[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 92 (Thursday, May 12, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27622-27629]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11723]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2010-0301; FRL-9304-7]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions;
Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards; South Dakota

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submission from the State of South Dakota to demonstrate that the
SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
promulgated for ozone on July 18, 1997. Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA
requires that each state, after a new or revised NAAQS is promulgated,
review their

SIPs to ensure that they meet the requirements of the ``infrastructure
elements'' of section 110(a)(2). The State of South Dakota submitted a
certification of their Infrastructure SIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS,
dated February 1, 2008, which was determined to be complete on March
27, 2008 (73 FR 16205). EPA does not propose to act on the State's
February 1, 2008 submission to meet the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA, relating to interstate transport of air
pollution, for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. EPA approved the State's
interstate transport SIP submission on May 8, 2008 (73 FR 26019).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 13, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2010-0301, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> (please alert the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
     Mail: Director, Air Program, Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202-1129.
     Hand Delivery: Director, Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop
Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only accepted
Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 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-
2010-0301. 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 information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 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, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
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: Kathy Dolan, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, 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.

Table of Contents

I. General Information
II. Background
III. What Infrastructure elements are required under sections
110(a)(1) and (2)?
IV. How did the State of South Dakota address the infrastructure
elements of Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. General Information

What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting Confidential Business Information (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 on 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:
    Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register, date, and page number);
    Follow directions and organize your comments;
    Explain why you agree or disagree;
    Suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested
changes;
    Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/
or data that you used;
    If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived
at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced;
    Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives;
    Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats; and,
    Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.

II. Background

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a new NAAQS for ozone based on 8-
hour average concentrations. The 8-hour averaging period replaced the
previous 1-hour averaging period, and the level of the NAAQS was
changed from 0.12 parts per million (ppm) to 0.08 ppm (62 FR 38856). By
statute, SIPs meeting the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2)
are to be submitted by states within three years after promulgation of
a new or revised standard. Section 110(a)(2) provides basic
requirements for SIPs, including emissions inventories, monitoring, and
modeling, to assure attainment and maintenance of the standards. These
requirements are set out in several ``infrastructure elements,'' listed
in section 110(a)(2).
    Section 110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP
submission to EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, and the contents of that
submission may vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In
particular, the data and analytical tools available at the time the
state develops and submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects
the content of the submission. The contents of such SIP submission may
also vary depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP
already contains. In the case of the 1997 ozone NAAQS, states typically
have met the basic program elements required in section 110(a)(2)
through earlier SIP submissions in connection with previous NAAQS.
    In a guidance issued on October 2, 2007, EPA noted that, to the
extent an existing SIP already meets the section 110(a)(2)
requirements, states need only certify that fact via a letter to
EPA.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Memorandum from William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality
Policy Division, ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections
110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5
National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (Oct. 2, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On 3/27/08, EPA published a final rulemaking entitled,
``Completeness Findings for section 110(a) State Implementation Plans;
8-hour Ozone NAAQS'' (73 FR 16205). In the rule, EPA made a finding for
each state that it had submitted or failed to submit a complete SIP
that provided the basic program elements of section 110(a)(2) necessary
to implement the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In particular, EPA found that
the State of South Dakota had submitted a complete SIP to meet these
requirements.

III. What infrastructure elements are required under Section 110(a)(1)
and (2)?

    Section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing requirements
for SIP submissions after a new or revised NAAQS is promulgated.
Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements the SIP must contain or
satisfy. These infrastructure elements include requirements such as
modeling, monitoring, and emissions inventories, which are designed to
assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The elements that are
the subject of this action are listed below.
     110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control measures.
     110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data system.
     110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control measures.
     110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate and international pollution.
     110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority.
     110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and reporting.
     110(a)(2)(G): Emergency powers.
     110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions.
     110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government officials;
public notification; and prevention of significant deterioration (PSD)
and visibility protection.
     110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/data.
     110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
     110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by affected local
entities.
    A detailed discussion of each of these elements is contained in the
next section.
    Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by
the three- year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1) and are
therefore not addressed in this action. These elements relate to part D
of Title I of the CAA, and submissions to satisfy them are not due
within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, but
rather are due at the same time nonattainment area plan requirements
are due under section 172. The two elements are: (i) Section
110(a)(2)(C) to the extent it refers to permit programs (known as
``nonattainment new source review (NSR)'') required under part D, and
(ii) section 110(a)(2)(I) pertaining to the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D. As a result, this action does not address
infrastructure elements related to the nonattainment NSR portion of
section 110(a)(2)(C) or related to 110(a)(2)(I).
    This action also does not address the ``interstate transport''
requirements of element 110(a)(2)(D)(i). In a separate action, EPA
approved the State's submission to meet the requirements of 110
(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS (73 FR 26019).

IV. How did the State of South Dakota address the elements of the
infrastructure provisions of Section 110(a)(2)?

    1. Emission limits and other control measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A)
requires SIPs to include enforceable emission limitations and other
control measures, means, or techniques (including economic incentives
such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions rights), as
well as schedules and timetables for compliance as may be necessary or
appropriate to meet the applicable requirements of this Act.
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: The rules in the
Administrative Rules of South Dakota (ARSD) Chapter 74:36:04 (Operating
permits for minor sources), 74:36:05 (Operating permits for part 70
sources), 74:35:06 (Regulated air pollutant emissions), 74:36:07 (New
source performance standards), 74:36:08 (National emission standards
for hazardous air pollutants), 74:36:09 (Prevention of significant
deterioration), and 74:36:10 (New source review) provide enforceable
emission limits and other control measures, means or techniques,
schedules for compliance and other related matters necessary to
maintain South Dakota in attainment with the federal NAAQS. Authority
to promulgate these rules is contained in South Dakota Codified Laws
(SDCL) 34A-1-1, 34A-1-6, 34A-1-18, 34A-1-19.
    b. EPA analysis: South Dakota's SIP meets the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(A) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, subject to the following
clarifications. First, this infrastructure element does not require the
submittal of regulations or emission limitations developed specifically
for attaining the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Furthermore, South Dakota has no
areas designated as nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. As a
result, the South Dakota SIP contains no emissions limitations specific
to ozone and/or its precursors. Instead, South Dakota regulates
emissions of ozone and its precursors through its SIP-approved major
and minor source permitting programs.\2\ This suffices, in the case of

