annual progress reports under the subcategory for EGUs permanently
ceasing coal combustion. As with the reporting and recordkeeping
requirements of the 2020 rule, for the early adopter subcategory, EPA
is proposing to balance the additional flexibilities for certifying to
the subcategory at a later date with additional reporting and
recordkeeping to provide extra certainty that plants still intend to
avail themselves of those provisions. Moreover, EPA is proposing to add
reporting and recordkeeping requirements to facilitate evaluation of
CRL discharges through groundwater. EPA is also proposing to make
conforming changes that would remove reporting and recordkeeping
requirements applying to LUEGUs.
    Second, to increase transparency for impacted communities, EPA is
proposing to require all steam electric plants subject to the reporting
and recordkeeping requirements of 423.19(d)-(k) to post this reporting
and recordkeeping information to a public-facing website.\184\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \184\ EPA is seeking to adopt provisions for the websites
consistent with those of the CCR rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, EPA is soliciting comment on a potential reporting
requirement intended to enhance flexibility for the transition to zero-
discharge limitations for FGD wastewater and BA transport water.
1. Summary of Proposed Changes to the Annual Progress Reports for EGUs
Permanently Ceasing Coal Combustion by 2028
    EPA proposes to modify the annual progress reports for the
subcategory of EGUs permanently ceasing coal combustion by 2028.
Specifically, EPA proposes adding a requirement that the annual
progress reports include either the official filing to the facility's
reliability authority or a certification providing an estimate of when
such a filing will be made. Furthermore, EPA is proposing that the
final annual progress report prior to permanent cessation of coal
combustion must include the official filing. While facilities may
already include these filings in the NOPP or annual progress reports,
these filings were not explicitly required in the 2020 rule and provide
the strongest assurance that a facility will not voluntarily change its
plans and continue operations beyond 2028. EPA solicits comment on
whether this or additional requirements would further support the
operation of the subcategory without unduly burdening regulated
facilities.
2. Summary of the Proposed Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for
Early Adopters
    EPA is proposing new reporting and recordkeeping requirements for
early adopters, including an initial NOPP and annual progress reports.
EPA is proposing that the initial NOPP contain three items. First, EPA
is proposing the NOPP include a statement that the facility discharged
FGD wastewater after the effective date of the 2020 rule (85 FR 64650,
October 13, 2020). Second, EPA is proposing the NOPP include a
demonstration that the facility already complies with the limitations
for FGD wastewater and BA transport water in the 2020 rule by March 29,
2023. Third, EPA is proposing the NOPP include information, with
milestones, about plans for the permanent cessation of coal combustion
by 2032 from the relevant EGUs. EPA is proposing the first two
reporting requirements to ensure that early adopters relied on EPA's
rules when incurring the costs to comply with existing regulations and
subsequently did comply with these regulations. Specifically, EPA is
proposing that this information include diagrams and descriptions of
the relevant treatment chains, commission dates, and monitoring data
demonstrating compliance. EPA is proposing the latter requirement to
ensure that facility have a firm commitment to permanently cease coal
combustion by 2032. For this requirement, EPA is proposing to require
the same information and milestones as were required for the permanent
cessation of coal combustion subcategory by 2028 in the 2020 rule.
Finally, EPA is proposing that, as with the permanent cessation of coal
combustion subcategory in the 2020 rule (and consistent with the
proposed modification above), the early adopter subcategory also
include annual progress reports on completion of milestones, upcoming
milestones, and including certifications and official filings made to
the reliability authority. Thus, EPA proposes the same language for
consistency.
3. Summary of Proposed Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for CRL
Discharges Through Groundwater
    As discussed in Section VII of this preamble above, EPA is
proposing BAT limitations and PSES for CRL. EPA further discusses in
that section and in the implementation section above that CRL can be
discharged not only through end-of-pipe discharges, but also through
groundwater. EPA is proposing to include annual reporting and
recordkeeping requirements to facilitate the permitting authorities'
review of CRL discharges through groundwater to surface waters that are
subject to NPDES permits. It would also facilitate compliance
monitoring and make compliance information available to the public.

    EPA is proposing that facilities with discharges of CRL through
groundwater file an Annual Combustion Residual Leachate Monitoring
Report with the permitting authority, or control authority in the case
of indirect dischargers, annually. This annual reporting requirement
would be implemented via NPDES permits that authorize discharges of CRL
through groundwater or directly where an indirect discharger eliminates
the discharge through groundwater and subsequently discharges the
treated CRL to a POTW. EPA is proposing that this report provide a
comprehensive set of monitoring data. EPA is proposing this requirement
to facilitate permitting and control authorities' ability to determine
compliance with CRL limitations and to increase transparency to local
communities. Thus, in addition to the data provided under 40 CFR part
127, where a CRL discharge occurs through groundwater, EPA is proposing
to require groundwater monitoring data on the CRL leaving each landfill
and surface impoundment and where it enters surface waterbodies. To
increase transparency to local communities, EPA is proposing to require
the report to include monitoring data on all the pollutants treated by
chemical precipitation, rather than just mercury and arsenic. EPA
solicits comment on this approach.
    EPA solicits comment on all aspects of the proposed CRL monitoring
report including the scope, types of information to be included, and
the timeframes for submitting these reports to the permitting
authority. EPA also solicits comment on whether there are additional
pieces of information that would increase transparency or that the
public or permitting authorities would find helpful. For example, one
comment in a community meeting suggested that EPA require some limited
independent monitoring and reporting to increase local community
members' trust in any results presented. EPA also solicits comment on
whether alternatives with a lower burden should be available in certain
circumstances.
4. Proposed Deletion of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for
LUEGUs
    EPA is proposing to remove the reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for LUEGUs in current section 423.19(c) and for the
associated BMP plans in current section 423.19(d), since EPA is
proposing to eliminate this subcategory, as described in Section VII of
this preamble above.
5. Proposed Requirement To Post Information to a Publicly Available
Website
    The reporting and recordkeeping requirements of the CCR rule
included a novel approach for posting information to a publicly
available website. This was initially done because at the time the CCR
rule was signed, EPA did not have enforcement authority over the CCR
rule. Thus, given the self-implementing nature of the regulations, EPA
sought to make information more readily available to states and the
public who could enforce the CCR rule through citizen suits.\185\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \185\ While the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation
Act later provided EPA with permitting and oversight authority, the
CCR rule continues to require posting to publicly available
websites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In contrast to the CCR rule, ELGs are implemented largely through
authorized state permitting programs with EPA oversight. Nevertheless,
one message that EPA received in initial outreach to communities was
that there was a lack of trust of utilities (and in some cases, the
states that regulate them). Another message was that there was an
interest in more accessible information. Given the success CCR websites
have achieved in disseminating information to a variety of
stakeholders, EPA proposes a comparable posting requirement for the
ELG. Specifically, EPA proposes that all reporting and recordkeeping
information not only be retained by the regulated entity and provided
to the permitting authority, but that it also be posted to a public
website for 10 years, or the length of the permit plus five years,
whichever is longer. EPA solicits comment on this timeframe.
Furthermore, EPA's proposal would include NOPPs and other filings that
have occurred since the 2020 rule. These new requirements are detailed
in proposed regulatory text for section 423.19(c), and EPA solicits
comment on the appropriateness of this approach, as well as any
modifications to the approach that could improve transparency. EPA also
proposes to allow this posting on existing CCR compliance websites to
reduce paperwork burden and make it easier for communities to access.
The Agency solicits comment on other ways such postings could be done
while minimizing burdens.
6. Additional Solicitation on Providing a More Flexible Transition to
Zero Discharge
    EPA solicits comment on creation of a temporary reporting
requirement, which would be in place prior to the facility meeting a
zero-discharge limitation. Under such an approach, a plant would not
include an optimization period in the calculation of its ``as soon as
possible'' date. Rather, the plant would monitor and report any
necessary discharges over the first year of attempted zero discharge
while the system was being optimized and these discharges would not be
a violation of the zero-discharge requirements. For subsequent years,
such a flexibility would be discontinued.

