[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 175 (Wednesday, September 10, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53717-53720]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21546]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2014-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1440]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

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

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before December 9, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in
the tables below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1440, to
Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
(email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/
fmxmain.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM
and FIS report become effective.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at http://
floodsrp.org/pdfs/srpfactsheet.pdf.

    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location and
the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Mohave County, Arizona, and Incorporated Areas
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Lake Havasu....................  City Hall, 2330 McCulloch
                                          Boulevard North, Lake Havasu
                                          City, AZ 86403.
Fort Mojave Indian Tribe...............  Fort Mojave Indian Reservation,
                                          500 Merriman Avenue, Needles,
                                          CA 92363.
Unincorporated Areas of Mohave County..  County Administration Building,
                                          700 West Beale Street,
                                          Kingman, AZ 86401.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Kings County, California, and Incorporated Areas
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Lemoore........................  Planning Department, 711 West
                                          Cinnamon Drive, Lemoore, CA
                                          93245.
Unincorporated Areas of Kings County...  Community Development Agency,
                                          1400 West Lacey Boulevard,
                                          Building 6, Hanford, CA 93230.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Los Angeles County, California, and Incorporated Areas
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Calabasas......................  City of Calabasas, 26134 Mureau
                                          Road, Suite 200, Calabasas, CA
                                          91302.
City of Palos Verdes Estates...........  City of Palos Verdes Estates,
                                          340 Palos Verdes Drive West,
                                          Palos Verdes Estates, CA
                                          90274.
Unincorporated Areas of Los Angeles      Los Angeles County Dept of
 County.                                  Public Works, 900 S. Fremont
                                          Avenue, Alhambra, CA 91803.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Sacramento County, California, and Incorporated Areas
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Sacramento.....................  Department of Utilities,
                                          Engineering and Water
                                          Resources Division, 1395 35th
                                          Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95822.
Unincorporated Areas of Sacramento       Municipal Services Agency,
 County.                                  Department of Water Resources,
                                          827 7th Street, Suite 301,
                                          Sacramento, CA 95814.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Sonoma County, California, and Incorporated Areas
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Petaluma.......................  Community Development
                                          Department, 11 English Street,
                                          Petaluma, CA 94952.
Unincorporated Areas of Sonoma County..  Permit and Resource Management,
                                          2550 Ventura Avenue, Santa
                                          Rosa, CA 95403.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Sutter County, California, and Incorporated Areas
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unincorporated Areas of Sutter County..  Sutter County Water Resources
                                          Division, 1130 Civic Center
                                          Boulevard, Suite F, Yuba City,
                                          CA 95993.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Maui County, Hawaii, and Incorporated Areas
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unincorporated Areas of Maui County....  County of Maui Planning
                                          Department, 2200 Main Street,
                                          Suite 315, Wailuku, HI 96793.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Kandiyohi County, Minnesota, and Incorporated Areas
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Lake Lillian...................  City Hall, 531 Lakeview Street,
                                          Lake Lillian, MN 56253.
City of New London.....................  City Hall, 20 First Avenue
                                          Southwest, New London, MN
                                          56273.
City of Raymond........................  City Office, 208 Cofield
                                          Street, Raymond, MN 56282.
City of Regal..........................  Mayor's Residence, 14465 293rd
                                          Avenue Northeast, Belgrade, MN
                                          56312.
City of Spicer.........................  City Hall, 217 Hillcrest
                                          Avenue, Spicer, MN 56288.
City of Willmar........................  City Office Building, 333 6th
                                          Street Southwest, Willmar, MN
                                          56201.
Unincorporated Areas of Kandiyohi        Kandiyohi County Office
 County.                                  Building, 400 Benson Avenue
                                          Southwest, Willmar, MN 56201.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

         Alamance County, North Carolina, and Incorporated Areas
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Burlington.....................  City Hall, Engineering
                                          Department, 425 South
                                          Lexington Avenue, Burlington,
                                          NC 27215.
City of Graham.........................  Planning Department, 201 South
                                          Main Street, Graham, NC 27254.
City of Mebane.........................  Planning Department, 106 East
                                          Washington Street, Mebane, NC
                                          27302.
Town of Elon...........................  Town Hall, 104 South Williamson
                                          Avenue, Elon, NC 27244.
Town of Gibsonville....................  Planning Department, 129 West
                                          Main Street, Gibsonville, NC
                                          27248.
Town of Green Level....................  Town Hall, 2510 Green Level
                                          Church Road, Green Level, NC
                                          27215.
Town of Haw River......................  Town Hall, 403 East Main
                                          Street, Haw River, NC 27258.
Town of Ossipee........................  Ossipee Town Hall, 2608 Ossipee
                                          Front Street, Elon, NC 27244.
Town of Swepsonville...................  Town of Swepsonville, Alamance
                                          County Annex Building,
                                          Planning Department, 124 West
                                          Elm Street, Graham, NC 27253.
Unincorporated Areas of Alamance County  Alamance County Annex Building
                                          Planning Department, 124 West
                                          Elm Street, Graham, NC 27253.
Village of Alamance....................  Alamance Village Hall, 2874 Rob
                                          Shepard Drive, Burlington, NC
                                          27215.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Chatham County, North Carolina, and Incorporated Areas
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Town of Cary...........................  Stormwater Services, Town Hall,
                                          316 North Academy Street,
                                          Cary, NC 27513.
Town of Pittsboro......................  Planning Department, 635 East
                                          Street, Pittsboro, NC 27312.
Town of Siler City.....................  Planning Department, 311 North
                                          Second Avenue, Room 301, Siler
                                          City, NC 27344.
Unincorporated Areas of Chatham County.  Chatham County Planning
                                          Department, 80-A East Street,
                                          Pittsboro, NC 27312.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Orange County, North Carolina, and Incorporated Areas
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Town of Carrboro.......................  Planning Department, 301 West
                                          Main Street, Carrboro, NC
                                          27510.
Town of Chapel Hill....................  Stormwater Management Program
                                          Office, 208 North Columbia
                                          Street, Chapel Hill, NC 27514.
Town of Hillsborough...................  Town Hall, 101 East Orange
                                          Street, Hillsborough, NC
                                          27278.
Unincorporated Areas of Orange County..  Orange County Planning
                                          Department, 306 East Revere
                                          Road, Hillsborough, NC 27278.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, and Incorporated Areas
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Philadelphia...................  Planning Commission Office, One
                                          Parkway, 13th Floor, 1515 Arch
                                          Street, Philadelphia, PA
                                          19102.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Bennington County, Vermont (All Jurisdictions)
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Town of Arlington......................  Town Clerk Building, 3828
                                          Vermont Route 7A, Arlington,
                                          VT 05250.
Town of Bennington.....................  Zoning Office, 205 South
                                          Street, Bennington, VT 05201.
Town of Dorset.........................  Zoning Office, 112 Mad Tom
                                          Road, East Dorset, VT 05253.
Town of Landgrove......................  Town Hall, 88 Landgrove Road,
                                          Landgrove, VT 05148.
Town of Manchester.....................  Planning and Zoning Office,
                                          6039 Main Street, Manchester,
                                          VT 05255.
Town of Peru...........................  Town Center, 402 Main Street,
                                          Peru, VT 05152.
Town of Pownal.........................  Town Office, 467 Center Street,
                                          Pownal, VT 05261.
Town of Readsboro......................  Town Hall, 301 Phelps Lane,
                                          Readsboro, VT 05350.
Town of Rupert.........................  Town Office, 187 East Street,
                                          West Rupert, VT 05776.
Town of Sandgate.......................  Town Hall, 3277 Sandgate Road,
                                          Sandgate, VT 05250.
Town of Searsburg......................  Town Hall, 18 Town Garage Road,
                                          Searsburg, VT 05363.
Town of Shaftsbury.....................  Cole Hall, 61 Buck Hill Road,
                                          Shaftsbury, VT 05262.
Town of Stamford.......................  Town Hall, 986 Main Road,
                                          Stamford, VT 05352.
Town of Sunderland.....................  Town Clerk's Office, 181 South
                                          Road, Sunderland, VT 05252.
Town of Winhall........................  Town Hall, 115 Vermont Route
                                          30, Bondville, VT 05340.
Town of Woodford.......................  Town Hall, 1391 Vermont Route
                                          9, Woodford, VT 05201.
Village of Manchester..................  Village Office, 45 Union
                                          Street, Manchester, VT 05254.
Village of North Bennington............  14 Prospect Street, North
                                          Bennington, VT 05257.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Dated: August 22, 2014.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2014-21546 Filed 9-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 24 (Wednesday, February 5, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6430-6431]
[FR Doc No: 2020-01300]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2019-0662; FRL-10004-63-Region 7]

Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Restriction of Emissions From Batch-
Type Charcoal Kilns

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a
Missouri State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision received on March 7,
2019. The submission revises a Missouri regulation that establishes
emission limits for batch-type charcoal kilns based on operational
parameters to reduce emissions of particulate matter (PM10),
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and carbon monoxide (CO).
Specifically, the revisions to the rule add definitions specific to the
rule, update references to test methods, remove unnecessary words,
remove an obsolete requirement which applied only during the phase-in
period of the rule that ended December 31, 2005, clarify a provision
for an alternative operating temperature, and make other minor edits.
These revisions are administrative in nature and do not impact the
stringency of the SIP or air quality. Approval of these revisions will
ensure consistency between State and federally-approved rules.

DATES: This final rule is effective on March 6, 2020.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2019-0662. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov or please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracey Casburn, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality and Planning Branch,
11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number (913)
551-7016; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On December 6, 2019, the EPA proposed approval to revise the SIP
revisions to a State rule that restricts emissions from batch-type
charcoal kilns in the Federal Register. See 84 FR 66853. The EPA
solicited comments on the proposed SIP revision and received no
comments.

II. What is being addressed in this document?

    The EPA is approving a request to revise the Missouri SIP received
on March 7, 2019. Missouri requested that the EPA approve revisions it
made to a State rule found at title 10, division 10 of the code of
state regulations--10 CSR 10-6.330 ``Restriction of Emissions from
Batch-Type Charcoal Kilns''. A detailed discussion of the submission,
and the EPA's review of it, was provided in the EPA's December 6, 2019,
notice of proposed rulemaking document published in the Federal
Register. See 84 FR 66853. The EPA received no comments during the
public comment period.

III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    The State submission met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission satisfied
the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The State
provided public notice of the revisions from August 1, 2018, to October
4, 2018, and held a public hearing on September 27, 2018. The State
received and addressed four comments. As explained in more detail in
the technical support document (TSD) which is part of this docket, the
SIP revision submission meets the substantive requirements of the Clean
Air Act (CAA), including section 110 and implementing regulations.

IV. What action is the EPA taking?

    The EPA is ammending the Missouri SIP by approving the State's
request to revise 10 CSR 10-6.330,''Restriction of Emissions From
Batch-Type Charcoal Kilns.'' Approval of these revisions will ensure
consistency between State and federally-approved rules. The EPA has
determined that these changes will not adversely impact air quality.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is approving regulatory text in an EPA
final rule that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with
the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is incorporating amendments to
40 CFR part 52 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov
and at the EPA Region 7 Office (please contact the person identified in
the ``For Further Information Contact'' section of this preamble for
more information).

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, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
if they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
     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 the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA) because this rulemaking does not
involve technical standards; 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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Particulate matter, Volatile organic
compounds.

    Dated: January 21, 2020.
James Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA is ammending 40 CFR
part 52 as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart AA--Missouri

0
2. In Sec.  52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry ``10-6.330'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1320  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                                            EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
        Missouri citation                 Title         effective date                     EPA approval date                           Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Missouri Department of Natural Resources
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Chapter 6--Air Quality Standards, Definitions, Sampling and Reference Methods, and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the State of Missouri
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
10-6.330.........................  Restiction of             3/30/2019  2/5/2020, [insert Federal Register citation]..........
                                    Emissions From
                                    Batch-type
                                    Charcoal Kilns.

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-01300 Filed 2-4-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 43 (Monday, March 8, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13256-13260]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03988]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2020-0732, FRL-10020-07-Region 10]

Air Plan Approval; WA; Regional Haze Best Available Retrofit
Technology Revision for TransAlta Centralia Generation Plant

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a source-specific State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) on
December 18, 2020. The SIP revision makes changes to nitrogen oxide
control requirements for the TransAlta Centralia Generation Plant
(TransAlta). These requirements were established in an order issued to
TransAlta by the state to satisfy the Clean Air Act Best Available
Retrofit Technology Requirements (BART) put in place by Congress to
reduce regional haze and restore visibility in national parks and
wilderness areas. The changes submitted by the state are intended to
improve the operation of pollution control equipment at TransAlta while
continuing to meet BART requirements.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 7, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2020-0732 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is

restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Hunt, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue--Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

I. Background

Visibility and Regional Haze

    Regional haze is air pollution that impairs visibility, including
visual range and/or colorization, across a broad geographic area. The
air pollution sources that contribute to regional haze include but are
not limited to: Industrial sources; cars, trucks and other mobile
sources; and area sources. These source categories emit fine
particulate matter (PM2.5), in addition to precursor gases
such as sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides
(NOX) that form secondary aerosols in the atmosphere.
Atmospheric sulfate, nitrate, organic carbon compounds, elemental
carbon, soil dust, and other compounds impair visibility by scattering
and absorbing light, and reduces clarity, color, and visual range of
visual scenes.

