[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 100 (Thursday, May 23, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30830-30839]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12215]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2009-0810; FRL-9816-4]

Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions;
Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards; Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Requirements for PM2.5 Increments and Major and Minor Source Baseline
Dates; Colorado

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submissions from the State of Colorado to demonstrate that the
SIP meets the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) promulgated for
particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers ([mu]m) in
diameter (PM2.5) on July 18, 1997 and on October 17, 2006.
The CAA requires that each state, after a new or revised NAAQS is
promulgated, review their SIP to ensure that they meet the requirements
of the ``infrastructure elements'' necessary to implement the new or
revised NAAQS. Colorado submitted certifications of its infrastructure
SIP for the 1997 and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS on April 4, 2008
and on June 4, 2010, respectively. Colorado also submitted revisions to
Regulation 3 of the Air Quality Control Commission permitting
requirements for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
program on May 11, 2012 and May 13, 2013 that incorporate the required
elements of the 2008 PM2.5 Implementation Rule and the 2010
PM2.5 Increment Rule. EPA proposes to approve portions of
these two SIP revisions that bring Colorado's PSD regulations up to
date for regulated pollutants. EPA does not propose to act on the
portions of the submission for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS that are
intended to meet requirements related to interstate transport of air
pollution. EPA will act on the remainder of the submissions in a
separate action.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 24, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2009-0810, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> (please alert the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
     Mail: Director, Air Program, Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202-1129.
     Hand Delivery: Director, Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop
Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only accepted
Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal
holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-
2009-0810. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA, without going through www.regulations.gov your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. For additional
instructions on submitting comments, go to section I, General
Information, of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy
of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding
federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy Ayala, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado

80202-1129,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Definitions

    For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain
words or initials as follows:

(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air
Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The initials APCD mean or refer to the Air Pollution Control
Division.
(iii) The initials APENs mean or refer to Air Pollution Emission
Notices.
(iv) The initials APPCA mean or refer to the Air Pollution Prevention
and Control Act.
(v) The initials AQCC mean or refer to the Air Quality Control
Commission.
(vi) The initials CBI mean or refer to confidential business
information.
(vii) The initials CFC mean or refer to chlorofluorocarbons.
(viii) The initials CRS mean or refer to Colorado Revised Statutes.
(ix) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
(x) The initials FIP mean or refer to a Federal Implementation Plan.
(xi) The initials GHG mean or refer to greenhouse gases.
(xii) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to national ambient air quality
standards.
(xiii) The initials NOX mean or refer to nitrogen oxides.
(xiv) The initials NNSR mean or refer to nonattainment new source
review.
(xv) The initials NSR mean or refer to new source review.
(xvi) The initials PM mean or refer to particulate matter.
(xvii) The initials PM2.5 mean or refer to particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than 2.5 micrometers (fine particulate
matter).
(xviii) The initials PM10 mean or refer to particulate
matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 micrometers (course
particulate matter).
(xix) The initials ppm mean or refer to parts per million.
(xx) The initials PSD mean or refer to Prevention of Significant
Deterioration.
(xxi) The initials SIL mean or refer to Significant Impact Levels.
(xxii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
(xxiii) The initials SSM mean or refer to start-up, shutdown, or
malfunction.
(xxiv) The initials SMC mean or refer to Significant Monitoring
Concentrations.
(xxv) The initials VOC mean or refer to volatile organic compounds.

Table of Contents

I. General Information
II. Background
III. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
IV. What infrastructure elements are required under sections
110(a)(1) and (2)?
V. How did Colorado address the infrastructure elements of sections
110(a)(1) and (2)?
VI. What action is EPA taking?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. General Information

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

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

II. Background

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated new NAAQS for PM2.5.
Two new PM2.5 standards were added, set at 15 [mu]g/m\3\,
based on the three-year average of annual arithmetic mean
PM2.5 concentration from single or multiple community-
oriented monitors, and 65 [mu]g/m\3\, based on the three-year average
of the 98th percentile of 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations at
each population-oriented monitor within an area. In addition, the 24-
hour PM2.5 standard was revised to be based on the 99th
percentile of 24-hour PM10 concentration at each monitor
within an area (62 FR 38652).
    On October 17, 2006 EPA promulgated a revised NAAQS for
PM2.5, tightening the level of the 24-hour PM2.5
standard to 35 [mu]g/m\3\ and retaining the level of the annual
PM2.5 standard at 15 [mu]g/m\3\. EPA also retained the 24-
hour PM10 and revoked the annual PM10 standard
(71 FR 61144). By statute, SIPs meeting the requirements of sections
110(a)(1) and (2) are to be submitted by states within three years
after promulgation of a new or revised standard. Section 110(a)(2)
provides basic requirements for SIPs, including emissions inventories,
monitoring, and modeling, to assure attainment and maintenance of the
standards. These requirements are set out in several ``infrastructure
elements,'' listed in section 110(a)(2).
    Section 110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP
submission to EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, and the contents of that
submission may vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In
particular, the data and analytical tools available at the time the
state develops and submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects
the content of the submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may
also vary depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP
already contains. In the case of the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS, states typically have met the basic program elements required in
section 110(a)(2) through earlier SIP submissions in connection with
previous NAAQS.

III. What is the scope of this rulemaking?

    This rulemaking will not cover four substantive issues that are not
integral to acting on a state's infrastructure SIP submission: (1)
Existing provisions related to excess emissions during periods of
start-up, shutdown, or malfunction at sources, that may be contrary to
the CAA and EPA's policies addressing such excess emissions (``SSM'');
(2) existing provisions related to ``director's variance'' or
``director's discretion'' that purport to permit revisions to SIP
approved emissions

limits with limited public process or without requiring further
approval by EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA (``director's
discretion''); (3) existing provisions for minor source new source
review (NSR) programs that may be inconsistent with the requirements of
the CAA and EPA's regulations that pertain to such programs (``minor
source NSR''); and (4) existing provisions for prevention of
significant deterioration (PSD) programs that may be inconsistent with
current requirements of EPA's ``Final NSR Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR
80186 (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007)
(``NSR Reform''). Instead, EPA has indicated that it has other
authority to address any such existing SIP defects in other
rulemakings, as appropriate. A detailed rationale for why these four
substantive issues are not part of the scope of infrastructure SIP
rulemakings can be found in EPA's July 13, 2011, final rule entitled,
``Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' in the
section entitled, ``What is the scope of this final rulemaking?'' (see
76 FR 41075 at 41076-41079).