South Dakota, to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) for the
1997 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Certain rules cited by South Dakota--its title V program
(ARSD 74:36:05), new source performance standards (ARSD 74:36:07),
and national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants (ARSD
74:36:08)--are not required for inclusion into South Dakota's SIP
and are therefore not considered by EPA in this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, in this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or
disapprove any existing state rules with regard to director's
discretion or variance provisions. A number of states have such
provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance (52
FR 45109, Nov. 24, 1987), and the Agency plans to take action in the
future to address such state regulations. In the meantime, EPA
encourages any state having a director's discretion or variance
provision which is contrary to the CAA and EPA guidance to take steps
to correct the deficiency as soon as possible.
    Finally, in this action, EPA is also not proposing to approve or
disapprove any existing SIP provisions with regard to excess emissions
during startup, shutdown, or malfunction (SSM) of operations at a
facility. A number of states have SSM provisions which are contrary to
the CAA and existing EPA guidance \3\ and the Agency plans to address
such state regulations in the future. In the meantime, EPA encourages
any state having a deficient SSM provision to take steps to correct it
as soon as possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Steven Herman, Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance, and Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation, Memorandum to EPA Air Division Directors,
``State Implementation Plans (SIPs): Policy Regarding Excess
Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown.'' (Sept. 20,
1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Ambient air quality monitoring/data system: Section 110(a)(2)(B)
requires SIPs to provide for establishment and operation of appropriate
devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to (i) monitor,
compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii) upon
request, make such data available to the Administrator.
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: The rules in ARSD
74:36:02 define the goals, NAAQS, air monitoring methods and monitoring
requirements provided for establishment and operation of ambient air
quality monitors, collecting and analyzing ambient air quality data and
making these data available to EPA. Authority used to promulgate these
rules is contained in SDCL 34A-1-6 and 34A-1-15.
    b. EPA analysis: South Dakota's air monitoring programs and data
systems meet the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(B) for the 1997
ozone NAAQS. The South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) 2008 Ambient Air Monitoring Annual Network Plan was
approved by EPA Region 8 on March 23, 2009.
    3. Program for enforcement of control measures: Section
110(a)(2)(C) requires SIPs to include a program to provide for the
enforcement of the measures described in subparagraph (A), and
regulation of the modification and construction of any stationary
source within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that
NAAQS are achieved, including a permit program as required in parts C
and D.
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: SDCL 34A-1-39
through 34A-1-54 and 34A-1-62 provides DENR with the authority to
provide enforcement of all South Dakota SIP measures and the
regulations under ARSD Chapter 74:36:09 (Prevention of significant
deterioration) and 74:36:10 (New source review).
    b. EPA analysis: As explained above, in this action EPA is not
evaluating non-attainment related provisions, such as the nonattainment
New Source Review (NSR) program required by part D of the Act. In
addition, South Dakota has no nonattainment areas for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS and is therefore not required at this point to have a
corresponding nonattainment NSR program. In this action, EPA is
evaluating the State's PSD program as required by part C of the Act,
and the State's minor NSR program as required by 110(a)(2)(C).
    South Dakota's SIP-approved PSD program incorporates by reference
(with certain exceptions) the federal PSD program in 40 CFR 52.21 as of
July 1, 2005 (72 FR 72617). As described in our notice of approval of
the program (72 FR 72617), South Dakota's PSD program met the general
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) as of that date.

Greenhouse Gas Regulation

    EPA notes a potential inconsistency between South Dakota's February
1, 2008 infrastructure SIP certification and EPA's recently promulgated
rule, ``Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in
State Implementation Plans'' (``PSD SIP Narrowing Rule''), 75 FR 82536
(Dec. 30, 2010). In the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, EPA withdrew its
previous approval of South Dakota's PSD program to the extent that it
applied PSD permitting to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions increases from
GHG-emitting sources below thresholds set in EPA's June 3, 2010
``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas
Tailoring Rule'' (``Tailoring Rule''), 75 FR 31514. EPA withdrew its
approval on the basis that the State lacked sufficient resources to
issue PSD permits to such sources at the statutory thresholds in effect
in the previously-approved PSD program. After the PSD SIP Narrowing
Rule, the portion of South Dakota's PSD SIP from which EPA withdrew its
approval had the status of having been submitted to EPA but not yet
acted upon. In its February 1, 2008 certification, South Dakota relied
on its PSD program as approved at that date--which was before December
30, 2010, the effective date of the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule--to satisfy
the requirements of infrastructure element 110(a)(2)(C). Given EPA's
basis for the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, EPA proposes approval of the
South Dakota infrastructure SIP for infrastructure element (C) if
either the State clarifies (or modifies) its certification to make
clear that the State relies only on the portion of the PSD program that
remains approved after the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule issued on December
30, 2010, and for which the State has sufficient resources to
implement, or the State acts to withdraw from EPA consideration the
remaining portion of its PSD program submission that would have applied
PSD permitting to GHG sources below the Tailoring Rule thresholds. In
the alternative, if South Dakota does not take either action, EPA
proposes to disapprove the infrastructure SIP to the extent it
incorporates that portion of the previously-approved PSD program from
which EPA withdrew its approval in the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, which is
the portion which would have applied PSD permitting requirements to GHG
emissions increases from GHG-emitting sources below the Tailoring Rule
thresholds. Such disapproval, if finalized, would not result in a need
for South Dakota to resubmit a SIP revision, sanctions, or a federal
implementation plan (FIP).

Regulation of Ozone Precursors

    In order for South Dakota's SIP-approved PSD program to satisfy the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the
program must also properly regulate ozone precursors. On November 29,
2005, EPA promulgated the phase 2 implementation rule for the 1997
ozone NAAQS, which includes requirements for PSD programs to treat
nitrogen oxides as a precursor for ozone (72 FR 71612). The phase 2
implementation rule accordingly updated the federal program at 40 CFR
52.21 to meet these requirements, effective January 30, 2006. This
effective date is after the July 1, 2005 date of incorporation of 40
CFR 52.21 by the currently approved South

Dakota SIP. In other words, South Dakota's current SIP-approved PSD
program does not meet the requirements of the phase 2 ozone
implementation rule.
    On June 14, 2010, the State submitted to EPA a SIP revision that
(among other things) revises ARSD 74:36:09 (Prevention of significant
deterioration) to incorporate by reference the federal PSD program in
40 CFR 52.21 as of July 1, 2009. As a result of the revised
incorporation date, the submitted PSD program meets the requirements of
the phase 2 ozone implementation rule. EPA therefore proposes to
concurrently approve the portion of the June 14, 2010 submission
revising ARSD 74:36:09, with the following exception.
    Consistent with the Tailoring Rule, the SIP PSD Narrowing Rule, and
the discussion above, EPA proposes to disapprove the revision of ARSD
74:36:09 in the June 14, 2010 submission to the extent that the
revision applies PSD permitting to GHG emissions increases from GHG-
emitting sources below Tailoring Rule thresholds. The Tailoring Rule
modified the federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21, effective August 2,
2010, to incorporate the Tailoring Rule thresholds.\4\ 75 FR at 31606-
07. This effective date is after July 1, 2009, the date of
incorporation of 40 CFR 52.21 in South Dakota's June 14, 2010
submission. Therefore, in order to ensure consistency with the
Tailoring Rule and the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, it is necessary for EPA
to propose to disapprove the revision to the extent it applies PSD
permitting to GHG emissions increases from GHG-emitting sources below
Tailoring Rule thresholds. As mentioned above, this disapproval will
not result in a need for South Dakota to submit a SIP revision,
sanctions, or a FIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Note that this is the effective date of the modification of
52.21, not the initial date of applicability of the thresholds,
which was January 2, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Minor New Source Review