Clean Air Act Requirements

    In 1977, Congress added section 169A to the Clean Air Act (CAA or
Act) creating a program to protect visibility in the nation's national
parks and wilderness areas (Class I areas). This section of the CAA
establishes national visibility goals in Class I areas as those goals
relate to manmade air pollution. See CAA section 169A(a)(1). On
December 2, 1980, the EPA promulgated regulations to address visibility
impairment in Class I areas that is ``reasonably attributable'' to a
single source or small group of sources, i.e., ``reasonably
attributable visibility impairment'' (RAVI) (45 FR 80084). These RAVI
regulations represented the first phase in addressing visibility
impairment.
    In 1990, Congress added section 169B to the CAA to address regional
haze issues. The EPA promulgated a rule to implement this statutory
requirement on July 1, 1999 (64 FR 35713) (the Regional Haze Rule or
RHR). The RHR revised the existing visibility regulations to integrate
regional haze provisions and to establish a comprehensive visibility
protection program for Class I areas. The requirements for regional
haze, found at 40 CFR 51.308 and 51.309, are included in the EPA's
visibility protection regulations at 40 CFR part 51, subpart P, which
were most recently updated on January 10, 2017 (82 FR 3078).

Pollution Controls

    With respect to this proposed action, section 169A of the CAA
directs states to evaluate the use of retrofit controls at certain
larger, often uncontrolled, older stationary sources in order to
address visibility impacts from these sources. Specifically, section
169A(b)(2)(A) of the CAA requires states to revise their SIPs to
contain such measures as may be necessary to make reasonable progress
towards the natural visibility goal, including a requirement that
certain categories of existing major stationary sources built between
1962 and 1977 procure, install, and operate the ``Best Available
Retrofit Technology'' as determined by the state. States are directed
to conduct BART determinations for such sources that may be anticipated
to cause or contribute to any visibility impairment in a Class I area.
    To assist states in determining which sources are subject to BART
requirements and what emission limits are appropriate for each subject
source, the EPA published the Guidelines for BART Determinations Under
the Regional Haze Rule at Appendix Y to 40 CFR part 51 (hereinafter
referred to as ``BART Guidelines'') (70 FR 39104, July 6, 2005). In
making a BART applicability determination for existing sources (such as
TransAlta) that fall into certain categories, e.g., fossil fuel-fired
electric generating plants with total generating capacity in excess of
750 megawatts, a state must use the specified approach set forth in the
BART Guidelines. A state is encouraged, but not required, to follow the
BART Guidelines in making BART determinations for other types of
sources. Regardless of source size or type however, a state must meet
the CAA and regulatory requirements for selection of BART, and the
state's BART analysis and determination must be reasonable in light of
the overarching purpose of the regional haze program. States must
address all visibility impairing pollutants emitted by a source in the
BART determination process. The most significant visibility-impairing
pollutants are NOX, SO2, and particulate matter.
The regional haze SIP must include source-specific BART emission limits
and compliance schedules for each source subject to BART.

TransAlta Centralia Generation Plant

    TransAlta is a coal-fired electric generation plant located in
Centralia, Washington. The plant, which operates two identical coal-
fired utility steam generating units (BW21 and BW22), has a total
generating capacity in excess of 750 megawatts and is subject to CAA
BART requirements to control emissions of visibility-impairing
pollutants. On June 11, 2003, the EPA approved a revision to the
Washington SIP for visibility which included controls for
NOX, SO2, and particulate matter for TransAlta
(68 FR 34821). In the action, the EPA determined that the prescribed
controls satisfied BART requirements for both SO2 and
particulate matter. We note that the 2003 BART determinations for
SO2 and particulate matter are not at issue in this proposed
action, which focuses only on BART for NOX.
    In our 2003 action, the EPA determined that the NOX
controls established for TransAlta, while better than prior controls,
did not represent BART. Subsequently, Ecology issued an administrative
order to TransAlta that, among other things, established a NOx emission
limit of 0.24 pounds per million British thermal units (lb/MMBtu) on
the coal-fired units and coal quality requirements (June 18, 2010, BART
Order 6426). Ecology revised the June 18, 2010 BART Order 6426 on
December 13, 2011 (First Revised BART Order 6426), to incorporate
provisions of a 2011 Memorandum of Agreement (2011 MOA) between
TransAlta and the Governor of the State of Washington. The First
Revised BART Order 6426 and the 2011 MOA are included in the docket for
this action.
    The 2011 MOA was negotiated under the statutory provisions of
Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 80.80.100 and focused on greenhouse
gas emission performance standards.
    While the greenhouse gas performance standards are outside the
scope of the SIP (which is primarily focused on the control of criteria
pollutants such as particulate matter, NOX, and
SO2), several of the provisions negotiated the 2011 MOA were
incorporated into the First Revised BART Order 6426 because they
provide significant regional haze benefit.

Specifically, the First Revised BART Order 6426 required selective
noncatalytic reduction (SNCR) to be installed by January 1, 2013. The
First Revised BART Order 6426 also provided that one coal unit must
cease burning coal by December 31, 2020, and the other coal unit cease
burning coal by December 31, 2025, unless Ecology determines that state
or federal law requires selective catalytic reduction (SCR) to be
installed on either unit.\1\ Due to the installation of SNCR, among
other controls, Ecology's First Revised BART Order 6426 established a
more stringent NOX emission limit of 0.21 lb/MMBtu. Ecology
submitted the First Revised BART Order 6426 as a revision to the
regional haze SIP on December 29, 2011. On December 6, 2012, the EPA
approved Ecology's First Revised BART Order 6426 as meeting CAA BART
requirements for NOX control at TransAlta and approved this
order in the Washington SIP (77 FR 72742).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On December 31, 2020, as scheduled, TransAlta shut down and
ceased combustion of coal at BW21 (a.k.a. Unit #1). As noted by
TransAlta, BW21 is retired from service. See December 31, 2020 email
in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Electrostatic Precipitator Fouling and Installation of Combustion
Optimization System With Neural Network

    In January 2020, TransAlta requested a change to the First Revised
BART Order 6426 to mitigate fouling of the electrostatic precipitators
at the plant that are used to control particulate matter emissions.
TransAlta stated that the fouling was being caused by ammonia slip from
the SNCR used to control NOX emissions. In the submission
Ecology explained, ``In the summer of 2019, TransAlta experienced
emission opacity readings that would have exceeded the opacity limits
if TransAlta had not reduced plant capacity to compensate. During a
maintenance shut-down of the facility, the electrostatic precipitators
(ESPs) were examined. The ESPs had a visual fouling of all interior
components, which dramatically reduced their efficiency. Samples of the
material in the ESPs were analyzed and identified as ammonia sulfate.
The source of ammonia in the system was from the reactions of urea in
the SNCR system.''
    In coordination with Southwest Clean Air Agency (the local clean
air authority) and Ecology, TransAlta installed a computerized emission
control system called a Combustion Optimization System with Neural
Network program (Neural Net) to decrease the ammonia slip in the SNCR.
At the end of calendar year 2019, TransAlta had enough data to
demonstrate that use of the Neural Net system would enable TransAlta to
meet a more stringent 0.18 lb/MMBtu emission standard than the 0.21 lb/
MMBtu required under the First Revised BART Order 6426 for the unit
that remains operational after 2020 (BW21 ceased burning coal on
December 31, 2020 and is now retired from service. Therefore, this
requirement applies to the only remaining unit, BW22).

