-0648; FRL-8563-6]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; States
of South Dakota and Wyoming; Interstate Transport of Pollution

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct Final Rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) submitted by the States of South Dakota and
Wyoming that address interstate transport with respect to the 1997 8-
hour ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National
Ambient Air Quality Standards. EPA has determined that the Interstate
Transport declarations submitted by South Dakota on May 15, 2007, and
by Wyoming on May 3, 2007, satisfy the requirements of the Clean Air
Act section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) provisions, also known as the ``good
neighbor'' provisions, that a state SIP contain adequate provisions
prohibiting air pollutant emissions from sources or activities in the
state from adversely affecting another state. This action is being
taken under section 110 of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 7, 2008 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 9, 2008. If adverse comment
is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final
rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2007-0648, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.

     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> (please alert the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
     Mail: Callie Videtich, Director, Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.
     Hand Delivery: Callie Videtich, Director, Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only accepted
Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:55 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-
2007-0648. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://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 e-mail comment directly to EPA, without
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail 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 instructions on submitting
comments, go to section I. General Information of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly-available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You
may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4
p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domenico Mastrangelo, Air Program,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Definitions

    For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain
words or initials as follows:
    (i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air
Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
    (ii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
    (iii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
    (iv) The words South Dakota and Wyoming mean respectively the State
of South Dakota and the State of Wyoming.

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What is the purpose of this action?
III. What is the State process to submit these materials to EPA?
IV. EPA's evaluation of the State of South Dakota May 15, 2007
submittal
V. EPA's evaluation of the State of Wyoming May 3, 2007 submittal
VI. Final Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. General Information

    What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI to EPA through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    a. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    b. Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    c. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    d. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    e. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    f. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    g. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    h. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.

II. What Is the Purpose of this Action?

    EPA is approving the ``Interstate Transport Report'' adopted into
the State of South Dakota SIP on April 19, 2007 and submitted to EPA on
May 15, 2007. EPA is also approving the ``Interstate Transport''
declaration adopted into the State of Wyoming SIP on April 19, 2007 and
submitted to EPA on May 3, 2007. The South Dakota ``Interstate
Transport Report'' and the Wyoming ``Interstate Transport'' declaration
address the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Clean Air
Act (CAA). The provisions in this section of the CAA, also referred to
as the ``good neighbor'' provisions, require that each state's SIP
include adequate provisions prohibiting emissions that adversely affect
another state's air quality through interstate transport of air
pollutants.

III. What Is the State Process To Submit These Materials to EPA?

    Section 110(k) of the CAA addresses EPA's actions on submissions of
revisions to a SIP. The CAA requires states to observe certain
procedural requirements in developing SIP revisions for submittal to
EPA. Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA requires that each SIP revision be
adopted after reasonable notice and public hearing. This must occur
prior to the revision being submitted by a state to EPA.
    The South Dakota Department of Environmental and Natural Resources
(DENR) held a public hearing for the addition of the Interstate
Transport Report to the South Dakota SIP on April 19, 2007, adopted the
Report on this same date, and submitted it to EPA on May 15, 2007.
    The Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) held a public
hearing for the addition of the Interstate Transport declaration on
December 11, 2006, adopted the declaration into the State SIP on April
15, 2007, and submitted it to EPA on May 3, 2007.
    We have evaluated the submittals of these SIP revisions by the
South Dakota DENR and the Wyoming DEQ and have determined that the
States met the requirements for reasonable notice and public hearing
under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA.

