laboratory humidity and test fuel data become available. For 1988
and later model years, the Administrator will specify the c value
after the necessary laboratory humidity and test fuel data become
available.
IW = (9.2917 x 10 -3 x SF3IWC x
FE3IWC) - (3.5123 x 10 -3 xx SF4ETW
x FE4IWC).

    Note: Any calculated value of IW less than zero shall be set
equal to zero.

SF3IWC = The 3000 lb. inertia weight class sales divided
by total sales. The quotient shall be rounded to 4 decimal places.
SF4ETW = The 4000 lb. equivalent test weight category
sales divided by total sales. The quotient shall be rounded to 4
decimal places.
FE4IWC = The sales-weighted average combined fuel economy
of all 3000 lb. inertia weight class base levels in the compliance
category. Round the result to the nearest 0.0001 mpg.
FE4IWC = The sales-weighted average combined fuel economy
of all 4000 lb. inertia weight class base levels in the compliance
category. Round the result to the nearest 0.0001 mpg.

    (f) The Administrator shall calculate and apply additional average
fuel economy adjustments if, after notice and opportunity for comment,
the Administrator determines that, as a result of test procedure
changes not previously considered, such correction is necessary to
yield fuel economy test results that are comparable to those obtained
under the 1975 test procedures. In making such determinations, the
Administrator must find that:
    (1) A directional change in measured fuel economy of an average
vehicle can be predicted from a revision to the test procedures;
    (2) The magnitude of the change in measured fuel economy for any
vehicle or fleet of vehicles caused by a revision to the test
procedures is quantifiable from theoretical calculations or best
available test data;
    (3) The impact of a change on average fuel economy is not due to
eliminating the ability of manufacturers to take advantage of
flexibility within the existing test procedures to gain measured
improvements in fuel economy which are not the result of actual
improvements in the fuel economy of production vehicles;
    (4) The impact of a change on average fuel economy is not solely
due to a greater ability of manufacturers to reflect in average fuel
economy those design changes expected to have comparable effects on in-
use fuel economy;
    (5) The test procedure change is required by EPA or is a change
initiated by EPA in its laboratory and is not a change implemented
solely by a manufacturer in its own laboratory.
    (g)(1) Alcohol dual fuel automobiles and natural gas dual fuel
automobiles must provide equal or greater energy efficiency while
operating on alcohol or natural gas as while operating on gasoline or
diesel fuel to obtain the CAFE credit determined in paragraphs
(c)(2)(v) and (vi) of this section. The following equation must hold
true:

Ealt/Epet > or = 1

Where:

Ealt = [FEalt/(NHValt x
Dalt)] x 10 6 = energy efficiency while
operating on alternative fuel rounded to the nearest 0.01 miles/
million BTU.
Epet = [FEpet/(NHVpet x
Dpet)] x 10 6 = energy efficiency while
operating on gasoline or diesel (petroleum) fuel rounded to the
nearest 0.01 miles/million BTU.
FEalt is the fuel economy [miles/gallon for liquid fuels
or miles/100 standard cubic feet for gaseous fuels] while operated
on the alternative fuel as determined in Sec.  600.113-08(a) and
(b);
FEpet is the fuel economy [miles/gallon] while operated
on petroleum fuel (gasoline or diesel) as determined in Sec.
600.113(a) and (b);
NHValt is the net (lower) heating value [BTU/lb] of the
alternative fuel;
NHVpet is the net (lower) heating value [BTU/lb] of the
petroleum fuel;
Dalt is the density [lb/gallon for liquid fuels or lb/100
standard cubic feet for gaseous fuels] of the alternative fuel;
Dpet is the density [lb/gallon] of the petroleum fuel.

    (i) The equation must hold true for both the FTP city and HFET
highway fuel economy values for each test of each test vehicle.
    (ii)(A) The net heating value for alcohol fuels shall be determined
per ASTM D 240-92 ``Standard Test Method for Heat of Combustion of
Liquid Hydrocarbon Fuels by Bomb Calorimeter.'' This incorporation by
reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be
obtained from the American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr
Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. Copies
may be inspected at U.S. EPA Headquarters Library, EPA West Building,
Constitution Avenue and 14th Street, NW., Room 3340, Washington, DC, or
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/[fxsp0]federal--register/code--

[fxsp0]of--federal--regulations/[fxsp0]ibr--locations.html.
    (B) The density for alcohol fuels shall be determined per ASTM D
1298-85 (Reapproved 1990) ``Standard Practice for Density, Relative
Density (Specific Gravity), or API Gravity of Crude Petroleum and
Liquid Petroleum Products by Hydrometer Method.'' This incorporation by
reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be
obtained from the American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr
Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. Copies
may be inspected at U.S. EPA Headquarters Library, EPA West Building,
Constitution Avenue and 14th Street, NW., Room 3340, Washington, DC, or
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/[fxsp0]federal--register/code--

[fxsp0]of--federal--regulations/[fxsp0]ibr--locations.html.
    (iii) The net heating value and density of gasoline are to be
determined by the manufacturer in accordance with Sec.  600.113(f).
    (2) [Reserved]
    (3) Alcohol dual fuel passenger automobiles and natural gas dual
fuel passenger automobiles manufactured during model years 1993 through
2004 must meet the minimum driving range

requirements established by the Secretary of Transportation (49 CFR
part 538) to obtain the CAFE credit determined in paragraphs (c)(2)(v)
and (vi) of this section.
    (h) For each of the model years 1993 through 2004, and for each
category of automobile identified in paragraph (a) of this section, the
maximum increase in average fuel economy determined in paragraph (c) of
this section attributable to alcohol dual fuel automobiles and natural
gas dual fuel automobiles shall be 1.2 miles per gallon or as provided
for in paragraph (i) of this section.
    (1) The Administrator shall calculate the increase in average fuel
economy to determine if the maximum increase provided in paragraph (h)
of this section has been reached. The Administrator shall calculate the
average fuel economy for each category of automobiles specified in
paragraph (a) of this section by subtracting the average fuel economy
values calculated in accordance with this section by assuming all
alcohol dual fuel and natural gas dual fuel automobiles are operated
exclusively on gasoline (or diesel) fuel from the average fuel economy
values determined in paragraphs (b)(2)(vi), (b)(2)(vii), and (c) of
this section. The difference is limited to the maximum increase
specified in paragraph (h) of this section.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (i) In the event that the Secretary of Transportation lowers the
corporate average fuel economy standard applicable to passenger
automobiles below 27.5 miles per gallon for any model year during 1993
through 2004, the maximum increase of 1.2 mpg per year specified in
paragraph (h) of this section shall be reduced by the amount the
standard was lowered, but not reduced below 0.7 mpg per year.

0
50. A new Sec.  600.512-08 is added to read as follows:

Sec.  600.512-01  Model year report.

    (a) For each model year, the manufacturer shall submit to the
Administrator a report, known as the model year report, containing all
information necessary for the calculation of the manufacturer's average
fuel economy. The results of the manufacturer calculations and summary
information of model type fuel economy values which are contained in
the average calculation shall be submitted to the Secretary of the
Department of Transportation, National Highway and Traffic Safety
Administration.
    (b)(1) The model year report shall be in writing, signed by the
authorized representative of the manufacturer and shall be submitted no
later than 90 days after the end of the model year.
    (2) The Administrator may waive the requirement that the model year
report be submitted no later than 90 days after the end of the model
year. Based upon a request by the manufacturer, if the Administrator
determines that 90 days is insufficient time for the manufacturer to
provide all additional data required as determined in Sec.  600.507,
the Administrator shall establish a date by which the model year report
must be submitted.
    (3) Separate reports shall be submitted for passenger automobiles
and light trucks (as identified in Sec.  600.510).
    (c) The model year report must include the following information:
    (1) All fuel economy data used in the FTP/HFET-based model type
calculations under Sec.  600.208-08, and subsequently required by the
Administrator in accordance with Sec.  600.507;
    (2) All fuel economy data for certification vehicles and for
vehicles tested for running changes approved under Sec.  86.1842-01 of
this chapter;
    (3) Any additional fuel economy data submitted by the manufacturer
under Sec.  600.509;
    (4) A fuel economy value for each model type of the manufacturer's
product line calculated according to Sec.  600.510(b)(2);
    (5) The manufacturer's average fuel economy value calculated
according to Sec.  600.510(c);
    (6) A listing of both domestically and nondomestically produced car
lines as determined in Sec.  600.511 and the cost information upon
which the determination was made; and
    (7) The authenticity and accuracy of production data must be
attested to by the corporation, and shall bear the signature of an
officer (a corporate executive of at least the rank of vice-president)
designated by the corporation. Such attestation shall constitute a
representation by the manufacturer that the manufacturer has
established reasonable, prudent procedures to ascertain and provide
production data that are accurate and authentic in all material
respects and that these procedures have been followed by employees of
the manufacturer involved in the reporting process. The signature of
the designated officer shall constitute a representation by the
required attestation.