    The State has a SIP-approved minor NSR program, adopted under
section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act, which regulates emissions of ozone and
its precursors. On September 6, 1995, EPA approved extensive changes to
the State's minor NSR program for incorporation into the SIP, and there
was at the time no objection to the provisions of this program (60 FR
46222). Since then, the State and EPA have relied on the existing State
minor NSR program to assure that new and modified sources not captured
by the major NSR permitting programs do not interfere with attainment
and maintenance of the NAAQS.
    In this action, EPA is proposing to approve South Dakota's
infrastructure SIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS with respect to the general
requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a program in the SIP
that regulates the modification and construction of any stationary
source as necessary to assure that the NAAQS are achieved. EPA is not
proposing to approve or disapprove the State's existing minor NSR
program itself to the extent that it is inconsistent with EPA's
regulations governing this program. A number of states may have minor
NSR provisions that are contrary to the existing EPA regulations for
this program. EPA intends to work with states to reconcile state minor
NSR programs with EPA's regulatory provisions for the program. The
statutory requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) provide for considerable
flexibility in designing minor NSR programs, and it may be time to
revisit the regulatory requirements for this program to give the states
an appropriate level of flexibility to design a program that meets
their particular air quality concerns, while assuring reasonable
consistency across the country in protecting the NAAQS with respect to
new and modified minor sources.
    4. Interstate transport: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires SIPs to
contain adequate provisions prohibiting, consistent with the provisions
of this title, any source or other type of emissions activity within
the state from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will (I)
contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with
maintenance by, any other state, with respect to any such national
primary or secondary ambient air quality standard, or (II) interfere
with measures required to be included in the applicable implementation
plan for any other state under part C to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility.
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: South Dakota
submitted its Interstate Transport SIP to EPA on May 25, 2007.
    b. EPA Analysis: EPA approved the State's Interstate Transport
provisions for the 1997 ozone NAAQS on May 8, 2008 (73 FR 26019). EPA
is taking no action relevant to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) in this
proposal.
    5. Interstate and International transport provisions: Section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires that each SIP shall contain adequate
provisions insuring compliance with applicable requirements of sections
126 and 115 (relating to interstate and international pollution
abatement).
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: South Dakota
submitted its Interstate Transport SIP to EPA on May 25, 2007.
    b. EPA Analysis: Section 126(a) of the CAA requires notification to
affected, nearby states of major proposed new (or modified) sources.
Sections 126(b) and (c) pertain to petitions by affected states to the
Administrator regarding sources violating the ``interstate transport''
provisions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). Section 115 of the CAA similarly
pertains to international transport of air pollution.
    South Dakota's SIP-approved PSD program incorporates by reference
the Federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21. However, South Dakota
separately implements public notice requirements by incorporating by
reference (with certain modifications) 40 CFR 51.166(q). In particular,
the SIP's incorporation of 51.166(q)(2)(iii), which requires notice to
states whose lands may be affected by the emissions of sources subject
to PSD, satisfies the notice requirement of section 126(a).
    South Dakota has no pending obligations under sections 126(c) or
115(b); therefore, its SIP currently meets the requirements of those
sections. The SIP therefore meets the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
    6. Adequate resources and authority: Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires
states to provide (i) necessary assurances that the state will have
adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out
the SIP (and is not prohibited by any provision of federal or state law
from carrying out the SIP or portion thereof), (ii) requires that the
state comply with the requirements respecting state boards under
section 128, and (iii) necessary assurances that, where the state has
relied on a local or regional government, agency, or instrumentality
for the implementation of any SIP provision, the state has
responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of such SIP
provision.
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: SDCL 34A-1-4, 34A-
1-7 through 34A-1-10 provides DENR with adequate personnel to carry out
South Dakota's SIP and related issues. SDCL 34A-1-57 through 34A-1-60,
and DENR's agreement with EPA for 103 and 105 grants and associated
matching state funds provides DENR with the funding necessary to carry
out South Dakota's SIP and related issues. SDCL 34A-1 provides DENR
with the legal authority

to carry out South Dakota's SIP and related issues.
    b. EPA Analysis: South Dakota's SIP meets the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(E) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. SDCL 34A-1-57 through
34A-1-60 provides adequate authority for the State of South Dakota and
the DENR to carry out its SIP obligations with respect to the 1997
ozone NAAQS. The State receives sections 103 and 105 grant funds
through its Performance Partnership Grant along with required state
matching funds to provide funding necessary to carry out South Dakota's
SIP requirements. South Dakota's resources meet the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(E). Finally, SDCL 1-40-25.1 requires the Board of
Minerals and Environment to be composed in accordance with section 128
of the CAA.
    7. Stationary source monitoring and reporting: Section 110(a)(2)(F)
requires (i) the installation, maintenance, and replacement of
equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners
or operators of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such
sources, (ii) period reports on the nature and amounts of emissions and
emissions-related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such
reports by the state agency with any emission limitations or standards
established pursuant to the Act, which reports shall be available at
reasonable times for public inspection.
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: The rules in ARSD
Chapter 74:36:04 (Operating permits for minor sources), 74:35:05
(Operating permits for part 70 sources), 74:37:11 (Performance testing)
and 74:36:13 (Continuous emission monitoring systems) establish a
system to monitor emissions from stationary sources and periodic
emissions reports. Authority to promulgate these rules is contained in
SDCL 34A-a-6 and SDCL 34A-1-12.
    b. EPA Analysis: South Dakota's SIP provides for monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements for sources subject to minor
and major source permitting. As mentioned above, the SIP contains no
other, specific emissions limitations on ozone or its precursors. South
Dakota's SIP therefore meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F)
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
    8. Emergency powers: Section 110(a)(2)(G) requires states to
provide for authority to address activities causing imminent and
substantial endangerment to public health, including contingency plans
to implement the emergency episode provisions in their SIPs.
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: The rules in ARSD
Chapter 74:36:03 (Air quality episodes) adopt by reference the criteria
in 40 CFR 51.151 as the air quality episode plan to address activities
causing imminent and substantial endangerment to public health,
including contingency plans to implement the emergency episode
provisions of the South Dakota SIP. Authority to promulgate these rules
is contained in SDCL 34A-1-6, 34A-1-15, and 34A-1-45. The episode
criteria specified in this chapter for ozone are based on an 8-hour
average ozone level at a monitoring site. These criteria have
previously been approved by EPA as adequate to address ozone emergency
episodes.
    b. EPA analysis: SDCL 34A-1-45 provides DENR with general emergency
authority comparable to that in section 303 of the Act. The SIP also
requires DENR to follow criteria in 40 CFR 51.151 in proclaiming an
emergency episode and to develop a contingency plan. The contingency
plan, though, has not itself been incorporated into the SIP. However,
South Dakota has not monitored any values above the priority cut point
for ozone. See 40 CFR 51.150(b)(5). The SIP therefore meets the
requirements of 110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
    9. Future SIP revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H) requires that SIPs
provide for revision of such plan (i) from time to time as may be
necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or
secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved
or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii),
except as provided in paragraph (3)(C), whenever the Administrator
finds on the basis of information available to the Administrator that
the SIP is substantially inadequate to attain the NAAQS which it
implements or to otherwise comply with any additional requirements
under this Act.
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: SDCL 34A-1-6
provides DENR with the authority to revise South Dakota's SIP in
response to changes to the federal NAAQS, availability of improved
methods for attaining the federal standards, or in response to an EPA
finding that the SIP is substantially inadequate.
    b. EPA analysis: South Dakota's statutory provision at SDCL 34A-1-6
gives DENR sufficient authority to meet the requirements of
110(a)(2)(H).
    10. Nonattainment Area Plan or Plan Revision under Part D: Section
110(a)(2)(I) requires that a SIP or SIP revision for an area designated
as a nonattainment area must meet the applicable requirements of part D
of this subchapter (relating to nonattainment areas).
    a. EPA analysis for Section 110(a)(2)(I): As noted above, the
specific nonattainment area plan requirements of section 110(a)(2)(I)
are subject to the timing requirement of section 172, not the timing
requirement of section 110(a)(1). This element is therefore not
applicable to this action. EPA will take action on part D attainment
plans through a separate process.
    11. Consultation with government officials, public notification,
PSD and visibility protection: Section 110(a)(2)(J) requires that each
SIP meet the applicable requirements of section 121 of this title
(relating to consultation), section 127 of this title (relating to
public notification), and part C of this subchapter (relating to
prevention of significant deterioration of air quality and visibility
protection).
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: SDCL 34A-1-1 and
34-1-10 provide DENR with the authority to consult with local
governments, other states, federal government, etc. SDCL 1-40-31 and
34A-1-9 provide DENR with the authority to collect and disseminate
information and provide full public inspection and disclosure of all
non-confidential public records related to DENR and those activities
within its jurisdiction. The public is notified of any concentrations
that exceed the NAAQS through DENR's Air Quality program website that
contains the daily concentrations updated hourly from five sites
covering 17 parameters from continuous analyzers and monitors located
throughout the state. Four of these sites report hourly ozone levels to
the website and to the AirNow EPA database. Through this site, the
public is notified of high concentration periods. The rules in ARSD
Chapter 74:36:09 (Prevention of significant deterioration) adopt by
reference federal regulations under 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 and provide
DENR with regulations necessary to meet the applicable requirements of
part C of the federal CAA related to PSD and visibility protection.
South Dakota's PSD rules were approved in South Dakota's SIP on January
22, 2008. Authority to promulgate these rules is contained in SDCL 34A-
1-6.
    b. EPA Analysis: The State has demonstrated that it has the
authority and rules in place to provide a process of consultation with
general purpose local governments, designated organizations of elected
officials of local governments and any Federal Land Manager having
authority over federal land to which the SIP applies,