IV. EPA's Evaluation of the State of South Dakota May 15, 2007
Submittal

    EPA has reviewed the South Dakota Interstate Transport Report
submitted on May 15, 2007 and believes that approval is warranted. The
provisions of the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) require that the South
Dakota SIP contain adequate provisions prohibiting air pollutant
emissions from sources or activities in the state from adversely
affecting another state. A state SIP must include provisions that
prohibit sources from emitting pollutants in amounts which will: (1)
Contribute significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another
state; (2) interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS by another state;
(3) interfere with another state's measures to prevent significant
deterioration of its air quality; and (4) interfere with the efforts of
another state to protect visibility. EPA issued guidance on August 15,
2006 relating to SIP submissions that meet the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the PM2.5 and the 8-hour ozone standards. The
Interstate Transport Report submitted by the State of South Dakota is
consistent with the guidance.
    To support the first two of the four elements noted above, the
State of South Dakota relies on a combination of: (a) EPA positions and
modeling analysis results published in Federal Register notices as part
of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) rulemaking process;\1\ and, (b)
considerations of geographical and meteorological factors affecting the
likelihood of pollution transport from the State to the closest 8-hour
ozone and PM2.5 nonattainment areas in other states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Unless otherwise noted, in this action the expression CAIR
rulemaking process or CAIR rule refers to materials (data, analyses,
assessments) developed during the rulemaking process that resulted
in the May 12, 2005 Federal Register notice ``Rule to Reduce
Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air
Interstate Rule); Revisions to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to
NOX SIP Call; Final Rule,'' (70 FR 25162).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, EPA includes data and analysis based on materials
published in EPA's CAIR rulemaking notices and on monitoring data
gathered by the states and reported to EPA in the Air Quality System
(AQS) database.
    For the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, the South Dakota Interstate
Transport Report identifies the Denver Metropolitan Area in Colorado,
and the Illinois and Wisconsin counties along the western shore of Lake
Michigan as the closest nonattainment areas. The northernmost edge of
the Denver Metropolitan Area is about 170 miles from the southwest
corner of South Dakota, and nearly in opposite direction to the
prevailing winds. These considerations, in combination with other
factors such as the absence of nonattainment areas in South Dakota, and
along the 170 miles between South Dakota's southwestern corner and the
Denver Metropolitan Area, lead to the conclusion that it is highly
unlikely that South Dakota makes a significant contribution to the 8-
hour ozone nonattainment in this Colorado area. The rim of Illinois/
Wisconsin counties along the western shore of Lake Michigan is more
than 400 miles from the South Dakota eastern border. Again, distance,
in combination with factors such as the absence of nonattainment areas
in the intervening downwind states of Minnesota and Iowa make it highly
unlikely that South Dakota contributes significantly to ozone
nonattainment in the Illinois and Wisconsin counties along the western
shore of Lake Michigan.
    A similar conclusion is suggested by our examination of AQS
monitoring data on 8-hour ozone exceedance days registered during the
2004-2006 years at monitoring stations in South Dakota and in
neighboring downwind or potentially downwind states. During these years
the ozone monitors did not register any exceedance days in South
Dakota, Nebraska and Iowa. In the same time span the monitors in
Minnesota, another of the closest downwind states, measured 8-hours
ozone exceedances on less than 0.5 percent of the days. Minnesota
monitors registered three exceedance days on June 2, July 12 and 22,
2005. The absence of 8-hour ozone exceedance days in South Dakota and
most of its adjacent states, combined with the rare occurrence of
exceedance days in Minnesota is consistent with conclusions drawn from
other data and analysis, presented in the preceding paragraphs: any
ozone or ozone precursor transport from South Dakota to downwind states
is not high enough to significantly contribute to nonattainment, or
interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS, in neighboring downwind
states.
    The section of the South Dakota Interstate Transport Report
addressing the absence of significant ozone transport from South Dakota
to downwind states includes a paragraph quoted from the EPA web page
``States Not Covered by CAIR'' \2\ that has since been replaced. While
the text quoted in the South Dakota Interstate Transport SIP reflects
accurately the EPA web page text at the time South Dakota adopted the
Report into the State SIP and submitted it to EPA, EPA subsequently
revised its website. Specifically, in September 2007, EPA removed the
sentence ``Several states are not included in the CAIR region because
they do not contribute to down wind nonattainment.'' EPA's revised
website prefaces the same list of 22 non-CAIR States (which includes
South Dakota) with the statement that these states are not covered by
CAIR, without discussing the basis for this conclusion.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See ``South Dakota Implementation Plan, Interstate Transport
Report,'' January 5, 2007, page 2.
    \3\ Reproductions of the two web pages discussed in this
paragraph may be found in EPA's April 8, 2008, ``Guidance and
Supporting Documentation'' memo included in the docket for this
action. As of 1/24/08 the EPA Web page for Non-CAIR States, updated
in September 2007, may be found at http://www.epa.gov/CAIR/not-
covered.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's replacement of the text originally published on its ``Non-
CAIR States'' web page does not affect our evaluation of the State of
South Dakota's position that the State is unlikely to contribute
significantly to ozone nonattainment in down wind states, as
demonstrated by the data and analysis examined in the preceding
paragraphs. In light of EPA's website revisions, EPA recommends that in
a future rulemaking the State of South Dakota remove from