0
51. A new Sec.  600.513-08 is added to read as follows:

Sec.  600.513-08  Gas Guzzler Tax.

    (a) This section applies only to passenger automobiles sold after
December 27, 1991, regardless of the model year of those vehicles. For
alcohol dual fuel and natural gas dual fuel automobiles, the fuel
economy while such automobiles are operated on gasoline will be used
for Gas Guzzler Tax assessments.
    (1) The provisions of this section do not apply to passenger
automobiles exempted for Gas Guzzler Tax assessments by applicable
federal law and regulations. However, the manufacturer of an exempted
passenger automobile may, in its discretion, label such vehicles in
accordance with the provisions of this section.
    (2) For 1991 and later model year passenger automobiles, the
combined FTP/HFET-based model type fuel economy value determined in
Sec.  600.208-08 used for Gas Guzzler Tax assessments shall be
calculated in accordance with the following equation, rounded to the
nearest 0.1 mpg:

FEadj = FE[((0.55 x ag x c) + (0.45 x c) +
(0.5556 x ag) + 0.4487) / ((0.55 x ag) + 0.45)] +
IWg

Where:

FEadj = Fuel economy value to be used for determination
of gas guzzler tax assessment rounded to the nearest 0.1 mpg.
FE = Combined model type fuel economy calculated in accordance with
Sec.  600.208-08, rounded to the nearest 0.0001 mpg.
ag = Model type highway fuel economy, calculated in
accordance with Sec.  600.208-08, rounded to the nearest 0.0001 mpg
divided by the model type city fuel economy calculated in accordance
with Sec.  600.208-08, rounded to the nearest 0.0001 mpg. The
quotient shall be rounded to 4 decimal places.
c = gas guzzler adjustment factor = 1.300 x 10-\3\ for
the 1986 and later model years.
IWg = (9.2917 x 10-3 x SF3IWCG
FE3IWCG) - (3.5123 x 10-3 x SF4ETWG
x FE4IWCG).

    Note: Any calculated value of IW less than zero shall be set
equal to zero.

SF3IWCG = The 3000 lb. inertia weight class sales in the
model type divided by the total model type sales; the quotient shall
be rounded to 4 decimal places.
SF4ETWG = The 4000 lb. equivalent test weight sales in
the model type divided by the total model type sales, the quotient
shall be rounded to 4 decimal places.
    FE3IWCG = The 3000 lb. inertial weight class base
level combined fuel economy used to calculate the model type fuel
economy rounded to the nearest 0.0001 mpg.
    FE4IWCG = The 4000 lb. inertial weight class base
level combined fuel economy used to calculate the model type fuel
economy rounded to the nearest 0.001 mpg.

    (b)(1) For passenger automobiles sold after December 31, 1990, with
a combined FTP/HFET-based model type fuel economy value of less than
22.5 mpg (as determined in Sec.  600.208-08), calculated in accordance
with paragraph (a)(2) of this section and rounded to the

nearest 0.1 mpg, each vehicle fuel economy label shall include a Gas
Guzzler Tax statement pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 32908(b)(1)(E). The tax
amount stated shall be as specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this
section.
    (2) For passenger automobiles with a combined general label model
type fuel economy value of:
    (i) At least 22.5 mpg, no Gas Guzzler Tax statement is required.
    (ii) At least 21.5 mpg, but less than 22.5 mpg, the Gas Guzzler Tax
statement shall show a tax of $1,000.
    (iii) At least 20.5 mpg, but less than 21.5 mpg, the Gas Guzzler
Tax statement shall show a tax of $1,300.
    (iv) At least 19.5 mpg, but less than 20.5 mpg, the Gas Guzzler Tax
statement shall show a tax of $1,700.
    (v) At least 18.5 mpg; but less than 19.5 mpg, the Gas Guzzler Tax
statement shall show a tax of $2,100.
    (vi) At least 17.5 mpg, but less than 18.5 mpg, the Gas Guzzler Tax
statement shall show a tax of $2,600.
    (vii) At least 16.5 mpg, but less than 17.5 mpg, the Gas Guzzler
Tax statement shall show a tax of $3,000.
    (viii) At least 15.5 mpg, but less than 16.5 mpg, the Gas Guzzler
Tax statement shall show a tax of $3,700.
    (ix) At least 14.5 mpg, but less than 15.5 mpg, the Gas Guzzler Tax
statement shall show a tax of $4,500.
    (x) At least 13.5 mpg, but less than 14.5 mpg, the Gas Guzzler Tax
statement shall show a tax of $5,400.
    (xi) At least 12.5 mpg, but less than 13.5 mpg, the Gas Guzzler Tax
statement shall show a tax of $6,400.
    (xii) Less than 12.5 mpg, the Gas Guzzler Tax statement shall show
a tax of $7,700.

0
52. Appendix II to Part 600 is amended by revising paragraph (b) as
follows:

Appendix II to Part 600--Sample Fuel Economy Calculations

* * * * *
    (b) This sample fuel economy calculation is applicable to 1988
and later model year automobiles.
    (1) Assume that a gasoline-fueled vehicle was tested by the
Federal Emission Test Procedure and the following results were
calculated:

HC = .139 grams/mile.
CO = 1.59 grams/mile.
CO2 = 317 grams/mile.

    (2) Assume that the test fuel used for this test had the
following properties:

SG = 0.745.
CWF = 0.868.
NHV = 18,478 Btu/lb.
    (3) According to the procedure in Sec.  600.113-08, the city
fuel economy or MPGc, for the vehicle may be calculated
by substituting the HC, CO, and CO2 gram/mile values and
the SG, CWF, and NHV values into the following equation:

MPGc = (5174 x 104x CWF x SG) / [((CWF x HC) +
(0.429 x CO + (0.273 x CO2)) ((0.6 x SG x NHV) + 5471)]

    Example:

MPGc = (5174 x 10 4 x 0.868 x 0.745) / [(0.868 x
.139 + 0.429 x 1.59 + 0.273 x 317)(0.6 x 0.745 x 18478 + 5471)]
MPGc = 27.9

    (4) Assume that the same vehicle was tested by the Federal
Highway Fuel Economy Test Procedure and a calculation similar to
that shown in (b)(3) of this section resulted in a highway fuel
economy of MPGh of 36.9. According to the procedure in
Sec.  600.210(c), the combined fuel economy (called
MPGcomb) for the vehicle may be calculated by
substituting the city and highway fuel economy values into the
following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.080

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.081

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.082

0
53. Appendix III to Part 600 is revised to read as follows:

Appendix III to Part 600--Sample Fuel Economy Label Calculation

    Suppose that a manufacturer called Mizer Motors has a product
line composed of eight car lines. Of these eight, four are available
with the 3.0 liter, 6 cylinder, sequential multi-point fuel
injection, 4-valve per cylinder, and 3-way catalyst engine. These
four car lines are:

Ajax
Boredom III
Dodo
Castor (Station Wagon)

    A. A car line is defined in subpart A (with additional guidance
provided in EPA Advisory Circular 89) as a group of vehicles within
a make or division which has a degree of commonality in
construction. Car line does not consider any level of decor or
opulence and is not generally distinguished by such characteristics
as roofline, number of doors, seats, or windows. Station wagons and
light duty trucks are, however, identified separately from the
remainder of each car line. In other words, a Castor station wagon
would be considered a different car line than the normal Castor car
line made up of sedans, coupes, etc.
    B. The engine considered here is defined as a basic engine in
subpart A of this part (with additional guidance provided in EPA
Advisory Circular 83A). A basic engine is a unique combination of
manufacturer, engine displacement, number of cylinders, fuel system,
catalyst usage and other engine and emission control system
characteristics specified by the Administrator. A model type is a
unique combination of car line, basic engine, and transmission
class. Thus Ajax is a car line but Ajax 3.0 liter, 6 cylinder manual
four-speed transmission is a model type whereas Ajax 3.0 liter, 6
cylinder automatic three-speed transmission is a different model
type.
    C. The following calculations provide an example of the
procedures described in subpart C of this part for the calculation
of vehicle configuration and model type fuel economy values. In
order to simplify the presentation, only city fuel economy values
are included (as determined by either the derived 5-cycle method or
vehicle-specific 5-cycle based method). The procedure is identical
for highway and combined fuel economy values.
    Step I. Input data as supplied by the manufacturer or as
determined from testing conducted by the Administrator.

Manufacturer--Mizer Motors

    Basic Engine: (3.0 liter, 6 cylinder, sequential multi-point
fuel injection, 4-valve per cylinder, 3-way catalyst).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Harmonically    Specific     Vehicle
                    Test vehicle carline                      Engine code     Trans       Inertia     Axle ratio    averaged.    label MPG     config.
                                                                                weight                   city MPG        \1\         sales
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ajax........................................................            1          M-4         3500         2.73       16.1001           16       15,000
Ajax........................................................            2          A-3         3500         2.56       15.9020           16       35,000
Boredom III.................................................            4          M-4         4000         3.08       14.2343           14       10,000
Ajax........................................................            3          M-4         4000         3.36       15.0000           15       15,000
Boredom III.................................................            8          A-3         4000         2.56       13.8138           14       25,000
Boredom III.................................................            5          A-3         4500         3.08       13.2203           13       20,000
Castor......................................................            5          A-3         5000         3.08       10.6006           11      40,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The vehicle configuration fuel economy values, rounded to the nearest mile per gallon, are the fuel economy values that would be used on specific
  labels for that vehicle configuration.

    Step II. Group vehicle fuel economy and sales data according to
base level combinations within this basic engine.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Projected
                                                                           Inertia     Miles per      vehicle
                Base level                      Transmission class          weight       gallon    configuration
                                                                                sales
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A........................................  Manual-4....................        3,500      16.1001        15,000
B........................................  Automatic-3.................        3,500      15.9020        35,000
C........................................  Manual-4....................        4,000      14.2343        10,000
C........................................  Manual-4....................        4,000      15.0000        15,000
D........................................  Automatic-3.................        4,000      13.8138        25,000
E........................................  Automatic-3.................        4,500      13.2203        20,000
F........................................  Automatic-3.................        5,000      10.6006        40,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Step III. Determine base level fuel economy values.
    A. For all the base levels except the base level which includes
4,000 pound, manual four-speed transmission data, the base level
fuel economy is as noted in Step II since only one vehicle
configuration was tested within each of these base levels.

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
3,500 lb/M4 transmission..................  16.1001 mpg.
3,500 lb/A3 transmission..................  15.9020 mpg.
4,000 lb/A3 transmission..................  13.8138 mpg.
4,500 lb/A3 transmission..................  13.2203 mpg.
5,000 lb/A3 transmission..................  10.6006 mpg.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    B. Since data from more than one vehicle configuration are
included in the 4,000-pound, manual four-speed transmission base
level, this fuel economy is harmonically averaged in proportion to
the percentage of total sales of all vehicle configurations tested
within that base level represented by each vehicle configuration
tested within that base level.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.083

    Base level: M4 transmission, 4000 pounds:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.084

    Therefore, the 4000 pound, M4 transmission fuel economy is
14.6840 miles per gallon.
    Note that the car line of the test vehicle using a given engine
makes no difference--only the weight and transmission do.
    Step IV. For each model type offered by the manufacturer with
that basic engine, determine the sales fraction represented by each
inertia weight/transmission class combination and the corresponding
fuel economy.

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

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ajax.....................................  M4........................  0.4000 at 3,500 lb..........      16.1001
                                                                       0.6000 at 4,000 lb..........      14.6840
                                           A3........................  0.3000 at 3,500 lb..........      15.9020
                                                                       0.7000 at 4,000 lb..........      13.8138
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dodo.....................................  M4........................  0.4000 at 3,500 lb..........      16.1001
                                                                       0.6000 at 4,000 lb..........      14.6840
                                           A3........................  0.3000 at 3,500 lb..........      15.9020
                                                                       0.7000 at 4,000 lb..........      13.8138
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boredom III..............................  M4........................  1.0000 at 4,000 lb..........      14.6840
                                           A3........................  0.2500 at 4,000 lb..........      13.8138
                                                                       0.7500 at 4,500 lb..........      13.2203
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Castor...................................  A3........................  0.2000 at 4,500 lb..........      13.2203
                                                                       0.8000 at 5,000 lb..........      10.6006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Step V. Determine fuel economy for each model type (that is, car
line/basic engine/transmission class combination).
    Ajax, 3.0 liter, 6 cylinder, A3 transmission, model type MPG is
calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.085

    Similarly, Ajax and Dodo 3.0 liter, 6 cylinder, M4 model type
MPG is calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.086

    Dodo 3.0 liter, 6 cylinder, A3 model type MPG is calculated as
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.087

    Boredom III 3.0 liter 6 cylinder M4 model type MPG = 14.6840
mpg, which rounds to 15 mi./gal\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The model type fuel economy values rounded to the nearest
mile per gallon, are the fuel economy values listed in the EPA Fuel
Economy Guide and used on the general labels (window stickers) for
production vehicles for that model year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Boredom III 3.0 liter, 6 cylinder, A3 model type MPG is
calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.088

    Castor 3.0 liter, 6 cylinder, A3 model type MPG is calculated as
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.089

    Note that even though no Dodo was actually tested, this approach
permits its fuel economy figure to be estimated, based on the
inertia weight distribution of projected Dodo sales within a
specific engine and transmission grouping.

0
54. A new Appendix IV is added to read as follows:

Appendix IV to Part 600--Sample Fuel Economy Labels for 2008 and Later
Model Year Vehicles

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    A. Gasoline (or diesel)-fueled vehicle label
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.090

    B. Gasoline (or diesel)-fueled vehicle label (with transitional
text statement for MY 2008 and 2009 vehicles only)

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.091

    C. Gasoline-fueled Gas Guzzler vehicle label
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.092

    D. Dual Fuel Vehicle Label (Ethanol/Gasoline)
    Option 1--without alternate fuel economy)

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.093

    Option 2--with alternate fuel economy
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.094

    E. Natural Gas Vehicle Label

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.095

    F. Dual Fuel Natural Gas Label
    Option 1--without alternate fuel economy
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.096

    Option 2--With alternate fuel economy

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.097

0
55. A new Appendix V is added to read as follows:

Appendix V to Part 600--Fuel Economy Label Style Guidelines for 2008
and Later Model Year Vehicles

    A. Format Guidelines for Gasoline (or Diesel) Vehicles

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.098

    B. Format Guidelines for Ethanol and Natural Gas Dual Fuel
Vehicles. Unless otherwise indicated, the format specifications in
Appendix V. A. apply.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.099