D. Site-Specific Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations

    EPA regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(d)(1), implementing section
301(b)(1)(C) of the CWA require each NPDES permit to include any
requirements, in addition to or more stringent than ELGs or standards
promulgated pursuant to sections 301, 304, 306, 307, 318, and 405 of
the CWA, necessary to achieve water quality standards established under
section 303 of the CWA, including state narrative criteria for water
quality. Those same regulations require that limitations must control
all pollutants or pollutant parameters (either conventional,
nonconventional, or toxic pollutants) that the Director determines are
or may be discharged at a level that will cause, have the reasonable
potential to cause, or contribute to an excursion above any state water
quality standard, including state narrative criteria for water quality
(40 CFR 122.44(d)(1)(i)).
    The preamble to the 2015 rule discussed bromide as a parameter for
which water quality-based effluent limitations may be appropriate. EPA
stated its recommendation that permitting authorities carefully
consider whether water quality-based effluent limitations for bromide
or TDS would be appropriate for FGD wastewater discharged from steam
electric power plants upstream of drinking water intakes. EPA also
stated its recommendation that the permitting authority notify any
downstream drinking water treatment plants of the discharge of bromide.
    While the 2020 rule did not include limitations on bromide for FGD
wastewater or BA transport water (beyond the removals that would be
required of plants choosing to meet the VIP limitations), the current
proposal would require zero discharge of FGD wastewater and BA
transport water for most plants. Nevertheless, EPA is proposing
subcategories for these wastewaters, and new data submitted to EPA on
CRL show measurable levels of

bromide.\186\ Therefore, the records for the 2015 rule, the 2020 rule,
and this proposal continue to suggest that permitting authorities
should consider establishing water quality-based effluent limitations
where necessary to meet applicable water quality standards to protect
of populations served by downstream drinking water treatment plants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \186\ The record also includes iodide in these discharges,
another pollutant which should be considered alongside bromide for
water quality-based effluent limitations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In consultations conducted with state and local government
entities, EPA received comments from the American Water Works
Association (AWWA) and the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies.
These comments requested that EPA consider technologies that could
treat upstream pollutants at the point of discharge, but also suggested
that EPA empower states to address the issue as well. The latter
discussion referenced the approaches discussed in Methods to Assess
Anthropogenic Bromide Loads from Coal-Fired Power Plants and Their
Potential Effect on Downstream Drinking Water Utilities.\187\ This
document, provided in comments during the 2020 rulemaking and again
during consultations on the current rulemaking, describes
methodologies, data sources, and considerations for constructing an
approach to bromide issues on a site-specific basis. This document
presents additional data sources that NPDES permitting authorities
could use to establish site-specific, water quality-based effluent
limitations (see, e.g., figure 29 in AWWA's document). The document
also provides examples of where states have already taken similar
action. For example, AWWA cites California's 0.05 mg/L standard for in-
river bromide to protect public health for specific waterways and
drinking water treatment systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \187\ Available online at: www.awwa.org/Portals/0/AWWA/ETS/Resources/17861ManagingBromideREPORT.pdf?ver=2020-01-09-151706-107.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to considering water quality-based effluent limitations
for parameters present in the wastestreams in this proposal, EPA also
calls attention to the need to address potential for per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) discharges. In EPA's PFAS Strategic
Roadmap,\188\ the Agency laid out actions that would prevent PFAS from
entering the environment. Specifically, EPA stated it would
``proactively use existing NPDES authorities to reduce discharges of
PFAS at the source and obtain more comprehensive information through
monitoring on the sources of PFAS and quantity of PFAS discharged by
these sources.'' EPA has already drafted a memorandum covering
facilities where EPA is the permitting authority,\189\ as well as
guidance to state permitting authorities to address PFAS in NPDES
permits.\190\ While the steam electric power sector was not identified
as one of the top PFAS dischargers, EPA notes that PFAS may
nevertheless be present in steam electric discharges. For example, the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has found PFAS at eight power
plants.\191\ In addition, firefighting foam used in exercises or actual
fires at steam electric plants could contain PFAS. Therefore,
permitting or control authorities may appropriately consider whether
PFAS monitoring and any further restrictions (e.g., BMPs) would be
appropriate at a given facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \188\ U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2021. PFAS
Strategic Roadmap: EPA's Commitments to Action 2021-2024. October
18. Available online at: www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2021-10/pfas-roadmap_final-508.pdf.
    \189\ Fox, Radhika. 2022. Addressing PFAS Discharges in EPA-
Issued NPDES Permits and Expectations Where EPA is the Pretreatment
Control Authority. April 28. Available online at: www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-04/npdes_pfas-memo.pdf.
    \190\ Fox, Radhika. 2022. Addressing PFAS Discharges in NPDES
Permits and Through the Pretreatment Program and Monitoring
Programs. December 5. Available online at: https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-12/NPDES_PFAS_State%20Memo_December_2022.pdf.
    \191\ The maximum sampled concentrations in discharge from eight
power plants was 28 ng/L for PFOS and 35 ng/L for PFOA, which the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources theorized was due to
concentration in cooling tower effluent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

XVI. Related Acts of Congress, E.O.s, and Agency Initiatives

    Additional information about these statutes and E.O.s can be found
at www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. E.O.s 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review)

    This proposed rule was submitted to the OMB for review as
significant under Section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866. Any changes
made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the
docket. EPA prepared an analysis of the potential social costs and
benefits associated with this action. This analysis is contained in
Chapter 12 of the BCA and is available in the docket.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    EPA has submitted the information collection activities in this
proposed rule to the OMB for approval under the Paperwork Reduction
Act. The Information Collection Request (ICR) document EPA prepared has
been assigned EPA ICR number 2752.01 and OMB Control Number 2040-NEW. A
copy of the ICR is available in the docket for this rule and is briefly
summarized here.
    As described in Section XV.C of this preamble, EPA is proposing
several changes to the individual reporting and recordkeeping
requirements of section 423.19 for specific subcategories of plants
and/or plants that have certain types of discharges. EPA is proposing
to add reporting and recordkeeping requirements to plants in the early
adopter subcategory and plants that discharge CRL through groundwater,
and to remove reporting and recordkeeping requirements for LUEGUs. EPA
is also proposing a new requirement for plants to post reports to a
publicly available website.
    Respondents/affected entities: The respondents affected by this ICR
are steam electric power plants. The North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) identification number applicable to
respondents is 221112: Electric Power Generation Plants--Fossil Fuel
Electric Power Generation. The U.S. Census Bureau describes this U.S.
industry as establishments primarily engaged in operating fossil fuel
powered electric power generation facilities. These facilities use
fossil fuels, such as coal, oil, or gas, in internal combustion or
combustion turbine conventional steam process to produce electric
energy. The electric energy produced in these establishments is
provided to electric power transmission systems or to electric power
distribution systems.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Proposed language at 40 CFR
423.19 (c)-(l).
    Estimated number of respondents: EPA estimates 100 steam electric
facilities would be subject to this proposed rulemaking.
    Frequency of response: EPA made the following assumptions for
estimating frequency:
     NOPPs, notices, and the Leachate Groundwater Information
Report (LGIR) would be submitted one time (in the first year of the
requirements).
     Progress reports and the annual LGIR would be submitted
once a year following the submittal of the official NOPP (i.e., twice
over a three-year period).

     Progress reports associated with EPA's VIP program or
NOPPs that have already been submitted would be submitted once a year
following the publication of the final rule.
    Total estimated burden: For facilities, the estimated facility
universe for any reporting for the purpose of this estimate is 100
facilities. EPA estimates the total one-time labor hours associated
with this ICR for facilities is 11,525 and total annual labor hours
ranging from 1,400 to 7,260 for a total annual average of 9,160 hours.
For permitting/control authorities, the estimated total one-time labor
hours associated with this ICR is 4,350 and total annual labor hours
ranging from 30 to 1,900 for a total annual average of 2,700 hours.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: For facilities, EPA estimates the total one-
time labor costs to be $667,000 and total annual labor costs to range
from $81,000 to $422,300 for a total annual average of $531,000. For
permitting/control Authorities, EPA estimates the total one-time labor
costs to be $212,000 and total annual labor costs to range from $1,300
to $89,800 for a total annual average of $131,000.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    Submit your comments on EPA's need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden using the docket identified at the
beginning of this rule. Written comments and recommendations for the
proposed information collection may also be sent within 30 days of
publication of this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find
this particular information collection by selecting ``Currently under
30-day Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search
function. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR
between 30 and 60 days after receipt, OMB must receive comments no
later than April 28, 2023. EPA will respond to any ICR-related comments
in the final rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. The small entities subject to the requirements of this
action include small businesses and small governmental jurisdictions
that own steam electric plants. EPA has determined that 229 to 427
entities own steam electric plants subject to the ELGs, of which 109 to
200 entities are small. These small entities own a total of 250 steam
electric plants (out of the total of 871 plants), including 20 plants
estimated to incur costs under the regulatory options. EPA considered
the impacts of the regulatory options in this proposal on small
businesses using a cost-to-revenue test. The analysis compares the cost
of implementing wastewater controls under the four regulatory options
to those under baseline (which reflects the 2020 rule, as explained in
Section V of this preamble). Small entities estimated to incur
compliance costs exceeding one or more of the one percent and three
percent impact thresholds were identified as potentially incurring a
significant impact. For the proposed rule (Option 3), EPA's analysis
shows only three small entities (one non-utility and two
municipalities) expected to incur incremental costs equal to or greater
than one percent of revenue. For one of these small entities (non-
utility), the incremental cost of the proposed rule exceeds three
percent of revenue. Details of this analysis are presented in Chapter 8
of the RIA, included in the docket.
    These results support EPA's finding of no significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains a Federal mandate under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538 that may result in expenditures
of $100 million (adjusted annually for inflation) or more for state,
local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector
in any one year ($170 million in 2021 dollars). Accordingly, EPA has
prepared a written statement required under section 202 of UMRA. The
statement is included in the docket for this action (see Chapter 9 in
the RIA report) and briefly summarized below.
    Consistent with the intergovernmental consultation provisions of
section 204 of the UMRA, EPA has initiated consultations with
government entities potentially affected by this proposed rule. As
described in Section XVI.E of this preamble, EPA held consultation
meetings with elected officials or their designated employees in
January 2022 to ensure their meaningful and timely input into the
proposed ELGs development. As described in Section XVI.F of this
preamble, EPA also initiated consultation and coordination with
federally recognized tribal governments in February 2022.
    Consistent with section 205, EPA has identified and considered a
reasonable number of regulatory alternatives to develop proposed BAT.
These regulatory options are discussed in Section VII of this preamble.
These options included a range of technology-based approaches. As
discussed in detail in Section VII.B of this preamble, EPA is proposing
Option 3 as the preferred BAT after considering the factors required
under CWA section 304(b)(2)(B). The technologies are available, are
economically achievable, and have acceptable non-water quality
environmental impacts.
    This proposed rule is not subject to the requirements of section
203 of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. To assess the
impact of compliance requirements on small governments (i.e.,
governments with a population of less than 50,000), EPA compared total
costs and costs per plant estimated to be incurred by small governments
with the costs estimated to be incurred by large governments. EPA also
compared costs for small government-owned plants with those of non-
government-owned facilities. The Agency evaluated both the average and
maximum annualized costs per plant. Chapter 9 of the RIA report
provides details of these analyses. In all these comparisons, both for
the cost totals and, in particular, for the average and maximum cost
per plant, the costs for small government-owned facilities were less
than those for large government-owned facilities or small non-
government-owned facilities. On this basis, EPA concludes that the
compliance cost requirements of the proposed steam electric ELGs would
not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.