IV. What infrastructure elements are required under sections 110(a)(1)
and (2)?

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

V. How did Colorado address the infrastructure elements of sections
110(a)(1) and (2)?

    1. Emission limits and other control measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A)
requires SIPs to include enforceable emission limitations and other
control measures, means, or techniques (including economic incentives
such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions rights), as
well as schedules and timetables for compliance as may be necessary or
appropriate to meet the applicable requirements of this Act.
    a. Colorado's response to this requirement: Enforceable limitations
and control measures are detailed in the various Air Quality Control
Commission (AQCC) regulations for all sources of criteria pollutants as
well as hazardous air pollutants, volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), smoke and odors. A summary of the
regulations which the State submitted as relevant to this element can
be found within the State's certification documents dated April 4, 2008
and June 4, 2010 which are included in the docket prepared for public
review.
    b. EPA analysis: Colorado's SIP meets the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(A), subject to the following clarifications. First,
EPA does not consider SIP requirements triggered by the nonattainment
area mandates in part D of Title I of the CAA to be governed by the
submission deadline of section 110(a)(1). Nevertheless, Colorado has
included some SIP provisions originally submitted in response to part D
requirements in its certification for the infrastructure requirements
of section 110(a)(2). In general, those provisions addressed ozone non-
attainment in the Denver metropolitan area and are not relevant to
implementation of the 1997 or 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Colorado
also referenced SIP provisions that are relevant, such as limits on
emissions of particulate matter in Regulation 1, woodburning controls
in Regulation 4, and the State's minor NSR and PSD programs in
Regulation 3. We propose to find these provisions adequately address
the requirements of element (A), again subject to the clarifications
made in this notice.
    Second, in this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or
disapprove any existing state rules with regard to director's
discretion or variance provisions. A number of states have such
provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance (52
FR 45109, November 24, 1987), and the Agency plans to take action in
the future to address such state regulations. In the meantime, EPA
encourages any state having a director's discretion or variance
provision which is contrary to the CAA and EPA guidance to take steps
to correct the deficiency as soon as possible.
    Finally, in this action, EPA is also not proposing to approve or
disapprove any existing state provision with regard to excess emissions
during startup, shutdown, or malfunction (SSM) or operations at a
facility. A number of states have SSM provisions which are contrary to
the CAA and existing EPA guidance \1\ and the Agency is addressing such
state regulations separately (78 FR 12460, February 22, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Steven Herman, Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance, and Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation, Memorandum to EPA Air Division Directors,
``State Implementation Plans (SIPs): Policy Regarding Emissions
During Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown.'' (Sept. 20, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Ambient air quality monitoring/data system: Section 110(a)(2)(B)
requires SIPs to provide for establishment and operation of appropriate
devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to ``(i) monitor,
compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii) upon
request, make such data available to the Administrator.''
    a. Colorado's response to this requirement: The provisions for
episode monitoring, data compilation and

reporting, public availability of information, and annual network
reviews are found in the statewide monitoring SIP which was approved by
EPA on July 9, 1980 (45 FR 46073) and August 11, 1980 (45 FR 53147).
The State has since revised the monitoring SIP to include all new
federal requirements. The revised SIP includes a commitment to operate
a particulate monitoring network in accordance with EPA regulations (40
CFR 58.20 and appendices A through G). The AQCC adopted monitoring SIP
revisions on March 18, 1993.
    As part of the monitoring SIP, Colorado submits a Colorado Annual
Network Monitoring Plan (ANMP) each year for EPA approval. The ANMP
details monitoring locations for all criteria pollutants, including
PM2.5, and lists the quality assurance accuracy audits and
precision check methods performed for each monitor. The Colorado APCD
periodically submits a Quality Management Plan and a Quality Assurance
Project Plan to EPA Region 8. These plans cover procedures to monitor,
analyze data and report data to an EPA central database. The State of
Colorado has an approved monitoring SIP, a plan and authority for
monitoring, and the ability to properly handle all related data.
    b. EPA analysis: Colorado's air monitoring programs and data
systems meet the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(B) for the 1997
and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. The Colorado 2011 ANMP was approved by
EPA Region 8 on September 20, 2011.
    3. Program for enforcement of control measures: Section
110(a)(2)(C) requires SIPs to include a program to provide for the
enforcement of the measures described in subparagraph (A), and
regulation of the modification and construction of any stationary
source within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that
NAAQS are achieved, including a permit program as required in parts C
and D.
    a. Colorado's response to this requirement: Colorado has an
approved SIP regulating the construction and modification of stationary
sources as necessary to assure the NAAQS are achieved (AQCC Regulation
3), including a permit program as required in parts C and D of the
federal CAA. Colorado has an approved SIP which provides for the
enforcement of the control measures required by CAA section
110(a)(2)(C).
    Many of the AQCC regulations address in some manner the programs
for enforcement of control measures. Some of these AQCC regulations and
other relevant Colorado-specific programs that are in the SIP are
described below.
    Regulation 1, Particulates, Smokes, Carbon Monoxide, and Sulfur
Dioxides--Regulation 1 sets forth emissions limitations, equipment
requirements, and work practices (abatement and control measures)
intended to control the emissions of particulates, smoke, and sulfur
oxides from new and existing stationary sources. Control measures
specified in this regulation are designed to limit emissions into the
atmosphere and thereby minimize the ambient concentrations of
particulates and sulfur dioxides.
    Regulation 3, Stationary Source Permitting and Air Pollution
Emission Notice Requirements--Regulation 3 provides for a procedural
permitting program and requires air pollution sources to file Air
Pollution Emissions Notices (APENs). The regulation also requires new
or modified sources of air pollution, with certain exemptions, to
obtain preconstruction permits.
    Regulation 3 has been revised to incorporate PM2.5
emissions, requiring major sources in the State to be subject to PSD
and NSR permitting thresholds for PM2.5 at the same level as
PM10. On May 11, 2012, Colorado submitted a revision to
incorporate the 2008 PM2.5 Implementation rule (73 FR 28321,
May 16, 2008) and the 2010 PM2.5 Increment rule (75 FR
64864, October 20, 2010). Specifically, the AQCC adopted revisions to
incorporate significant emission rates for PM2.5 emissions,
including PM2.5 precursors (sulfur dioxide and nitrogen
oxides, and condensable particulate matter), PM2.5
increments, the definitions of major and minor source baseline dates
and baseline area.
    Regulation 3 also was revised in 2008 to address ozone formation in
the Denver Metro Area/North Front Range Ozone nonattainment area.
Specifically, the AQCC adopted revisions to control and reduce ozone
precursor emissions. The revisions are part of the federally-
enforceable SIP to help Colorado make progress toward eventual
compliance with the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
    Regulation 4, Woodburning Controls--Regulation 4 requires new
woodstove and fireplace inserts to meet the federal certification
requirements in specified areas of Colorado.
    Regulation 7, Volatile Organic Compound Control--Regulation 7
controls the emissions of VOCs, primarily in the Denver-metro area. It
sets standards and mandates control for specific types of VOC sources.
In 2008 Regulation 7 was revised to increase control requirements for
oil and gas condensate tanks, glycol dehydrators, and reciprocating
internal combustion engines. These revisions were made as part of the
State's Ozone SIP.
    Regulation 11, Motor Vehicle Inspection--Regulation 11 requires
automobile emission inspection and maintenance programs to be
implemented in specified areas of the state for gasoline powered on-
road vehicles. These programs apply to businesses, industry, and the
general public. In addition, the State's Automobile Inspection and
Readjustment (AIR) program's purpose is to reduce motor vehicle related
pollution through the inspection and emissions related repair of
automobiles. The program as defined in Regulation 11, works in specific
areas of the state, and requires motor vehicles to meet emission
standards through periodic inspection and, as necessary, repair.
    Regulation 16, Street Sanding and Sweeping--Regulation 16 sets
specification standards for street sanding material and street sweeping
practices in the area covered by the AIR program and Denver-metro
particulate attainment/maintenance area.
    Common Provisions Regulation--The Colorado APCD may require owners
and operators of stationary air pollution sources to install, maintain,
and use instrumentation to monitor and record emission data as a basis
for periodic reports to the Division under the provisions of the AQCC
Common Provisions regulation.
    b. EPA analysis: To generally meet the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C), the State is required to have SIP-approved PSD,
nonattainment NSR, and minor NSR permitting programs adequate to
implement the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. As explained above,
in this action EPA is not evaluating nonattainment related provisions,
such as the nonattainment NSR program required by part D of the Act.
EPA is evaluating the State's PSD program as required by part C of the
Act, and the State's minor NSR program as required by 110(a)(2)(C).