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.100

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.101

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.102

    C. Format Guidelines showing Gas Guzzler. Unless otherwise
indicated, the format specifications in Appendix V. A. apply.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.103

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.104

    D. Format Guidelines for Natural Vehicles. Unless otherwise
indicated, the format specifications in Appendix V. A. apply.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE06.105

[FR Doc. 06-9749 Filed 12-26-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: May 8, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 88)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 26040-26045]
[DOCID:fr08my07-28]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2007-0347; FRL-8309-6]

Approval And Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Iowa; Clean
Air Interstate Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Iowa State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on August 15, 2006. This revision
addresses the requirements of EPA's Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
promulgated on May 12, 2005, and subsequently revised on April 28,
2006, and December 13, 2006. EPA is proposing to determine that the SIP
revision fully implements the CAIR requirements for Iowa. Therefore, as
a consequence of the SIP approval, EPA will also withdraw the CAIR
Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) concerning SO2,
NOX annual, NOX ozone season emissions for Iowa.
The CAIR FIPs for all States in the CAIR region were promulgated on
April 28, 2006, and subsequently revised on December 13, 2006.
    CAIR requires States to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide
(SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) that
significantly contribute to, and interfere with maintenance of, the
national ambient air quality standards for fine particulates and/or
ozone in any downwind state. CAIR establishes State budgets for
SO2 and NOX and requires States to submit SIP
revisions that implement these budgets in States that EPA concluded did
contribute to nonattainment in downwind states. States have the
flexibility to choose which control measures to adopt to achieve the
budgets, including participating in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs. In the SIP revision that EPA is proposing to approve, Iowa
would meet CAIR requirements by participating in the EPA-administered
cap-and-trade programs addressing SO2, NOX
annual, and NOX ozone season emissions.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 7, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2007-0347, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail: Michael Jay, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning
and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas
66101.
    4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: Michael Jay,
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch,
901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. 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 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2007-0347. 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 through http://www.regulations.gov
 or e-mail,

information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. 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 and any form of encryption and should be free of any defects
or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://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 http://www.regulations.gov
 or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection

Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street,
Kansas City, Kansas 66101. EPA requests that you contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your
inspection. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents
should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours in
advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions concerning this
proposal, please contact Michael Jay at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

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

Table of Contents

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing to Take?
II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
III. What Are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
IV. What Are the Types of CAIR SIP Submittals?
V. Analysis of Iowa's CAIR SIP Submittal
    A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations
    B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs
    C. NOX Allowance Allocations
    D. Allocation of NOX Allowances from Compliance
Supplement Pool
    E. Individual Opt-in Units
VI. Proposed Actions
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing to Take?

    EPA is proposing to approve a revision to Iowa's SIP submitted on
August 15, 2006. In its SIP revision, Iowa would meet CAIR requirements
by requiring certain electric generating units (EGUs) to participate in
the EPA-administered State CAIR cap-and-trade programs addressing
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
emissions, as finalized in the Iowa Administrative Bulletin on June 7,
2006 (567-20.1(455B,17A), 21.1(4), and Chapter 34). Iowa's regulations
adopt by reference most of the provisions of EPA's SO2,
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season model trading
rules, with certain changes discussed below. EPA is proposing to
determine that the SIP as revised will meet the applicable requirements
of CAIR. Any final action approving the SIP will be taken by the
Regional Administrator for Region 7. If EPA approves this revision, the
Administrator of EPA will also issue a final rule to withdraw the FIPs
concerning SO2, NOX annual, and NOX
ozone season emissions for Iowa. This action would delete and reserve
40 CFR 52.840 and 40 CFR 52.841, relating to the CAIR FIP obligations
for Iowa. The withdrawal of the CAIR FIPs for Iowa is a conforming
amendment that must be made once the SIP is approved because EPA's
authority to issue the FIPs was premised on a deficiency in the SIP for
Iowa. Once a SIP is fully approved, EPA no longer has authority for the
FIPs. Thus, EPA will not have the option of maintaining the FIPs
following full SIP approval. Accordingly, EPA does not intend to offer
an opportunity for a public hearing or an additional opportunity for
written public comment on the withdrawal of the FIPs.

II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?

    The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) was published by EPA on May
12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). In this rule, EPA determined that 28 States and
the District of Columbia contribute significantly to nonattainment and
interfere with maintenance of the national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for fine particles (PM2.5) and/or 8-hour
ozone in downwind States in the eastern part of the country. As a
result, EPA required those upwind States to revise their SIPs to
include control measures that reduce emissions of SO2, which
is a precursor to PM2.5 formation, and/or NOX,
which is a precursor to both ozone and PM2.5 formation. For
jurisdictions that contribute significantly to downwind
PM2.5 nonattainment, CAIR sets annual State-wide emission
reduction requirements (i.e., budgets) for SO2 and annual
State-wide emission reduction requirements for NOX.
Similarly, for jurisdictions that contribute significantly to 8-hour
ozone nonattainment, CAIR sets State-wide emission reduction
requirements for NOX for the ozone season (May 1 to
September 30). Under CAIR, States may implement these reduction
requirements by participating in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs or by adopting any other control measures.
    CAIR explains to subject States what must be included in SIPs to
address the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) with regard to interstate transport with respect to the 8-hour
ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA made national findings, effective
on May 25, 2005, that the States had failed to submit SIPs meeting the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D). The SIPs were due in July 2000, 3
years after the promulgation of the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5
NAAQS. These findings started a 2-year clock for EPA to promulgate a
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D). Under CAA section 110(c)(1), EPA may issue a FIP
anytime after such findings are made and must do so within two years
unless a SIP revision correcting the deficiency is approved by EPA
before the FIP is promulgated.
    Iowa submitted its SIP in response to EPA's section 110(a)(2)(D)
finding, which EPA approved in a rule published March 8, 2007 (72 FR
10380). In that rule, EPA stated that Iowa had met its obligation with
regard to interstate transport by adoption of the CAIR model rule. EPA
also stated that it would review and act on Iowa's CAIR rule in a
separate rulemaking. This document proposes action on Iowa's CAIR rule
as explained below.
    On April 28, 2006, EPA promulgated FIPs for all States covered by
CAIR in order to ensure the emissions reductions required by CAIR are
achieved on schedule. Each CAIR State is subject to the FIPs until the
State fully adopts, and EPA approves, a SIP revision meeting the
requirements of CAIR. The CAIR

FIPs require EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered CAIR
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
trading programs, as appropriate. The CAIR FIP SO2,
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season trading programs
impose essentially the same requirements as, and are integrated with,
the respective CAIR SIP trading programs. The integration of the FIP
and SIP trading programs means that these trading programs will work
together to effectively create a single trading program for each
regulated pollutant (SO2, NOX annual, and
NOX ozone season) in all States covered by the CAIR FIP or
SIP trading program for that pollutant. The CAIR FIPs also allow States
to submit abbreviated SIP revisions that, if approved by EPA, will
automatically replace or supplement certain CAIR FIP provisions (e.g.,
the methodology for allocating NOX allowances to sources in
the State), while the CAIR FIP remains in place for all other
provisions.
    On April 28, 2006, EPA published two additional CAIR-related final
rules that added the States of Delaware and New Jersey to the list of
States subject to CAIR for PM2.5 and announced EPA's final
decisions on reconsideration of five issues, without making any
substantive changes to the CAIR requirements.