III. Summary of Revisions to the First Revised BART Order 6426

    In response to TransAlta's request, Ecology amended the First
Revised BART Order 6426 on July 29, 2020 in three primary ways: (1)
Reducing the NOX emission limit for the unit equipped with
the Neural Network (2) eliminating unnecessary requirements to prevent
further ESP fouling, and (3) revising the language to align with a 2017
amendment to the 2011 MOA signed between the Governor of Washington and
TransAlta. Because the Neural Net enables TransAlta to maintain a more
stringent NOX emission standard, Ecology eliminated several
requirements from the First Revised BART Order 6426 that were either no
longer necessary or were causing problems with the ESP control device.
Specifically, Ecology: (1) Removed the requirement of a specific urea
injection rate to allow TransAlta to inject urea as needed to meet the
new emission standard; (2) removed the requirement to analyze and
report nitrogen and sulfur coal content, or mandate a specific source
of coal, because the facility would have to meet NOX,
SO2, and particulate matter emission standards regardless of
the coal used, and (3) changed the requirement for ammonia emission
monitoring to require monitoring only when using a urea injection rate
of greater than 1.5 gallons per minute. Ecology retained the
requirement for TransAlta to determine compliance with the
NOX emission limitation by use of a continuous emission
monitoring system meeting the requirements of 40 CFR part 75. As
discussed further in this document, the EPA has reviewed these changes
and we have determined they are reasonable and consistent with BART and
other CAA requirements.
    Ecology also updated the First Revised BART Order 6426 to reflect a
July 13, 2017 amendment to the 2011 MOA signed between TransAlta and
the Governor, included in the docket for this action (2017 MOA). The
2017 amendment states that TransAlta shall, ``permanently cease coal-
fired power generation operations of one Boiler in 2020 and the other
Boiler in 2025, which dates are prior to the 2035 end of their expected
useful lives, in each case pursuant to the terms and subject to the
conditions of this MOA.'' This text is now mirrored in the Schedule for
Compliance section of the second revised BART Order 6426 (2020 BART
Order 6426). The 2017 MOA makes clear that TransAlta is not precluded
from the possibility of retrofitting the facility to natural gas, or
other non-coal energy source, as long as it meets the statutory
requirements of Chapter 80.80 RCW.

IV. Evaluation of the Washington SIP Submission

    EPA proposes to approve the 2020 BART Order 6426 as meeting BART
for NOX for TransAlta. The 2020 BART Order 6426 is
consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(e) and 40 CFR part
51, subpart Y. Specifically, Ecology either retained or strengthened
the NOX emissions limits. Ecology also justified the removal
of certain parametric monitoring and demonstrated that the 2020 BART
Order 6426 remains enforceable as a practical matter. Finally, the
revision to the Schedule for Compliance section does not substantively
change TransAlta's compliance obligations as compared to the First
Revised BART Order 6426. As with the First Revised BART Order 6426, the
2020 BART Order 6426 will have the practical effect of prohibiting coal
burning beyond the specified schedule.
    Regarding future repowering of TransAlta with fuels other than
coal, in the submission, Ecology stated with respect to regional haze
that, ``If TransAlta decides to switch to non-coal power generation, a
Notice of Construction application would need to be submitted to
Southwest Clean Air Agency by the company. Ecology would require the
company to do, at a minimum, emissions modeling that would be required
under the BART process to quantify the visibility impacts resulting
from the operation as a natural gas boiler plant (EGU). This is similar
to what we would require of a new power plant to determine if it meets
the requirements of WAC 173-400-117, special protection requirements
for federal Class I areas.'' Ecology further explained, ``Since
TransAlta has not requested repowering at this time, this issue will
not be addressed in this BART order revision.''
    The EPA agrees that any non-coal repowering, should TransAlta
submit a Notice of Construction application in the future, is outside
the scope of this current action focused on the improved

NOX controls. Any future ``new source'' as defined in the
SIP-approved provisions of Southwest Clean Air Agency (SWCAA) 400-
030(77), would need to meet all CAA requirements for protection of the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and regional haze.
Specifically, SWCAA 400-030(77) states:
    ``New source'' means one or more of the following:
    (a) The construction or modification of a ``stationary source''
that increases the amount of any air contaminant emitted by such
``stationary source'' or that results in the emission of any air
contaminant not previously emitted;
    (b) Any other project that constitutes a ``new source'' under the
Federal Clean Air Act;
    (c) Restart of a ``stationary source'' after permanent shutdown;
    (d) The installation or construction of a new ``emission unit'';
    (e) Relocation of a ``stationary source'' to a new location, except
in the case of portable sources operating under a valid permit as
provided in SWCAA 400-110(6);
    (f) Replacement or modification of the burner(s) in a combustion
source; or
    (g) Modification of a combustion source to fire a fuel that the
source was not previously capable of firing.
    Any ``new source'' as described by the requirements above would
require a separate action, subject to public participation
requirements, under the SIP-approved new source review permitting
provisions of SWCAA 400 or Chapter 173-400 Washington Administrative
Code (WAC) for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) provisions
implemented directly by Ecology.