E. E.O. 13132: Federalism

    EPA has concluded that this action has federalism implications
because it imposes direct compliance costs on state or local
governments, and the Federal Government will not provide the funds
necessary to pay those costs.
    As discussed in Section XVI.B of this preamble, EPA anticipates
that this proposed action would not impose incremental administrative
burden on states from issuing, reviewing, and overseeing compliance
with discharge requirements. EPA has identified 148 steam electric
plants owned by 64 state or local government entities. Under the
proposed regulatory Option 3 (BAT and PSES), EPA projects that 17
government-owned plants would incur

compliance costs. EPA estimates that the maximum compliance cost in any
one year to governments (excluding the Federal Government) for the four
regulatory options ranges from $31 million under Option 1 to $46
million under Options 3 and 4 (see Chapter 9 of the RIA report for
details).
    EPA provides the following federalism summary impact statement.
    EPA consulted with state and local officials early in the process
of developing the proposed action to permit them to have meaningful and
timely input into its development. EPA invited government officials to
a consultation meeting held on January 27, 2022. EPA conducted outreach
with several intergovernmental associations representing elected
officials and encouraged their members to participate in the meeting,
including the National Governors Association, the National Conference
of State Legislatures, the Council of State Governments, the National
Association of Counties, the National League of Cities, the U.S.
Conference of Mayors, the County Executives of America, and the
National Associations of Towns and Townships.
    Participants representing 15 state and local government
organizations participated in the virtual consultation meeting. EPA
representatives were also present. EPA received five sets of unique
written comments after the meeting. Two comments came from trade
associations representing public water systems. These comments
generally recommended more advanced treatment to reduce the pollutants
making their way downstream to intakes for government-owned public
water systems or, alternatively, to empower states to more effectively
address these discharges. The remaining three comments came from the
American Public Power Association and two of its member utilities.
These comments recommended the retention of existing limitations and
subcategories, a careful consideration of the CRL definition and BAT,
and a compliance pathway for utilities that installed or are installing
technologies to comply with the 2015 and 2020 rules.
    As explained in Section VII of this preamble, EPA is proposing more
stringent limitations on several wastestreams that would alleviate
concerns raised by the public water systems. At the same time, EPA's
preferred option (Option 3) includes retention of the permanent
cessation of coal combustion subcategory and a proposed subcategory for
early adopters. EPA believes these differentiated requirements would
alleviate some of the concerns raised by publicly owned utilities.
Further, as explained in Section VIII of this preamble, EPA's analysis
demonstrates that the proposed requirements are economically achievable
for the steam electric industry as a whole and for plants owned by
state or local government entities. EPA is including in the docket for
this proposed action a memorandum that responds to the comments it
received through this consultation and the consultations described in
Section XVI.F of this preamble below. For further information regarding
the consultation process and supplemental materials provided to state
and local government representatives, please go to the steam electric
power generating effluent guidelines website at: www.epa.gov/eg/2021-supplemental-steam-electric-rulemaking. In the spirit of E.O. 13132,
and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA
and state and local governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on
the proposed ELGs from state and local officials.

F. E.O. 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments

    This proposed action would not have tribal implications, as
specified in E.O. 13175 (65 FR 67249 (November 9, 2000)). It would not
have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian Tribes, or
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes as specified in E.O. 13175. EPA's analyses
show that no facility subject to these proposed ELGs is owned by tribal
governments. Thus, E.O. 13175 does not apply to this proposed action.
    Although E.O. 13175 does not apply to this action, EPA consulted
with tribal officials in developing this action. EPA initiated
consultation and coordination with federally recognized tribal
governments in January 2022, sharing information about the steam
electric effluent guidelines rulemaking with the National Tribal
Caucus, the National Tribal Water Council, and several individual
tribes. EPA continued this government-to-government dialogue and, on
February 1 and February 9, 2022, invited tribal representatives to
participate in further discussions about the rulemaking process and
objectives, with a focus on identifying specific ways the rulemaking
may affect tribes.\192\ The consultation process ended on March 29,
2022. While no tribal governments requested direct government-to-
government consultations, EPA received written comments from three
tribes: the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, the Mille Lacs
Band of Ojibwe, and the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians.
These comments conveyed the importance of historical tribal waters and
rights (e.g., fishing, trapping) and recommended more stringent
technological controls to protect those rights or encourage retirement
or fuel conversion of old coal-fired units. EPA is including in the
docket for this action a memorandum that provides a response to the
comments it received through this consultation and the consultations
described in Sections XVI.D and XVI.E of this preamble above. For
further information regarding the consultation process and supplemental
materials provided to tribal representatives, please go to the steam
electric power generating effluent guidelines website at: www.epa.gov/eg/2021-supplemental-steam-electric-rulemaking. EPA specifically
solicits additional comment on this proposed action from tribal
officials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \192\ As discussed in Sections XIII and XVI.J of this preamble,
EPA also did targeted outreach to communities in the top tier of its
EJ screening analysis which included two tribal communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. E.O. 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks
and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to E.O. 13045 because EPA does not
believe the environmental health risks or safety risks addressed by
this action present a disproportionate risk to children. This action's
health and risk assessments are discussed in Chapters 4 and 5 of the
BCA and are summarized below.
    EPA identified several ways in which the proposed regulatory
options could benefit children, including by potentially reducing
health risks from exposure to pollutants present in steam electric
plant discharges, or through impacts of the discharges on the quality
of source water used by public water systems. This reduction arises
from more stringent pollutant limitations as compared to baseline. In
particular, EPA quantified the changes in IQ losses from lead exposure
among preschool children and from mercury exposure in utero resulting
from maternal fish consumption under the four regulatory options as
compared to baseline. EPA also estimated changes in the lifetime risk
of developing bladder cancer due to exposure to TTHM in drinking water.
For this analysis, EPA did not estimate children-specific risks because
these adverse health effects normally follow

long-term exposure. Finally, EPA estimated changes in air-related
adverse health effects resulting from changes in the profile of
electricity generation under Option 3 as compared to baseline. The
analysis found that the resulting reductions in PM2.5 and
ozone will benefit children by reducing asthma onset and symptoms,
allergy symptoms, emergency room visits and hospital visits for
respiratory conditions, and school absences. These analyses show that
all the regulatory options presented in this proposal would benefit
children.