III. What Are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?

    CAIR establishes State-wide emission budgets for SO2 and
NOX and is to be implemented in two phases. The first phase
of NOX reductions starts in 2009 and continues through 2014,
while the first phase of SO2 reductions starts in 2010 and
continues through 2014. The second phase of reductions for both
NOX and SO2 starts in 2015 and continues
thereafter. CAIR requires States to implement the budgets by either:
(1) Requiring EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs; or (2) adopting other control measures of the State's
choosing and demonstrating that such control measures will result in
compliance with the applicable State SO2 and NOX
budgets.
    The May 12, 2005, and April 28, 2006, CAIR rules provide model
rules that States must adopt (with certain limited changes, if desired)
if they want to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs.
    With two exceptions, only States that choose to meet the
requirements of CAIR through methods that exclusively regulate EGUs are
allowed to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs. One
exception is for States that adopt the opt-in provisions of the model
rules to allow non-EGUs individually to opt into the EPA-administered
trading programs. The other exception is for States that include all
non-EGUs from their NOX SIP Call trading programs in their
CAIR NOX ozone season trading programs.

IV. What Are the Types of CAIR SIP Submittals?

    States have the flexibility to choose the type of control measures
they will use to meet the requirements of CAIR. EPA anticipates that
most States will choose to meet the CAIR requirements by selecting an
option that requires EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered CAIR
cap-and-trade programs. For such States, EPA has provided two
approaches for submitting and obtaining approval for CAIR SIP
revisions. States may submit full SIP revisions that adopt the model
CAIR cap-and-trade rules. If approved, these SIP revisions will fully
replace the CAIR FIPs. Alternatively, States may submit abbreviated SIP
revisions. These SIP revisions will not replace the CAIR FIPs; however,
the CAIR FIPs provide that, when approved, the provisions in these
abbreviated SIP revisions will be used instead of or in conjunction
with, as appropriate, the corresponding provisions of the CAIR FIPs
(e.g., the NOX allowance allocation methodology).
    A State submitting a full SIP revision may either adopt regulations
that are substantively identical to the model rules or incorporate by
reference the model rules. CAIR provides that States may only make
limited changes to the model rules if the States want to participate in
the EPA-administered trading programs. A full SIP revision may change
the model rules only by altering their applicability and allowance
allocation provisions to: (1) Include NOX SIP Call trading
sources that are not EGUs under CAIR in the CAIR NOX ozone
season trading program; (2) provide for State allocation of
NOX annual or ozone season allowances using a methodology
chosen by the State; (3) provide for State allocation of NOX
annual allowances from the compliance supplement pool (CSP) using the
State's choice of allowed, alternative methodologies; or (4) allow
units that are not otherwise CAIR units to opt individually into the
CAIR SO2, NOX annual, or NOX ozone
season trading programs under the opt-in provisions in the model rules.
    An approved CAIR full SIP revision addressing EGUs' SO2,
NOX annual, or NOX ozone season emissions will
replace the CAIR FIP for that State for the respective EGU emissions.

V. Analysis of Iowa's CAIR SIP Submittal

A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations

    The CAIR NOX annual and ozone season budgets were
developed from historical heat input data for EGUs. Using these data,
EPA calculated annual and ozone season regional heat input values,
which were multiplied by 0.15 lb/mmBtu, for phase 1, and 0.125 lb/
mmBtu, for phase 2, to obtain regional NOX budgets for 2009-
2014 and for 2015 and thereafter, respectively. EPA derived the State
NOX annual and ozone season budgets from the regional
budgets using State heat input data adjusted by fuel factors.
    The CAIR State SO2 budgets were derived by discounting
the tonnage of emissions authorized by annual allowance allocations
under the Acid Rain Program under title IV of the CAA. Under CAIR, each
allowance allocated in the Acid Rain Program for the years in phase 1
of CAIR (2010 through 2014) authorizes 0.5 ton of SO2
emissions in the CAIR trading program, and each Acid Rain Program
allowance allocated for the years in phase 2 of CAIR (2015 and
thereafter) authorizes 0.35 ton of SO2 emissions in the CAIR
trading program.
    In this action, EPA is proposing approval of Iowa's SIP revision
that adopts the budgets established for the State in CAIR, i.e., 32,692
(2009-2014) and 27,243 (2015-thereafter) tons for NOX annual
emissions, 14,263 (2009-2014) and 11,886 (2015-thereafter) tons for
NOX ozone season emissions, and 64,095 (2010-2014) and
44,866 (2015-thereafter) tons for SO2 emissions. Iowa's SIP
revision sets these budgets as the total amounts of allowances
available for allocation for each year under the EPA-administered cap-
and-trade programs.
    Iowa has committed to revising a definition in all three CAIR rules
in order to fully ensure allowances can be traded among all sources
participating in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs as
intended. EPA discovered after review of other States' rules, but after
Iowa had adopted its CAIR rules, that there was an issue related to the
definition of ``permitting authority'' when it is revised to refer to a
specific State's permitting authority.
    In each of Iowa's rules for CAIR, the EPA model trading rules were
revised to limit all references to ``permitting authority'' to refer to
the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. This

change is acceptable in most, but not all, instances under the current
model rules. In certain definitions in the model rules incorporated by
Iowa (i.e., ``allocate'' or ``allocation,'' ``CAIR NOX
allowance,'' ``CAIR SO2 allowance,'' and ``CAIR
NOX Ozone Season allowance''), it is important that the term
``permitting authority'' cover permitting authorities in all States
that choose to participate in the respective EPA-administered trading
programs. This is necessary to ensure that all allowances issued in
each EPA-administered trading program are fungible and can be traded
and used for compliance with the allowance-holding requirement in any
State in the program.
    On February 17, 2007, EPA provided a letter to Iowa that requested
and outlined necessary definition revisions. EPA received a letter from
Iowa on February 28, 2007, that provided a commitment to make the EPA
suggested rule revisions as soon as is practicable upon publication of
the final rule concerning the proposed Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR)
Federal plan. On April 11, 2007, EPA received an electronic
correspondence from Iowa stating that Iowa will, in any event, complete
these rule revisions before January 1, 2008. The State will be able to
simultaneously revise the ``permitting authority'' definition in all
cap-and-trade rules for both CAIR and CAMR, and properly update the
State's rule as necessary to meet the requirements of the EPA-
administered cap-and-trade-program for mercury.
    The final rule concerning the CAMR Federal plan is expected to be
published before the earliest, major deadline for compliance with
requirements for source owners and operators under the CAIR trading
programs, i.e., the January 1, 2008, deadline for emissions monitoring
requirements under the CAIR Annual Trading Program. EPA expects that,
by timing adoption of the EPA requested rule revisions to be soon after
the publication of the final rule concerning the CAMR Federal plan, the
State will ensure the revisions to the definition of ``permitting
authority'' will be completed prior to any of the major compliance
deadlines for source owners and operators under the CAIR trading
programs. In the event the final rule concerning the CAMR Federal plan
is not published in the expected timeframe, the State will need to
ensure the necessary State rule revisions are completed and submitted
to EPA in advance of the January 1, 2008, monitoring deadline for the
CAIR NOX Annual Trading Program.
    To be clear, EPA notes that it is not proposing to approve the
State's rule to comply with CAMR as part of this rulemaking. EPA will
propose a separate rulemaking for the Iowa rule relating to CAMR.