its Interstate Transport Report the EPA paragraph incorrectly
reflecting the Agency's position on the Non-CAIR states' contribution
to down wind nonattainment.
    For the 1997 PM2.5 standard, South Dakota identifies Libby, in
Lincoln County, Montana, and Chicago, Illinois, as the nonattainment
areas closest to the State. Libby is about 570 miles northwest from
South Dakota, in a direction opposite to that of the prevailing winds.
In addition, EPA's findings based on a nine-factor analysis of Lincoln
County, and reported in the Agency's technical support document for the
December 17, 2004 designations, stressed the local origins of PM2.5
nonattainment in Libby.\4\ These considerations in combination with
other factors such as the absence of PM2.5 nonattainment areas in South
Dakota, and the absence of PM2.5 nonattainment areas along the 570
miles between the State's northwest corner and Libby lead to the
conclusion that it is unlikely that South Dakota is making a
significant contribution to the PM2.5 nonattainment status of Lincoln
County or interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in Montana.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Technical Support for State and Tribal Air Quality Fine
Particle (PM2.5) Designations,'' December 2004; Chapter 6, pages
347-352.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Cook County nonattainment area, in which Chicago is located, is
about 450 miles from the southeastern corner of South Dakota. Given the
distance, the absence of PM2.5 nonattainment areas in South Dakota, and
between South Dakota and Cook County, it is unlikely that the State of
South Dakota is making a significant contribution to the nonattainment
of the 1997 PM2.5 standard in Cook County. This assessment is
consistent with results of the modeling analysis EPA conducted and
reported in the rulemaking Federal Register notices for the
determination of the CAIR states (69 FR 4566 and 70 FR 25162).
According to the CAIR Proposed Rule of January 30, 2004, the maximum
PM2.5 contribution by South Dakota to downwind counties identified as
being in nonattainment for the base years 2010 and 2015 is to Cook
County, and is estimated to be 0.04 [mu]g/m\3\ (Table V-5, 69 FR 4608).
This amount is well below the ``significant contribution'' threshold of
0.20[mu]g/m\3\ set by EPA. AQS monitoring data we reviewed are
consistent with these results. During the years 2004-2006, monitors in
the State of South Dakota and its adjacent downwind or potentially
downwind states, except for Minnesota, showed no PM2.5 exceedance days.
During these years the Minnesota monitors registered exceedances only
on one out of 1,096 days.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Adjacent downwind/potentially downwind states showing no
PM2.5 exceedance days include Nebraska, North Dakota and Iowa.
Minnesota monitors showed one exceedance day in three years, on
January 31, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In conclusion, the data and analysis reviewed above indicate that
the Interstate Transport Report adopted by South Dakota into the State
SIP satisfactorily addresses the first two elements of the CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone standards.
    The third element of the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) provisions
requires states to prohibit emissions that interfere with any other
state's measures to prevent significant deterioration (PSD) of air
quality. Consistently with EPA guidance issued August 11, 2006, the
State of South Dakota explains that the State's SIP provisions include
EPA-approved PSD and Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) programs
that satisfy the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirements. The State PSD
program has been implemented for many years and NNSR implementation has
not been needed since there are no PM2.5 or 8-hour ozone nonattainment
areas in South Dakota.
    The fourth element of the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) provisions
concerns the requirement that a state SIP prohibit sources from
emitting pollutants that interfere with the efforts of another state to
protect visibility. Consistent with the August 15, 2006 EPA guidance,
the South Dakota Interstate Transport Report declares that there are no
State sources of emissions interfering with the implementation of the
1980 regulations that required the states to address Reasonably
Attributable Visibility Impairment (RAVI) SIPs in other states.
Regarding visibility impairment caused by regional haze, the South
Dakota Interstate Transport Report concurs with EPA that it is
currently premature to determine whether or not SIPs for 8-hour ozone
or PM2.5 contain adequate provisions to prohibit emissions that
interfere with measures in other states' SIPs designed to address
regional haze. This requirement will be addressed in the South Dakota
regional haze SIP. Therefore, South Dakota addresses the third and
fourth elements of the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) provisions in a way that
is consistent with the EPA guidance noted above.

V. EPA's Evaluation of the State of Wyoming May 3, 2007 Submittal

    EPA has reviewed the Wyoming Interstate Transport SIP submitted on
May 3, 2007 and believes that approval is warranted. The provisions of
the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) require that the Wyoming SIP contain
adequate provisions prohibiting air pollutant emissions from sources or
activities in the state from adversely affecting another state. A state
SIP must include provisions that prohibit sources from emitting
pollutants in amounts which will: (1) Contribute significantly to
nonattainment of the NAAQS in another state; (2) interfere with
maintenance of the NAAQS by another state; (3) interfere with another
state's measures to prevent significant deterioration of its air
quality; and (4) interfere with the efforts of another state to protect
visibility. EPA issued guidance on August 15, 2006 relating to SIP
submissions that meet the requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for
the 1997 PM2.5 and the 8-hour ozone standards. The Interstate Transport
SIP submitted by the State of Wyoming is consistent with the guidance.
    To support the first two of the four elements noted above, the
State of Wyoming relies on a combination of: (a) EPA positions and
modeling analysis results published in Federal Register notices as part
of the CAIR rulemaking process; and (b) considerations of geographical,
meteorological and topographical factors affecting the likelihood of
significant pollution transport from the State to the closest PM2.5 and
8-hour ozone nonattainment areas in other states. In addition, we
examine factors specific to Wyoming, and to a number of downwind or
potentially downwind states that might be significantly affected by any
transport of PM2.5, and of ozone and/or ozone precursors from Wyoming.
    For the 8-hour ozone standard, the Denver metropolitan area in
Colorado, and the Las Vegas-Clark County area in Nevada are the closest
nonattainment areas. The Las Vegas-Clark County area is more than 400
miles from the southwest corner of Wyoming and in a direction opposite
to that of the prevailing winds. Given this distance and the absence of
8-hour ozone nonattainment areas between Wyoming and Clark County, it
is unlikely that Wyoming is making a significant contribution to the
ozone nonattainment in Clark County.
    Even though the northernmost edge of the Denver metropolitan area
is only 30 miles south of the Wyoming border, it is highly unlikely
that Wyoming contributes significantly to this area's non-attainment
for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. The State of Wyoming does not have
any ozone nonattainment areas, and the AQS database indicates that
during the 2004-2006 years Wyoming monitors registered four