H. E.O. 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use

    This proposed action is not a ``significant energy action'' because
it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. EPA analyzed the potential energy
effects of the proposed rule relative to baseline and found minimal or
no impacts on electricity generation, generating capacity, cost of
energy production, or dependence on a foreign supply of energy.
Specifically, the Agency's analysis found that the proposed rule would
not reduce electricity production by more than 1 billion kWhs per year
or by 500 MW of installed capacity, nor would the proposed rule
increase U.S. dependence on foreign energy supplies. For more detail on
the potential energy effects of the regulatory options in this
proposal, see section 10.7 in the RIA, available in the docket.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. E.O. 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    E.O. 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) directs Federal
agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to
make EJ part of their missions by identifying and addressing
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority
populations (people of color and/or Indigenous peoples) and low-income
populations.
    EPA believes that the human health or environmental conditions
existing prior to this action result in or have the potential to result
in disproportionate and adverse human health or environmental effects
on people of color, low-income populations, and/or Indigenous peoples.
    EPA believes that this action is likely to reduce existing
disproportionate and adverse effects on people of color, low-income
populations, and/or Indigenous peoples. A summary of the projected
effects on these populations are contained in the EJA, which is
available in the docket and summarized in Section XIII of this preamble
above.

Appendix A to the Preamble: Definitions, Acronyms, and Abbreviations
Used in This Preamble

    The following acronyms, abbreviations, and terms are used in this
preamble. These terms are provided for convenience to the reader and
they are not regulatory definitions with the force or effect of law,
nor are they to be used as guidance for implementation of this proposed
rule.

    Administrator. The Administrator of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
    Agency. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
    BAT. Best available technology economically achievable, as
defined by CWA sections 301(b)(2)(A) and 304(b)(2)(B).
    BCA. Benefit Cost Analysis.
    Bioaccumulation. General term describing a process by which
chemicals are taken up by an organism either directly from exposure
to a contaminated medium or by consumption of food containing the
chemical, resulting in a net accumulation of the chemical over time
by the organism.
    BMP. Best management practice.
    BA. Bottom ash. The ash, including EGU slag, that settles in a
furnace or is dislodged from furnace walls. Economizer ash is
included when it is collected with BA.
    BA purge water. The water discharged from a wet BA handling
system that recycles some, but not all, of its BA transport water.
    BPT. The best practicable control technology currently
available, as defined by CWA sections 301(b)(1) and 304(b)(1).
    CBI. Confidential business information.
    CCR. Coal combustion residuals.
    CWA. Clean Water Act; The Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), as amended, e.g., by
the Clean Water Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 95-217) and the Water Quality
Act of 1987 (Pub. L. 100-4).
    Combustion residuals. Solid wastes associated with combustion-
related power plant processes, including fly ash and BA from coal-,
petroleum coke-, or oil-fired units; FGD solids; FGMC wastes; and
other wastewater treatment solids associated with combustion
wastewater. In addition to the residuals associated with coal
combustion, this also includes residuals associated with the
combustion of other fossil fuels.
    Direct discharge. (1) Any addition of any ``pollutant'' or
combination of pollutants to ``waters of the United States'' from
any ``point source'' or (2) any addition of any pollutant or
combination of pollutant to waters of the ``contiguous zone'' or the
ocean from any point source other than a vessel or other floating
craft that is being used as a means of transportation. This
definition includes additions of pollutants into waters of the
United States from surface runoff that is collected or channeled by
man; discharges through pipes, sewers, or other conveyances owned by
a state, municipality, or other person that do not lead to a
treatment works; and discharges through pipes, sewers, or other
conveyances that lead into privately owned treatment works. This
term does not include addition of pollutants by any ``indirect
discharger.''
    Direct discharger. A plant that discharges treated or untreated
wastewaters into waters of the United States.
    DOE. Department of Energy.
    Dry BA handling system. A system that does not use water as the
transport medium to convey BA away from the EGU. Dry handling
systems include systems that collect and convey the BA without using
any water, as well as systems in which BA is quenched in a water
bath and then mechanically or pneumatically conveyed away from the
EGU. Dry BA handling systems do not include wet sluicing systems
(such as remote MDS or complete recycle systems).
    Effluent limitation. Under CWA section 502(11), any restriction,
including schedules of compliance, established by a state or the
Administrator on quantities, rates, and concentrations of chemical,
physical, biological, and other constituents that are discharged
from point sources into navigable waters, the waters of the
contiguous zone, or the ocean.
    EGU. Electric generating unit.
    EIA. Energy Information Administration.
    EJA. Environmental Justice Analysis
    ELGs. Effluent limitations guidelines and standards.
    E.O. Executive Order.
    EPA. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
    FA. Fly ash.
    Facility. Any NPDES ``point source'' or any other facility or
activity (including land or appurtenances thereto) that is subject
to regulation under the NPDES program.
    FGD. Flue gas desulfurization.
    FGD wastewater. Wastewater generated specifically from the wet
FGD scrubber system that contacts the flue gas or the FGD solids,
including, but not limited to, the blowdown or purge from the FGD
scrubber system, overflow or underflow from the solids separation
process, FGD solids wash water, and the filtrate from the solids
dewatering process. Wastewater generated from cleaning the FGD
scrubber, cleaning FGD solids separation equipment, cleaning FGD
solids dewatering equipment, or that is collected in floor drains in
the FGD process area is not considered FGD wastewater.
    Fly ash. The ash that is carried out of the furnace by a gas
stream and collected by a capture device such as a mechanical
precipitator, electrostatic precipitator, and/or fabric filter.
Economizer ash is included in this definition when it is collected
with FA. Ash is not included in this definition when it is collected
in wet scrubber air pollution control systems whose primary purpose
is particulate removal.
    Groundwater. Water that is found in the saturated part of the
ground underneath the land surface.

    Indirect discharge. Wastewater discharged or otherwise
introduced to a POTW.
    IPM. Integrated Planning Model.
    Landfill. A disposal facility or part of a facility or plant
where solid waste, sludges, or other process residuals are placed in
or on any natural or manmade formation in the earth for disposal and
which is not a storage pile, a land treatment facility, a surface
impoundment, an underground injection well, a salt dome or salt bed
formation, an underground mine, a cave, or a corrective action
management unit.
    MDS. Mechanical drag system.
    Mechanical drag system. BA handling system that collects BA from
the bottom of an EGU in a water-filled trough. The water bath in the
trough quenches the hot BA as it falls from the EGU and seals the
EGU gases. A drag chain operates in a continuous loop to drag BA
from the water trough up an incline, which dewaters the BA by
gravity, draining the water back to the trough as the BA moves
upward. The dewatered BA is often conveyed to a nearby collection
area, such as a small bunker outside the EGU building, from which it
is loaded onto trucks and either sold or transported to a landfill.
The MDS is considered a dry BA handling system because the ash
transport mechanism is mechanical removal by the drag chain, not the
water.
    Mortality. Death rate or proportion of deaths in a population.
    NAICS. North American Industry Classification System.
    NPDES. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
    NSPSs. New Source Performance Standards.
    ORCR. Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery.
    Paste. A substance containing solids in a fluid which behaves as
a solid until a force is applied that causes it to behave like a
fluid.
    Paste landfill. A landfill that receives any paste designed to
set into a solid after the passage of a reasonable amount of time.
    Point source. Any discernible, confined, and discrete
conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch, channel,
tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling stock,
concentrated animal feeding operation, vessel, or other floating
craft from which pollutants are or may be discharged. The term does
not include agricultural stormwater discharges or return flows from
irrigated agriculture. See CWA section 502(14), 33 U.S.C. 1362(14);
40 CFR 122.2.
    POTW. Publicly owned treatment works. See CWA section 212, 33
U.S.C. 1292; 40 CFR 122.2, 403.3.
    PSES. Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources.
    Publicly owned treatment works. Any device or system owned by a
state or municipality that is used in the treatment (including
recycling and reclamation) of municipal sewage or industrial wastes
of a liquid nature. These include sewers, pipes, or other
conveyances only if they convey wastewater to a POTW providing
treatment. See CWA section 212, 33 U.S.C. 1292; 40 CFR 122.2, 403.3.
    PSC. Public service commission.
    PUC. Public utility commission.
    RCRA. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42
U.S.C. 6901 et seq.
    Remote MDS. BA handling system that collects BA at the bottom of
the EGU, then uses transport water to sluice the ash to a remote MDS
that dewaters BA using a similar configuration as the MDS. The
remote MDS is considered a wet BA handling system because the ash
transport mechanism is water.
    RO. Reverse osmosis.
    RFA. Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    SBA. Small Business Administration.
    Sediment. Particulate matter lying below water.
    Surface water. All waters of the United States, including
rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs, and seas.
    Toxic pollutants. As identified under the CWA, 65 pollutants and
classes of pollutants, of which 126 specific substances have been
designated priority toxic pollutants. See Appendix A to 40 CFR part
423.
    Transport water. Wastewater that is used to convey FA, BA, or
economizer ash from the ash collection or storage equipment or EGU,
and has direct contact with the ash. Transport water does not
include low volume, short duration discharges of wastewater from
minor leaks (e.g., leaks from valve packing, pipe flanges, or
piping) or minor maintenance events (e.g., replacement of valves or
pipe sections).
    UMRA. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
    Wet BA handling system. A system in which BA is conveyed away
from the EGU using water as a transport medium. Wet BA systems
typically send the ash slurry to dewatering bins or a surface
impoundment. Wet BA handling systems include systems that operate in
conjunction with a traditional wet sluicing system to recycle all BA
transport water (e.g., remote MDS or complete recycle systems).
    Wet FGD system. Wet FGD systems capture sulfur dioxide from the
flue gas using a sorbent that has mixed with water to form a wet
slurry, and that generates a water stream that exits the FGD
scrubber absorber.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 423

    Environmental protection, Electric power generation, Power
facilities, Waste treatment and disposal, Water pollution control.