V. Proposed Action

    The EPA proposes to approve and incorporate by reference into the
Washington SIP the 2020 BART Order 6426 for the TransAlta Centralia
Generation Plant, state effective July 29, 2020.\2\ The EPA is also
proposing to remove from incorporation by reference the First Revised
BART Order 6426 for the TransAlta Centralia Generation Plant, state
effective December 13, 2011.\3\ The EPA proposes to find that the
changes are designed to improve the operation of pollution controls at
the plant and are consistent with regional haze and other CAA
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In the Matter of an Administrative Order Against, TransAlta
Centralia Generation LLC, Second Revision: Order No. 6426, except
the undesignated introductory text, the section titled ``Findings,''
and the undesignated text following condition 9, state effective
July 29, 2020.
    \3\ In the Matter of an Administrative Order Against, TransAlta
Centralia Generation LLC, First Revision: Order No. 6426, except the
undesignated introductory text, the section titled ``Findings,'' and
the undesignated text following condition 13, state effective
December 13, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is proposing to include in a final rule,
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the 2020 BART Order 6246 to TransAlta Centralia Generation
Plant, state effective July 29, 2020, as described in Section III of
this preamble. Also, in this document, the EPA is proposing to remove,
in a final EPA rule, regulatory text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is
proposing to remove the incorporation by reference of the first revised
BART Order 6246 to TransAlta Centralia Generation Plant, state-
effective December 13, 2011, as described in Section V of this
preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available through https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region 10 Office (please contact the person identified in the For
Further Information Contact section of this preamble for more
information).

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting
federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     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 the requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide the 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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land in
Washington except as specifically noted below and is also not approved
to apply in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the proposed rule does not have tribal implications and will
not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November
9, 2000). Washington's SIP is approved to apply on non-trust land
within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation, also
known as the 1873 Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe of Indians
Settlement Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided
state and local agencies in Washington authority over activities on
non-trust lands within the 1873 Survey Area. Consistent with EPA
policy, the EPA provided a consultation opportunity to the Puyallup
Tribe, and other tribes located in Washington, in a letter dated
September 4, 2020.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: February 19, 2021.
Michelle L. Pirzadeh,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2021-03988 Filed 3-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 168 (Friday, August 29, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51484-51485]
[FR Doc No: 2014-20542]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0744]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Port Allen Canal, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
regulation governing the operation of the Union Pacific Railroad Bridge
across the Port Allen Canal, mile 8.7 (Gulf Intracoastal Canal, Morgan
City to Port Allen (Alternate Route), mile 56.0), near Morley, West
Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. This deviation allows the bridge to
remain closed to navigation for five hours on three consecutive days.
The deviation is necessary to conduct maintenance and install new track
panels on the bridge.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. on Tuesday September 9,
2014 through noon on Thursday, September 11, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2014-0744] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email David Frank, Bridge Administration
Branch, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Cheryl F. Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Union Pacific Railroad Company has
requested a temporary deviation in order to conduct maintenance and
install track panels on the Union Pacific Railroad Vertical Lift Span
Bridge across the Port Allen Canal, mile 8.7 (Gulf Intracoastal Canal,
Morgan City to Port Allen (Alternate Route), mile 56.0), near Morley,
West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. This temporary deviation will allow
the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position from 7 a.m.
to noon from Tuesday, September 9, 2014, until Thursday, September 11,
2014.
    The bridge has a vertical clearance of 7 feet above mean high water
in the closed-to-navigation position and 73 feet above mean high water
in the open-to-navigation position. Navigation on the waterway consists
mainly of tugs with tows. Alternate routes are not readily available.
The bridge owner can open the bridge in case of an emergency. The
repairs are necessary for continued safe operation of the draw span.
    Due to prior experience, as well as coordination with waterway
users, it has been determined that this closure will not have a
significant effect on these vessels.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35, the bridge must return to its
regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation.
    This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under
33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: August 18, 2014.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-20542 Filed 8-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9910-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 183 (Monday, September 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59301-59302]
[FR Doc No: 2020-20766]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC20-82-000.
    Applicants: Golden Fields Solar III, LLC.
    Description: Informational Submission to July 20, 2020 Application
for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act of Golden
Fields Solar III, LLC.
    Filed Date: 9/3/20.
    Accession Number: 20200903-5209.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER10-2906-015; ER10-2908-015; ER19-1716-003; ER11-
4393-009.
    Applicants: Morgan Stanley Capitol Group Inc., MS Solar Solutions
Corp., Morgan Stanley Energy Structuring, L.L.C, TAQA Gen X LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of the MS
Public Utilities, et al.
    Filed Date: 9/4/20.
    Accession Number: 20200904-5178.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/25/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1667-005.
    Applicants: Battery Utility of Ohio, LLC.
    Description: Market Power Update for the Northeast region of
Battery Utility of Ohio, LLC.
    Filed Date: 9/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200914-5159.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/13/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-105-005; ER17-104-005; ER17-556-004; ER15-
1019-007; ER10-1362-004; ER12-2639-009; ER20-1722-000; ER18-2158-001;
ER11-3959-008.
    Applicants: Broadview Energy JN, LLC, Broadview Energy KW, LLC,
Grady Wind Energy Center, LLC, Fowler Ridge IV Wind Farm LLC, Hatchet
Ridge Wind, LLC, Spring Valley Wind LLC, Ocotillo Express LLC, Lost
Creek Wind, LLC, Post Rock Wind Power Project, LLC, Stillwater Wind,
LLC.
    Description: Third Supplement to April 20, 2020 Notice of Change in
Status of the Pattern MBR Entities, et al.
    Filed Date: 9/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20200902-5299.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1593-001; ER20-2715-002; ER17-380-002; ER19-
997-002; ER16-2549-003.
    Applicants: Highlander Solar Energy Station 1, LLC, Stored Solar,
LLC, Stored Solar J&WE, LLC, Stored Solar Bethlehem, LLC, Stored Solar
Tamworth, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Highlander
Solar Energy Station 1, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 9/11/20.
    Accession Number: 20200911-5339.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1593-002.
    Applicants: Highlander Solar Energy Station 1, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: Highlander Solar Energy Station 1,
LLC--Market-Based Rate Tariff Update to be effective 9/15/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200914-5119.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/5/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1594-002.
    Applicants: Highlander IA, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Highlander IA, LLC--Market-Based
Rate Tariff Update to be effective 9/15/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200914-5120.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/5/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1596-002.
    Applicants: Pleinmont Solar 1, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Pleinmont Solar 1, LLC--Market-
Based Rate Tariff Update to be effective 9/15/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200914-5121.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/5/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1597-002.
    Applicants: Pleinmont Solar 2, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Pleinmont Solar 2, LLC--Market-
Based Rate Tariff Update to be effective 9/15/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200914-5123.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/5/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1599-002.
    Applicants: Richmond Spider Solar, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Richmond Spider Solar, LLC--Market-
Based Rate Tariff Update to be effective 9/15/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200914-5118.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/5/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1837-002
    Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, LLC, Duke Energy Progress, LLC,
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Second Amendment to Joint OATT
Order 864 Compliance Filing to be effective 1/27/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200914-5122.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/5/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2877-000.
    Applicants: Pinetree Power LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of Succession filing
to be effective 9/15/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200914-5124.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/5/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2878-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Wholesale Distribution
Tariff Rate Case 2020 (WDT3) to be effective 11/15/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200915-5001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2879-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Filing of Service Agreement
No. 887 to be effective 2/25/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200915-5002.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2880-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of Rate
Schedule FERC No. 258 to be effective 8/26/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200915-5003.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2881-000.
    Applicants: Harts Mill Solar, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market-Based
Rate Authority to be effective 11/14/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200915-5023.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2882-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to Attachment X to
Modify Credit Application to be effective 1/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 9/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200915-5026.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2883-000.
    Applicants: AES Laurel Mountain, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Reactive Power Compensation
Filing to be effective 11/14/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200915-5029.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2884-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2020-09-15_SA 3356 METC-
Isabella Renewables II 1st Rev GIA (J728) to be effective 8/31/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200915-5038.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2885-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: DEF-FPL Affected System
Study Agreement to be effective 9/14/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200915-5047.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2886-000.
    Applicants: Pinetree Power-Tamworth, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of succession filing
to be effective 9/16/2020.
    Filed Date: 9/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200915-5063.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/20.

