Suggested References by Panel Members

1.  Roberta L. Grant, Bernard J. Kadlubar, Neeraja K. Erraguntla,
Michael Honeycutt.

Evaluation of acute inhalation toxicity for chemicals with limited
toxicity information

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 47 (2007) 261–273

Abstract

−5. For a chemical with limited toxicity information, this composite
factor is multiplied by a 4-hour LC50 value or other appropriate acute
lethality data. Both approaches can be used to produce an estimate of a
conservative threshold air concentration below which no appreciable risk
to the general population would be expected to occur after a one-hour
intermittent exposure.

2.  Honaganahalli, P. and J.N. Seiber.  Measured and predicted airshed
concentrations of methyl bromide in an agricultural valley and
application to exposure assessment.  Atmos. Environ.  34 (2000)
3511-3523

Abstract

A field study was conducted in September 1995 to measure the ambient
atmospheric concentrations of methyl bromide (MeBr) in the Salinas
Valley, California. Air concentrations of MeBr were measured at 11 sites
located on the adjacent mountains, valley floor and at the Pacific Ocean
coast over a 4-d period. The concentrations ranged up to 8.98 lg m-3.
Industrial Source Complex Short Term 3 (ISCST3) and CALPUFF dispersion
model simulations were performed with several fumigated fields serving
as sources, using two estimates of source strengths from published flux
values. CALPUFF was driven by 3D meteorology from CALMET. With the lower
of the two estimates, the ISCST3 model under predicted concentrations
for 76% of data and averaged 66% of measured, and the CALPUFF model also
under predicted concentrations for 67% of observations and averaged 84%
of measured. With the higher of the two estimates the ISCST3 over
predicted by a factor of two for 67% of data, and CALPUFF over predicted
concentrations by a factor of 1.6 for over 50% of data. Between the
model predicted and measured concentrations, the coeffcient of
determination, R2, was was approx. 0.7 for both source strengths with
ISCST3 model. The R2 with CALPUFF model was 0.55 and 0.82 with source
strength estimated from two prior flux studies. The margin of exposure
(MOE) for the population of the city of Salinas was calculated based on
the measured ambient concentrations and compared with the current
benchmark used by US-EPA and California Department of Pesticide
Regulation for acceptable human health risk. Based on the models
predicted worst-case exposure concentration, the MOE for acute effects
was approximately 10,000. For chronic effects it was approximately 100,
indicating a need for attention to exposure to MeBr in areas of intense
methyl bromide use.

3. Monique A.J. Rennen, Tialda Bouwman, Annette Wilschut, Jos G.M.
Bessems, and Cees De Heer.  Oral-to-inhalation route extrapolation in
occupational health risk assessment: a critical assessment. Regulatory
Toxicology and Pharmacology 39 (2004) 5–11

Abstract

Due to a lack of route-specific toxicity data, the health risks
resulting from occupational exposure are frequently assessed by
route-to-route (RtR) extrapolation based on oral toxicity data. Insight
into the conditions for and the uncertainties connected with the
application of RtR extrapolation has not been clearly described in a
systematic manner. In our opinion, for a reliable occupational health
risk assessment, it is necessary to have insight into the accuracy of
the routinely applied RtR extrapolation and, if possible, to give a
(semi-)quantitative estimate of the possible error introduced.
Therefore, experimentally established no-observed adverse-effect-levels
for inhalation studies were compared to no-adverse-effect-levels
predicted from oral toxicity studies by RtR extrapolation. From our
database analysis it can be concluded that the widely used RtR
extrapolation methodology based on correction for differences in
(estimates of) absorption is not generally reliable and certainly not
valid for substances inducing local effects. More experimental data are
required (from unpublished data or new experiments) to get insight into
the reliability of RtR extrapolation and the possibility to derive an
assessment factor to account for the uncertainties. Moreover, validated
screening methods to predict/exclude the occurrence of local effects
after repeated exposure are warranted. Especially, in cases where
chemical exposure by inhalation or skin contact cannot be excluded
route-specific toxicity studies should be considered to prevent from
inadequate estimates of human health risks.