exceedance days for the 8-hour ozone standard, all occurring in the
wintertime.\6\ Given that ozone levels generally reach peak values
during the warm months of the year, which is also the case of the
Denver metropolitan area, one may readily conclude that the monitoring
data noted above excludes the likelihood of a significant contribution
from the State of Wyoming to the 8-hour ozone nonattainment of the
Denver metropolitan area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The exceedance days were registered at two monitors within
Sublette County--the site of the Jonah gas field development. The
exceedance values were measured on February 3, 20, and 26, 2005, and
February 27, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A significant transport of ozone and/or its precursors from Wyoming
to other close downwind or potentially downwind states such as Montana,
Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota is also unlikely. As is the
case with Wyoming, none of these states have any ozone nonattainment
areas, and the four ozone exceedance days registered in Wyoming during
the winter of 2005 and 2006 had no significant impact on these states.
During the 2004-2006 years considered here, the monitoring stations in
Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota showed no exceedance
days for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
    The section of the Wyoming Interstate Transport SIP addressing the
absence of significant ozone transport from Wyoming to downwind states
includes a paragraph quoted from the EPA Web page ``States Not Covered
by CAIR'' \7\ that has since been replaced. While the text quoted in
the Wyoming Interstate Transport SIP reflects accurately the EPA Web
page text at the time Wyoming adopted the Interstate Transport
declaration into the State SIP and submitted it to EPA, EPA
subsequently revised its Web site. Specifically, in September 2007, EPA
removed the sentence ``Several states are not included in the CAIR
region because they do not contribute to downwind nonattainment.''
EPA's revised Web site prefaces the same list of 22 non-CAIR States
(which includes Wyoming) with the statement that these states are not
covered by CAIR, without discussing the basis for this conclusion.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See ``Wyoming State Implementation Plan, Interstate
Transport,'' December 11, 2006, page 2.
    \8\ Reproductions of the two Web pages discussed in this
paragraph may be found in EPA's ``Guidance, Supporting Materials,
and Additional Materials'' in this docket. As of 1/24/08 the EPA Web
page for Non-CAIR States, updated on September 20, 2007, may be
found at http://www.epa.gov/CAIR/not-covered.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's replacement of the text originally published on its ``Non-
CAIR States'' Web page does not affect our evaluation of the State of
Wyoming's position that the State is unlikely to contribute
significantly to ozone nonattainment in downwind states, as
demonstrated by the data and analysis examined in the preceding
paragraphs. In light of EPA's Web site revisions, EPA recommends that
in a future rulemaking the State of Wyoming remove from its Interstate
Transport SIP the EPA paragraph incorrectly reflecting the Agency's
position on the Non-CAIR states' contribution to downwind
nonattainment.
    The Wyoming Interstate Transport SIP addresses the question of
potential PM2.5 transport to other states by quoting from the
explanation given by EPA in support of the exclusion of four western
states (including Wyoming) from the analysis that underlies the CAIR
final rule notice:

    Regarding modeling of all states, in the PM2.5 modeling for the
NPRM, we modeled 41 states, and found that the westernmost of these
states made very small contributions to nonattainment in any other
state. For the revised modeling for the final rule, we reduced the
set of states modeled for reasons of efficiency. The results again
showed that the westernmost states modeled did not make
contributions above the significance threshold, indicating that had
other even more western States been modeled they also would not have
done so. \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ ``Corrected Response to Significant Public Comments on the
Proposed Clean Air Interstate Rule Received in response to: Rule to
Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone
(Interstate Air Quality Rule); Proposed Rule (69 FR 4566; January
30, 2004) Supplemental Proposal for the Rule to Reduce Interstate
Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate
Rule); Proposal Rule (69 FR 32684; June 10, 2004) Docket Number OAR-
2003-0053,'' April 2005.