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

    Dated: September 15, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-20766 Filed 9-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 226 (Friday, November 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 70159]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28402]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ID-7020-000]

Knueppel, Henry W.; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on November 15, 2012, Henry W. Knueppel submitted
for filing, an application for authority to hold interlocking
positions, pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, 16
U.S.C. 825d(b) (2008), Part 45 of Title 18 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, 18 CFR part 45(c)(2012).
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 6, 2012.

    Dated: November 16, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-28402 Filed 11-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 25, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 206)]
[Notices]
[Page 66128-66130]
[DOCID:fr25oc11-133]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0106; Notice 2]

CFMOTO Powersports, Inc., Denial of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Denial of petition for inconsequential noncompliance.

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

SUMMARY: CFMOTO Powersports, Inc. (CFMOTO),\1\ agent for the Chunfeng
Holding Group Hangshou Motorcycles Manufacturing Co., LTD. (formerly
known as Zhejiang CFMOTO Power Co., Ltd. (CHG)) has determined that
certain model year 2005-2009 CHG Model CF250T-3(V3) and CF250T-5(V5)
motorcycles that CFMOTO imported did not fully comply with paragraph
S5.2.1 of 49 CFR 571.123 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
No. 123, Motorcycle Controls and Displays. CFMOTO filed an appropriate
report, dated January 13, 2010, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Specifically, CFMOTO
estimated that approximately 6,405 model year 2005-2009 CHG model
CF250T-3(V3) and CF250T-5(V5) motorcycles, produced January 1, 2005,
through December 31, 2009 are affected (hereafter referred to as
``noncompliant vehicles'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ CFMOTO Powersports, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, is an
importer of motor vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h), and 49 CFR Part 556,
CFMOTO has petitioned for an exemption from the notification and remedy
requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act as
amended and rectified, 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Notice of
receipt of CFMOTO's petition was published, with a 30-day public
comment period, on August 10, 2010, in the Federal Register (75 FR
49020). No comments were received.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on CFMOTO's
petition or this decision, contact Mr. Stuart Seigel, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA), telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In October 2009, OVSC tested a model year
(MY) 2009 V3 CF250T to the performance requirements of FMVSS No. 122
Motorcycle Brakes at Transportation Research Center (VRTC) in East
Liberty, Ohio. At the conclusion of the testing,\2\ it was noted that
the vehicle appeared to not comply with S5.2.1 Control Location and
Operation requirements of FMVSS No. 123. Specifically, according to
Table 1 row 11 within that standard, the control for the rear wheel
brake must be a right foot control unless the vehicle is a motor-driven
cycle or a scooter with an automatic clutch in which case the left
handlebar actuator is to be used. As the vehicle was equipped with only
a left handlebar lever for rear brake actuation, but did not meet the
definition of a scooter, and with an advertised 14 horsepower motor,
did not meet the definition of a motor-driven cycle,\3\ a non-
compliance appeared to be present. NHTSA notified CFMOTO of the
apparent noncompliance in a letter dated December 4, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ NHTSA No. C91202.
    \3\ CFR 49 571.3--Motor-driven cycle means a motor cycle with a
motor that produces 5-brake horsepower or less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CFMOTO's Analysis of Noncompliance

    CFMOTO provided the following arguments to support its contention
that the subject noncompliance, (i.e., that the rear wheel brake
control is located on the left handlebar instead of a right foot
control as required by paragraph S5.2.1 FMVSS No. 123), is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety:

    The subject vehicles were manufactured and certified as scooters
by CHG. CHG believed that the vehicles met all of the requirements
for a scooter under FMVSS No. 123. As a result of the scooter
certification the rear wheel brake was placed on the left handlebar.
    The placement of the rear brake on the left handlebar should be
deemed by the NHTSA as an inconsequential noncompliance, based on
the history and safety records of the vehicles. No consumer
complaints and no warranty claims or incident reports have been
received by CFMOTO or CHG that relate to the lack of a right foot
actuated rear wheel brake.
    One of the main reasons consumers have been attracted to the
subject vehicles is that they have the appearance of a motorcycle
and the operation or function of a scooter. Aside from a lack of
pass-through leg area, the vehicles are scooters in all technical
respects. It is the scooter functionality that has been the driving
force behind consumer demand for the vehicles.
    Individuals with disabilities prefer the left hand rear brake
controls to those of a foot operated actuator. Similarly, many
consumers want to upgrade from a scooter to a ``motorcycle look''
without the complexities of operating a motorcycle and therefore
choose the subject vehicles.

    In summation, CFMOTO believes that the described noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Therefore, CFMOTO requests
that its petition, to exempt it from providing recall notification of
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.
    CFMOTO also stated that CHG has corrected the problem that caused
these errors so that they will not be repeated in future production.

NHTSA Decision

Background of the Requirements for a Motorcycle

    Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 123, Motorcycle

Controls and Displays, specifies requirements for the location,
operation, identification, and illumination of motorcycle controls and
displays. The purpose of FMVSS No. 123 is to minimize accidents caused
by operator error in responding to the motoring environment by
standardizing certain motorcycle controls and displays. Among other
requirements, FMVSS No. 123 (at S5.2.1, Table 1, Row 11) requires the
control for a motorcycle's rear wheel brakes to be operable by a right
foot control. However, if the motorcycle is a motor-driven cycle or a
scooter with an automatic clutch, the rear wheel brake control must be
located on the left handlebar. This requirement was delineated in a
Final Rule amending FMVSS No. 123 published in the Federal Register (70
FR 51286) on August 30, 2005. Additionally, this notice defined the
``scooter'' style motorcycle as (1) having a platform for the
operator's feet or has integrated footrests, and (2) has a step-through
architecture, meaning that the part of the vehicle forward of the
operator's seat and between the legs of an operator seated in the
riding position is lower than the operator's seat. NHTSA has
consistently held that standardization for motorcycle control locations
is critical to the safe operation of these vehicles. Specifically, in
order to lessen the risk of such crashes due to driver misapplication
or non-application of the rear wheel brake there is an expectation by
the operator that the control locations on a motorcycle with certain
design characteristics, such as a scooter or a step-over traditional
styled motorcycle, will for each style, be consistent from motorcycle
to motorcycle. In the absence of this uniformity, the operator is at
risk when operating a new or unfamiliar motorcycle.