4.  Martha E. Harnly, Asa Bradman, Marcia Nishioka, Thomas E. McKone,
Daniel Smith, Robert McLaughlin, Geri Kavanagh-Baird,
Rosemary Castorina, and Brenda Eskenazi.   HYPERLINK
"http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/es9020958?cookieSet=1" \l "afn2"
 Pesticides in Dust from Homes in an Agricultural Community. Environ.
Sci. Technol., Article ASAP. DOI: 10.1021/es9020958. Publication Date
(Web): October 30, 2009.

  HYPERLINK "http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es9020958" \t ""
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es9020958

Abstract

 49% increases, respectively, in dust concentrations for each kg applied
per day, near participant homes, in the month or season prior to sample
collection. However, agricultural use of diazinon, which was 2.2 times
that of chlorpyrifos, and of permethrin were not significantly
associated with dust levels. Other variables independently associated
with dust levels included temperature and rainfall, farmworkers storing
work shoes in the home, storing a diazinon product in the home, housing
density, having a home less clean, and having an air conditioner.
Permethrins, chlorpyrifos, DCPA, and iprodione have either a log
octanol−water partition coefficient (Kow) greater than 4.0, a very low
vapor pressure, or both. Health risk assessments for pesticides that
have these properties may need to include evaluation of exposures to
house dust.

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register: October 21, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 203)]
[Notices]
[Page 65010]
[DOCID:fr21oc10-43]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR11-1-000; Docket No. PR11-2-000; Docket No. PR11-3-000]

Notice of Baseline Filings

October 14, 2010.

Cranberry Pipeline             Docket No. PR11-1-000
 Corporation.
New Mexico Gas Company, Inc..  Docket No. PR11-2-000
Peoples Natural Gas Company    Docket No. PR11-3-000
 LLC.
                               (Not Consolidated)

    Take notice that on October 8, 2010, and October 13, 2010,
respectively the applicants listed above submitted their baseline
filing of its Statement of Operating Conditions for services provided
under section 311 of the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA).
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate proceeding must
file a motion 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 and 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 date as indicated below. Anyone filing
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the
intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern time on Monday, October 25, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-26482 Filed 10-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


 [Federal Register Volume 76, Number 142 (Monday, July 25, 2011)] [Notices] [Pages 44320-44321] [FR Doc No: 2011-18700]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL11-54-000]

Buckeye Power, Inc. v. American Transmission Systems,

Incorporated; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on July 18, 2011, pursuant to sections 206 and 306

of the Federal Power Act and Rule 206 of the Rules of Practice and

Procedure of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission),

Buckeye Power, Inc. (Buckeye or Complainant) filed a formal complaint

against American Transmission Systems, Incorporated (ATSI or

Respondent) alleging that ATSI's voltage-differentiated rates for

transmission service in the ATSI Zone of PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

(PJM) are unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory, and

preferential, and should be replaced with a rolled-in rate reflecting

the cost of all ATSI transmission facilities, regardless of voltage.

    Buckeye certifies that copies of the complaint were served on ATSI,

PJM, and the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio.

    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. The Respondent's answer and all interventions, or protests

must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondent's answer,

motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainants.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and

interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC

20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's

Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''

link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail

notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For

assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 8, 2011.

    Dated: July 19, 2011.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2011-18700 Filed 7-22-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 44784]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20597]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2017-0260; FRL-9968-45-OW]

Extension of Public Comment Period for the Draft Updated Aquatic
Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum in Freshwater

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is extending the
comment period for the Draft Updated Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality
Criteria for Aluminum in Freshwater. The current comment period closes
on September 26, 2017. The public comment period will be extended for
an additional 30 days.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 26, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2017-0260, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. EPA
may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish
to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents
located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diana Eignor, Health and Ecological
Criteria Division, Office of Water (Mail Code 4304T), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 28, 2017, EPA announced the
availability of the Draft Updated Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality
Criteria for Aluminum in Freshwater and opened a 60-day public review
and comment period to seek additional scientific views, data, and
information regarding the science and technical approach used in the
derivation of the draft document.
    The original deadline to submit comments was September 26, 2017.
This action extends the comment period for 30 days. Written comments
must now be received by October 26, 2017. The draft report and other
supporting materials may also be viewed and downloaded from EPA's Web
site at https://www.epa.gov/wqc/2017-draft-aquatic-life-criteria-aluminum-freshwater-documents.