Michael S. Regan,
Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency proposes to amend 40 CFR part 423 as follows:

PART 423--STEAM ELECTRIC POWER GENERATING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY

0
1. The authority citation for part 423 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 101; 301; 304(b), (c), (e), (g), and (i)(A) and
(B); 306; 307; 308 and 501, Clean Water Act (Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972, as amended; 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.;
1311; 1314(b), (c), (e), (g), and (i)(A) and (B); 1316; 1317; 1318
and 1361).
0
2. Amend Sec.  423.11 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (x), (y), and (z);
0
b. Removing paragraph (bb);
0
c. Redesignating paragraph (cc) as paragraph (bb) and revising new
paragraph (bb);
0
d. Redesignating paragraph (dd) as paragraph (cc); and
0
e. Adding new paragraphs (dd) and (ee).

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  423.11  Specialized definitions.

* * * * *
    (x) The term ``early adopter'' means the owner or operator
certifies under Sec.  423.19(e) that an electric generating unit that
generated FGD wastewater on or after October 13, 2020, has installed by
March 24, 2023 biological treatment equipment or zero valent iron
treatment equipment to meet all applicable limitations in Sec.
423.13(g) or 423.16(e) as those provisions existed on October 13, 2020,
and bottom ash handling equipment to meet all applicable limitations in
Sec.  423.13(k) or 423.16(g) as those provisions existed on October 13,
2020; that the installed equipment does meet such applicable
limitations as of March 24, 2023; and that such electric generating
unit will and does permanently cease combustion of coal no later than
December 31, 2032.
    (y) The term ``surface impoundment'' means a natural topographic
depression, man-made excavation, or diked area, which is designed to
hold an accumulation of coal combustion residuals and liquids, and the
unit treats, stores, or disposes of coal combustion residuals.
    (z) The term ``tank'' means a stationary device, designed to
contain an accumulation of wastewater, which is constructed primarily
of non-earthen materials (e.g., wood, concrete, steel, plastic) that
provide structural support, and which is not a surface impoundment.
* * * * *
    (bb) The term ``bottom ash purge water'' means any water being
discharged subject to Sec.  423.13(k)(2)(i) or 423.16(g)(3).
    (cc) The term ``30-day rolling average'' means the series of
averages using the measured values of the preceding 30 days for each
average in the series.
    (dd) The term ``surface impoundment decant wastewater'' means the
layer of a closing surface impoundment's wastewater which is located
from the water surface down to the level sufficiently above any coal
combustion

residuals that, when drained, does not resuspend the coal combustion
residuals.
    (ee) The term ``surface impoundment dewatering wastewater'' means
the layer of a closing surface impoundment's wastewater which is
located below surface impoundment decant wastewater due to its contact
with either stationary or resuspended coal combustion residuals. * * *
* *
0
3. Amend Sec.  423.12 by revising paragraph (b)(11) to read as follows:

Sec.  423.12  Effluent limitations guidelines representing the degree
of effluent reduction attainable by the application of the best
practicable control technology currently available (BPT).

* * * * *
    (b)* * *
    (11) The quantity of pollutants discharged in FGD wastewater, flue
gas mercury control wastewater, combustion residual leachate,
gasification wastewater, bottom ash purge water, surface impoundment
decant wastewater, and surface impoundment dewatering wastewater shall
not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of the
applicable wastewater times the concentration listed in the following
table:

                      Table 7 to Paragraph (b)(11)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             BPT effluent limitations
                                         -------------------------------
                                                            Average of
                                                           daily values
     Pollutant or pollutant property        Maximum for       for 30
                                          any 1 day (mg/    consecutive
                                                L)        days shall not
                                                           exceed (mg/L)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSS.....................................           100.0            30.0
Oil and grease..........................            20.0            15.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec.  423.13 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (g)(1), (2)(ii), (2)(iii), (3)(ii), (k)(1),
(2)(i), (2)(iii), (l);
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (n) as paragraph (p);
0
c. Redesignating paragraph (m) as paragraph (n) and adding new
paragraph (m); and
0
d. Revising paragraphs (o)(1), and (3).

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  423.13  Effluent limitations guidelines representing the degree
of effluent reduction attainable by the application of the best
available technology economically achievable (BAT).

* * * * *
    (g)(1)(i) FGD wastewater. Except for those discharges to which
paragraph (g)(2) or (3) of this section applies, there shall be no
discharge of pollutants in FGD wastewater. Dischargers must meet the
discharge limitation in this paragraph by a date determined by the
permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning [DATE 60
DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE], but no later than
December 31, 2029. These effluent limitations apply to the discharge of
FGD wastewater generated on and after the date determined by the
permitting authority for meeting the effluent limitations, as specified
in this paragraph.
    (ii) FGD wastewater generated before the date determined by the
permitting authority as specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this
section.
    (A) [Reserved]
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) For any electric generating unit subject to paragraph
(g)(2)(i) of this section for which the owner has submitted a
certification for the permanent cessation of coal combustion pursuant
to Sec.  423.19(f) and has not transferred between subcategories under
paragraph (o) of this section, after December 31, 2028, there shall be
no discharge of pollutants in FGD wastewater. Any permit issued
beginning [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE] must
contain this no discharge requirement applicable as of January 1, 2029.
    (iii) For FGD wastewater discharges from an early adopter electric
generating unit, on or before December 31, 2032, the quantity of
pollutants in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined
by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration
listed in the table following this paragraph (g)(2)(iii) of this
section. After December 31, 2032, there shall be no discharge of
pollutants in FGD wastewater. Any permit issued beginning [DATE 60 DAYS
AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE] must contain this no discharge
requirement applicable as of January 1, 2033.

                    Table 6 to Paragraph (g)(2)(iii)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             BAT effluent limitations
                                         -------------------------------
                                                            Average of
                                                           daily values
     Pollutant or pollutant property        Maximum for       for 30
                                             any 1 day      consecutive
                                                          days shall not
                                                              exceed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenic, total ([micro]g/L).............              18               8
Mercury, total (ng/L)...................             103              34
Selenium, total ([micro]g/L)............              70              29
Nitrate/nitrite as N (mg/L).............               4               3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) FGD wastewater generated before December 31, 2028.
    (A) For discharges of FGD wastewater generated before December 31,
2023, the quantity of pollutants discharged in FGD wastewater shall not
exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD
wastewater times the concentration listed for TSS in Sec.
423.12(b)(11).
    (B) [Reserved].
* * * * *
    (k)(1)(i) Bottom ash transport water. Except for those discharges
to which paragraph (k)(2) of this section applies, or when the bottom
ash transport water is used in the FGD scrubber, there shall be no
discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water. Dischargers must
meet the discharge limitation in this paragraph by a date determined by
the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning [DATE 60
DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE], but no later than
December 31, 2029. This limitation applies to the discharge of bottom
ash transport water generated on and after the date determined by the
permitting authority for meeting the discharge limitation, as specified
in this paragraph. Except for those discharges to which paragraph
(k)(2) of this section applies, whenever bottom ash transport water is
used in any other plant process or is sent to a treatment system at the
plant (except when it is used in the FGD scrubber), the resulting
effluent must comply with the discharge limitation in this paragraph.
When the bottom ash transport water is used in the FGD scrubber, it
ceases to be bottom ash transport water, and instead is FGD wastewater,
which must meet the requirements in paragraph (g) of this section.
    (ii) Bottom ash transport water generated before the date
determined by the permitting authority as specified in paragraph
(k)(1)(i) of this section.
    (A) [Reserved]
    (2)(i) For early adopter electric generating units:
    (A) The discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water from
a properly installed, operated, and maintained bottom ash system on or
before December 31, 2032, is authorized under the following conditions,
and after December 31, 2032, there shall be no discharge of pollutants
in BA transport water. Any permit issued beginning [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER
DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE] must contain this no discharge
requirement.
    (1) To maintain system water balance when precipitation-related
inflows are generated from storm events exceeding a 10-year storm event
of 24-hour or longer duration (e.g., 30-day storm event) and cannot be
managed by installed spares, redundancies, maintenance tanks, and other
secondary bottom ash system equipment; or
    (2) To maintain system water balance when regular inflows from
wastestreams other than bottom ash transport water exceed the ability
of the bottom ash system to accept recycled water and segregating these
other wastestreams is not feasible; or
    (3) To maintain system water chemistry where installed equipment at
the facility is unable to manage pH, corrosive substances, substances
or conditions causing scaling, or fine particulates to below levels
which impact system operation or maintenance; or
    (4) To conduct maintenance not otherwise included in paragraphs
(k)(2)(i)(A)(1), (2), or (3) of this section and not exempted from the
definition of transport water in Sec.  423.11(p), and when water
volumes cannot be managed by installed spares, redundancies,
maintenance tanks, and other secondary bottom ash system equipment.
    (B) The total volume that may be discharged for the activities in
paragraph (k)(2)(i)(A) of this section shall be reduced or eliminated
to the extent achievable using control measures (including best
management practices) that are technologically available and
economically achievable in light of best industry practice. The total
volume of the discharge authorized in this paragraph shall be
determined on a case-by-case basis by the permitting authority and in
no event shall such discharge exceed a 30-day rolling average of ten
percent of the primary active wetted bottom ash system volume. The
volume of daily discharges used to calculate the 30-day rolling average
shall be calculated using measurements from flow monitors.
* * * * *
    (iii) For any electric generating unit subject to paragraph
(k)(2)(ii) of this section for which the owner has submitted a
certification for the permanent cessation of coal combustion pursuant
to Sec.  423.19(f), and has not transferred to another subcategory
under paragraph (o) of this section, after December 31, 2028, there
shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water. Any
permit issued beginning [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF
FINAL RULE] must contain this no discharge requirement applicable as of
January 1, 2029.
    (l) Combustion residual leachate. The quantity of pollutants in
combustion residual leachate shall not exceed the quantity determined
by multiplying the flow of combustion residual leachate times the
concentration listed in the table following this paragraph (l).
Dischargers must meet the effluent limitations in this paragraph by a
date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible
beginning [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE], but
no later than December 31, 2029. These effluent limitations apply to
the discharge of combustion residual leachate generated on and after
the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the
effluent limitations, as specified in this paragraph.