NHTSA's Analysis of CFMOTO's Reasoning

    The subject vehicles were certified as scooter style motorcycles by
the CHG. CHG believed that the vehicles met all of the requirements for
a scooter under FMVSS No. 123.
    CHG made a fundamental error in concluding that the motorcycle was
a scooter. The subject CFMOTO motorcycles in question have body
cladding forward of the operators seat and have a similar step-over
body configuration as a traditional motorcycle. It is quite obvious
that the subject units do not have the step-thru architecture that is
required for a scooter designation. It is the responsibility of the
manufacturer to certify that the vehicles it manufacturers are
compliant with all applicable FMVSS's and part of that process is
ensuring that the vehicle is properly defined.
    We will now address CHG's assertion that the placement of the rear
brake on the left handlebar should be deemed by the NHTSA as an
inconsequential noncompliance, based on the history and safety records
of the vehicles. No consumer complaints and no warranty claims or
incident reports have been received by CFMOTO or CHG that relate to the
lack of a right foot actuated rear wheel brake.\4\ NHTSA notes however,
that the absence of this data does not necessarily indicate the lack of
a potential safety problem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ We note no such consumer complaints, warranty claims or
incident reports have been reported to NHTSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CHG asserted that one of the main reasons consumers have been
attracted to the subject vehicles is that they have the appearance of a
motorcycle and the operation or function of a scooter. CHG asserted
that aside from a lack of pass-through leg area, the vehicles are
scooters in all technical respects, and that it is the scooter
functionality that has been the driving force behind consumer demand
for the vehicles.
    In response, NHTSA notes that the subject vehicles have the
appearance of a motorcycle which we interpret the petitioner as meaning
the body styling of a traditional step-over motorcycle, yet the
operation or function of a scooter, which we additionally interpret to
mean automatic transmission and left handlebar brake and no right foot
rear brake actuator. Not having the appearance of a scooter is the
basis of the safety issue in question. A motorcycle that appears to be
of standard configuration would be expected by operators to also have
controls in the customary locations for a standard motorcycle. Thus, a
safety scenario could arise as the operator riding on what they
consider to be a standard motorcycle with commensurate standard control
locations, during a braking event, would attempt to apply the
traditional right foot brake lever when none was present, resulting in
diminished braking capability and possible loss of vehicle control.
CFMOTO has answered its own question as to why a motorcycle with a
certain configuration yet with unexpected operational control locations
presents a safety concern. Consequently, NHTSA is not persuaded by
CFMOTO'S argument.
    CFMOTO also asserted that individuals with disabilities prefer the
left hand rear brake controls to those of a foot operated actuator, and
that many consumers want to upgrade from a scooter to a motorcycle
without the complexities of operating a motorcycle and therefore choose
the subject vehicles.
    In response, NHTSA notes CFMOTO has provided no evidence backing
its assertion regarding consumer preference or marketing strategies.
However, if such consumer preference is true, the requirement for the
right foot rear wheel brake actuator does not preclude incorporation of
a supplemental left handlebar brake lever controlling the rear brake
wheel for the CFMOTO units. Per S5.2.1 of the standard, ``If a
motorcycle with an automatic clutch other than a scooter is equipped
with a supplemental rear brake control, the control shall be located on
the left handlebar.'' Thus the motorcycles in question can continue to
have the left hand brake lever provided the right foot lever is
provided.

NHTSA Conclusions

    The subject noncompliant vehicles do not qualify as either ``motor-
driven cycle'' type or ``scooter'' style motorcycle. Because the
noncompliant vehicles clearly do not resemble scooters or motor-driven
cycles, an operator will very likely expect the motorcycle to be of
traditional design with controls traditionally located as well. In the
absence of the right foot brake lever, the operator will be precluded
from the right foot rear wheel brake application thereby possibly
increasing stopping distance and the likelihood of loss of vehicle
control.
    Lastly, CFMOTO has not produced any data to support its contention
that the noncompliance does not present a significant safety risk.

Decision

    After a review of CFMOTO's arguments and the final rule preamble
language, NHTSA concludes that CFMOTO has not met its burden of
demonstrating that the noncompliance does not present a significant
safety risk. Therefore, NHTSA does not agree with CFMOTO that this
specific noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that the
petitioner has not met its burden of persuasion that the noncompliances
described are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly,
CFMOTO's petition is hereby denied, and the petitioner must notify
owners, purchasers and dealers pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118 and provide
a remedy in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30120.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: October 19, 2011.
Claude H. Harris,
Acting Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2011-27565 Filed 10-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: May 27, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 102)]
[Notices]
[Page 30413]
[DOCID:fr27my08-78]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1755-DR]

Maine; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Maine (FEMA-1755-DR), dated May 9, 2008, and
related determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 9, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated May 9, 2008, the President declared a major disaster under the
authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Maine resulting from severe storms and flooding beginning on
April 28, 2008, and continuing, is of sufficient severity and
magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.
Sec. Sec.  5121-5206 (the Stafford Act). Therefore, I declare that
such a major disaster exists in the State of Maine.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance in the
designated areas, Hazard Mitigation throughout the State, and any
other forms of assistance under the Stafford Act that you deem
appropriate. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance
be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act
for Hazard Mitigation and Other Needs Assistance will be limited to
75 percent of the total eligible costs. If Public Assistance is
later requested and warranted, Federal funds provided under that
program also will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible
costs, except for any particular projects that are eligible for a
higher Federal cost-sharing percentage under the FEMA Public
Assistance Pilot Program instituted pursuant to 6 U.S.C. 777.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The time period prescribed for the implementation of section
310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public
Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed
six months after the date of this declaration.
    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Phillip E. Parr, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this declared
disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Maine have been designated as
adversely affected by this declared major disaster:

    Aroostook County for Individual Assistance.
    All counties within the State of Maine are eligible to apply for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

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

R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
 [FR Doc. E8-11689 Filed 5-23-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P


Supporting Statement

for

Plan Approval and Records for Vital System Automation

OMB No.: 1625-0047

COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS:  Instruction

A.  Justification

1.  Circumstances which make the collection of information necessary.

(a)  The collection of information pertaining to the vital automation
systems of commercial vessels is necessary to protect personnel and
property on board U.S. flag commercial vessels.  The vital systems in
machinery and engineering spaces of Coast Guard inspected commercial
vessels are automated for a variety of reasons.  These reasons include
convenience of operation, improvements of efficiency, reduction of
personnel, and the detection and control of unsafe conditions.  Most
automation is implemented at the discretion of the vessel owner to
reduce necessary manning and increase operating efficiency, thereby
significantly reducing operating costs.