PSD Requirements

    Colorado has a SIP-approved PSD program that meets the general
requirements of part C of the Act (51 FR 31125). To satisfy the
particular requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C), states should have a
PSD program that applies to all regulated NSR pollutants, including
greenhouse gases (GHGs). See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48) and (b)(49). The PSD
program should reflect current requirements for these pollutants. In
particular, for three pollutants--ozone, PM2.5, and GHGs--
there are additional

regulatory requirements (set out in portions of 40 CFR 51.166) that we
consider in evaluating Colorado's PSD program.
    On January 9, 2012 (77 FR 1027), we approved a revision to the
Colorado PSD program that addressed the PSD requirements of the Phase 2
Ozone Implementation Rule promulgated in 2005 (70 FR 71612). As a
result, the approved Colorado PSD program meets current requirements
for ozone.
    We evaluate PSD Requirements for GHGs. In EPA's rule, ``Limitation
of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions
Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State Implementation
Plans'' (``PSD SIP Narrowing Rule''), (75 FR 82536, December 30, 2010),
EPA withdrew its previous approval of Colorado's PSD program to the
extent that it applied PSD permitting to GHG emissions increases from
GHG-emitting sources below thresholds set in EPA's June 3, 2010
``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas
Tailoring Rule'' (``Tailoring Rule''), 75 FR 31514. EPA withdrew its
approval on the basis that the State lacked sufficient resources to
issue PSD permits to such sources at the statutory thresholds in effect
in the previously-approved PSD program. After the PSD SIP Narrowing
Rule, the portion of Colorado's PSD SIP from which EPA withdrew its
approval had the status of having been submitted to EPA but not yet
acted upon. In its April 4, 2008 and June 4, 2010 infrastructure
certifications, Colorado relied upon its PSD program as approved at
that date--which was before December 30, 2010, the effective date of
the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule--to satisfy the requirements of
infrastructure element 110(a)(2)(C). In a letter dated May 10, 2011,
the State clarified its certifications to make clear that the State
relies only on the portion of the PSD program that remains approved
after the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule issued on December 30, 2010, and for
which the State has sufficient resources to implement. As a result,
Colorado's PSD program as approved in the SIP meets current
requirements for GHGs.
    Finally, we evaluate the PSD program with respect to current
requirements for PM2.5. In particular, on May 16, 2008, EPA
promulgated the rule, ``Implementation of the New Source Review Program
for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5) and
on October 20, 2010 EPA promulgated the rule, ``Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
Micrometers (PM2.5)--Increments, Significant Impact Levels
(SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC)'' (75 FR 64864).
EPA regards adoption of these PM2.5 rules as a necessary
requirement when assessing a PSD program for the purposes of element
(C).
    On January 4, 2013,the U.S. Court of Appeals, in Natural Resources
Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (DC Cir.), issued a judgment that
remanded the EPA's 2007 and 2008 rules implementing the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS. The Court ordered the EPA to ``repromulgate
these rules pursuant to Subpart 4 consistent with this opinion.'' Id.
at 437. Subpart 4 of part D, Title 1 of the CAA establishes additional
provisions for particulate matter nonattainment areas.
    The 2008 implementation rule addressed by the court decision,
``Implementation of New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate
Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5),'' (73 FR 28321,
May 16, 2008), promulgated New Source Review (NSR) requirements for
implementation of PM2.5 in nonattainment areas
(nonattainment NSR) and attainment/unclassifiable areas (PSD). As the
requirements of subpart 4 only pertain to nonattainment areas, the EPA
does not consider the portions of the 2008 Implementation rule that
address requirements for PM2.5 attainment and unclassifiable
areas to be affected by the Court's opinion. Moreover, the EPA does not
anticipate the need to revise any PSD requirements promulgated in the
2008 Implementation rule in order to comply with the Court's decision.
Accordingly, the EPA's approval of Colorado's infrastructure SIP as to
elements (C) or (J) with respect to the PSD requirements promulgated by
the 2008 Implementation rule does not conflict with the Court's
opinion.
    The Court's decision with respect to the nonattainment NSR
requirements promulgated by the 2008 Implementation rule also does not
affect the EPA's action on the present infrastructure action. The EPA
interprets the Act to exclude nonattainment area requirements,
including requirements associated with a nonattainment NSR program,
from infrastructure SIP submissions due 3 years after adoption or
revision of a NAAQS. Instead, these elements are typically referred to
as nonattainment SIP or attainment plan elements, which would be due by
the dates statutorily prescribed under subpart 2 through 5 under part
D, extending as far as 10 years following designations for some
elements.
    The second PSD requirement for PM2.5 is contained in
EPA's October 20, 2010 rule, ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers
(PM2.5)--Increments, Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and
Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC)'' (75 FR 64864). EPA regards
adoption of the PM2.5 increments as a necessary requirement
when assessing a PSD program for the purposes of element (C).
    On May 11, 2012, the State submitted revisions to Regulation 3 that
adopted all elements of the 2008 Implementation Rule and the 2010
PM2.5 Increment Rule. However, the submittal contained a
definition of Major Source Baseline Date which was inconsistent with 40
CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i). On May 13, 2013, the State submitted revisions to
Regulation 3 which incorporate the definition of Major Source Baseline
Date which was consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i). These submitted
revisions make Colorado's PSD program up to date with respect to
current requirements for PM2.5. We propose to approve the
necessary portions of Colorado's May 11, 2012 and May 13, 2013
submissions to reflect the 2008 PM2.5 Implementation Rule
and the 2010 PM2.5 Increment Rule; specifically 40 CFR part
166, paragraphs (b)(14)(i), (ii), (iii), (b)(15)(i), (ii), (b)(23)(i),
(b)(49)(i), (vi), and paragraph (c)(1). Specifically, EPA is proposing
to approve revisions to: Part D, sections II.A.5.a and b, II.A.23.a and
b, II.A.25.a.(i), (a).(ii), (a).(iii), and (b).(i), II.A.38.c and g,
II.A.42.a. and X.A.1. as submitted on May 11, 2012, and revisions to
II.A.23.c, as submitted on May 13, 2013. We are not proposing to act on
any other portions of the May 11, 2012 submittal, including the
adoption of significant impact levels (SILs) and significant monitoring
concentrations (SMCs) for PM2.5.
    With these revisions, Colorado's SIP-approved PSD program will meet
current requirements for PM2.5. As a result, EPA is
proposing to approve Colorado's infrastructure SIP for the 1997 and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to the requirement in section
110(a)(2)(C) to include a permit program in the SIP as required by part
C of the Act.