consistent with the requirements of CAA section 121. Furthermore, EPA
previously addressed the requirements of CAA section 127 for the South
Dakota SIP. (45 FR 58528, Sept. 4, 1980.)
    As discussed above, the State has a SIP-approved PSD program that
incorporates by reference the federal program at 40 CFR 52.21. EPA has
further evaluated South Dakota's SIP-approved PSD program in this
proposed action under IV.3, element 110(a)(2)(C).
    Finally, with regard to the applicable requirements for visibility
protection, EPA recognizes that states are subject to visibility and
regional haze program requirements under part C of the act. In the
event of the establishment of a new NAAQS, however, the visibility and
regional haze program requirements under part C do not change. Thus we
find that there are no applicable visibility requirements under section
110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS becomes effective. In conclusion, the
South Dakota SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) for the
1997 ozone NAAQS.
    12. Air quality and modeling/data: Section 110(a)(2)(K) requires
that each SIP provide for (i) the performance of such air quality
modeling as the Administrator may prescribe for the purpose of
predicting the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any
air pollutant for which the Administrator has established a NAAQS, and
(ii) the submission, upon request, of data related to such air quality
modeling to the Administrator.
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: The rules in ARSD
Chapter 74:36:04 (Operating permit for minor sources), 74:36:05
(Operating permit for part 70 sources), 74:36:09 (Prevention of
significant deterioration), and 74:36:10 (New source review) provide
DENR with the authority to perform air quality modeling for predicting
effects on air quality of emissions of any NAAQS pollutant and
submission of such data to EPA upon request. Authority to promulgate
these rules is contained in SDCL 34A-1-6 and 34A-1-9.
    b. EPA Analysis: South Dakota's SIP meets the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(K) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. In particular, South
Dakota's PSD program incorporates by reference the federal program at
40 CFR 52.21, including the provision at 40 CFR 52.21(l)(1) requiring
that estimates of ambient air concentrations be based on applicable air
quality models specified in Appendix W of 40 CFR part 51, and the
provision at 40 CFR 52.21(l)(2) requiring that modification or
substitution of a model specified in Appendix W must be approved by the
Administrator. As a result, the SIP provides for such air quality
modeling as the Administrator has prescribed.
    13. Permitting fees: Section 110(a)(2)(L) requires SIPs to require
the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the
permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under this
act, a fee sufficient to cover (i) the reasonable costs of reviewing
and acting upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) if the
owner or operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable
costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any
such permit (not including any court costs or other costs associated
with any enforcement action), until such fee requirement is superseded
with respect to such sources by the Administrator's approval of a fee
program under title V.
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: The DENR has an
approved title V operating permit program (61 FR 2720, Jan. 29, 1996)
that requires major stationary sources to pay permitting fees to cover
the cost of reviewing, approving, implementing and enforcing the title
V permit.
    b. EPA Analysis: South Dakota's approved title V operating permit
program meets the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 1997
ozone NAAQS. Final approval of the title V operating permit program
became effective February 28, 1996. (See 61 FR 2720, Jan. 29, 1996.) As
discussed in the notice proposing approval of the title V program (60
FR 2917, Jan. 12, 1995), the State demonstrated that the fees collected
were sufficient to administer the program.
    14. Consultation/participation by affected local entities: Section
110(a)(2)(M) requires states to provide for consultation and
participation in SIP development by local political subdivisions
affected by the SIP.
    a. South Dakota's response to this requirement: SDCL 34A-1-1, 34A-
1-10 provides DENR with the authority to provide for consultation and
participation in South Dakota's SIP development by local political
subdivision affected by the SIP. Cooperation by DENR with other
agencies provides for the consultation, advise, and cooperation with
other state, local, industries, other states, interstate or inter local
agencies, and the federal government, and with interested persons or
groups on air pollution control issues.
    b. EPA Analysis: South Dakota's submittal meets the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(M) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.

V. What action is EPA taking?

    In this action, EPA is proposing to approve in full the following
section 110(a)(2) infrastructure elements for South Dakota for the 1997
ozone NAAQS: (A), (B), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), (M).
EPA proposes to approve the section 110(a)(2)(C) infrastructure element
in full in the event that South Dakota takes one of the actions
described in the discussion of that element; in the alternative, EPA
proposes to disapprove the section 110(a)(2)(C) element to the extent
described and to otherwise approve this element. EPA is taking no
action on infrastructure elements (D)(i) and (I) for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS. EPA also proposes to approve the portion of South Dakota's June
14, 2010 SIP submission that revises South Dakota's PSD program to
incorporate by reference the federal program at 40 CFR 52.21 as of July
1, 2009, except to the extent that revision applies PSD permitting to
GHG emissions increases from GHG-emitting sources below the thresholds
set out in the Tailoring Rule, 75 FR 31514.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, 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 CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves some state law as meeting Federal
requirements and disapproves other state law because it does not meet
Federal requirements; this proposed action does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); is not an economically
significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject
to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and,
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have Tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: May 4, 2011.
Judith Wong,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2011-11723 Filed 5-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 161 (Monday, August 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 50097]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20427]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Commission Staff Attendance

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hereby gives notice that
members of the Commission's staff may attend the following meetings
related to the transmission planning activities of the PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM):

PJM Regional Transmission Planning Task Force Conference Call
    August 17, 2012, 1 p.m.-4 p.m., Local Time
Markets and Reliability Committee
    August 23, 2012, 9 a.m.-3:30 p.m., Local Time
Transmission Owner Cost Allocation Conference Call
    September 5, 2012, 10 a.m.-12 p.m., Local Time
Combined Markets and Reliability Committee/Members Committee
    September 27, 2012, 9 a.m.-5 p.m., Local Time

    The above-referenced meetings will be held over conference call or
at:

The Chase Center on the Riverfront, Wilmington, DE
The PJM Conference & Training Center, Norristown, PA

    The above-referenced meetings are open to stakeholders.
    Further information may be found at www.pjm.com.
    The discussions at the meetings described above may address matters
at issue in the following proceedings:

Docket No. EL05-121, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER10-253 and EL10-14, Primary Power, L.L.C.
Docket No. EL10-52, Central Transmission, LLC v. PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C.
Docket No. ER11-4070, RITELine Indiana et. al.
Docket No. ER11-2875 and EL11-20, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER09-1256, Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER09-1589, FirstEnergy Service Company
Docket No. ER10-549, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. EL11-56, FirstEnergy Service Company
Docket No. EL12-38, New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER11-1844, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator,
Inc.
Docket No. ER11-2140, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER11-2622, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER11-3106, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER11-4379, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER12-445, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER12-773, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER12-718, New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-1177, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER12-1178, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER12-1693, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. EL12-69, Primary Power LLC v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER12-1700, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER12-1901, GenOn Power Midwest, LP
Docket No. ER12-2080, GenOn Power Midwest, LP
Docket No. ER12-2085, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER12-2260, New York Independent System Operator, Inc
Docket No. ER12-2288, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    For more information, contact Jonathan Fernandez, Office of Energy
Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at (202) 502-
6604 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: August 14, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-20427 Filed 8-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY                 NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY                              2000 TRAVERWOOD ROAD                            ANN ARBOR, MI  48105-2498

									          	OFFICE OF 										AIR AND RADIATION

January 12, 2011

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Meeting with Eaton

FROM:	Angela Cullen, Mechanical Engineer

TO:		Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0162

This memorandum documents a meeting held on Tuesday, January 11, 2011 between Eaton and EPA and included the following individuals:

      Eaton:  Tom Stover, Chris Hess, Pat Quinn              EPA: Byron Bunker, Cle Jackson, and Angela Cullen

The discussion focused primarily on powerpack testing procedures and drive cycles for hybrid vehicle testing.