                        Table 9 to Paragraph (l)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             BAT effluent limitations
                                         -------------------------------
                                                            Average of
                                                           daily values
     Pollutant or pollutant property        Maximum for       for 30
                                             any 1 day      consecutive
                                                          days shall not
                                                              exceed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenic, total ([micro]g/L).............              11               8
Mercury, total (ng/L)...................             788             356
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (m)(1) Surface impoundment decant wastewater.
    (A) [Reserved].
    (2) Surface impoundment dewatering wastewater.
    (A) [Reserved].
    (3) Bottom ash purge water.
    (A) [Reserved].
    (n) At the permitting authority's discretion, the quantity of
pollutant allowed to be discharged may be expressed as a concentration
limitation instead of any mass-based limitations specified in
paragraphs (b) through (m) of this section. Concentration limitations
shall be those concentrations specified in this section.
    (o)(1) Transfer between subcategories and applicable limitations in
a permit. Where, in the permit, the permitting authority has included
alternative limitations subject to eligibility requirements, upon
timely notification to the permitting authority under Sec.  423.19(i),
a facility can become subject to the alternative limitations under the
following circumstances:
    (i) On or before December 31, 2025, a facility may convert:
    (A) From voluntary incentives program limitations under paragraph
(g)(3)(i) of this section to limitations for electric generating units
permanently ceasing coal combustion under paragraph (g)(2)(i) of this
section; or
    (B) From limitations for electric generating units permanently
ceasing coal combustion under paragraphs (g)(2)(i) or (k)(2)(ii) of
this section to voluntary incentives program limitations under
paragraphs (g)(3)(i) of this section or generally applicable
limitations under (k)(1)(i) of this section.
* * * * *
    (3) Where a facility seeking a transfer is currently subject to
more stringent limitations than the limitations being sought, the
facility must continue to meet those more stringent limitations.
    (p) In the event that wastestreams from various sources are
combined for treatment or discharge, the quantity of each pollutant or
pollutant property controlled in paragraphs (a) through (n) of this
section attributable to each controlled waste source shall not exceed
the specified limitation for that waste source.
0
5. Amend Sec.  423.16 by revising paragraphs (e)(1) and (g)(1), and
adding paragraphs (j) and (k) to read as follows:

Sec.  423.16  Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).

* * * * *
    (e)(1) FGD wastewater. (i) Except as provided for in paragraph
(e)(2) of this section, for any electric generating unit with a total
nameplate generating capacity of more than 50 megawatts, that is not an
oil-fired unit, and that the owner has not certified to the permitting
authority that it will permanently cease coal combustion pursuant to
Sec.  423.19(f), there shall be no discharge of pollutants in FGD
wastewater. Dischargers must meet the standards in this paragraph by
[DATE 3 YEARS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE] except as
provided for in paragraph (e)(2) of this section. These standards apply
to the discharge of FGD wastewater generated on and after [DATE 3 YEARS
AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE].
    (ii) For any electric generating unit excepted from paragraph
(e)(1)(i) of this section because the owner has submitted a
certification for the permanent cessation of coal combustion pursuant
to Sec.  423.19(f), after December 31, 2028, there shall be no
discharge of pollutants in FGD wastewater.
    (2) For FGD wastewater discharges from an early adopter electric
generating unit, on or before December 31, 2032, the quantity of
pollutants in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined
by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration
listed in the table following this paragraph (e)(2) of this section.
After December 31, 2032, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in
FGD wastewater.

                       Table 3 to Paragraph (e)(2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       PSES
                                         -------------------------------
                                                            Average of
                                                           daily values
     Pollutant or pollutant property        Maximum for       for 30
                                             any 1 day      consecutive
                                                          days shall not
                                                              exceed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenic, total (ug/L)...................              18               8
Mercury, total (ng/L)...................             103              34
Selenium, total (ug/L)..................              70              29
Nitrate/nitrite as N (mg/L).............               4               3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (g) Bottom ash transport water. (1) Except for those discharges to
which paragraph (g)(2) of this section applies, or when the bottom ash
transport water is used in the FGD scrubber, for any electric
generating unit with a total nameplate generating capacity of more than
50 megawatts, that is not an oil-fired unit, and that the owner has not
certified to the permitting authority that the electric generating unit
will permanently cease coal combustion pursuant to Sec.  423.19(f),
there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport
water. This standard applies to the discharge of bottom ash transport
water generated on and after [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF
FINAL RULE]. Except for those discharges to which paragraph (g)(3) of
this section applies, whenever bottom ash transport water is used in
any other plant process or is sent to a treatment system at the plant
the resulting effluent must comply with the discharge standard in this
paragraph.
    (2) For any electric generating unit excepted from paragraph (g)(1)
because the owner has submitted a certification for the permanent
cessation of coal combustion pursuant to Sec.  423.19(f), after
December 31, 2028, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom
ash transport water.
    (3) For early adopter electric generating units:
    (i) The discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water from
a properly installed, operated, and maintained bottom ash system on or
before December 31, 2032, is authorized under the following conditions,
and after December 31, 2032, there shall be no discharge of pollutants
in BA transport water.
    (A) To maintain system water balance when precipitation-related
inflows are generated from a 10-year storm event of 24-hour or longer
duration (e.g., 30-day

storm event) and cannot be managed by installed spares, redundancies,
maintenance tanks, and other secondary bottom ash system equipment; or
    (B) To maintain system water balance when regular inflows from
wastestreams other than bottom ash transport water exceed the ability
of the bottom ash system to accept recycled water and segregating these
other wastestreams is feasible; or
    (C) To maintain system water chemistry where current operations at
the facility are unable to currently manage pH, corrosive substances,
substances or conditions causing scaling, or fine particulates to below
levels which impact system operation or maintenance; or
    (D) To conduct maintenance not otherwise included in paragraphs
(g)(3)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of this paragraph and not exempted from the
definition of transport water in Sec.  423.11(p), and when water
volumes cannot be managed by installed spares, redundancies,
maintenance tanks, and other secondary bottom ash system equipment.
    (ii) The total volume that may be discharged to a POTW for the
activities in paragraph (g)(3)(i) of this section shall be reduced or
eliminated to the extent achievable as determined by the control
authority. The control authority may also include control measures
(including best management practices) that are technologically
available and economically achievable in light of best industry
practice. In no event shall the total volume of the discharge exceed a
30-day rolling average of ten percent of the primary active wetted
bottom ash system volume. The volume of daily discharges used to
calculate the 30-day rolling average shall be calculated using
measurements from flow monitors.
* * * * *
    (j) Combustion residual leachate. The quantity of pollutants in
combustion residual leachate shall not exceed the quantity determined
by multiplying the flow of combustion residual leachate times the
concentration listed in the table following this paragraph (j).
Dischargers must meet the standards in this paragraph [DATE 60 DAYS
AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE].