    Dated: September 20, 2017.
Michael H. Shapiro,
Acting Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-20597 Filed 9-25-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 184 (Monday, September 25, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 65665]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20728]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2970-004]

The Village of Argyle, Wisconsin; Notice of Effectiveness of
Withdrawal of Application for Surrender of Exemption From Licensing

    On October 6, 2021, the Village of Argyle, Wisconsin (exemptee)
filed an application to surrender its exemption from licensing for the
50-kilowatt Argyle Hydroelectric Project No. 2970. On July 5, 2023, the
licensee filed a notice of withdrawal of the surrender application. The
project is located on the East Branch Pecatonica River, in Argyle,
Lafayette County, Wisconsin.
    No motion in opposition to the notice of withdrawal has been filed,
and the Commission has taken no action to disallow the withdrawal.
Pursuant to Rule 216(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure,\1\ the withdrawal of the application became effective on
July 20, 2023, and this proceeding is hereby terminated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 385.216(b) (2022).

    Dated: September 19, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-20728 Filed 9-22-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: April 3, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 63)]
[Notices]
[Page 15926-15928]
[DOCID:fr03ap07-99]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55543; File No. SR-NYSE-2007-31]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Rule 60 To Allow the Exchange To Identify Its Quotation as Slow
Non-Firm During the Manual Reporting of a Block-Sized Transaction

March 27, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 20, 2007, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II, below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the
Exchange. NYSE has designated the proposed rule change as constituting
a ``non-controversial'' rule change under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the
Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 60 to provide that when the
Exchange quotation is not available for automatic execution due to the
manual reporting of a block-sized transaction, the Exchange will
identify such quotes with an indicator signifying that they are non-
firm within the context of Regulation National Market System (``Reg.
NMS'').\5\ The text of the rule proposal is available on the Exchange's
Web site (http://www.nyse.com), at the Exchange, and at the

Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The NYSE proposes to amend Rule 60 to specify that when a
specialist manually reports a block-sized transaction \6\ that involves
orders in the Display Book[supreg]( system (``block-sized
transaction''), the Exchange will use an indicator to signify that the
NYSE quote is non-firm. During the brief moment it takes a specialist
to manually report a block-sized transaction in a security, autoquoting
of the highest bid/lowest offer is suspended in that stock.\7\ In
addition, during that same period of time, automatic executions against
the displayed quotation are not available.\8\ After the specialist has
completed the report of a block-sized transaction, autoquote will
resume immediately,\9\ and the NYSE quotation will similarly again be
available for automatic executions.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ NYSE Rule 127.10 defines a ``block'' size as at least 10,000
shares or a quantity of stock having a market value of $200,000 or
more, whichever is less.
    \7\ See NYSE Rule 60(e)(i)(B).
    \8\ See NYSE Rule 1000(a)(v).
    \9\ See NYSE Rule 60(e)(ii)(B).
    \10\ See NYSE Rule 1000(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the NYSE Hybrid MarketSM (``Hybrid Market''),
autoquote and the availability of the Exchange quotation for automatic
executions are likewise both disengaged for limited periods in
connection with two other specific auction market activities: (1) When
the specialist gaps the quotation in accordance with Exchange policies
and procedures,\11\ and (2) when trading on the Exchange reaches a
Liquidity Replenishment Point (``LRP'').\12\ For both of these
situations, as provided in Rule 60(c)(2)(b), the Exchange identifies
its quotation as unavailable for automatic execution in accordance with
Reg. NMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See NYSE Rule 60(e)(i)(A). For a description of gapped
quotations, see Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53539 (March 22,
2006), 71 FR 16353 (March 31, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2004-05) (the ``Hybrid
MarketSM Approval Order'').
    \12\ See NYSE Rule 60(e)(i)(C). For a description of LRPs, see
Hybrid MarketSM Approval Order, supra note 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Through this filing, the Exchange proposes to specify in Rule
60(c)(2)(b) that in addition to the two situations described in the
preceding paragraph, the NYSE will identify its quotation as non-firm
as soon as the report template is opened by the specialist to report a
block-sized transaction, and will continue to do so until the trade has
been reported. This change is necessary because the quotation that is
disseminated when a block-sized transaction is being manually reported
may not reflect the current state of the market in the stock, given the
temporary suspension of autoquoting of the highest bid/lowest offer
that occurs during the reporting of a block-sized transaction. Thus,
identifying the quotation as non-firm when autoquote and automatic
executions are suspended by a block-sized transaction will provide
market participants with more accurate information about the state of
the NYSE quotation. Moreover, identifying the NYSE quotation as non-
firm will bring the dissemination of the quotation during block-sized
transactions more in line with the way in which they are identified
during other Exchange manual auction market activities that similarly
cause the suspension of autoquote and automatic executions--i.e., gap
quotes and LRPs.
    The Exchange completed Phase IV of the Hybrid MarketSM
rollout on February 28, 2007. However, the Phase IV software does not
contain the coding necessary to properly identify the Exchange
quotation as non-firm during the manual report of a block-sized
transaction that involves orders in the Display Book. The NYSE has made
the software changes required and is currently rolling it out as part
of the post-Phase IV software in phases through March 30, 2007, the
date by which it currently expects the rollout to be completed.
    In addition, the NYSE notes that it has requested from the
Commission limited no-action relief from the requirement that the NYSE
enforce compliance by its specialist members with NYSE Rule 19 (Locking
or Crossing Protected Quotations in NMS Stocks), with respect only to
the display of a quotation when a block-sized transaction is being
manually reported,

beginning on the Trading Phase Date until April 5, 2007.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Letter from Mary Yeager, Assistant Secretary, NYSE, to
Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Commission, dated March 2, 2007. In the
letter, the NYSE requested that the no action relief be granted
through April 5, 2007, rather than through March 30, 2007, because
at the time of the request it was contemplated that the post-Phase
IV rollout would not conclude until April 5, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is the
requirement under Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \14\ that an Exchange have
rules that are designed to promote just and equitable principles of
trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder \16\
because the proposal does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection
of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden
on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on
which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may if
consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \17\ Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act requires that a self-
regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of
its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. NYSE
has satisfied the pre-filing requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Normally, a proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) may not
become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. However,
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \18\ permits the Commission to designate a
shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay and designate an operative
date of March 30, 2007 for the proposal. In its filing, the Exchange
noted that, given the temporary suspension of autoquoting of the
highest bid/lowest offer that occurs during the reporting of a block-
sized transaction, the quotation that is disseminated when a block-
sized transaction is being manually reported may not reflect the
current state of the market in the subject stock. Moreover, identifying
the NYSE quotation as non-firm during the manual reporting of block
transactions will bring the dissemination of the quotation more in line
with the way in which quotes are identified during other Exchange
manual auction market activities that similarly cause the suspension of
autoquote and automatic executions--i.e., gap quotes and LRPs
(discussed above). Accordingly, the Exchange believes that this
proposed rule change does not significantly affect the protection of
investors or the public interest and does not impose any significant
burden on competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because the proposed rule change will allow the NYSE to accurately
identify the status of the NYSE quotation during the manual reporting
of block transactions in line with the way in which quotes are
identified during other Exchange manual auction market activities that
similarly cause the suspension of autoquote and automatic executions--
i.e., gap quotes and LRPs.\19\ Accordingly, consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest, the Commission
designates the proposed rule change to be operative on March 30, 2007,
as requested by the Exchange.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The Commission notes that the Exchange must continue to
conduct surveillance with respect to manual auction market
activities, including the manual reporting of block transactions
addressed in this proposed rule change, in order to monitor for
abuse.
    \20\ For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative
delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NYSE-2007-31 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-31. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing
will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal
office of the NYSE. All comments received will be posted without
change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information
from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to
make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File number
SR-NYSE-2007-31 and should be submitted on or before April 24, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-6082 Filed 4-2-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 136 (Thursday, July 16, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42026-42028]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16971]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31023; Amdt. No. 3648]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These
regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised
criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace
System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities,
adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These
changes are designed to provide for the safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective July 16, 2015. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of July 16, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the
affected airport is located;
    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
    For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call
202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free
of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center online at nfdc.faa.gov
to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP
copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service
Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard A. Dunham III, Flight
Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420) Flight Technologies and Procedures
Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration,
Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK. 73125)
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (NFDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20.
The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained on FAA form documents is
unnecessary.
    This amendment provides the affected CFR sections, and specifies
the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective
dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the
procedure and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPs, Takeoff