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 226 (Monday, November 27, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 56088]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25464]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-118, OMB Control No. 3235-0095]

Submission for OMB Review; 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 236

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget this request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information discussed below.
    Rule 236 (17 CFR 230.236) under the Securities Act of 1933 (15
U.S.C. 77a et seq.) (``Securities Act'') provides an exemption from
registration under the Securities Act for the offering of shares of
stock or similar securities to provide funds to be distributed to
security holders in lieu of fractional shares, scrip certificates or
order forms, in connection with a stock dividend, stock split, reverse
stock split, conversion, merger or similar transaction. Issuers wishing
to rely upon the exemption are required to furnish specified
information to the Commission at least 10 days prior to the offering.
The information is needed to provide notice that the issuer is relying
on the exemption. Public companies are the likely respondents. All
information provided to the Commission is available to the public for
review upon request. Approximately 10 respondents file the information
required by Rule 236 at an estimated 1.5 hours per response for a total
annual reporting burden of 15 hours (1.5 hours per response x 10
responses).
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    The public may view the background documentation for this
information collection at the following Web site, www.reginfo.gov.
Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an email to:
[email protected]; and (ii) Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 or send an email
to: [email protected]. Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30
days of this notice.

    Dated: November 20, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-25464 Filed 11-24-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 6 (Friday, January 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 1410]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00167]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9921-47-Region-1]

Notice of Availability of Draft NPDES General Permit for
Stormwater Discharges From Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
in Massachusetts; Reopening of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice; reopening of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a Notice of
Availability of the draft Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
(MS4) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general
permit for Massachusetts, published in the Federal Register on
September 30, 2014. This notice reopens the comment period through
February 27, 2015. Comments submitted between the close of the original
comment period (December 29, 2014) and the reopening of this comment
period will be accepted and considered.

DATES: The comment period for the draft general permit published
September 30, 2014 (79 FR 58774) is reopened through February 27, 2014.
All comments must be received on or before February 27, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments by one of the following methods:
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: Newton Tedder, US EPA--Region 1, 5 Post Office
Square--Suite 100, Mail Code--OEP06-4, Boston, MA 02109-3912.
    No facsimiles (faxes) will be accepted.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Additional information concerning the
draft permit may be obtained between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m. Monday through Friday excluding legal holidays from: Newton
Tedder, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Environmental Protection
Agency, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109-3912;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice reopens the public comment
period established in the Federal Register issue of September 30, 2014
(79 FR 58774) (FRL-9917-31-Region-1). In that notice, EPA announced the
availability for public comment of its draft small MS4 NPDES general
permit for Massachusetts. All draft permit documents can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/region1/npdes/stormwater/MS4_MA.html. This reopening
of the comment period is in response to requests received from several
commenters to extend the comment period.

    Dated: December 22, 2014.
Deb Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2015-00167 Filed 1-8-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 04/18/2008 02:58 PM

To

Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Deirdre Murphy/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: Documents you requested on lead NAAQS

Thank you very much, Lydia Tricia, Karen and Deidre,

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 2:49 PM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: Documents you requested on lead NAAQS

Heidi,

Here are the documents you requested on the lead NAAQS.  Please let me

know if you have any questions.

Lydia

Axelrad 2008, (See attached file:

AxelradJan04-2008-NHANES2003-04-age1-5.doc)(See attached file: lead

NHANES data 2003-2004.xls)

Auinger 2008,(See attached file: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0735-5118.pdf)

Chiodo 2008,(See attached file: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0735-5125.pdf)

Hornung 2008,(See attached file: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0735-5126.pdf)

Kordas 2008,(See attached file: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0735-5124.pdf)

Tellez-Rojo 2008 (See attached file: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0735-5123.pdf)

Schwartz 2003

We do not cite a 2003 Schwartz article in the RIA docket.  The Schwartz

articles cited are from 1993 and 1994.  I have attached both of those.

(See attached file: Schwartz 1993.pdf)(See attached file:

Schwartz1994.pdf)

             "King, Heidi R."

             <Heidi_R._King@o

             mb.eop.gov>                                             To

                                      Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

             04/16/2008 06:56                                        cc

             PM                       Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,

                                      Deirdre Murphy/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,

                                      Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

                                                                Subject

                                      RE: Pb- Two items for OMB

Lydia,

Thank you so much!  I do appreciate the quick response; I'll share this

with the reviewers who have asked for it.

Along the same line of interest, to support interagency reviewers of the

rule in their effort to respect EPA's request that we rely on the

printed materials rather than ask EPA staff to prepare and present

briefings, reviewers have requested the following studies cited in the

rulemaking.  I believe these are all studies referenced in the rule

preamble or risk assessment.  Could I trouble EPA to share these with me

so that I might distribute them to the interested scientist readers:

From Preamble:

Axelrad 2008,

Auinger 2008,

Chiodo 2008,

Hornung 2008,

Kordas 2008,

Tellez-Rojo 2008

From RIA:

Schwartz 2003

Thank you, Lydia, Karen and Deirdre -- if you could give me a sense of

when these might be available, that would be helpful.  I would like to

give reviewers a sense of whether they will have time to read the

studies or whether they should provide written comment/question instead.

Have a good evening,

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 6:27 PM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: Fw: Pb- Two items for OMB

Here are the items we discussed today Heidi.

----- Forwarded by Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US on 04/16/2008 06:25 PM

-----

             Deirdre

             Murphy/RTP/USEPA

             /US                                                     To

                                      Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

             04/16/2008 05:59                                        cc

             PM                       Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

                                                                Subject

                                      Pb- Two items for OMB

Lydia,

Here are the two documents for OMB:

1. The email with subgroup means from Lanphear et al 2000:

(See attached file: AuingerFeb11-2008-LanphearEtal2000.doc)

2.  The technical memo on air-related IQ loss (See attached file: Lead

NAAQ-REview Docket - Murphy-Pekar 2008.pdf)

Deirdre


                                  METHOD 0051

                MIDGET IMPINGER HCl/Cl2 EMISSION SAMPLING TRAIN

 1.0      SCOPE AND APPLICATION

 This method describes the collection of hydrogen chloride (HCl, CAS Registry Number 7647-01-0) and chlorine (Cl2, CAS Registry Number 7782-50-5) in stack gas emission samples from hazardous waste incinerators and municipal waste combustors. The collected samples are analyzed using Method 9057. This method is designed to collect HCl/Cl2 in their gaseous forms. Use of this method is limited to the sampling of relatively dry, particulate-free gas streams. Sources, such as those controlled by wet scrubbers, that emit acid particulate matter (e.g., HCl dissolved in water droplets) must be sampled using an isokinetic HCl/Cl2 sampling train (see Method 0050). This method has potential for collection of all halogens and halogen acids, but has not been fully evaluated for that use. For analytical determination of additional halides, Method 9056 is used rather than Method 9057.

 2.0      SUMMARY OF METHOD

 An integrated gas sample is extracted from the stack and passes through a particulate filter, acidified water, and finally through an alkaline solution. The filter serves to remove particulate matter such as chloride salts which could potentially react and form the analyte in the absorbing solutions. In the acidified water absorbing solution, the HCl gas is solubilized and forms chloride ions (Cl-) as follows:
                            HCl + H2O = H3O+ + Cl-
 The Cl2 gas present in the emissions has a very low solubility in acidified water and passes through to the alkaline absorbing solution where it undergoes hydrolysis to form a proton (H+), Cl -, and hypochlorous acid (HClO) as follows:
                          H2O + Cl2 = H+ + Cl- + HClO
 The Cl - ions in the separate solutions are measured by ion chromatography (Method 9057).

 Sodium thiosulfate solution is added to the contents of the hydroxide filled impingers, in order to promote the following reaction.

                   -2	-	-	-2	-
S2O3    + 4OCl + 2OH  = 2SO4    + 4Cl +  H2O
 Conversion of all the original Cl2 to the stable Cl - ion, and appropriate adjustment of the analysis calculations, removes the possibility of partial reduction of OCl- to Cl- and the resulting high bias to the results.