                        Table 5 to Paragraph (j)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       PSES
                                         -------------------------------
                                                            Average of
                                                           daily values
     Pollutant or pollutant property        Maximum for       for 30
                                             any 1 day      consecutive
                                                          days shall not
                                                              exceed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenic, total (ug/L)...................              11               8
Mercury, total (ng/L)...................             788             356
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (k) Surface impoundment decant wastewater, surface impoundment
dewatering wastewater, and bottom ash purge water.
    (1) Surface impoundment decant wastewater.
    (A) [Reserved].
    (2) Surface impoundment dewatering wastewater.
    (A) [Reserved].
    (3) Bottom ash purge water.
    (A) [Reserved].
0
6. Amend Sec.  423.18 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows.

Sec.  423.18  Permit conditions.

    (a) All permits subject to this part shall include the following
permit conditions:
    (1) An electric generating unit shall qualify as permanently
ceasing the combustion of coal by December 31, 2028, or December 31,
2032, if such qualification would have been demonstrated absent the
following qualifying event:
    (i) An emergency order issued by the Department of Energy under
Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act;
    (ii) A reliability must run agreement issued by a Public Utility
Commission; or
    (iii) Any other reliability-related order or agreement issued by a
competent electricity regulator (e.g., an independent system operator)
which results in that electric generating unit operating in a way not
contemplated when the certification was made; or
    (2)(i) The operation of the electric generating unit was necessary
for load balancing in an area subject to a declaration under 42 U.S.C.
5121 et seq., that there exists:
    (A) An ``Emergency''; or
    (B) A ``Major Disaster''; and
    (3) That load balancing was due to the event that caused the
``Emergency'' or ``Major Disaster'' in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this
section to be declared.
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec.  423.19 by:
0
a. Removing paragraph (d);
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (c) as paragraph (d) and adding a new
paragraph (c) and revising the newly designated paragraph (d);
0
c. Revising paragraphs, (e), (f)(1) and (4), (i), and (j); and
0
d. Adding paragraph (k).

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  423.19  Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) Publicly accessible internet site requirements.
    (1) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, each
facility subject to the requirements of this part must maintain a
publicly accessible internet site (ELG website) containing the
information specified in paragraphs (d) through (l) of this section, if
applicable. This website shall be titled ``ELG Rule Compliance Data and
Information.'' The facility must ensure that all information required
to be posted is immediately available to anyone visiting the site,
without requiring any prerequisite, such as registration or a
requirement to submit a document request. All required information must
be clearly identifiable and must be able to be immediately downloaded
by anyone accessing the site in a format that enables additional
analysis (e.g., comma-separated values text file format). When the
facility initially creates, or later changes, the web address (i.e.,
Uniform Resource Locator (URL)) at any point, they must notify EPA via
the ``contact us'' form on EPA's Effluent Guidelines website and the
permitting authority or control authority within 14 days of creating
the website or making the change. The facility's ELG website must also
have a ``contact us'' form or a specific email address posted on the
website for the public to use to submit questions and issues relating
to the availability of information on the website.

    (2) Combined websites.
    (i) When an owner or operator subject to this section already
maintains a ``CCR Rule Compliance Data and Information'' website
pursuant to 40 CFR 257.107, the postings required under this section
may be made to the existing ``CCR Rule Compliance Data and
Information'' website and shall be delineated under a separate heading
that shall state ``ELG Rule Compliance Data and Information.'' When
electing to use an existing website pursuant to this paragraph, the
facility shall notify EPA via the ``contact us'' form on EPA's Effluent
Guidelines website and the permitting authority or control authority no
later than [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE].
    (ii) When the same owner or operator is subject to the provisions
of this part for multiple facilities, the owner or operator may comply
with the requirements of this section by using the same internet site
for multiple facilities provided the ELG website clearly delineates
information by the name of each facility.
    (3) Unless otherwise required in this section, the information
required to be posted to the ELG website must be made available to the
public for at least 10 years following the date on which the
information was first posted to the ELG website, or the length of the
permit plus five years, whichever is longer. All required information
must be clearly identifiable and must be able to be immediately
downloaded by anyone accessing the site in a format that enables
additional analysis (e.g., comma-separated values text file format).
    (4) Unless otherwise required in this section, the information must
be posted to the ELG website:
    (i) Within 30 days of submitting the information to the permitting
authority or control authority; or
    (ii) Where information was submitted to the permitting authority or
control authority prior to [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF
FINAL RULE], by [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE].
    (d) Requirements for early adopter electric generating units
discharging bottom ash transport water pursuant to Sec.
423.13(k)(2)(i) or 423.16(g)(3).
    (1) Initial Certification Statement. For sources seeking to
discharge bottom ash transport water pursuant to Sec.  423.13(k)(2)(i)
or 423.16(g)(3), an initial certification shall be submitted to the
permitting authority by [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF
FINAL RULE].
    (2) Signature and certification. The certification statement must
be signed and certified by a professional engineer.
    (3) Contents. An initial certification shall include the following:
    (i) A statement that the professional engineer is a licensed
professional engineer.
    (ii) A statement that the professional engineer is familiar with
the regulation requirements.
    (iii) A statement that the professional engineer is familiar with
the facility.
    (iv) The primary active wetted bottom ash system volume in Sec.
423.11(aa).
    (v) Material assumptions, information, and calculations used by the
certifying professional engineer to determine the primary active wetted
bottom ash system volume.
    (vi) A list of all potential discharges under Sec.
423.13(k)(2)(i)(A)(1) through (A)(4) or 423.16(g)(3)(i) through (iv),
the expected volume of each discharge, and the expected frequency of
each discharge.
    (vii) Material assumptions, information, and calculations used by
the certifying professional engineer to determine the expected volume
and frequency of each discharge including a narrative discussion of why
such water cannot be managed within the system and must be discharged.
    (viii) A list of all wastewater treatment systems at the facility
currently, or otherwise required by a date certain under this section.
    (ix) A narrative discussion of each treatment system including the
system type, design capacity, and current or expected operation.
    (e) Requirements for early adopter electric generating units.
    (1) Notice of Planned Participation. For sources seeking to qualify
as early adopter electric generating units that will achieve permanent
cessation of coal combustion by December 31, 2032, under this part, a
Notice of Planned Participation shall be submitted to the permitting
authority or control authority no later than [DATE 1 YEAR AFTER DATE OF
PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE].
    (2) Contents. A Notice of Planned Participation shall identify the
early adopter electric generating unit intended to achieve the
permanent cessation of coal combustion. A Notice of Planned
Participation shall include:
    (i) A statement that the electric generating unit discharged FGD
wastewater on or after October 13, 2020;
    (ii) A statement that the facility was in compliance with the FGD
wastewater limitations of Sec.  423.13(g)(2)(iii) or 423.16(e)(2)(i) as
those provisions existed on October 13, 2020, and where applicable the
bottom ash transport water limitations of Sec.  423.13(k)(2)(i) or
423.16(g)(2)(i) as those provisions existed on October 13, 2020, by
March 24, 2023 with the following additional details:
    (A) A diagram of the treatment chain for FGD wastewater, including
the biological treatment or zero valent iron component, with a complete
narrative discussion explaining the components of the treatment chain
including the flows entering, leaving, or passing through each
component, a description of any solids generated by each component, and
measurements (or where necessary, estimates) of both the flows and
solids (e.g., gallons per minute, tons per day, etc.);
    (B) A diagram of the bottom ash handling system with a complete
narrative discussion explaining the treatment chain including the flows
entering, leaving, or passing through each component, a description of
any solids generated by each component, and measurements (or where
necessary, estimates) of both the flows and solids (e.g., gallons per
minute, tons per day, etc.);
    (C) The dates the treatment chains in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this
section were commissioned, or where separate components were
commissioned on different dates, the commission dates of each;
    (D) All effluent monitoring data from the relevant outfall(s) or,
where an internal monitoring location(s) was used, from the internal
monitoring location(s); and
    (E) Where applicable, the data and calculations demonstrating
compliance of the diluted FGD wastewater where monitoring data from the
relevant outfall captures a diluted wastestream shall include a
narrative discussion of all data, assumptions, and calculations such
that an independent party could duplicate the work.