Minor NSR

    The State has a SIP-approved minor NSR program, adopted under
section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act. The minor NSR program is found in
Section II of the Colorado SIP, and was originally approved by EPA as
Section 2 of the SIP (see 68 FR 37744, June 25, 2003). Since approval
of the minor NSR program, the State and EPA have relied on the program
to assure that new and

modified sources not captured by the major NSR permitting programs do
not interfere with attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.
    In this action, EPA is proposing to approve Colorado's
infrastructure SIP for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS with
respect to the general requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a
program in the SIP that regulates the modification and construction of
any stationary source as necessary to assure that the NAAQS are
achieved. EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove the State's
existing minor NSR program itself to the extent that it is inconsistent
with EPA's regulations governing this program. A number of states may
have minor NSR provisions that are contrary to the existing EPA
regulations for this program. EPA intends to work with states to
reconcile state minor NSR programs with EPA's regulatory provisions for
the program. The statutory requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) provide
for considerable flexibility in designing minor NSR programs, and it
may be time to revisit the regulatory requirements for this program to
give the states an appropriate level of flexibility to design a program
that meets their particular air quality concerns, while assuring
reasonable consistency across the country in protecting the NAAQS with
respect to new and modified minor sources.
    4. Interstate Transport: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) is subdivided into
four ``prongs,'' two under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and two under
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). The two prongs under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) require
SIPs to contain adequate provisions to prohibit emissions that (prong
1) contribute significantly to nonattainment in any other state with
respect to any such national primary or secondary NAAQS, and (prong 2)
interfere with maintenance by any other state with respect to the same
NAAQS. The two prongs under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) require SIPs to contain
adequate provisions to prohibit emissions that interfere with measures
required to be included in the applicable implementation plan for any
other state under part C (prong 3) to prevent significant deterioration
of air quality or (prong 4) to protect visibility. As noted, we are not
acting on the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) in this proposed
rulemaking.
    5. Interstate and International transport provisions: Section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires that each SIP shall contain adequate
provisions insuring compliance with applicable requirements of sections
126 and 115 (relating to interstate and international pollution
abatement). As noted, we are not acting on the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) in this proposed rulemaking.
    6. Adequate resources and authority: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i)
requires states to provide necessary assurances that the state will
have adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to
carry out the SIP (and is not prohibited by any provision of federal or
state law from carrying out the SIP or portion thereof). Section
110(a)(2)(E)(iii) requires states to ``provide necessary assurances
that, where the State has relied on a local or regional government,
agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any [SIP]
provision, the State has responsibility for ensuring adequate
implementation of such [SIP] provision.''
    a. Colorado's response to this requirement: There are no state or
federal provisions prohibiting the implementation of any provision of
the Colorado SIP. In general, Colorado provides the necessary
assurances that funding, personnel, and authority exist and that the
State of Colorado has responsibility for implementing local provisions.
The AQCC adopted all of the regulatory provisions in the SIP pursuant
to authority delegated to it by statute. The AQCC's general authority
to adopt the rules and regulations necessary to implement the SIP is
set out in the Colorado Air Pollution Prevention and Control Act
(APPCA) section 25-7-105 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS). The
authority for the APCS to administer and enforce the program is set out
at 25-7-111 CRS. Additional authority to regulate air pollution and
implement provisions in the SIP is set out elsewhere in the Colorado
APPCA, Article 7 of Title 25. In addition, the AQCC and the APCD have
the authority delegated to them in sections 42-4-301 to 42-4-316, CRS
(concerning motor vehicle emissions) and 42-4-414 (concerning emissions
from diesel-powered vehicles).
    The AQCC's authority includes the authority to regulate particulate
emissions, regardless of size (CRS section 25-7-109(2)(b)).
    The Colorado APCD has staff and an annual budget to operate its six
programs (Stationary Sources, Mobile Sources, Indoor Air, Technical
Service, Planning and Policy, and Administrative Services). As of June
30, 2009, the APCD employed 159 people and had a budget of $19.7
million for fiscal year 2009.
    Of the total budget, 17 percent was derived from federal grants, 32
percent from mobile source fees, 47 percent from stationary source
fees, and 4 percent from other cash sources.
    Relationships with other agencies responsible for carrying out
State activities--The Colorado APCD contracts with local governments in
two distinct ways: (1) Colorado grants monies to local health
departments to endow them as agents of the State to provide inspections
of some local stationary sources, asbestos abatement jobs, and CFC
sources. Some local health departments also operate gaseous and
particulate monitors under contract for the State. These efforts must
comply with federal and state regulations; and (2) Colorado grants
monies to local governments to help pay for their support of SIP
elements via public and private partnerships, education and informal
campaigns. Most of these agencies create their own work plan that
consists of programs they believe will help enhance air quality in
their communities in accordance with SIP directives.
    Colorado has adopted specific regulations for local attainment/
maintenance areas to assure these areas meet requirements of the SIP.
These regulations include the Colorado AQCC SIP-specific regulations, 5
CCR 1001-20. These regulations provide the necessary authority for the
Colorado APCD to adequately enforce the provisions of the SIP elements
in local attainment/maintenance areas.
    b. EPA Analysis: Colorado's SIP meets the requirements of sections
110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (E)(iii) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS. The State cites the Colorado Revised Statutes, specifically the
APPCA Sections 25-7-105, 25-7-111, 42-4-301 to 42-4-316, 42-4-414 and
Article 7 of Title 25 to demonstrate that the APCD and AQCC have
adequate authority to carry out Colorado's SIP obligations with respect
to the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and to revise its SIP as
necessary. The State received Sections 103 and 105 grant funds through
its Performance Partnership Grant along with required state matching
funds to provide funding necessary to carry out Colorado's SIP
requirements. The regulations cited by Colorado also provide the
necessary assurances that the State has responsibility for adequate
implementation of SIP provisions by local governments.
    7. State boards: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires that the State
comply with the requirements respecting State boards under section 128.
    a. Colorado's response to this requirement: Section 128 of the CAA
indicates Colorado's SIP must contain