 3.0     INTERFERENCES

 Volatile materials which produce chloride ions upon dissolution during sampling are obvious interferences in the measurement of HCl. One interferant for HCl is diatomic chlorine (Cl2) gas which disproportionates to HCl and hypochlorous acid (HClO) upon dissolution in water. Cl2 gas exhibits

 a low solubility in water, however, and the use of acidic rather than neutral or basic solutions for collection of hydrogen chloride gas greatly reduces the dissolution of any chlorine present. Sampling a 400 ppm HCl gas stream containing 50 ppm Cl2 with this method does not cause a significant bias. Sampling a 220 ppm HCl gas stream containing 180 ppm Cl2 results in a positive bias of 3.4 percent in the HCl measurement.

 APPARATUS AND MATERIALS

 Sampling Train. The sampling train is shown in Figure 1 and component parts are discussed below.

       Probe. Borosilicate glass, approximately 3/8-in. (9-mm) inside diameter, with a heating system to prevent condensation. When the concentration of alkaline particulate matter in the emissions is high, a 3/8-in. (9-mm) inside diameter Teflon elbow should be attached to the inlet of the probe. A 1-in. (25-mm) length of Teflon tubing with a 3/8-in. (9- mm) inside diameter should be attached at the open end of the elbow to permit the opening of the probe to be turned away from the gas stream, thus reducing the amount of particulate entering the train. When high concentrations of particulate matter are not present, the Teflon elbow is unnecessary, and the probe inlet can be perpendicular to the gas stream. When sampling at locations where gas temperatures are greater than approximately 400F, such as wet scrubber inlets, glass or quartz elbows must be used. In no case should a glass wool plug be used to remove particulate matter; use of such a filtering device could result in a bias in the data. Instead, a Teflon filter should be used as specified in Section 5.5.

       Three-way stopcock. A borosilicate, three-way glass stopcock with a heating system to prevent condensation. The heated stopcock should connect directly to the outlet of the probe and filter assembly and the inlet of the first impinger. The heating system should be capable of preventing condensation up to the inlet of the first impinger. Silicone grease may be used, if necessary, to prevent leakage.

 Impingers. Five 30-ml midget impingers with leak-free glass connectors. For sampling at high moisture sources or for extended sampling times greater than one hour, a midget impinger with a shortened stem (such that the gas sample does not bubble through the collected condensate) should be used in front of the first impinger.

       Mae West impinger or drying tube. Mae West design impinger (or drying tube, if a moisture determination is not to be conducted) filled with silica gel, or equivalent, to dry the gas sample and to protect the dry gas meter and pump.

       Sample line. Leak-free, with compatible fittings to connect the last impinger to the needle valve.

       Barometer. Mercury, aneroid, or other barometer capable of measuring atmospheric pressure within 2.5 mm Hg (0.1 in Hg). In many cases, the barometric reading may be obtained from a nearby National Weather Service station, in which case the station value (which is the absolute barometric pressure) shall be requested and an adjustment for the elevation differences between the weather station and sampling point shall be applied at a rate of minus 2.5 mm Hg (0.1 in. Hg) per 30 m (100 ft) elevation increase or vice versa for elevation decrease.

       Purge pump, purge line, drying tube, needle valve, and rate meter. Pump capable of purging sample probe at 2 liters/min. with drying tube, filled with silica gel or equivalent, to protect pump, and a rate meter, 0 to 5 liters/min.

 Metering system. The following items comprise the metering system which is identical to that used for EPA Method 6 (see Reference 5).

 Valve. Needle valve, to regulate sample gas flow rate.

 Pump. Leak-free diaphragm pump, or equivalent, to pull gas through train. Install a small surge tank between the pump and the rate meter to eliminate the pulsation effect of the diaphragm pump on the rotameter.

 Rate meter. Rotameter, or equivalent, capable of measuring flow rate to within 2 percent of selected flow rate of 2 liters/min.

 Volume meter. Dry gas meter, sufficiently accurate to measure the sample volume within 2 percent, calibrated at the selected flow rate and conditions encountered during sampling, and equipped with a temperature gauge (dial thermometer or equivalent) capable of measuring temperature to within 30C (5.40F).

 Vacuum gauge. At least 760 mm Hg (30 in. Hg) gauge to be used for leak check of the sampling train.

                    Water Bath: To minimize loss of absorbing solution

              Sample Recovery.

 Wash bottles. Polyethylene or glass, 500 ml or larger, two.

 Storage bottles. Glass, with Teflon-lined lids, 100 ml, to store impinger samples (two per sampling run).

 REAGENTS

       Reagent grade inorganic chemicals shall be used in all tests. Unless otherwise indicated, it is intended that all reagents shall conform to the specifications of the Committee on Analytical Reagents of the American Chemical Society, where such specifications are available. Other grades may be used, provided it is first ascertained that the reagent is of sufficiently high purity to permit its use without lessening the accuracy of the determination.

       Reagent Water. All references to water in the method refer to reagent water as defined in Chapter One unless otherwise specified. It is advisable to analyze a blank sample of this reagent prior to sampling, since the reagent blank value obtained during the field sample analysis must be less than 10 percent of the sample values.

       Sulfuric acid (0.05 M), H2SO4. Used as the HCl absorbing reagent. To prepare 100 mL, slowly add 0.28 mL of concentrated H2SO4 to about 90 mL of water while stirring, and adjust the final volume to 100 mL using additional water. Shake well to mix the solution. It is advisable to

 analyze a blank sample of this reagent prior to sampling, since the reagent blank value obtained during the field sample analysis must be less than 10 percent of the sample values.

  Sodium hydroxide (0.1 M), NaOH. Used as the Cl2 absorbing reagent. To prepare 100 mL, dissolve 0.40 g of solid NaOH in about 90 mL of water and adjust the final volume to 100 mL using additional water. Shake well to mix the solution. It is advisable to analyze a blank sample of this reagent prior to sampling, since the reagent blank value obtained during the field sample analysis must be less than 10 percent of the sample value.

  Filter. Teflon mat Pallflex(R) TX40HI75 or equivalent. Locate in a glass, quartz, or Teflon filter holder with a Teflon filter support in a filter box heated to 250F.

  Sodium thiosulfate (0.5 M), Na2S2O3. Used as the reducing agent added to the sodium hydroxide filled impingers to promote the reaction given in Section 2.0. Buy premixed reagent grade, as free of chloride as possible.

  Silica gel. Indicating type, 6- to 16-mesh. If the silica gel has been used previously, dry at 175C (350F) for 2 hours. New silica gel may be used as received. Alternatively, other types of desiccants (equivalent or better) may be used.

 SAMPLE COLLECTION, PRESERVATION, AND HANDLING

       Sample collection is described in this method. The analytical procedures are described in Method 9057.

 Samples should be stored in clearly labeled, tightly sealed containers between sample recovery and analysis. They may be analyzed up to four weeks after collection.

 PROCEDURE

 Calibration. Section 3.5.2 of EPA's Quality Assurance Handbook Volume III (Reference 4) may be used as a guide for these operations.

 Dry Gas Metering System.

       Initial calibration. Before its initial use in the field, first leak check the metering system (sample line, drying tube, if used, vacuum gauge, needle valve, pump, rate meter, and dry gas meter) as follows: plug the inlet end of the sampling line, pull a vacuum of 250 mm (10 in.) Hg, plug off the outlet of the dry gas meter, and turn off the pump. The vacuum should remain stable for 30 seconds. Carefully release the vacuum from the system by slowly removing the plug from the sample line inlet. Remove the sampling line (and drying tube, if applicable), and connect the dry gas metering system to a appropriately sized wet test meter (e.g., 1 liter per revolution). Make three independent calibration runs, using at least five revolutions of the dry gas meter per run. Calculate the calibration factor, Y (wet test meter calibration volume divided by the dry gas meter volume, with both volumes adjusted to the same reference temperature and pressure), for each run, and average the results. If any Y value deviates by more than 2 percent from the average, the

             metering system is unacceptable for use. Otherwise, use the average as the calibration factor for subsequent test runs.