B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs

    The CAIR NOX annual and ozone season model trading rules
both largely mirror the structure of the NOX SIP Call model
trading rule in 40 CFR part 96, subparts A through I. While the
provisions of the NOX annual and ozone season model rules
are similar, there are some differences. For example, the
NOX annual model rule (but not the NOX ozone
season model rule) provides for a compliance supplement pool (CSP),
which is discussed below and under which allowances may be awarded for
early reductions of NOX annual emissions. As a further
example, the NOX ozone season model rule reflects the fact
that the CAIR NOX ozone season trading program replaces the
NOX SIP Call trading program after the 2008 ozone season and
is coordinated with the NOX SIP Call program. The
NOX ozone season model rule provides incentives for early
emissions reductions by allowing banked, pre-2009 NOX SIP
Call allowances to be used for compliance in the CAIR NOX
ozone season trading program. In addition, States have the option of
continuing to meet their NOX SIP Call requirement by
participating in the CAIR NOX ozone season trading program
and including all their NOX SIP Call trading sources in that
program.
    The provisions of the CAIR SO2 model rule are also
similar to the provisions of the NOX annual and ozone season
model rules. However, the SO2 model rule is coordinated with
the ongoing Acid Rain SO2 cap-and-trade program under CAA
title IV. The SO2 model rule uses the title IV allowances
for compliance, with each allowance allocated for 2010-2014 authorizing
only 0.50 ton of emissions and each allowance allocated for 2015 and
thereafter authorizing only 0.36 ton of emissions. Banked title IV
allowances allocated for years before 2010 can be used at any time in
the CAIR SO2 cap-and-trade program, with each such allowance
authorizing 1 ton of emissions. Title IV allowances are to be freely
transferable among sources covered by the Acid Rain Program and sources
covered by the CAIR SO2 cap-and-trade program.
    EPA also used the CAIR model trading rules as the basis for the
trading programs in the CAIR FIPs. The CAIR FIP trading rules are
virtually identical to the CAIR model trading rules, with changes made
to account for Federal rather than State implementation. The CAIR model
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
trading rules and the respective CAIR FIP trading rules are designed to
work together as integrated SO2, NOX annual, and
NOX ozone season trading programs.
    In the SIP revision, Iowa has chosen to implement its CAIR budgets
by requiring EGUs to participate in EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs for SO2, NOX annual, and NOX
ozone season emissions. Iowa has adopted a full SIP revision that
adopts, with the changes discussed above and with certain allowed
changes discussed below, the CAIR model cap-and-trade rules for
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
emissions.

C. NOX Allowance Allocations

    Under the NOX allowance allocation methodology in the
CAIR model trading rules and in the CAIR FIP, NOX annual and
ozone season allowances are allocated to units that have operated for
five years, based on heat input data from a three-year period that are
adjusted for fuel type by using fuel factors of 1.0 for coal, 0.6 for
oil, and 0.4 for other fuels. The CAIR model trading rules and the CAIR
FIP also provide a new unit set-aside from which units without five
years of operation are allocated allowances based on the units' prior
year emissions.
    States may establish in their SIP submissions a different
NOX allowance allocation methodology that will be used to
allocate allowances to sources in the States if certain requirements
are met concerning the timing of submission of units' allocations to
the Administrator for recordation and the total amount of allowances
allocated for each control period. In adopting alternative
NOX allowance allocation methodologies, States have
flexibility with regard to: (1) The cost to recipients of the
allowances, which may be distributed for free or auctioned; (2) the
frequency of allocations; (3) the basis for allocating allowances,
which may be distributed, for example, based on historical heat input
or electric and thermal output; and (4) the use of allowance set-asides
and, if used, their size.
    Iowa has chosen to adopt the essential components of the CAIR
NOX annual and CAIR NOX ozone season model
trading rules concerning the allocation of allowances with two notable
exceptions. Language is provided in Iowa's rules that attempts to
clarify that allowances will be allocated in future years only ``to
meet the minimum timing requirements'' specified in the Federal
regulations. EPA understands that the language is intended to mean that
allocations will be determined by

the dates and only for the years identified or described in 40 CFR
96.141 and 40 CFR 96.341. Additionally, Iowa's CAIR NOX
Annual and CAIR NOX ozone rules establish permanent
allocations for specified units designated as ``existing units'' or
``new units'' and do not include provisions of the EPA's model rules
that call for adjusting the allocations for existing units to provide
allocations for future, new units. EPA is proposing to approve these
changes to the model rule provisions because the changes are consistent
with the flexibility that CAIR provides States with regard to
allocation methodologies.

D. Allocation of NOX Allowances From Compliance Supplement
Pool

    The CAIR establishes a compliance supplement pool to provide an
incentive for early reductions in NOX annual emissions. The
CSP consists of 200,000 CAIR NOX annual allowances of
vintage 2009 for the entire CAIR region, and a State's share of the CSP
is based upon the projected magnitude of the emission reductions
required by CAIR in that State. States may distribute CSP allowances,
one allowance for each ton of early reduction, to sources that make
NOX reductions during 2007 or 2008 beyond what is required
by any applicable State or Federal emission limitation. States also may
distribute CSP allowances based upon a demonstration of need for an
extension of the 2009 deadline for implementing emission controls.
    The CAIR annual NOX model trading rule establishes
specific methodologies for allocations of CSP allowances. States may
choose an allowed, alternative CSP allocation methodology to be used to
allocate CSP allowances to sources in the States.
    Iowa has not chosen to modify the provisions of the CAIR
NOX annual model trading rule concerning the allocation of
allowances from the CSP. Iowa has chosen to distribute CSP allowances
using the allocation methodology provided in 40 CFR 96.143 and has
adopted this section by reference.

E. Individual Opt-in Units

    The opt-in provisions of the CAIR SIP model trading rules allow
certain non-EGUs (i.e., boilers, combustion turbines, and other
stationary fossil-fuel-fired devices) that do not meet the
applicability criteria for a CAIR trading program to participate
voluntarily in (i.e., opt into) the CAIR trading program. A non-EGU may
opt into one or more of the CAIR trading programs. In order to qualify
to opt into a CAIR trading program, a unit must vent all emissions
through a stack and be able to meet monitoring, recordkeeping, and
recording requirements of 40 CFR part 75. The owners and operators
seeking to opt a unit into a CAIR trading program must apply for a CAIR
opt-in permit. If the unit is issued a CAIR opt-in permit, the unit
becomes a CAIR unit, is allocated allowances, and must meet the same
allowance-holding and emissions monitoring and reporting requirements
as other units subject to the CAIR trading program. The opt-in
provisions provide for two methodologies for allocating allowances for
opt-in units, one methodology that applies to opt-in units in general
and a second methodology that allocates allowances only to opt-in units
that the owners and operators intend to repower before January 1, 2015.
    States have several options concerning the opt-in provisions.
States may adopt the CAIR opt-in provisions entirely or may adopt them
but exclude one of the methodologies for allocating allowances. States
may also decline to adopt the opt-in provisions at all.
    Iowa has chosen to allow non-EGUs meeting certain requirements to
opt into the CAIR trading programs by adopting by reference the
entirety of EPA's model rule provisions for opt-in units in the CAIR
SO2, CAIR NOX annual, and CAIR NOX
ozone season trading programs.

VI. Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to approve Iowa's full CAIR SIP revision submitted
on August 15, 2006. Under this SIP revision, Iowa is choosing to
participate in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs for
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
emissions. EPA believes that the SIP revision meets the applicable
requirements in 40 CFR 51.123(o) and (aa), with regard to
NOX annual and NOX ozone season emissions, and 40
CFR 51.124(o), with regard to SO2 emissions. EPA is
proposing to determine that the SIP as revised will meet the
requirements of CAIR. If EPA finalizes this action as proposed, the
Administrator of EPA will also issue, without providing an opportunity
for a public hearing or an additional opportunity for written public
comment, a final rule to withdraw the CAIR FIPs concerning
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
emissions for Iowa. The Administrator's action would delete and reserve
40 CFR 52.840 and 40 CFR 52.841.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely proposes to approve State law as meeting Federal requirements
and would impose no additional requirements beyond those imposed by
State law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601 et seq.). Because this action proposes to approve pre-existing
requirements under State law and would not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required by State law, it 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).
    This proposal also does not have tribal implications because it
would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This proposed action also
does not have Federalism implications because it would not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This
action merely proposes to approve a State rule implementing a Federal
standard and will result, as a consequence of that approval, in the
Administrator's withdrawal of the CAIR FIP. It does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities
established in the Clean Air Act. This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because it would approve a State rule implementing a Federal
Standard.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission
for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable
law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a
SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air
Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.
This proposed rule would not impose an information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Electric
utilities, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
dioxide.