requirements that anybody approving permits or enforcement orders under
the CAA must have a majority of members who represent the public
interest and do not derive any significant portion of their income from
persons subject to permits or enforcement actions.
    The AQCC Procedural Rules, section 1.11.0, state that ``The
Commission shall have at least a majority of members who represent the
public interest and do not derive a significant portion of their income
from persons subject to permits or enforcement orders under this
article or under the federal act. The members of the Commission shall
disclose any potential conflicts of interest that arise during their
terms of membership to the other Commissioners in a public meeting of
the Commission.''
    b. EPA Analysis: On April 10, 2012 (77 FR 21453) EPA approved the
Procedural Rules, Section 1.11.0, as adopted by the AQCC on January 16,
1998, into the SIP as meeting the requirements of section 128 of the
Act. Section 1.11.0 specifies certain requirements regarding the
composition of the AQCC and disclosure by its members of potential
conflicts of interest. Details on how this portion of the Procedural
Rules meets the requirements of section 128 are provided in our January
4, 2012 proposal notice (77 FR 235). In our April 10, 2012 action, we
correspondingly approved Colorado's infrastructure SIP for the 1997
ozone NAAQS for element (E)(ii). Colorado's SIP continues to meet the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), and we propose to approve the
infrastructure SIP for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS for
this element.
    8. Stationary source monitoring system: Section 110(a)(2)(F)
requires:
    (i) The installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment,
and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators
of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources,
    (ii) Periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions and
emissions-related data from such sources, and
    (iii) Correlation of such reports by the state agency with any
emission limitations or standards established pursuant to [the Act],
which reports shall be available at reasonable times for public
inspection.
    a. Colorado's response to this requirement: Colorado AQCC
Regulations 1, 3, and 6 address the issue of stationary source
monitoring. Colorado Regulation 1 sets forth emission limitations,
equipment requirements, and work practices (abatement and control
measures) intended to control the emissions of particulates, smoke, and
sulfur dioxides from new and existing stationary sources. Colorado
Regulation 3 requires stationary sources to report their emissions on a
regular basis through APENs. This air pollutant inventory program is
described in the APPCA Section 25-7-114.1 (CRS) and in Colorado
Regulation 3, Part I.VIII that allows for record keeping of air
pollutants. Colorado Regulation 6 sets standards of performance for
monitoring and new stationary sources in the state and establishes
monitoring system requirements.
    The Colorado APCD may require owners and operators of stationary
air pollution sources to install, maintain, and use instrumentation to
monitor and record emission data as a basis for periodic reports to the
APCD under the provisions of the AQCC Common Provisions regulation.
    b. EPA Analysis: The regulations cited by Colorado, including APEN
reporting requirements and requirements in Regulation 3, Part I.VIII,
meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.
    9. Emergency powers: Section 110(a)(2)(G) requires states to
provide for authority to address activities causing imminent and
substantial endangerment to public health, including contingency plans
to implement the emergency episode provisions in their SIPs.
    a. Colorado's response to this requirement: The State has the
authority to implement emergency powers similar to section 303 of the
CAA. First, the EPA-approved ``Denver Emergency Episode Plan''
addresses ozone, particulate matter (PM10), and carbon
monoxide for the Denver-metro region and requires the State to
implement protective measures when air quality exceeds defined
thresholds. Additionally, the APPCA Sections 25-7-112 and 25-7-113,
which have various sections similar to 42 U.S.C. 7603, generally
describe Colorado's authority regarding Emergency Episodes. For
example, 25-7-112(2) provides the Governor the authority to implement
emergency provisions through an order to the Colorado APCD.
    As described in EPA's September 25, 2009 guidance, areas that have
had a PM2.5 exceedance greater than 140.4 [mu]g/m\3\ should
have an emergency episode plan. If no such concentration was recorded
since 2006, the State can rely on its general emergency authorities.
Colorado has never had such a PM2.5 level and thus an
emergency episode plan for PM2.5 is not necessary.
Nevertheless, the State certifies it has the appropriate emergency
powers to address PM2.5 episodes, as described above.
    Additionally, the State implements EPA's air quality index system
and typically issues alerts and advisories to the public when any
pollutant is expected to or exceeds an AQI value of 100. If
PM2.5 concentrations are expected to or actually exceed
EPA's recommended index value thresholds of 201 (alert), 301 (warning),
350.5 (significant harm), or 401 (emergency), the State can invoke
emergency powers.
    b. EPA analysis: Colorado Pollution Prevention and Control Act
Sections 25-7-112 and 25-7-113 provide APCD with general emergency
authority comparable to that in section 303 of the Act. In our 2009
guidance for infrastructure requirements for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS, we suggested that states that had monitored and recorded 24-hour
PM2.5 levels greater than 140.4 [micro]g/m\3\, using the
most recent three years of data, should develop emergency episode plans
for the areas with the monitored values. We also suggested that, if
these levels had not been exceeded, states could certify that they had
adequate general emergency authority to address PM2.5
episodes. In this rulemaking, we view these suggestions as still
appropriate in assessing Colorado's SIP for this element. Colorado has
not monitored any values above the 140.4 [micro]g/m\3\ level for
PM2.5 for the past three years (e.g., 2009, 2010, and 2011).
Since this level was not exceeded in any area of the state and the
State has demonstrated that it has appropriate general emergency powers
to address PM2.5 related episodes, no specific emergency
episode plans are necessary at this time. The SIP therefore meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.
    10. Future SIP revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H) requires that SIPs
provide for revision of such plan:
    (i) From time to time as may be necessary to take account of
revisions of such national primary or secondary ambient air quality
standard or the availability of improved or more expeditious methods of
attaining such standard, and
    (ii) Except as provided in paragraph (3)(C), whenever the
Administrator finds on the basis of information available to the
Administrator that the [SIP] is substantially inadequate to attain the
[NAAQS] which it implements or to otherwise comply with any additional
requirements under this [Act].
    a. Colorado's response to this requirement: The State of Colorado
has the ability and authority to address and

revise the SIP due to changes in the NAAQS or due to findings of
inadequacies.
    The Colorado AQCC has the authority and duty to adopt and revise a
SIP as necessary to comply with the federal requirements. Colorado
APPCA section 25-7-105(1)(a)(I) (CRS) directs the Colorado AQCC to
promulgate rules and regulations as related to a comprehensive SIP
which will assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS and which
will prevent significant deterioration or air quality in the State of
Colorado.
    Colorado APPCA section 25-7-109 (CRS) also gives the Colorado AQCC
the authority to promulgate emission control regulations.
    b. EPA analysis: Colorado's statutory provision at Colorado APPCA
Section 25-7-105(1)(a)(I) gives the AQCC sufficient authority to meet
the requirements of 110(a)(2)(H).
    11. Consultation with government officials, public notification,
PSD and visibility protection: Section 110(a)(2)(J) requires that each
SIP ``meet the applicable requirements of section 121 of this title
(relating to consultation), section 127 of this title (relating to
public notification), and part C of this subchapter (relating to [PSD]
of air quality and visibility protection).''
    a. Colorado's response to this requirement: Consultation--
Engineering and meteorological consultation is provided by the State to
local agencies. The State assists local agencies in planning air
management programs for their respective areas. The Colorado AQCC holds
public meetings and hearings on all SIP revisions in accordance with
the AQCC Procedural Rules. Public comment is solicited and accepted at
Colorado AQCC meetings and hearings.
    Colorado's Transportation Conformity Rule, Regulation 10, specifies
consultation procedures for SIP revisions in Section IV.F.
    Also, as part of the State of Colorado's Visibility SIP, the APCD
consults with the Federal Land Managers and other states as necessary
and required.
    Public notification--Colorado notifies the public of instances or
of areas in which any national primary ambient air quality standard is
exceeded. Included in this notification are public awareness
announcements regarding health hazards and manners in which the public
can participate in regulatory and other efforts to improve Colorado's
air quality. Not only does the State provide after-the-fact information
about readings in excess of the NAAQS, the Denver PM10 SIP
provides for advance warnings to the public that the NAAQS may be
exceeded whenever meteorological conditions make it possible or likely
for ambient concentrations to exceed the NAAQS.
    The Colorado APCD prepares a daily public notification in the form
of an Air Pollution Advisory for a nine-county Denver-Boulder
metropolitan and North Front Range area and the communities of Fort
Collins and Greeley. The advisory is posted on the APCD Web site and
includes details of the day's air quality and visibility, a forecast of
the coming day's air quality, residential burning restrictions, and
voluntary motor vehicle driving reduction requests during the winter
high pollution season. The advisory includes links to an open burning
forecast and other important information such as the day's Air Quality
Index, the health effects of specific pollutants, and measures that can
be taken by the public to reduce exposure. While not part of Colorado's
SIP, the advisories are part of an ongoing commitment by the State to
inform and educate citizens about air quality.
    Other Colorado communities also maintain and operate daily air
quality forecasts, including Mesa County on the Western Slope and El
Paso County in the Colorado Springs area.
    The State has developed Natural Events Action Plans that include
public notification and education elements. While not a formal part of
the State SIP, the plans include provisions to notify the public about
actions to take during imminent blowing dust and wildfire events that
could lead to high levels of particulate matter.
    Prevention of Significant Deterioration--Colorado AQCC Regulation 3
(Stationary Source Permitting and Air Pollution Emission Notice
Requirements), Regulation 6 (Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources), and Colorado's Long Term Strategy for Visibility
Protection adequately address PSD and Visibility Protection. For
example, new major stationary sources or major modifications are
restricted in their emissions in order to protect the PSD increment
under Colorado AQCC Regulation 3. PSD and visibility analyses are also
required by NSR regulations of Colorado. Colorado is required to review
new major stationary sources and major modifications prior to
construction to assess potential impacts on visibility in any Class I
Area. Colorado AQCC Regulation 3.XI.E, ``New Source Review'' (Appendix
D) describes the applicant's demonstration that the proposed source
will not have an adverse effect on visibility in Class I areas.
    Visibility--For PM2.5, Colorado's visibility program
contains adequate provisions that are either in the SIP or submitted
for inclusion into the SIP to prohibit any source or other type of
emission activity in the State from emitting air pollutants in amounts
that will interfere with measures required to be included in the
applicable implementation plan of another state to protect visibility.
Colorado's implementation plan also adheres to the direction set forth
in EPA's applicable guidance interpreting this section of the CAA.
    The plan submitted to EPA on March 31, 2010 demonstrates that there
is a significant downward trend in Colorado's visibility impairing
emissions, visibility in surrounding Mandatory Class I Areas is
improving over time, and regional modeling indicates Colorado has a
small contribution to out-of-state haze. Thus, air pollution sources
and other types of emission activity within the State of Colorado do
not interfere with measures required to be included in the applicable
implementation plan of another state to protect visibility.
    b. EPA Analysis: The State has demonstrated that it has the
authority and rules in place to provide a process of consultation with
general purpose local governments, designated organizations of elected
officials of local governments and any Federal Land Manager having
authority over federal land to which the SIP applies, consistent with
the requirements of CAA section 121. Furthermore, EPA previously
approved Colorado's SIP submission to meet the requirements of CAA
section 127 (45 FR 53147, August 11, 1980).
    Colorado's SIP regulations for its PSD program were federally-
approved and made part of the SIP on September 2, 1986 (51 FR 31125).
EPA has further evaluated the State's SIP-approved PSD program in
section V.3, element 110(a)(2)(C) of this proposed action. As explained
in that section, we propose to approve Colorado' s infrastructure SIPs
for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to the
requirement in element (C) to have a permit program as required by Part
C of the Act. We correspondingly propose to approve the infrastructure
SIPs for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to the
requirement in element (J) that the SIP meet the applicable
requirements of Part C with respect to PSD.
    Finally, with regard to the applicable requirements for visibility
protection, EPA recognizes that states are subject to visibility and
regional haze program requirements under part C of the act. In