(b)  The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) currently addresses the
technical criteria for the safe and reliable automation of these
vessels—see 46 CFR Parts 61 and 62.  The statutory authority for the
requirements is 46 U.S.C. 3306.  These regulations also ensure that U.S.
flag vessels conform to the automation regulations of the International
Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea.  The U.S. is signatory to this
convention.

This information collection supports the following strategic goals:

Department of Homeland Security

Prevention

Coast Guard

Maritime Safety

Prevention Policy & Response Policy Directorates (CG-5P & CG-5R)

Reduce crewmember deaths and injuries on U.S. commercial vessels

Reduce the number of collisions, allisions, and groundings

2.  Purpose of the information collection.

This information, which is collected by the Coast Guard, is used to
determine compliance with safety regulations.  Through the review of the
plans prior to construction, the vessel owner or builder may be assured
that the vessel, if built in accordance with the plans, will meet the
regulatory standards.

3.  Considerations of the use of improved technology.

The Coast Guard Marine Safety Center (MSC) accepts information/plans via
electronic submittal.  For information on submitting information go
to—   HYPERLINK "https://homeport.uscg.mil/msc"
https://homeport.uscg.mil/msc  > Contact Us > Mail Address, Telephone
Contacts, and E-Commerce Info.  Information may also be submitted to the
CG Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) at the local Sector
Office.  Contact info for CG OCMIs can be found at—  HYPERLINK
"http://www.uscg.mil/top/units/"  http://www.uscg.mil/top/units/ .
Electronic submission is voluntary, and we estimate that 86% of
respondents submit their plans electronically.

4.  Efforts to identify duplication.

There are no other Federal agencies with similar programs, thus there is
no duplication of other Federal information collections.

5.  Methods used to minimize the burdens to small business if involved.

This information collection does not have an impact on small businesses
or other small entities.

6.  Consequences to the Federal program if collection were conducted
less frequently.

If this information were not collected, the Coast Guard would not be
able to carry out its responsibility for the promotion of safety on
commercial vessels.  The information cannot be collected any less
frequently, as the information is submitted when the owner seeks Coast
Guard approval of automation installations or changes in vessel manning.

7.  Special collection circumstances.

This information collection is conducted in a manner consistent with the
guidelines in 5 CFR 1320(d)(2).

8.  Consultation.

A 60-day Notice will be published in the Federal Register to obtain
public comment on this collection.

9.  Provide any payments or gifts to respondents.

The Coast Guard does not provide payment of gifts to respondents in
exchange for a benefit sought.

10.  Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents.

There are no assurances of confidentiality provided to the respondents
for this information collection.

11.  Additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature.

There are no questions of sensitive language.

12.  Estimate of annual hour and cost burdens to respondents.

The estimates number of annual respondents is 96.

The estimated number of annual responses is 620.

The estimated annual hour burden is 46,500 hours.

The estimated annual cost burden is $3,999,000.

The burden to respondents is provided in Appendix A.  We estimate that
it takes 75 hours per plan submission and that a submission is done by a
technical specialist.  The position of a technical specialist is
equivalent to a GS-13.  The wage rate used is in accordance with the
current edition of COMDTINST 7310.1(series) for “Out-Government”
personnel.

13.  Total of annualized capital and start-up costs.

There are no recordkeeping, capital, start-up or maintenance costs
associated with this information collection.

14.  Estimates of annualized Federal Government costs.

The estimated annual Federal Government cost is $99,200 (see Appendix
B).  We estimate that it will take 2 hours by a GS-13 to review and
process each submission.  The wage rate shown is in accordance with the
current edition of COMDTINST 7310.1(series) for “In-Government”
personnel.

15.  Explain the reasons for change in burden.

The change in burden is an ADJUSTMENT due to a change (i.e., increase)
in the estimated annual number of responses.  There is no proposed
change to the reporting requirements of this collection.  The reporting
requirements, and the methodology for calculating burden, remain
unchanged.

16.  Plans for tabulation, statistical analysis and publication.

This information collection will not be published for statistical
purposes.

17.  Approval for not explaining the expiration date for OMB approval.

The Coast Guard will display the expiration date for OMB approval of
this information collection.

18.  Exception to the certification statement.

The Coast Guard does not request an exception to the certification of
this information collection.

B.  Collection of Information Employing Statistical Methods

This information collection does not employ statistical methods.

  Plan submission is not an annual requirement.  A plan submission is
only required for ship construction or modification.

1625-0047

  PAGE  3  of   NUMPAGES  3


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 30 (Wednesday, February 15, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 10766]
[FR Doc No: 2017-03003]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

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

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1429-005.
    Applicants: Emera Maine.
    Description: Compliance filing: Refund Report--ER12-1650 & ER15-
1429 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 2/9/17.
    Accession Number: 20170209-5010.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/2/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-947-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to ISA No. 690,
Queue No. D07 to be effective 4/2/2002.
    Filed Date: 2/8/17.
    Accession Number: 20170208-5033.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/1/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-948-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original Service Agreement
No. 4615; Queue No. AB1-138 to be effective 1/9/2017.
    Filed Date: 2/8/17.
    Accession Number: 20170208-5037.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/1/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-949-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2017-02-08 Metering Rules
Enhancements Amendment to be effective 4/10/2017.
    Filed Date: 2/8/17.
    Accession Number: 20170208-5038.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/1/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-950-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to OATT Schedule
12--Appdx and Appdx A re: ConEd Wheeling Termination to be effective 5/
1/2017.
    Filed Date: 2/8/17.
    Accession Number: 20170208-5040.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/1/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-951-000.
    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: FPL and JEA Agreement for
Preliminary Engineering Design, et al., for Oneil-Nass to be effective
2/9/2017.
    Filed Date: 2/9/17.
    Accession Number: 20170209-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/2/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-952-000.
    Applicants: Delmarva Power & Light Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Construction Agreement with
DMEC to be effective 2/9/2017.
    Filed Date: 2/9/17.
    Accession Number: 20170209-5001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/2/17.

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

    Dated: February 9, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-03003 Filed 2-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P