    Dated: April 30, 2007.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. E7-8665 Filed 5-7-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 118 (Friday, June 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35336-35337]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15109]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14513-001]

Idaho Irrigation District, New Sweden Irrigation District; Notice
of Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application
Document (PAD), Commencement of Pre-Filing Process, and Scoping;
Request for Comments on the PAD and Scoping Document, and
Identification of Issues and Associated Study Requests

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application for
an Original License and Commencing Pre-filing Process.
    b. Project No.: 14513-001.
    c. Date Filed: April 20, 2015.
    d. Submitted By: Idaho Irrigation District, New Sweden Irrigation
District (the Districts).
    e. Name of Project: County Line Road Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Snake River, in Jefferson and Bonneville
Counties, Idaho. The project would occupy 0.1 acre of United States
lands under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR part 5 of the Commission's
Regulations.
    h. Applicant Contact: Nicholas Josten, 2742 Saint Charles Ave,
Idaho Falls, Idaho 83404;<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Matt Cutlip at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in item n. below. Cooperating agencies should note
the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation
of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See 94 FERC ]
61,076 (2001).
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or National Marine Fisheries
Service under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint
agency regulations thereunder at 50 CFR part 402 and (b) the State
Historic Preservation Officer, as required by section 106, National
Historical Preservation Act, and the implementing regulations of the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. The Districts filed with the Commission a Pre-Application
Document (PAD), pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    m. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public

Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field, to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY).
    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    n. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and
Commission's staff Scoping Document 1 (SD1), as well as study requests.
All comments on the PAD and SD1, and study requests should be sent to
the address above in paragraph h. In addition, all comments on the PAD
and SD1, study requests, requests for cooperating agency status, and
all communications to and from Commission staff related to the merits
of the potential application must be filed with the Commission.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
all documents using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>In lieu of electronic filing, please send a
paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing
should include docket number P-14513-001.
    All filings with the Commission must bear the appropriate heading:
``Comments on Pre-Application Document,'' ``Study Requests,''
``Comments on Scoping Document 1,'' ``Request for Cooperating Agency
Status,'' or ``Communications to and from Commission Staff.'' Any
individual or entity interested in submitting study requests,
commenting on the PAD or SD1, and any agency requesting cooperating
status must do so by August 18, 2015.
    o. Although our current intent is to prepare an environmental
assessment (EA), there is the possibility that an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) will be required. Nevertheless, this meeting will
satisfy the NEPA scoping requirements, irrespective of whether an EA or
EIS is issued by the Commission.

Scoping Meetings

    Commission staff will hold two scoping meetings in the vicinity of
the project at the time and place noted below. The daytime meeting will
focus on resource agency, Indian tribes, and non-governmental
organization concerns, while the evening meeting is primarily for
receiving input from the public. We invite all interested individuals,
organizations, and agencies to attend one or both of the meetings, and
to assist staff in identifying particular study needs, as well as the
scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the environmental
document. The times and locations of these meetings are as follows:

Evening Scoping Meeting

    Date and Time: Wednesday, July 8, 2015, 7:00 p.m. (MDT).
    Location: Shilo Inn Suites Hotel, 780 Lindsay Blvd., Idaho Falls,
ID.
    Phone Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Daytime Scoping Meeting

    Date and Time: Thursday, July 9, 2015, 9:30 a.m. (MDT).
    Location: Shilo Inn Suites Hotel, 780 Lindsay Blvd., Idaho Falls,
ID.
    Phone Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Scoping Document 1 (SD1), which outlines the subject areas to be
addressed in the environmental document, was mailed to the individuals
and entities on the Commission's mailing list. Copies of SD1 will be
available at the scoping meetings, or may be viewed on the web at
http://www.ferc.gov, using the ``eLibrary'' link. Follow the directions
for accessing information in paragraph n. Based on all oral and written
comments, a Scoping Document 2 (SD2) may be issued. SD2 may include a
revised process plan and schedule, as well as a list of issues,
identified through the scoping process.

Environmental Site Review

    The Districts and Commission staff will conduct an Environmental
Site Review of the project on Wednesday, July 8, starting at 1:00 p.m.
(MDT). All participants should meet at the West River Road Boat Ramp,
located at 9924 North River Road, Idaho Falls, Idaho 83402. All
participants are responsible for their own transportation. Please
contact Mr. Nick Josten at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by July 2, 2015, if you
plan to attend the environmental site review.
    Directions: From the junction of Highway 20 and Lindsay Boulevard
in Idaho Falls, go north on Lindsay Boulevard for 2 miles, continue
onto North River Road for 3.5 miles to the public boat launch and
picnic area on the west side of the Snake River.

Meeting Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, staff will: (1) Initiate scoping of the
issues; (2) review and discuss existing conditions and resource
management objectives; (3) review and discuss existing information and
identify preliminary information and study needs; (4) review and
discuss the process plan and schedule for pre-filing activity that
incorporates the time frames provided for in Part 5 of the Commission's
regulations and, to the extent possible, maximizes coordination of
federal, state, and tribal permitting and certification processes; and
(5) discuss the appropriateness of any federal or state agency or
Indian tribe acting as a cooperating agency for development of an
environmental document.
    Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their issues
and/or concerns. Please review the PAD in preparation for the scoping
meetings. Directions on how to obtain a copy of the PAD and SD1 are
included in item m. of this document.

Meeting Procedures

    The meetings will be recorded by a stenographer and will be placed
in the public records of the project.

    Dated: June 12, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-15109 Filed 6-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 69 (Monday, April 11, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 21069]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07683]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 573

[Docket No. FDA-2022-F-0342]

Anitox Corporation; Filing of Food Additive Petition (Animal Use)

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notification of petition.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing
that we have filed a petition, submitted by Anitox Corporation,
proposing that the food additive regulations be amended to provide for
the safe use of trans-2-hexenal as a preservative in food for poultry
and swine.

DATES: The food additive petition was filed on March 8, 2022.

ADDRESSES: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document into
the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts, and/or go to the Dockets
Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carissa Adams, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-221), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 409(b)(5) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(5)), we are giving notice that
we have filed a food additive petition (FAP 2315), submitted by Anitox
Corporation, 1055 Progress Circle, Lawrenceville, GA 30043-4646. The
petition proposes to amend 21 CFR part 573--Food Additives Permitted in
Feed and Drinking Water of Animals to provide for the safe use of
trans-2-hexenal as a preservative in food for poultry and swine.
    The petitioner has claimed that this action is categorically
excluded under 21 CFR 25.32(r) because it is of a type that does not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. In addition, the petitioner has stated that, to their
knowledge, no extraordinary circumstances exist that may significantly
affect the quality of the human environment. If FDA determines a
categorical exclusion applies, neither an environmental assessment nor
an environmental impact statement is required. If FDA determines a
categorical exclusion does not apply, we will request an environmental
assessment and make it available for public inspection.

    Dated: April 4, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-07683 Filed 4-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 10, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69936-69937]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22410]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0292]

National Chemical Transportation Safety Advisory Committee;
November 2023 Meetings

AGENCY: U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice of Federal advisory committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The National Chemical Transportation Safety Advisory Committee
(Committee) will conduct a series of meetings over three days in League
City, TX, to discuss matters relating to the safe and secure marine
transportation of hazardous materials. The subcommittee meetings will
also be available by videoconference for those unable to attend in
person, however the full committee meeting will be held in person only.
All meetings will be open to the public.