    These assessments are substantiated by data and consideration of
additional factors we examine next. Findings from the modeling analysis
conducted by EPA for the CAIR proposed rule include the maximum annual
average PM2.5 contribution by 41 states to the downwind counties
identified in nonattainment for the base years 2010 and 2015. Among the
states included in the study, the maximum PM2.5 annual average
contribution to nonattainment by the westernmost states amounted to:
0.04 [mu]g/m\3\ for Colorado, 0.03 [mu]g/m\3\ for Montana, 0.08 [mu]g/
m\3\ for Nebraska, 0.12 [mu]g/m\3\ for North Dakota, 0.04 [mu]g/m\3\
for South Dakota, and 0.05 [mu]g/m\3\ for Wyoming (69 FR 4608). These
amounts are well below the ``significant contribution'' threshold of
0.20 [mu]g/m\3\ set by EPA.
    A review of PM2.5 attainment/nonattainment areas and AQS monitoring
data in Wyoming and its downwind, or potentially downwind, states
yields similar conclusions. Wyoming's closest PM2.5 nonattainment area
is centered in Libby, Lincoln County, Montana, which is about 330 miles
north of the Wyoming northwest corner. EPA's findings based on a nine-
factor analysis of Lincoln County (reported in the Agency's technical
support document for the December 17, 2004 nonattainment designations)
stress the local origins of PM2.5 nonattainment in Libby.\10\ These
findings, in combination with other factors such as distance, the
absence of PM2.5 nonattainment areas in Wyoming, and the absence of
PM2.5 nonattainment areas along the 330 miles between the Wyoming
northwest corner area and Libby, are strong indications that it is
unlikely that Wyoming is making a significant contribution to the PM2.5
nonattainment status of Lincoln County. AQS monitoring data for the
period 2004-2006 shows that there were no PM2.5 exceedance days in
Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota, South Dakota and Nebraska. Montana
monitors registered five exceedance days, equivalent to less than 0.5
percent, distributed among four different counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ ``Technical Support for State and Tribal Air Quality Fine
Particle (PM2.5) Designations,'' December 2004; Chapter 6, pages
347-352.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The data and analyses considered in the preceding paragraphs
indicate that the Interstate Transport declaration adopted by Wyoming
into the State SIP satisfactorily addresses the first two elements of
the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirements for the 1997
PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone standards.
    The third element of the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) provisions
requires states to prohibit emissions that interfere with any other
state's measures to prevent significant deterioration (PSD) of air
quality. Consistent with EPA guidance issued August 11, 2006, the State
of Wyoming explains that the State's SIP provisions include an EPA-
approved PSD program, implemented for many years, that satisfies the
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirements. In the absence of any
PM2.5 or 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas, Wyoming does not
have an NNSR program but indicates that the State will update its NSR
program to include one if the need should arise.
    The fourth element of the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) provisions
concerns the requirement that a state SIP prohibit sources from
emitting pollutants that interfere with the efforts of another state to
protect visibility. Consistent with the

August 15, 2006 EPA guidance, the Wyoming Interstate Transport SIP
declares that there are no State sources of emissions interfering with
the implementation of the 1980 regulations that required the states to
address Reasonably Attributable Visibility Impairment (RAVI) SIPs in
other states. Regarding visibility impairment caused by regional haze,
the Wyoming Interstate Transport SIP concurs with EPA that it is
currently premature to determine whether or not SIPs for 8-hour ozone
or PM2.5 contain adequate provisions to prohibit emissions
that interfere with measures in other states' SIPs designed to address
regional haze. This requirement will be addressed in the Wyoming
regional haze SIP. Thus, Wyoming addresses the third and fourth
elements of the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) provisions in a way that is
consistent with the EPA guidance noted above.

VI. Final Action

    EPA is approving the Interstate Transport Report submitted by the
State of South Dakota on May 15, 2007, and is adding section X to 40
CFR 52.1270(e) to reflect that the State has adequately addressed the
required elements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Clean Air Act.
    EPA is approving the Interstate Transport SIP submitted by the
State of Wyoming on May 3, 2007 and is adding section XVIII to 40 CFR
52.2620(e) to reflect that the State has adequately addressed the
required elements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Clean Air Act.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments. This rule will be effective July 7, 2008 without
further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by June 9,
2008. If the EPA receives adverse comments, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule
will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if
EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of
the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are
not the subject of an adverse comment.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Review

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 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, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; 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 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.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 7, 2008. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
Organic Compounds.