the event of the establishment of a new NAAQS, however, the visibility
and regional haze program requirements under part C do not change. Thus
we find that there is no new visibility obligation ``triggered'' under
section 110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS becomes effective. In conclusion,
the Colorado SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) for the
1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to the requirements
of sections 121 and 127 of the Act, and also meets the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(J) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
    12. Air quality and modeling/data: Section 110(a)(2)(K) requires
that each SIP provide for:
    (i) The performance of such air quality modeling as the
Administrator may prescribe for the purpose of predicting the effect on
ambient air quality of any emissions of any air pollutant for which the
Administrator has established a [NAAQS], and
    (ii) The submission, upon request, of data related to such air
quality modeling to the Administrator.
    a. Colorado's response to this requirement: Colorado has the
authority and resources to model for criteria pollutants, including
PM2.5. Air quality modeling is done for SIP revisions and
for transportation conformity. Colorado Regulation 3 (Stationary Source
Permitting and Air Pollution Emission Notice Requirements) requires
stationary sources to predict the effect of air pollutants in
attainment areas. Regulation 3 also details the State of Colorado's
program regarding permitting as related to air quality modeling and
data handling in predicting the effect of emissions of a pollutant with
an established NAAQS. Regulatory requirements for Air Quality Related
Values as related to modeling are described within Colorado Regulation
3, Part B, subsection X and XI. A permit modification for purposes of
the acid rain portion of a permit are governed by regulations
promulgated under Title VI of the federal act, found in 40 CFR Part 72
as described under Colorado Regulation 3, Part C, subsection X.K.
    The Modeling, Meteorology, and Emission Inventory Unit within the
Colorado APCD performs and reviews air quality impact analyses for a
variety of programs, including SIP revisions, transportation conformity
determinations, stationary source permitting, environmental impact
statements, and hazardous waste site audits. The analyses include
modeling, meteorological analysis, and emission inventory development
for mobile sources and area stationary sources such as woodburning. The
Unit also performs air quality forecasting for the Denver-metro area
High Pollution Season, open burning, and for special air quality
studies. Additional information regarding these programs and authority
is provided below. Some of these programs are found in the SIP. For
example, both Colorado AQCC Regulation 4 (Woodburning) and the Denver
PM10 SIP address state air quality modeling programs.
    PSD and Increment Consumption--Colorado's PSD program includes a
requirement that the State periodically assess the adequacy of its plan
to prevent significant deterioration of air quality. This is presented
in Regulation 3, Part B, section VII. In addition, Regulation 3, Part
A, section VIII, ``Technical Modeling and Monitoring Requirements''
states that all estimates of ambient concentrations required under
Regulation 3 shall be based on the applicable air quality models, data
bases, and other requirements generally approved by EPA and
specifically approved by the APCD.
    SIP Development--Modeling is performed in the development and
revision of SIPs, as needed, to ensure specific areas of the State will
maintain or re-attain compliance with the NAAQS in light of development
and increased population and traffic.
    Permits--The primary Colorado regulation for air quality permits is
Colorado AQCC Regulation 3. Certain new/modified air pollution sources
are subject to the regulatory modeling requirements in Regulation 3.
Regulation 3, Part A, subsection VIII describes Colorado's technical
modeling and monitoring requirements. Modeling is often required to
obtain a construction permit. While modeling is not required to obtain
an operating permit, it may be required if the operating permit is
modified (in Regulation 3, Part C, subsection X--Minor Permit
Modification Procedures). Operating permits may also be subject to
modeling if the application is for a combined construction/operating
permit (Regulation 3, Part C, subsection III.C.12.d).
    b. EPA Analysis: Colorado's SIP meets the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(K) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. In
particular, Colorado's Regulation 3 Part A.VIII requires estimates of
ambient air concentrations be based on applicable air quality models
approved by EPA. Final approval for Regulation 3 Part A.VIII became
effective February 20, 1997 (62 FR 2910). As a result, the SIP provides
for such air quality modeling as the Administrator has prescribed.
    13. Permitting fees: Section 110(a)(2)(L) requires SIPs to:
    Require the owner or operator of each major stationary source to
pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required
under this act, a fee sufficient to cover--
    (i) The reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon any
application for such a permit, and
    (ii) If the owner or operator receives a permit for such source,
the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and
conditions of any such permit (not including any court costs or other
costs associated with any enforcement action), until such fee
requirement is superseded with respect to such sources by the
Administrator's approval of a fee program under [title] V * * *
    a. Colorado's response to this requirement: The State of Colorado
requires the owner or operator of a major stationary source to pay the
Colorado APCD any fee necessary to cover the reasonable costs of
reviewing and acting upon any permit application. The collection of
fees is described in Colorado AQCC Regulation 3. Specifically,
Regulations 3, Part A.VI describes how each applicant required to
obtain a permit must pay a fee, including the cost of permit review and
relevant actions. Also, stationary source owners or operators must pay
an annual fee based on total emissions. The funds are used by the State
to administer programs for the control of air pollution from stationary
sources.
    b. EPA Analysis: Colorado's approved title V operating permit
program meets the requirements of CAA section 111(a)(2)(L) for the 1997
and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Final approval of the title V
operating permit program became effective October 16, 2000 (65 FR
49919). Interim approval of Colorado's title V operating permit program
became effective February 23, 1995 (60 FR 4563). As discussed in the
proposed interim approval of the title V program (59 FR 52123, October
14, 1994), the State demonstrated that the fees collected were
sufficient to administer the program. In addition, as described by
Colorado, the State collects fees that cover the cost of review of
permits for major stationary sources.
    14. Consultation/participation by affected local entities: Section
110(a)(2)(M) requires states to provide for consultation and
participation in SIP development by local political subdivisions
affected by the SIP.
    a. Colorado's response to this requirement: Colorado AQCC
Regulation 10, ``Transportation Conformity,'' defines the criteria the
Colorado AQCC uses for transportation

conformity determinations to develop SIP revisions in non-attainment
areas. Interagency consultation requirements are detailed in Regulation
10, and meet the federal requirements under 40 CFR 51.390, as published
at 62 FR 43780 (August 15, 1997). Colorado AQCC Regulation 3 also
provides for consultation and participation by local entities. Local
governments receive notice and have the opportunity to comment on and
participate in construction permit review procedures and operating
permit application procedures.
    The Colorado AQCC holds a public hearing before adopting any
regulatory revisions to the SIP. Local political subdivisions may
participate in the hearing.
    b. EPA Analysis: Colorado's submittal meets the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(M) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