DATES:
    Meetings: National Chemical Transportation Safety Advisory
Committee subcommittees will meet on Tuesday, November 28 and
Wednesday, November 29, 2023, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Central Standard
Time (CST) each day. The full Committee will meet on Thursday, November
30, 2023, from 9 a.m. until 5 p.m. CST. Please note these meetings may
close early if the Committee has completed its business.
    Comments and supporting documents: To ensure your comments are
reviewed by Committee members before the meeting, submit your written
comments no later than November 15, 2023.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at INEOS Oligomers USA, 2600 South
Shore Boulevard, Suite 400, League City, TX 77573.
    Pre-Registration Information: Pre-registration is required for in-
person access to the meeting or to attend the subcommittee meetings by
videoconference. Public attendees will be required to pre-register no
later than noon, Eastern Standard Time, on November 15, 2023, to be
admitted to the meeting. In-person attendance may be capped due to
limited space in the meeting venue, and registration will be on a
first-come-first-served basis. To pre-register, contact Lieutenant
Ethan Beard at [email protected]. You will be asked to provide
your name, telephone number, email, company, or group with which you
are affiliated, and whether you wish to attend virtually or in person;
if a foreign national, also provide your country of citizenship,
passport country, country of residence, place of birth, passport
number, and passport expiration date.
    The National Chemical Transportation Safety Advisory Committee is
committed to ensuring all participants have equal access regardless of
disability status. If you require reasonable accommodation due to a
disability to fully participate, please email Lieutenant Ethan Beard at
[email protected] or call at<PHONE_NUMBER> as soon as possible.
    Instructions: You are free to submit comments at any time,
including orally at the meeting as time permits, but if you want
Committee members to review your comment before the meeting, please
submit your comments no later than November 15, 2023. We are
particularly interested in comments on the topics in the ``Agenda''
section below. We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal
Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov/docket/USCG-2023-0292. If your material cannot be submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the individual in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. You must include the docket number USCG-2023-0292. We do
not redact personal information from comments which are posted at
https://www.regulations.gov, so any personal information provided in a
comment posted will be viewable by the public. You may wish to review
the Privacy and Security Notice found via a link on the homepage of
https://www.regulations.gov, and DHS's eRulemaking System of Records
notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020). If you encounter technical
difficulties with comment submission, contact the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.
    Docket Search: Documents mentioned in this notice as being
available in the docket, and all public comments, will be 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Ethan T. Beard, Alternate
Designated Federal Officer of the National Chemical Transportation
Safety Advisory Committee, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of the meeting of the National
Chemical Transportation Safety Advisory Committee is in compliance with
the Federal Advisory Committee Act, (Pub. L. 117-286, 5. U.S.C., ch.
10). The Committee is authorized by section 601 of the Frank LoBiondo
Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115-282, 132 Stat. 4192)
and is codified in 46 U.S.C. 15101. The Committee operates under the
provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and 46 U.S.C. 15109.
The Committee provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of
Homeland Security through the Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard on
matters related to the safe and secure marine transportation of
hazardous materials.

Agenda

Tuesday, November 28, 2023

    Two subcommittees will meet to discuss the following task
statements:
9:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. CST
    (1) Task Statement 21-01: Recommendations on Loading Limits of Gas
Carriers and USCG Supplement to International Hazardous Zone
Requirements.
1:30 p.m.-5:00 p.m. CST
    (2) Task Statement 22-01: Recommendations to Support Reductions to
Emissions and Environmental Impacts Associated with Marine Transport of
Chemicals,

Liquefied Gases and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG).

Wednesday, November 29, 2023

    Two subcommittees will meet to discuss the following task
statements:
9:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. CST
    (1) Task Statement 22-03: Recommendations on Testing Requirements
for Anti-Flashback Burners for Vapor Control Systems.
1:30 p.m.-5:00 p.m. CST
    (2) Task Statement 22-02: Recommendations on Industry Best
Practices and Regulatory Updates Related to the Maritime Transportation
of Lithium Batteries.
    The task statements and other subcommittee information are located
at Homeport at the following address: https://homeport.uscg.mil/missions/federal-advisory-committees/national-chemical-transportation-safety-advisory-committee-(nctsac)/task-statements. The agenda for the
discussion of each task statement will include the following:
    (1) Introduction and review subcommittee task statement.
    (2) Public comment period.
    (3) Subcommittee discussion and preparation of any proposed
recommendations for the Committee meeting on November 30, 2023.
    (4) Adjournment of meeting.

Thursday, November 30, 2023

    The agenda for the National Chemical Transportation Safety Advisory
Committee meeting on Thursday, November 30, 2023 is as follows:
    (1) Call to order.
    (2) Roll call and determination of quorum.
    (3) Remarks from U.S. Coast Guard leadership.
    (4) Chairman and Designated Federal Officer's remarks.
    (5) Acceptance of June 15, 2023 meeting minutes and status of task
items.
    (6) Committee will review, discuss, and formulate recommendations
on the following items:
    a. Task Statement 21-01: Recommendations on Loading Limits of Gas
Carriers and U.S. Coast Guard Supplement to International Hazardous
Zone Requirements.
    b. Task Statement 22-01: Recommendations to Support Reductions to
Emissions and Environmental Impacts Associated with Marine Transport of
Chemicals, Liquefied Gases and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG).
    c. Task Statement 22-02: Recommendations on Industry Best Practices
and Regulatory Updates Related to the Maritime Transportation of
Lithium Batteries.
    d. Task Statement 22-03: Recommendations on Testing Requirements
for Anti-Flashback Burners for Vapor Control System.
    (7) Subcommittee recommendation discussion.
    (8) Presentation of Task Statement 23-01: Recommendations to Update
CG-ENG Policy Letter 02-15.
    (9) Task statement tracking discussion.
    (10) Public comment period.
    (11) Set next meeting date and location.
    (12) Adjournment of meeting.
    A copy of all meeting documentation will be available at: https://homeportr.uscg.mil/missions/federal-advisory-committees/national-chemical-transportation-safety-advisory-committee-(nctsac)/committee-
meetings no later than November 22, 2023. Alternatively, you may
contact Lieutenant Ethan Beard as noted in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section above.
    Public comments or questions will be taken throughout the meetings
as the Committee discusses the issues and prior to deliberations and
voting. There will be a public comment period at the end of meetings.
Speakers are requested to limit their comments to two minutes. Contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
above, to register as a speaker.

    Dated: October 2, 2023.
Jeffrey G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2023-22410 Filed 10-6-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: December 29, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 249)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 78279-78280]
[DOCID:fr29de04-17]

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

Part V

Department of Health and Human Services

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

Food and Drug Administration

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

26 CFR Parts 201 and 610

Biological Products; Bacterial Vaccines and Toxoids; Implementation of
Efficacy Review; Withdrawl; Final Rule and Proposed Rule

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Parts 201 and 610

[Docket No. 1980N-0208]

Biological Products; Bacterial Vaccines and Toxoids;
Implementation of Efficacy Review; Withdrawal

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Final rule and final order; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published in the
Federal Register of January 5, 2004 (69 FR 255), a final rule and final
order (January 2004 final rule and final order) amending the biologics
regulations in response to the report and recommendations of the Panel
on Review of Bacterial Vaccines and Toxoids with Standards of Potency.
On January 8, 2004 (69 FR 1320), a correction document was published to
correct the effective date from ``January 4, 2003'', to ``January 4,
2005.'' On February 13, 2004 (69 FR 7114), FDA issued a correction
document to correct typographical errors in the reference section of
the January 2004 final rule and final order.
    On October 27, 2004, the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia (the Court) issued a memorandum opinion vacating
and remanding the January 2004 final rule and final order to FDA for
reconsideration, following an appropriate notice and comment period.
Because the January 2004 final rule and final order were vacated by the
Court, FDA is withdrawing the January 2004 final rule and final order.
    In a proposed rule and proposed order published concurrently with
this document, FDA is providing notice and an opportunity to comment on
the Bacterial Vaccine and Toxoids efficacy review.

DATES: The final rule and final order published at 69 FR 255 (January
5, 2004), is withdrawn as of December 29, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Astrid Szeto, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (HFM-17), Food and Drug Administration, 1401
Rockville Pike, Suite 200N, Rockville, MD 20852-1448,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
AUTHORITY: Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act,
and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs,
the final rule and final order published on January 5, 2004 (69 FR 255)
is withdrawn.

    Dated: December 22, 2004.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 04-28459 Filed 12-23-04; 11:16 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S