              Post-test calibration check. After each field test series, conduct a calibration check as in Section <IP_ADDRESS> above, except for the following variations: (a) the leak check is not to be conducted, (b) three or more revolutions of the dry gas meter may be used, (c) only two independent runs need to be made. If the calibration factor does no deviate by more than 5 percent from the initial calibration factor (determined in Section <IP_ADDRESS>), the dry gas meter volumes obtained during the test series are acceptable. If the calibration factor deviates by more than 5 percent, recalibrate the metering system as Section <IP_ADDRESS>, and for the calculations, use the calibration factor (initial or recalibration) that yields the lower gas volume for each test run.

 Thermometer(s). Prior to each field test, calibrate against mercury-in-glass thermometers at ambient temperature. Alternative mercury-free thermometers may be used if the thermometers are, at a minimum, equivalent in terms of performance or suitably effective for the specific temperature measurement application. If the thermometer being calibrated reads within 2°C (2.6°F) of the mercury-in-glass thermometer, it is acceptable. If not, adjust the thermometer or use an appropriate correction factor.

       Rate meter. The rate meter should be cleaned and maintained according to the manufacturer's instructions.

 Barometer. Prior to each field test, calibrate against a mercury barometer. The field barometer should agree within 0.1 in. Hg with the mercury barometer. If it does not, the field barometer should be adjusted.

              Sampling.

       Preparation of collection train. Prepare the sampling train as follows: The first or knockout impinger should have a shortened stem and be left empty to condense moisture in the gas stream. The next two midget impingers should each be filled with 15 mL of 0.05 M H2SO4. The fourth and fifth impingers should each be filled with 15 mL of 0.1 M NaOH. It is essential that the NaOH filled impingers be maintained strongly basic throughout the sampling run. In highly acid stack environments, this may require measures such as stronger base, more volume of basic solution, or changeout of impinger liquid during the run. When in doubt the pH of the solution should be monitored frequently or continuously. Place a fresh charge of silica gel, or equivalent, in the Mae West impinger (or the drying tube). Connect the impingers in series with the knockout impinger first, followed by the two impingers containing the acidified reagent and two impingers containing the alkaline reagent, and the Mae West impinger containing the silica gel. If the moisture will be determined, weigh the impinger assembly to the nearest + 0.5 g and record the weight.

        Leak check procedures. Leak check the probe and three-way stopcock prior to inserting the probe into the stack. Connect the stopcock to the outlet of the probe, and connect the sample line to the needle valve. Plug the probe inlet, turn on the sample pump, and pull a vacuum of at least 250 mm Hg (10 in. Hg). Turn off the needle valve, and note the vacuum gauge reading. The vacuum should remain stable for at least 30 seconds. Place the probe in the stack at the sampling location, and adjust the filter heating system to 121C (250F) and the probe and stopcock heating systems to a temperature sufficient to prevent water condensation. Connect the first impinger to the stopcock, and connect the sample line to the last impinger and the needle valve. Upon completion of a sampling run, remove the probe from the stack and leak check as described above. If a leak has occurred, the sampling run must be voided. Alternatively, the portion of the train behind the probe may be leak checked between multiple runs at the same site as follows: Close the stopcock to the first impinger, and turn on the sample pump. Pull a vacuum of at least 250 mm Hg (10 in. Hg), turn off the needle valve, and note the vacuum gauge reading. The vacuum should remain stable for at least 30 seconds. Release the vacuum on the impinger train by turning the stopcock to the vent position to permit ambient air to enter. If this procedure is used, the full train leak check described above must be conducted following the final run and all preceding sampling runs voided if a leak has occurred.

        Purge procedures. Immediately prior to sampling, connect the purge line to the stopcock and turn the stopcock to permit the purge pump to purge the probe (see Figure 1A). Turn on the purge pump, and adjust the purge rate to 2 liters/min. Purge for at least 5 minutes prior to sampling.

        Sample collection. Turn on sample pump, pull a slight vacuum of approximately 25 mm Hg (1 in. Hg) on the impinger train, and turn the stopcock to permit stack gas to be pulled through the impinger train (see Figure 1C). Adjust the sampling rate to 2 liters/min. as indicated by the rate meter, and maintain this rate within 10 percent during the entire sampling run. Take readings of the dry gas meter, the dry gas meter temperature, rate meter, and vacuum gauge at least once every five minutes during the run. A sampling time of one hour is recommended. However, if the expected condensate catch for this sampling run duration will exceed the capacity of the sampling train, (1) a larger knockout impinger may be used or (2) two sequential half-hour runs may be conducted. At the conclusion of the sampling run, remove the train from the stack, cool, and perform a leak check as described in Section 7.2.2.

       Sample recovery. Following sampling, disconnect the impinger train from the remaining sampling equipment at the inlet to the knockout impinger and the outlet to the last impinger. If performing a moisture determination, wipe off any moisture on the outside of the train; weigh the train to the nearest 0.5 g and record the weight. Then disconnect the impingers from each other. Quantitatively transfer the contents of the first three impingers (the knockout impinger and the two 0.05 M H2SO4 impingers) to a leak-free storage bottle. Add the water rinses of each of these impingers and connecting glassware to the storage bottle. The contents of the impingers and connecting glassware from the second set of impingers (containing the 0.1 M NaOH) should be recovered in a similar manner if a Cl2 analysis is desired. Add 2 mL or more of 0.5 M Na2S2O3. to the sodium hydroxide (Cl2) samples. It is necessary to add sufficient Na2S2O3 to reduce the OCl-, but too much thiosulfate may interfere with the ion chromatography analysis. The amount needed will vary with stack emission composition. In certain situations, it may be advantageous to add the Na2S2O3 before sampling. Consult recent references for additional suggestions. The sample bottle should be sealed, shaken to mix, and labeled; the fluid level should be marked so that if any sample is lost during transport, a correction proportional to the lost volume can be applied. Save portions of the 0.05 M H2SO4 and 0.1 M NaOH used as impinger reagents as reagent blanks. Take 50 ml of each and place in separate leak-free storage bottles. Label and mark the fluid levels as previously described.

  Calculations. Retain at least one extra decimal figure beyond those contained in the available data in intermediate calculations, and round off only the final answer appropriately.

 Nomenclature.

                                                                            Bws

                                                                             Mw
                                                                      Pbar Pstd
      =	Water vapor in the gas stream, proportion by volume.

      =	Molecular weight of water, 18.0 g/g-mole (18.0 lb/lb-mole).

      =	Barometric pressure at the exit orifice of the dry gas meter, mm Hg (in. Hg).

      =	Standard absolute pressure, 760 mm Hg (29.92 in. Hg).

                            R	=	Ideal gas constant, 0.06236 mm Hg-m3/K-g-mole (21.85 in. Hg-ft3/R-lb-mole).

                   Tm

                   Tstd Vlc

                   Vm
                                                                Vm(std) Vw(std)
    =	Average dry gas meter absolute temperature, K (R).

 =	Standard absolute temperature, 293K (528R).

    =	Total volume of liquid collected in impingers and silica gel, mL (equivalent to the difference in weight of the impinger train before and after sampling, 1 mg = 1 mL).

    =	Dry gas volume as measured by the dry gas meter, dcm (dcf).

    =	Dry gas volume measured by the dry gas meter, corrected to standard conditions, dscm (dscf).

    =	Volume of water vapor in the gas sample, corrected to standard conditions, scm (scf).

                   Y	=	Dry gas meter calibration factor.

                   pw	=	Density of water, 0.9982 g/mL (0.002201 lb/mL).

 Sample volume, dry basis, corrected to standard conditions. Calculate as described below:

                                                                           Tstd
    Pbar
       Vm Pbar

             m
Vm(std) = Vm Y  ----	----  = K1 Y -------	(1)
                          T	Pstd	Tm

             where:

                                                                             K1

    = 0.3858K/mm Hg for metric units.
    = 17.64R/in. Hg for English units.

                    Volume of water vapor.