VI. What action is EPA taking?

    In this action, EPA is proposing to approve the following
infrastructure elements for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS:
(A), (B), (C) with respect to minor NSR requirements, (E), (F), (G),
(H), (J) with respect to the requirements of sections 121 and 127 of
the Act, (K), (L), and (M). EPA proposes to approve infrastructure
elements (C) and (J) with respect to PSD requirements for the 1997 and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve revisions
to Regulation 3 submitted by Colorado on May 11, 2012, and May 13,
2013, which incorporate the requirements of the 2008 PM2.5
Implementation Rule and the 2010 PM2.5 Increment Rule;
specifically, revisions to: Regulation 3, Part D, sections II.A.5.a and
b, II.A.23.a and b, II.A.25.a.(i), (a).(ii), (a).(iii), and (b).(i),
II.A.38.c and g, II.A.42.a. and X.A.1. as submitted on May 11, 2012,
and revisions to II.A.23.c, as submitted on May 13, 2013. EPA is taking
no action at this time on infrastructure element (D)(i)(I) for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations (42 U.S.C. 7410(k), 40 CFR 52.02(a)). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves some state law as meeting federal
requirements and disapproves other state law because it does not meet
federal requirements; this proposed action does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); is not an
economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety
risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: May 13, 2013.
Howard M. Cantor,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2013-12215 Filed 5-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 179 (Tuesday, September 15, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 57203]
[FR Doc No: 2020-20241]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EF20-8-000]

Western Area Power Administration; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on August 31, 2020, Western Area Power
Administration submitted tariff filing: 2021 base charge and rates for
electric service to be effective 10/1/2020 for Boulder Canyon Project.
    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 strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically may mail
similar pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in
docketed proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 30, 2020.

    Dated: September 3, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-20241 Filed 9-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 221 (Monday, November 17, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68431-68432]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27100]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:
    Docket Numbers: EG15-12-000.
    Applicants: Samchully Power & Utilities 1 LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Samchully Power & Utilities 1 LLC.
    Filed Date: 11/6/14.
    Accession Number: 20141106-5173.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/14.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER14-2140-002.
    Applicants: Mulberry Farm, LLC.
    Description: Report Filing: Supp 3 to Baseline Filing--Mulberry MBR
Tariff to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 11/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20141107-5219.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/14/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2141-002.
    Applicants: Selmer Farm, LLC.
    Description: Report Filing: Supp 4 to Baseline Filing--Selmer MBR
Tariff to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 11/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20141107-5204.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/14/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-359-000.
    Applicants: Samchully Power & Utilities 1 LLC.
    Description: Initial rate filing per 35.12 MBR Application to be
effective 12/15/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/6/14.
    Accession Number: 20141106-5137.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-360-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2896SO
Hale Community Energy GIA to be effective 5/29/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20141107-5062.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-361-000.
    Applicants: UNS Electric, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Update
to Attachment C of Open Access Transmission Tariff to be effective 1/6/
2015.
    Filed Date: 11/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20141107-5070.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-362-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 1693R3
Westar Energy, Inc. LGIA to be effective 10/31/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20141107-5079.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-363-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii):
Original Service Agreement No. 3991; Queue Y3-062 to be effective 10/
10/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20141107-5117.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-364-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., American Electric Power
Service Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): AEP
submits 44th Revised Service Agreement No. 1336 to be effective 10/10/
2014.
    Filed Date: 11/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20141107-5161.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-365-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2014-
11-07_SA 2710 ITC Midwest-EDF Renewable GIA (J097) to be effective 11/
8/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20141107-5181.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/14.

    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: November 7, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-27100 Filed 11-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55251-55252]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21960]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD13-9-000]

Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2013; Notice of Workshop

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) staff
will hold a workshop on October 2, 2013, from 12:00 p.m. (EDT) to 4:00
p.m. (EDT) in the Commission Meeting Room at 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The workshop will be open to the public, and all
interested parties are invited to attend and participate.
    The purpose of the workshop is to begin investigating the
feasibility of a two-year process for the issuance of a license for
hydropower development at non-powered dams and closed-loop pumped
storage projects in compliance with section 6 of the Hydropower
Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2013. Participants should be prepared to
discuss whether such a process is feasible, present ideas on the
details of a two-year licensing process, discuss potential criteria for
identifying projects that may be appropriate for a two-year licensing
process, and recommend potential pilot projects to test a two-year
licensing process.
    This workshop will be transcribed. Transcripts of the workshop will
be immediately available for a fee from Ace-Federal Reporters, Inc. at
(202) 347-3700. A free webcast of this event will be available through
www.ferc.gov. Anyone with internet access who wants to view this event
can do so by navigating to the Calendar of Events at www.ferc.gov and
locating this event in the Calendar. The event will contain a link to
its webcast. The Capitol Connection provides technical support for
webcasts and offers the option of listening to the workshop via phone-
bridge for a fee. If you have any questions, visit

www.CapitolConnection.org or call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Those interested in attending the workshop or viewing the webcast
are encouraged to register at https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/efficiency-act-10-02-13-form.asp by September 25, 2013. A
limited number of phone lines will be available on a first-come, first-
served basis for interested parties to participate via teleconference.
If you would like to participate via teleconference, please contact Ken
Wilcox at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by September 25,
2013. A workshop agenda will be issued under separate notice.
    Commission workshops are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please
send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll
free) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a FAX to<PHONE_NUMBER> with the
required accommodations.
    Those who wish to file written comments may do so by November 1,
2013. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to
6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number AD13-9-000.
    All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files and
will be available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference
Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at www.ferc.gov
using the eLibrary link. Enter AD13-9 in the docket number field to
access documents. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support.
    For more information about this workshop, please contact:

Brandon Cherry (Technical Information), Office of Energy Projects,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sarah McKinley (Logistical Information), Office of External Affairs,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: September 3, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-21960 Filed 9-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 96 (Wednesday, May 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 30321]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10615]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94899; File Nos. SR-NYSE-2021-67, SR-NYSEAMER-2021-43,
SR-NYSEArca-2021-97, SR-NYSECHX-2021-17, SR-NYSENAT-2021-23]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; NYSE
American LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., NYSE Chicago, Inc., and NYSE National,
Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on
Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed
Rule Change To Offer Wireless Connectivity to CME Group Data and
Establish Associated Fees