    (iii) The expected date that each electric generating unit is
projected to achieve permanent cessation of coal combustion, whether
each date represents a retirement or a fuel conversion, whether each
retirement or fuel conversion has been approved by a regulatory body,
and what the relevant regulatory body is. The Notice of Planned
Participation shall also include a copy of the most recent integrated
resource plan for which the applicable state agency approved the
retirement or repowering of the unit subject to the ELGs, or other
documentation supporting that the electric generating unit will
permanently cease the combustion of coal by December 31, 2032. The
Notice of Planned Participation shall also include, for each such
electric generating unit, a timeline to achieve the permanent cessation
of coal combustion. Each timeline shall include interim milestones and
the projected dates of completion.
    (3) Annual Progress Report. Annually after submission of the Notice
of Planned Participation in paragraph (e)(1) of this section, a
progress report shall be filed with the permitting authority, or
control authority in the case of an indirect discharger.
    (4) Contents. An Annual Progress Report shall detail the completion
of any interim milestones listed in the Notice of Planned Participation
since the previous progress report, provide a narrative discussion of
any completed, missed, or delayed milestones, and provide updated
milestones. An annual progress report shall also include one of the
following:
    (i) A copy of the official suspension filing (or equivalent filing)
made to the facility's reliability authority detailing the conversion
to a fuel source other than coal;
    (ii) A copy of the official retirement filing (or equivalent
filing) made to the facility's reliability authority which must include
a waiver of recission rights; or
    (iii) An initial certification, or recertification for subsequent
annual progress reports, containing either a statement that the
facility will make the filing required in paragraph (e)(4)(i) of this
section or a statement that the facility will make the filing required
in paragraph (e)(4)(ii) of this section. The certification or
recertification must include the estimated date that such a filing will
be made.
    (iv) A facility shall not include a certification or
recertification under paragraph (e)(4)(iii) of this section in the
final annual progress report submitted prior to permanent cessation of
coal combustion. Rather, this final annual progress report must include
the filing under paragraph (e)(4)(i) or (ii) of this section.
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) Notice of Planned Participation. For sources seeking to qualify
as an electric generating unit that will achieve permanent cessation of
coal combustion by December 31, 2028, under this part, a Notice of
Planned Participation shall be made to the permitting authority, or to
the control authority in the case of an indirect discharger, no later
than [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE].
* * * * *
    (4) Contents. An Annual Progress Report shall detail the completion
of any interim milestones listed in the Notice of Planned Participation
since the previous progress report, provide a narrative discussion of
any completed, missed, or delayed milestones, and provide updated
milestones. An annual progress report shall also include one of the
following:
    (i) A copy of the official suspension filing (or equivalent filing)
made to the facility's reliability authority detailing the conversion
to a fuel source other than coal;
    (ii) A copy of the official retirement filing (or equivalent
filing) made to the facility's reliability authority which must include
a waiver of recission rights; or
    (iii) An initial certification, or recertification for subsequent
annual progress reports, containing either a statement that the
facility will make the filing required in paragraph (f)(4)(i) of this
section or a statement that the facility will make the filing required
in paragraph (f)(4)(ii) of this section. The certification or
recertification must include the estimated date that such a filing will
be made.
    (iv) A facility shall not include a certification or
recertification under paragraph (f)(4)(iii) of this section in the
final annual progress report submitted prior to permanent cessation of
coal combustion. Rather, this final annual progress report must include
the filing under paragraph (f)(4)(i) or (ii) of this section.
* * * * *
    (i) Requirements for facilities seeking to transfer between
subcategories and applicable limitations in a permit under Sec.
423.13(o).
    (1) Notice of Planned Participation. For sources which have filed a
Notice of Planned Participation under paragraphs (f)(1) or (h)(1) of
this section and intend to make changes that would qualify them for a
different set of requirements under Sec.  423.13(o), a Notice of
Planned Participation shall be made to the permitting authority, or to
the control authority in the case of an indirect discharger, no later
than the dates stated in Sec.  423.13(o)(1).
    (2) Contents. A Notice of Planned Participation shall include a
list of the electric generating units for which the source intends to
change compliance alternatives. For each such electric generating unit,
the notice shall list the specific provision under which this transfer
will occur, the reason such a transfer is warranted, and a narrative
discussion demonstrating that each electric generating unit will be
able to maintain compliance with the relevant provisions.
    (j) Notice of Material Delay.
    (1) Notice. Within 30 days of experiencing a material delay in the
milestones set forth in paragraphs (e)(2), (f)(2), or (h)(2) of this
section, and where such a delay may preclude permanent cessation of
coal combustion or compliance with the voluntary incentives program
limitations by December 31, 2028, or December 31, 2032, for early
adopter electric generating units, a facility shall file a notice of
material delay with the permitting authority, or control authority in
the case of an indirect discharger.
    (2) Contents. The contents of such a notice shall include the
reason for the delay, the projected length of the delay, and a proposed
resolution to maintain compliance.
    (k) Requirements for facilities with coal combustion residual
landfills or surface impoundments
    (1) Annual Combustion Residual Leachate Monitoring Report. In
addition to reporting pursuant to 40 CFR part 127, each facility
treating combustion residual leachate in groundwater to comply with
Sec.  423.13(l) or 423.16(j) shall file an annual combustion residual
leachate monitoring report each calendar year to the permitting
authority or control authority for indirect discharges of the treated
CRL.

    (2) Contents. The annual combustion residual leachate monitoring
report shall provide the following monitoring data for each pollutant
listed in the table following this section. For paragraphs (k)(2)(ii)
and (iii) of this section the report shall also describe the location
of monitoring wells, screening depth, and frequency of sampling. The
report shall include summary statistics including monthly minimum,
maximum, and average concentrations for each pollutant. The report
shall be supported by an appendix of all samples.
    (i) Effluent monitoring data reported pursuant to 40 CFR part 127.
    (ii) Groundwater monitoring data as the combustion residual
leachate leaves each of the landfills and surface impoundments
discharging through groundwater.
    (iii) Groundwater monitoring at the point the combustion residual
leachate enters each surface waterbody.
    (iv) Summary statistics for the data described in paragraphs
(k)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section including the monthly average
and daily maximum of each pollutant and a comparison to any limitation
in Sec.  423.13(l) or 423.16(j).

                     Table 1 to Paragraph (k)(2)(iv)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       BAT/PSES Treated Pollutants in Combustion Residual Leachate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Antimony                             Magnesium
Arsenic                              Manganese
Barium                               Mercury
Beryllium                            Molybdenum
Cadmium                              Nickel
Chromium                             Thallium
Cobalt                               Titanium
Copper                               Vanadium
Lead                                 Zinc
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2023-04984 Filed 3-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 231 (Monday, December 4, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 84174-84175]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26524]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2010-0023]

Overhead and Gantry Cranes Standard; Extension of the Office of
Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information Collection
(Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning the proposal to
extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the
information collection requirements specified in Overhead and Gantry
Cranes Standard.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
February 2, 2024.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Documents in the docket are
listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; however, some
information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to
read or download through the website. All submissions, including
copyrighted material, are available for inspection through the OSHA
Docket Office. Contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY
(877) 889-5627) for assistance in locating docket submissions.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and OSHA
docket number (OSHA-2010-0023) for the Information Collection Request
(ICR). OSHA will place all comments, including any personal
information, in the public docket, which may be made available online.
Therefore, OSHA cautions interested parties about submitting personal
information such as social security numbers and birthdates.
    For further information on submitting comments, see the ``Public
Participation'' heading in the section of this notice titled
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Seleda Perryman or Theda Kenney,
Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of the continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, the collection instruments are clearly understood, and
OSHA's estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et
seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing
information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational
injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also
requires that OSHA obtain such information with minimum burden upon
employers, especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce
to the maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of effort in
obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).
    The following sections describe who uses the information collected
under each requirement, as well as how they use it. The paperwork
provisions of the Standard specify requirements for: marking the rated
load of cranes; preparing certification records to verify the
inspection of the crane hooks, hoist chains, and rope; and preparing
reports of rated load tests for repaired hooks or modified cranes.
Records and reports must be maintained and disclosed upon request.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary

for the proper performance of the agency's functions to protect
workers, including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection, and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend the approval of the Information
Collection Requirements contained in the Overhead and Gantry Cranes
Standard. After consulting with subject matter experts, OSHA has
decided to retain the current number of burden hours of 321,345 for
this Information Collection Request. There are no adjustments or
program changes.
    OSHA will summarize the comments submitted in response to this
notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB to extend
the approval of the information collection requirements.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Overhead and Gantry Cranes Standard (29 CFR 1910.179).
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0224.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.
    Number of Respondents: 31,495.
    Number of Responses: 642,566.
    Frequency of Responses: On occasion; monthly; semi-annually.
    Average Time per Response: Varies.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 321,345.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax), if your comments, including
attachments, are not longer than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA
Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> or (3) by hard copy. All comments,
attachments, and other material must identify the agency name and the
OSHA docket number for the ICR (OSHA-2010-0023). You may supplement
electronic submissions by uploading document files electronically.
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
dates of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this
website. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on
using the http://www.regulations.gov website to submit comments and
access the docket is available at the website's ``User Tips'' link.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>)
for information about materials not available from the website, and for
assistance in using the internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    James S. Frederick, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020
(85 FR 58393).

    Signed at Washington, DC.
James S. Frederick,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2023-26524 Filed 12-1-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P