                                   pw	RTstd

                   Vw(std) = Vlc ---- --------- = K2Vlc
                                                                            (2)

                                                                         where:
           Mw	Pstd

                   K2	= 0.0013333 m3/mL for metric units.
                         = 0.04707 ft3/mL for English units.

                    Moisture content.

                                    Vw(std)
                   Bws = ----------------	(3)
                               Vm(std) + Vw(std)

       below:

       Analytical calculation of total ug HCl per sample.  Calculate as described

      mHCl  = S x Vs  x 36.46/35.45
where:

      mHCl = Mass of HCl in sample, ug  S = Analysis of sample, ug  Cl-/mL
      Vs = Volume of filtered and diluted sample, mL
      36.46 = Molecular weight of HCl, ug/ug-mole
      35.45 = Molecular weight of Cl-, ug/ug-mole

                    Analytical calculation of total ug Cl2  per sample.  Calculate as   described
       below:

                         mCl2  = S x V2

                                                                         where:

V2 = Volume of filtered and diluted sample, mL S = Analysis of sample, ug Cl-/mL
mCl2  = Mass of Cl2  in sample,  ug

                    Concentration of HCl in the flue gas. Calculate as described below: C	= K x m/Vm(std)

                   where: C	= Concentration of HCl or Cl2, dry basis, mg/dscm, K	= 10-3 mg/ug,
                   m	= Mass of HCl or Cl2 in sample, ug, and

                                                                        Vm(std)
 = Dry gas volume measured by the dry gas meter, corrected to standard conditions, dscm.

 QUALITY CONTROL

 At the present time, a validated audit material does not exist for this method. Analytical quality control procedures are detailed in Method 9057.

       Quality control check sample. Chloride solutions of reliably known concentrations are available for purchase from the National Bureau of Standards (SRM 3182). The QC check sample should be prepared in the appropriate absorbing reagent at a concentration approximately equal to the mid range calibration standard. The quality control check sample should be injected in duplicate immediately after the calibration standards have been injected the first time. The Cl- value obtained for the check sample using the final calibration curve should be within 10 percent of the known value for the check sample.

 METHOD PERFORMANCE

 The in-stack limit for HCl for the method is approximately 0.08 mg/dscm of stack gas for a 1-hour sample.

 The precision and bias for measurement of HCl using this sampling protocol combined with the analytical protocol, Method 9057, have been determined. The laboratory relative standard deviation is within 6.2 percent and 3.2 percent at HCl concentrations of 3.9 and 15.3 ppm, respectively. The method does not exhibit any bias for HCl when sampling at Cl2 concentrations less than 50 ppm.

 10.0	REFERENCES

 Steinsberger, S.C. and J.H. Margeson, "Laboratory and Field Evaluation of a Methodology for Determination of Hydrogen Chloride Emissions from Municipal and Hazardous Waste Incinerators," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Report No. 600/3/89/064, April, 1989. Available from NTIS.

 State of California, Air Resources Board, Method 421, "Determination of Hydrochloric Acid Emissions from Stationary Sources," March 18, 1987.

 Entropy Environmentalists, Inc., "Laboratory Evaluation of a Sampling and Analysis Method for Hydrogen Chloride Emissions from Stationary Sources: Interim Report," EPA Contract No. 68-02-4442, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, January 22, 1988.

 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems, Volume III, Stationary Source Specific Methods," Publication No. EPA-600/4-77-027b, August 1977.

 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A, Method 6.

 Steger, J.L.; Wagoner, D.E.; Bursey, J.T.; Merrill, R.G.; Fuerst, R.G. and Johnson, L.D. "Laboratory Evaluation of Method 0050 for Hydrogen Chloride," Proceedings of the 13th Annual International Incineration Conference, Houston, TX, May 1994.

 Johnson, L.D.,"Stack Sampling Methods for Halogens and Halogen Acids," presented at EPA/A&WMA International Symposium: Measurement of Toxic and Related Air Pollutants, Research Triangle Park, NC, May 1996.

                                    FIGURE 1. METHOD 0051 SAMPLING TRAIN

                                                    CD-ROM	0051 - 11	Revision 1
                                                                    August 2018

                                  METHOD 0051
                MIDGET IMPINGER HCl/Cl2 EMISSION SAMPLING TRAIN

                          CD-ROM	0051 - 12	Revision 1
                                                                    August 2018


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 124 (Monday, June 29, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 37047]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15877]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Bureau of Transportation Statistics

[Docket ID Number: DOT-OST-2014-0031]

Agency Information Collection; Activity Under OMB Review; Part
249 Preservation of Records

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology
(OST-R), Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), Department of
Transportation.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public
Law 104-13, the Bureau of Transportation Statistics invites the general
public, industry and other governmental parties to comment on the
continuing need for and usefulness of BTS requiring certificated air
carriers to preserve accounting records, consumer complaint letters,
reservation reports and records, system reports of aircraft movements,
etc. Also, public charter operators and overseas military personnel
charter operators are required to retain certain contracts, invoices,
receipts, bank records and reservation records.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by August 28, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Gorham, Office of Airline
Information, RTS-42, Room E34, OST-R, BTS, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, Telephone Number<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax Number
(202) 366-3383 or Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Comments

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket ID Number
DOT-OST-2014-0031 OMB Approval No. 2138-0006 by any of the following
methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
    Mail: Docket Services: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Identify docket number, DOT-OST-2014-0031, at the
beginning of your comments, and send two copies. To receive
confirmation that DOT received your comments, include a self-addressed
stamped postcard. Internet users may access all comments received by
DOT at http://www.regulations.gov. All comments are posted
electronically without charge or edits, including any personal
information provided.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://DocketInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov. or the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets.

Electronic Access

    You may access comments received for this notice at http://www.regulations.gov, by searching docket DOT-OST-2014-0031.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Approval No.: 2138-0006.
    Title: Preservation of Air Carrier Records--14 CFR part 249.
    Form No.: None.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved recordkeeping
requirement.
    Respondents: Certificated air carriers and charter operators.
    Number of Respondents: 90 certificated air carriers, 300 charter
operators.
    Estimated Time per Response: 3 hours per certificated air carrier,
1 hour per charter operator.
    Total Annual Burden: 570 hours.
    Needs and Uses: Part 249 requires the retention of records such as:
General and subsidiary ledgers, journals and journal vouchers, voucher
distribution registers, accounts receivable and payable journals and
ledgers, subsidy records documenting underlying financial and
statistical reports to DOT, funds reports, consumer records, sales
reports, auditors' and flight coupons, air waybills, etc. Depending on
the nature of the document, the carrier may be required to retain the
document for a period of 30 days to three years. Public charter
operators and overseas military personnel charter operators must retain
documents which evidence or reflect deposits made by each charter
participant and commissions received by, paid to, or deducted by travel
agents, and all statements, invoices, bills and receipts from suppliers
or furnishers of goods and services in connection with the tour or
charter. These records are retained for six months after completion of
the charter program.
    Not only is it imperative that carriers and charter operators
retain source documentation, but it is critical that DOT has access to
these records. Given DOT's established information needs for such
reports, the underlying support documentation must be retained for a
reasonable period of time. Absent the retention requirements, the
support for such reports may or may not exist for audit/validation
purposes and the relevance and usefulness of the carrier submissions
would be impaired, since the data could not be verified to the source
on a test basis.
    The Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency
Act of 2002 (44 U.S.C. 3501 note), requires a statistical agency to
clearly identify information it collects for non-statistical purposes.
BTS hereby notifies the respondents and the public that BTS uses the
information it collects under this OMB approval for non-statistical
purposes including, but not limited to, publication of both
Respondent's identity and its data, submission of the information to
agencies outside BTS for review, analysis and possible use in
regulatory and other administrative matters.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 24, 2015.
William Chadwick, Jr.,
Director, Office of Airline Information, Bureau of Transportation
Statistics.
[FR Doc. 2015-15877 Filed 6-26-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P