May 12, 2022.
    On November 3, 2021, New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE American
LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., NYSE Chicago, Inc., and NYSE National, Inc.
(collectively, the ``Exchanges'') each filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend their respective fee
schedules to offer wireless connectivity to CME Group, Inc. (``CME
Group'') market data (``CME Group Data'') and establish associated
fees. Each proposed rule change was immediately effective upon filing
with the Commission pursuant to Section 19b(3)(A) of the Act.\3\ The
proposed rule changes were published for comment in the Federal
Register on November 18, 2021.\4\ On December 17, 2021, the Commission
issued an order suspending the proposed rule changes and instituted
proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed
rule change.\5\ The Commission has received comment letters on the
proposals.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 93563 (November 12,
2021), 86 FR 64561 (November 18, 2021) (SR-NYSE-2021-67); 93561
(November 12, 2021), 86 FR 64580 (November 18, 2021) (SR-NYSEAMER-
2021-43); 93564 (November 12, 2021), 86 FR 64570 (November 18, 2021)
(SR-NYSEArca-2021-97); 93565 (November 12, 2021), 86 FR 64556
(November 18, 2021) (SR-NYSECHX-2021-17); and 93567 (November 12,
2021), 86 FR 64576 (November 18, 2021) (SR-NYSENAT-2021-23)
(collectively, the ``Notices'').
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93810 (December 17,
2021), 86 FR 73026 (December 23, 2021).
    \6\ See letter dated January 13, 2022 from Jim Considine, Chief
Financial Officer, McKay Brothers, LLC to Vanessa Countryman,
Secretary, Commission and letter dated April 13, 2022 from Martha
Redding, Associate General Counsel, Corporate Secretary, NYSE Group,
Inc. (``NYSE Group'') to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission.
All comments received by the Commission on the proposed rule change
are available on the Commission's website at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nyse-2021-67/srnyse202167.htm. NYSE Group filed comment
letters on behalf of all of the Exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \7\ provides that, after initiating
proceedings, the Commission shall issue an order approving or
disapproving the proposed rule change not later than 180 days after the
date of publication of notice of the filing of the proposed rule
change. The Commission may extend the period for issuing an order
approving or disapproving the proposed rule change, however, by not
more than 60 days if the Commission determines that a longer period is
appropriate and publishes the reasons for such determination. The
proposed rule changes were published for comment in the Federal
Register on November 18, 2021.\8\ The 180th day after publication of
the Notices is May 17, 2022. The Commission is extending the time
period for approving or disapproving the proposals for an additional 60
days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \8\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to issue an order approving or disapproving the
proposed rule changes so that it has sufficient time to consider the
proposed rule changes along with the comments received. Accordingly,
the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\9\ designates
July 16, 2022 as the date by which the Commission should either approve
or disapprove the proposed rule changes (File Nos. SR-NYSE-2021-67, SR-
NYSEAMER-2021-43, SR-NYSEArca-2021-97, SR-NYSECHX-2021-17, SR-NYSENAT-
2021-23).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-10615 Filed 5-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: August 27, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 167)]
[Notices]
[Page 50609]
[DOCID:fr27au08-34]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP06-61-000; CP01-23-003]

North Baja Pipeline, LLC; Notice of Motion To Vacate Certificate
in Part

August 20, 2008.
    Take notice that on June 25, 2008, North Baja Pipeline, LLC (North
Baja), 1400 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 900, Portland, Oregon 94201, filed
in Docket Nos. CP06-61-000 and CP01-23-003, a motion to vacate a
portion of the certificate authority granted on October 2, 2007, in
those dockets, allowing North Baja to modify and expand its existing
pipeline system to facilitate the importation of regasified liquefied
natural gas from Mexico into California and Arizona (Expansion
Project). North Baja states that the planned construction of a 45.7-
mile, 16-inch diameter lateral pipeline extending from a point north of
its Ogilby Meter Station to the Imperial Irrigation District's El
Centro Generating Facility in Imperial County, California (the ``IID
Lateral'' proposed as construction Phase I-A), is no longer necessary
due to the Imperial Irrigation District's decision to terminate its
precedent agreement. North Baja seeks to vacate the portion of its
certificate that authorizes the IID Lateral facilities, proposed as
Phase I-A of the project.
    The motion is on file with the Commission and open for public
inspection. This motion is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for
TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding the application should be directed to Carl
M. Fink, Associate General Counsel, North Baja Pipeline, LLC (North
Baja), 1400 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 900, Portland, Oregon 94201, (503)
833-4256.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
North Baja's request. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status
by becoming a party to this proceeding should, on or before the comment
date listed below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in
accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the
NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on
the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will
receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other
parties. A party must submit 14 copies of this filing and all
subsequent filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy of all
filing to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding.
Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission
orders in the proceeding.
    However, other persons do not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to North Baja's
request. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to this
project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties
directly involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only in support of or in opposition to
North Baja's request should submit an original and two copies of their
comments to the Secretary of the Commission. The Commission's rules
require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the applicant. However, the
non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by
other parties or issued by the Commission and will not have the right
to seek court review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-Filing'' link.
    Comment Date: September 10, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-19814 Filed 8-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 22, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 10578]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4153]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Thursday,
February 23, 2012 at 3 p.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the
scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Gallagher, as duty officer, voted to consider the
items listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday,
February 23, 2012 will be:

    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
    Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
    Adjudicatory matters; and
    Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact: The Office of the
Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: February 16, 2012.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-4153 Filed 2-17-12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency= s Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request: USEPA/ Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance/ Office of Compliance 2. OMB control number b.   None a. 2060 0006 3. Type of information collection ( check one)

a.   New collection b.   Revision of a currently approved collection c. X Extension of a currently approved collection d.   Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e.   Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired f.   Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one) a. X Regular b.   Emergency  Approval requested by: / /

c.   Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?   Yes X No For b f, note item A2 of Supporting Statement Instructions 6. Requested expiration date a. X Three years from approval date b.   Other Specify: / /___

7. Title: NSPS for Bulk Gasoline Terminals ( 40 CFR part 60, subpart XX) ( Renewal)

8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable): ICR Number 0664.08 9. Keywords: Gasoline terminal; loading racks; refinery 10. Abstract This rule applies to affected facilities at bulk gasoline terminals which have a throughput greater than 75,700 liters per day, delivering liquid product into gasoline tank trucks. The affected facilities include the loading arms, pumps, meters, shutoff valves, relief valves, and other piping and valves necessary to fill delivery tank trucks. Owners and operators would comply with the monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements of the NSPS General Provisions ( 40 CFR part 60, subpart A) and any specific requirements cited in this rule, to determine if compliance has been achieved.

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. P Business or other for profit e. Federal Government c. Not for profit institutions f. State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Voluntary b. Required to obtain or retain benefits c. P Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents: 40 b. Total annual responses: 40 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically: 10 % c. Total hours requested: 13,168 d. Current OMB inventory: 11,420 e. Difference: 1,748 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change: 0 2. Adjustment: 1,748 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars) a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs: $ 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M: $ 0 c. Total annualized cost requested: $ 0 d. Current OMB inventory: $ 0 e. Difference: $ 0 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change: $ 0 2. Adjustment: $ 0 15. Purpose of information collection public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Application for benefits e. Program planning or management b. Program evaluation f. Research c. General purpose statistics g. P Regulatory or compliance d. __ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply)

a. X Recordkeeping b.   Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. X On occasion 2.   Weekly 3.   Monthly 4.   Quarterly 5.   Semi annually 6.   Annually 7.   Biennially 8. X Other ( describe): Initially 17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

  Yes X No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission)

Name: María Malavé Phone: 202 564 7027 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

( c) It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3):

( i) Why the information is being collected; ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( i) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Official Michael S. Alushin, Director Compliance Assessment and Media Programs Division Office of Compliance Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Oscar Morales, Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information Date