Minimums and ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for part 97
of this final rule.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the
transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this
amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP
and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as modified by FDC permanent NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, as modified by FDC
permanent NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the
criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument
Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs and Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific
conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in
this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an
emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to
published aeronautical charts.
    The circumstances that created the need for these SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP amendments require making them effective in less than
30 days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these
SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find
that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making these
SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 5, 2015.
John Duncan,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal regulations, Part 97, (14 CFR part 97), is amended by
amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and Takeoff Minimums
and ODPs, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:
    By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31 RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, Identified as follows: EFFECTIVE UPON PUBLICATION

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      AIRAC Date            State               City               Airport          FDC No.      FDC Date                      Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23-Jul-15............  OH               Athens/Albany......  Ohio University....       5/0186     06/02/15  Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Orig.
23-Jul-15............  CO               Holyoke............  Holyoke............       5/0908     06/02/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Orig-D.
23-Jul-15............  CO               Holyoke............  Holyoke............       5/0909     06/02/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig-C.
23-Jul-15............  MI               Detroit............  Willow Run.........       5/0927     06/02/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 23L, Amdt 1A.
23-Jul-15............  TX               Dumas..............  Moore County.......       5/0955      5/26/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Orig.
23-Jul-15............  TX               Dumas..............  Moore County.......       5/0957      5/26/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Orig.
23-Jul-15............  TX               Dumas..............  Moore County.......       5/0958     05/26/15  VOR/DME-A, Amdt 6.
23-Jul-15............  MI               Three Rivers.......  Three Rivers Muni         5/1435      5/20/15  VOR-A, Amdt 10.
                                                              Dr Haines.
23-Jul-15............  OH               Bucyrus............  Port Bucyrus-             5/1689     05/26/15  VOR OR GPS RWY 22, Amdt 4A.
                                                              Crawford County.
23-Jul-15............  TX               Fort Hood/Killeen..  Robert Gray AAF....       5/2282     05/20/15  ILS OR LOC RWY 33, Amdt 1.
23-Jul-15............  TX               Fort Hood/Killeen..  Robert Gray AAF....       5/2283     05/20/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 15, Amdt 1.
23-Jul-15............  TX               Fort Hood/Killeen..  Robert Gray AAF....       5/2285     05/20/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Amdt 1.
23-Jul-15............  TX               Fort Hood/Killeen..  Robert Gray AAF....       5/2286     05/20/15  VOR-A, Amdt 2.
23-Jul-15............  TX               Fort Hood/Killeen..  Robert Gray AAF....       5/2287     05/20/15  COPTER VOR RWY 33, Amdt 2.
23-Jul-15............  UT               Vernal.............  Vernal Rgnl........       5/2584     05/20/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Amdt 1B.
23-Jul-15............  UT               Vernal.............  Vernal Rgnl........       5/2585     05/20/15  VOR RWY 34, Amdt 8.
23-Jul-15............  CA               Arcata/Eureka......  Arcata.............       5/3233     05/20/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Amdt 1.
23-Jul-15............  CA               Arcata/Eureka......  Arcata.............       5/3234     05/20/15  VOR/DME RWY 14, Amdt 1.
23-Jul-15............  CA               Arcata/Eureka......  Arcata.............       5/3235     05/20/15  VOR/DME RWY 1, Amdt 8.
23-Jul-15............  TX               Van Horn...........  Culberson County...       5/4650     05/21/15  NDB RWY 21, Amdt 2B.
23-Jul-15............  TX               Van Horn...........  Culberson County...       5/4651     05/21/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Orig.
23-Jul-15............  CA               Arcata/Eureka......  Arcata.............       5/5469     05/20/15  ILS Y OR LOC/DME RWY 32, Amdt 2B.
23-Jul-15............  CA               Arcata/Eureka......  Arcata.............       5/5481     05/20/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Amdt 1.
23-Jul-15............  CA               Arcata/Eureka......  Arcata.............       5/5488     05/20/15  ILS Z RWY 32, Amdt 30A.
23-Jul-15............  MO               Branson............  M Graham Clark            5/5668     05/26/15  Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 2.
                                                              Downtown.
23-Jul-15............  TX               Harlingen..........  Valley Intl........       5/5857     06/02/15  VOR/DME Z RWY 31, Orig.
23-Jul-15............  WI               New Richmond.......  New Richmond Rgnl..       5/6799     06/02/15  Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Orig.