    Dated: April 23, 2008.
Robert E. Roberts,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart QQ--South Dakota

0
2. In Sec.  52.2170, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding
entry ``X'' in numerical order to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2170  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) EPA-approved nonregulatory provisions.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Applicable geographic   State submittal date/
Name of nonregulatory SIP provision  or non-attainment area       Adopted date         EPA approval date and citation             Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
X. Interstate Transport. South       Statewide.............  Submitted: 5/15/07....  5/08/08 [insert FR page number
 Dakota Interstate Transport Report                          Adopted: 4/19/07......   where document begins].
 satisfying the requirement of
 Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA
 for the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM
 2.5 standards.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subpart ZZ--Wyoming

0
3. In Sec.  52.2620, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding
entry ``XVIII'' in numerical order to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2620  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) EPA-approved nonregulatory provisions.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Applicable geographic   State submittal date/
Name of nonregulatory SIP provision  or non-attainment area       Adopted date         EPA approval date and citation             Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
XVIII. Interstate Transport.         Statewide.............  Submitted: 5/3/07.....  5/08/08 [insert FR page number
 Wyoming Interstate Transport SIP                            Adopted: 4/15/07......   where document begins].
 satisfying the requirement of
 Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA
 for the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM
 2.5 standards.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E8-10103 Filed 5-7-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 24, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 186)]
[Notices]
[Page 55066]
[DOCID:fr24se08-68]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER96-719-022; ER99-2156-015]

MidAmerican Energy Company; Cordova Energy Company; Notice of
Filing

September 17, 2008.
    Take notice that on September 11, 2008, MidAmerican Energy Company
and Cordova Energy filed revisions to its April, 2008 and June 30, 2008
filings, pursuant to Order 697-A, Mart-Based Rtes for Wholesales of
Electric Energy, Capacity and Ancillary Services by Public Utilities,
Order No. 697, 72 FR 39,904 (July 20, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. ]
31,252 (2007) (Order No. 697), order on clarification, 121 FERC ]
61,260 (2007) (Clarifying Order), order on reh'g, Order No. 697-A, 73
FR 25,832 (May 7, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,268 (2008) (Order no.
697-A), section 35.37 of the Commission's Regulations, and an April 4,
2008 Commission Order, MidAmerican Energy Co., 123 FERC ] 61,013 (2008)
(April 2008 Order).
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 2, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-22284 Filed 9-23-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 24 (Monday, February 8, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8658-8659]
[FR Doc No: 2021-02505]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-614, OMB Control No. 3235-0682]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736.
Extension:
    Rule 13h-1 and Form 13H.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 13h-1 (17 CFR 240.13h-1)
and Form 13H--registration of large traders \1\ submitted pursuant to
Section 13(h) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et
seq.) (``Exchange Act''). The Commission plans to submit this existing
collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget
(``OMB'') for extension and approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Rule 13h-1(a)(1) defines ``large trader'' as any person that
directly or indirectly, including through other persons controlled
by such person, exercises investment discretion over one or more
accounts and effects transactions for the purchase or sale of any
NMS security for or on behalf of such accounts, by or through one or
more registered broker-dealers, in an aggregate amount equal to or
greater than the identifying activity level or voluntarily registers
as a large trader by filing electronically with the Commission Form
13H.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 13h-1 and Form 13H under Section 13(h) of the Exchange Act
established a large trader reporting framework.\2\ The framework
assists the Commission in identifying and obtaining certain baseline
information about traders that conduct a substantial amount of trading
activity, as measured by volume or market value, in the U.S. securities
markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64976 (July 27,
2011), 76 FR 46959 (August 3, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The identification, recordkeeping, and reporting framework provides
the Commission with a mechanism to identify large traders and obtain
additional information on their trading activity. Specifically, the
system requires large traders to identify themselves to the Commission
and file certain interim updates with the Commission on Form 13H. Upon
receipt of Form 13H, the Commission issues a unique identification
number to the large trader, which the large trader then provides to its
registered broker-dealers. Certain registered broker-dealers are
required to maintain transaction records for each large trader, and are
required to report that information to the Commission upon request.\3\
In addition, certain registered broker-dealers are required to adopt
procedures to monitor their customers for activity that would

trigger the identification requirements of the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Commission, pursuant to Rule 17a-25 (17 CFR 240.17a-25),
currently collects transaction data from registered broker-dealers
through the Electronic Blue Sheets (``EBS'') system to support its
regulatory and enforcement activities. The large trader framework
added two new fields, the time of the trade and the identity of the
trader, to the EBS system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The respondents to the collection of information required by Rule
13h-1 and Form 13H are large traders and registered broker-dealers. The
Commission estimates that the total annual time burden associated with
Rule 13h-1 and Form 13H is approximately 185,200 hours per year. This
burden is comprised of 23,500 hours for initial filings by large
traders on Form 13H, 58,500 hours for updates by large traders, 96,000
hours for broker-dealer reporting, and 7,200 hours for broker-dealer
monitoring.
    Compliance with Rule 13h-1 is mandatory. The information collection
under proposed Rule 13h-1 is considered confidential subject to the
limited exceptions provided by the Freedom of Information Act.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 5 U.S.C. 552 and 15 U.S.C. 78m(h)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: David Bottom, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o
Cynthia Roscoe, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: February 3, 2021.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-02505 Filed 2-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Meeting attendees:
[CAMD -- EPA's Clean Air Markets Division, PSGC -- Prairie State Generating Company]