23-Jul-15............  IL               Kankakee...........  Greater Kankakee...       5/7231     06/02/15  VOR RWY 4, Amdt 6B.
23-Jul-15............  WI               New Richmond.......  New Richmond Rgnl..       5/7837     06/02/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 2A.
23-Jul-15............  WI               New Richmond.......  New Richmond Rgnl..       5/7846     06/02/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Amdt 2B.
23-Jul-15............  MI               Boyne City.........  Boyne City Muni....       5/8161     06/02/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig-A.
23-Jul-15............  MI               Boyne City.........  Boyne City Muni....       5/8162     06/02/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig-A.
23-Jul-15............  MI               Jackson............  Jackson County-           5/8180     06/02/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig-B.
                                                              Reynolds Field.
23-Jul-15............  OK               Cushing............  Cushing Muni.......       5/8845     06/02/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1A.
23-Jul-15............  KY               Louisville.........  Louisville Intl-          5/8899     06/02/15  ILS OR LOC RWY 17R, Amdt 3C.
                                                              Standiford Field.
23-Jul-15............  KY               Louisville.........  Louisville Intl-          5/9501     06/02/15  ILS OR LOC RWY 35L, ILS RWY 35L (SA CAT I),
                                                              Standiford Field.                              ILS RWY 35L (CAT II), ILS RWY 35L (CAT
                                                                                III), Amdt 3B.
23-Jul-15............  KY               Louisville.........  Louisville Intl-          5/9502     06/02/15  ILS OR LOC RWY 35R, ILS RWY 35R (SA CAT I),
                                                              Standiford Field.                              ILS RWY 35R (CAT II), ILS RWY 35R (CAT
                                                                                III), Amdt 4B.
23-Jul-15............  KY               Louisville.........  Louisville Intl-          5/9505     06/02/15  ILS OR LOC RWY 17L, Amdt 4B.
                                                              Standiford Field.
23-Jul-15............  LA               Lafayette..........  Lafayette Rgnl/Paul       5/9530     05/26/15  ILS OR LOC RWY 22L, Amdt 5A.
                                                              Fournet Field.
23-Jul-15............  LA               Lafayette..........  Lafayette Rgnl/Paul       5/9531     05/26/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Orig-B.
                                                              Fournet Field.
23-Jul-15............  LA               Lafayette..........  Lafayette Rgnl/Paul       5/9532     05/26/15  ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 4R, Amdt 2A.
                                                              Fournet Field.
23-Jul-15............  LA               Lafayette..........  Lafayette Rgnl/Paul       5/9533     05/26/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 22L, Amdt 1A.
                                                              Fournet Field.
23-Jul-15............  LA               Lafayette..........  Lafayette Rgnl/Paul       5/9534     05/26/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 4R, Amdt 1A.
                                                              Fournet Field.
23-Jul-15............  LA               Lafayette..........  Lafayette Rgnl/Paul       5/9536     05/26/15  VOR/DME RWY 11, Amdt 1E.
                                                              Fournet Field.
23-Jul-15............  LA               Lafayette..........  Lafayette Rgnl/Paul       5/9537     05/26/15  RADAR 1, Amdt 10.
                                                              Fournet Field.
23-Jul-15............  LA               Lafayette..........  Lafayette Rgnl/Paul       5/9538     05/26/15  Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 2.
                                                              Fournet Field.
23-Jul-15............  TX               Fort Worth.........  Fort Worth Meacham        5/9624     05/20/15  Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 7.
                                                              Intl.
23-Jul-15............  WI               Mosinee............  Central Wisconsin..       5/9628     06/02/15  ILS OR LOC RWY 8, Amdt 13A.
23-Jul-15............  WI               Mosinee............  Central Wisconsin..       5/9629     06/02/15  ILS OR LOC RWY 35, Amdt 2B.
23-Jul-15............  WI               Mosinee............  Central Wisconsin..       5/9630     06/02/15  VOR/DME RWY 35, Amdt 9A.
23-Jul-15............  WI               Mosinee............  Central Wisconsin..       5/9631     06/02/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Amdt 1A.
23-Jul-15............  WI               Mosinee............  Central Wisconsin..       5/9632     06/02/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 1A.
23-Jul-15............  WI               Mosinee............  Central Wisconsin..       5/9633     06/02/15  RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1A.
23-Jul-15............  CA               Merced.............  Merced Rgnl/              5/9712     06/02/15  ILS OR LOC RWY 30, Amdt 14D.
                                                              Macready Field.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2015-16971 Filed 7-15-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 46 (Monday, March 9, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13602-13603]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04774]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0615; FRL-10006-16-Region 3]

Supplemental Information and Data for the Indiana, Pennsylvania
Nonattainment Area for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide Primary National Ambient
Air Quality Standard; Notice of Data Availability (NODA)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of data availability; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing the
availability of new modeling, meteorological and emissions information
and data contained in a package submitted to EPA by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania on February 5, 2020 in support of the Indiana,
Pennsylvania state implementation plan (SIP, or Attainment Plan) for
the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) primary National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS). EPA will be evaluating this information as
well as any public comments received to take final action on the
Attainment Plan. The modeling and large data files submitted are not
provided in the docket but are available upon request by contacting the
person named in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 8, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2017-0615 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission

methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Megan Goold, Planning & Implementation
Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Ms. Goold can also be reached
via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

    EPA proposed approval of the Attainment Plan for the Indiana,
Pennsylvania Nonattainment Area for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS on
July 13, 2018. 83 FR 32606. As part of approving the Attainment Plan,
EPA also proposed to approve into the Pennsylvania SIP SO2
emission limits and associated compliance parameters for Keystone,
Conemaugh, Homer City and Seward Generating Stations. The public
comment period for EPA's proposal closed on August 13, 2018. During the
public comment period, EPA received from one commenter new information
and analysis purporting to show that, using an alternative receptor
grid, the critical emission values (CEVs) for Seward and Conemaugh
Stations modeled a violation of the standard within the boundaries of
the nonattainment area (NAA). In response, the Pennsylvania Department
of Environmental Protection (PADEP) opted to provide EPA with
supplemental information to provide further support for their submitted
Attainment Plan. The supplemental information includes: (1) A
supplemental air dispersion modeling report, (2) Supplemental air
dispersion modeling data, (3) Supplemental air dispersion modeling
protocol, (4) A meteorological monitoring plan, (5) Meteorological
monitoring data, (6) Meteorological monitoring quality assurance,
quality control, and audit reports, (7) Clean Air Markets Division
(CAMD) emission data for 2010-2018, and (8) Continuous Emissions
Monitoring (CEM) data for 2010-2019 (3rd Quarter).
    PADEP's supplemental modeling report provides additional modeling
using the newly provided site specific meteorological data to support
the SO2 emission limits established in the original
attainment plan. The study supplements the modeling submitted in 2017
(see Docket EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0615-0018 which can be located via https://www.regulations.gov) to focus on the area in the NAA near Conemaugh
and Seward stations. The meteorological data collection spanned the 13-
month period of August 1, 2015 through August 31, 2016. Due to better
SOnic Detection And Radar (SODAR) data capture percentages for the
September 1, 2015 through August 31, 2016 period, this 12-month period
was used for this supplemental modeling analysis. PADEP used AERMOD
dispersion model 16 (Version 19191), current as of August 2019, to
evaluate air quality impacts from the emission sources of interest. The
South Fayette, Pennsylvania monitor, which is located about 62
kilometers to the west-southwest of the Indiana County NAA, was used to
determine the uniform regional background component for the NAAQS
SO2 modeling. The most recent 3-year period (2016-2018) of
emissions data were used in the modeling analysis and details on the
emissions processing are provided in the submittal, which can be found
in the docket for this notice.
    The modeling was used to define CEVs for Seward and Conemaugh
Generating Stations that show 99th percentile peak daily 1-hour maximum
concentrations (``design concentrations'') complying with the 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS. For the Seward and Conemaugh Generating Stations,
longer-term emission rates that are discounted from the 1-hour CEV
rates were derived. Different averaging times were selected to best fit
the emission source profiles at each plant. Conemaugh emission rates
are based upon a 3-hour block emission average, and the Seward emission
rate is based upon a rolling 30-day average. The current SO2
emission limits for the modeled emission sources at the Conemaugh and
Seward Stations are lower than the longer-term emission rates that
demonstrate attainment with the NAAQS through modeling.
    To demonstrate that Seward's rolling 30-day emission limit is
protective of the NAAQS, PADEP submitted randomly reassigned emissions
(RRE) modeling. One hundred AERMOD simulations were run using randomly
reassigned 1-hour emission rates for Seward's emissions along with
constant CEV 1-hour emission rates for the remaining three
SO2 sources in the NAA plus regional background (South
Fayette monitor for 2016-2018 as discussed in Section 4.7 of the
Modeling Report). For each of the 100 modeling runs with one year of
on-site meteorology, the 99th percentile peak daily 1-hour maximum at
each receptor resulted in design concentrations that comply with the
NAAQS. The highest 99th percentile daily maximum SO2
concentration of the 100 model simulations was 190.05 micrograms per
meter cubed ([mu]g/m \3\) (this occurred in simulation run 44) and is
less than the NAAQS (196.4 [mu]g/m \3\).
    The supplemental modeling purports to demonstrate that a lower CEV
for Seward Generating Station demonstrates attainment compared to the
CEV provided in the original attainment plan. The rolling 30-day
emission limit for Seward has remained unchanged. The newly submitted
RRE modeling purportedly demonstrates that the rolling 30-day emission
limit for Seward is protective of the NAAQS. The CEV for Conemaugh
Generating Station has not changed from the original Attainment Plan as
a result of the supplemental modeling analysis, and therefore no
additional analysis was provided in support of the source's longer term
3-hour block limit.
    EPA is seeking comment on the Pennsylvania supplemental information
submitted on February 5, 2020 as supporting analysis that shows the
previously-established longer term emission limits for Seward and
Conemaugh Generating Stations demonstrate attainment of the 2010
SO2 NAAQS in the Nonattainment Area. EPA is not seeking
comment on any other aspect of the Attainment Plan, which has already
gone through the public comment process from July 13, 2018 through
August 13, 2018.

    Dated: February 24, 2020.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2020-04774 Filed 3-6-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P