Sam Napolitano [CAMD, Division Director]
Michael Cohen [CAMD, Environmental Scientist]
Peter DeQuattro [PSGC, President and CEO]
Craig Bressan [PSGC, Director of Environmental Health & Safety]
Ashlie Kenner Kuehn [PSGC, MGR, Government Affairs & Public Relations]
Natalie Locke[Locke Environmental, Manager]
Robert Talley [Talley & Associates, Government Affairs & Political Consulting]
Joseph Stanko, Jr [Hunton & Williams, Partner]

On April 11, 2011 representatives of Prairie State Generating Company (PSGC) met with representatives of EPA's Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD) between 3:00 and 4:00 EST at EPA's 1310 L Street offices.  At this meeting PSGC and their representatives went over their comments on the Proposed Transport Rule submitted October 1, 2010 and their comments on the NODA to the Proposed Transport Rule submitted February 4, 2011.  No new comments were submitted.


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 159 (Friday, August 20, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46861-46862]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17919]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2021-0412]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and
Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0033

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension of
its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0033,
Display of Fire Control Plans for Vessels; without change. Our ICR
describes the information we seek to collect from the public. Before
submitting this ICR to OIRA, the Coast Guard is inviting comments as
described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before October 19,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2021-0412] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public
participation and request for comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the internet
at https://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available
from: Commandant (CG-6P), Attn: Paperwork Reduction Act Manager, U.S.
Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, Stop 7710,
Washington, DC 20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A.L. Craig, Office of Privacy
Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for questions
on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be
granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.
    In response to your comments, we may revise this ICR or decide not
to seek an extension of approval for the Collection. We will consider
all comments and material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2021-0412], and
must be received by October 19, 2021.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public
comments, are in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that website's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking System
of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

Information Collection Request

    Title: Display of Fire Control Plans for Vessels.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0033.

    Summary: This information collection is for the posting or display
of specific plans on certain categories of commercial vessels. The
availability of these plans aid firefighters and damage control efforts
in response to emergencies.
    Need: Under 46 U.S. Code 3305 and 3306, the Coast Guard is
responsible for ensuring the safety of inspected vessels and has
promulgated regulations in 46 CFR parts 35, 78, 97, 109, 131, 169, and
196 to ensure that safety standards are met.
    Forms: None.
    Respondents: Owners and operators of vessels.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden remains 472 hours a
year.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter
35, as amended.

    Dated: August 17, 2021.
Kathleen Claffie,
Chief, Office of Privacy Management, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2021-17919 Filed 8-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on December 21, 2005

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2005-23124

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  EIRJET LIMITED			    				 Date Filed:  November 22, 2005,

                   										as supplemented (see docket)

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 USC § 40109 and a statement of
authorization under 14 CFR Part 212 to permit the applicant to engage in
wet lease operations on behalf of Air Jamaica for Air Jamaica’s
currently authorized U.S. – Jamaica scheduled services through January
15, 2006.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  New authority.

Applicant representative:  Patricia N. Snyder,<PHONE_NUMBER>	      DOT
analyst:  Robert J. Finamore,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  On December 5, 2005, Continental Airlines, Inc.,
filed a responsive pleading stating that it opposes Eirjet’s
application for an exemption to the extent that it seeks broad authority
to conduct charter operations between the United States and third
countries without obtaining statements of authorization required under
14 CFR Part 212.  Continental states that it does not object to
Eirjet’s requests for short-term U.S.-Jamaica exemption authority
provided Eirjet also secures the requisite statement of authorization
for such operations under Part 212.

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved in part (limited exemption request and corresponding
statement of authorization), remainder (request for broader authority)
deferred.

Action date:  December 21, 2005

Effective dates of authority granted:  December 21, 2005, through
January 15, 2006.

Basis for approval:  Reciprocity with Ireland.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations of our standard exemption conditions
(attached).

Special conditions/Remarks: We found that the applicant is operationally
and financially qualified to conduct its proposed operations and is
substantially owned and effectively controlled by citizens of its
homeland.  Also, the FAA advised us that it knows of no reason to
withhold this authority.  We have limited our action here as requested
by the applicant (see footnote 1) and consistent with the position taken
by Continental.  We are deferring action on the remaining broader
authority requested in Eirjet’s initial application.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director, Office of International
Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

FOREIGN CARRIER EXEMPTION CONDITIONS
                              ATTACHMENT

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

1) Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

2) Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1546 or 1550, as
applicable.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing
any new service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that
would be the holder’s last point of departure for the United States,
contact its International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise
the IPSI of its plans and to find out whether the Transportation
Security Administration has determined that security is adequate to
allow such airport(s) to be served;

3) Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage contained
in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any operations
under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the form of a
completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation Administration’s
Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards Service (any
changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be filed with that
office);

4) Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

5) Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

6) Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

7) Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: a) based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or b) based on
a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term “international air transportation” means “international
transportation” as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

8) Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

9) Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department’s
rules governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and limitations
required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the Department,
with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S. agencies and
courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

  05/2004

 In its initial application filed on November 22, 2005, the applicant
requested broader exemption authority than that being considered in this
Notice.  In subsequent pleadings made on December 1 and December 2,
2005, the applicant stated that, in the near term, it seeks an exemption
and statement of authorization to wet-lease aircraft to Air Jamaica for
service on Air Jamaica’s Jamaica-U.S. scheduled routes, through
January 15, 2006, and requested that we defer, temporarily, action on
the remainder of its application.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 112 (Monday, June 12, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38077-38078]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12477]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2023-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2346]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before September 11, 2023.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2346, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard

determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location
https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities
with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Nicholas A. Shufro,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Grant County, Kentucky and Incorporated Areas
         Project: 18-04-0022S Preliminary Date: October 13, 2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Williamstown...................  Grant County Courthouse, 101
                                          North Main Street,
                                          Williamstown, KY 41097.
Grant County Unincorporated Areas......  Grant County Courthouse, 101
                                          North Main Street,
                                          Williamstown, KY 41097.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2023-12477 Filed 6-9-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 16, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55308-55309]
[FR Doc No: 2019-22518]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG20-7-000.
    Applicants: Lincoln Clean Energy, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Willow Creek Wind,
LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/7/19.
    Accession Number: 20191007-5139.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/28/19.

    Docket Numbers: EG20-8-000.
    Applicants: Lincoln Clean Energy, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of EG of Plum Creek Wind,
LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/7/19.
    Accession Number: 20191007-5140.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/28/19.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER19-469-002.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing: Filing to Request Change to
Effective Date from 12/3/2019 to 12/31/9998 to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5112.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/29/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-2463-001.
    Applicants: Utah Red Hills Renewable Park, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Utah Red
Hills Renewable Park, LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/7/19.
    Accession Number: 20191007-5162.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/28/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-17-000.
    Applicants: Tenaska Pennsylvania Partners, LLC.
    Description: Report Filing: Informational Filing Regarding Upstream
Change in Control and Request for Waiver to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 10/4/19.
    Accession Number: 20191004-5121.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/25/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-45-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing: Revisions to OA, Schedule 6, sec
1.5 re: Commission's 8/30/2019 order in EL19-61 to be effective 1/1/
2020.
    Filed Date: 10/7/19.
    Accession Number: 20191007-5145.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/28/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-46-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2019-10-08_SA 3359 METC-
Isabella-Isabella II MPFCA (J717 J728) to be effective 9/24/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5040.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/29/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-47-000.
    Applicants: Nevada Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amended and Restate Rate
Schedule Facilities Agreement to be effective 12/8/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5086.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/29/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-49-000.
    Applicants: Mid-Atlantic Interstate Transmission, LLC, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: MAIT submits OIA SA No. 4577
to be effective 12/7/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5097.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/29/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-50-000.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: EKPC West Shelby CIAC to be
effective 12/9/2019.

    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5103.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/29/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-51-000.
    Applicants: Kentucky Utilities Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: EKPC West Shelby CIAC KU
Concurrence to be effective 12/9/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5107.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/29/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-52-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Orginal ISA, SA No. 5485;
Queue No. AB1-107 to be effective 9/12/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5108.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/29/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-53-000.
    Applicants: Citizens Sycamore-Penasquitos Transmission LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amended Formula Rate
Protocols in Attachment 1 to Appendix III to be effective 1/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5121.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/29/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-54-000.
    Applicants: Sunflower Electric Power Corporation, Southwest Power
Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Attachment M Appendix 1
Revisions to update Loss Factor for Sunflower to be effective 12/31/
9998.
    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5123.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/29/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-55-000.
    Applicants: OhmConnect, Inc.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: OHM Connect Initial Market-
Based Rate Tariff Filing to be effective 10/8/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5130.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/29/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-56-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2019-10-08 Third Amendment
to Market Efficiency Enhancement Agreement with SMUD to be effective
10/17/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5142.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/29/19.

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

    Docket Numbers: ES19-45-000; ES19-46-000.
    Applicants: AEP Generating Company, Kingsport Power Company.
    Description: Amended and Restated Application under Section 204 of
the Federal Power Act for Authorization to Issue Securities of AEP
Generating Company, et al.
    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5075.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/18/19.

    Docket Numbers: ES20-1-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Application Under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act
for Authorization to Issue Securities of PacifiCorp.
    Filed Date: 10/8/19.
    Accession Number: 20191008-5098.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/29/19.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 8, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-22518 Filed 10-15-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P