[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 5 (Tuesday, January 8, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 85-86]
[FR Doc No: 2019-00019]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC19-43-000.
    Applicants: CalPeak Power LLC, CalPeak Power--Border LLC, CalPeak
Power--Enterprise LLC, CalPeak Power--Panoche LLC, CalPeak Power--Vaca
Dixon LLC, Midway Peaking, LLC, Malaga Power, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, et al. of CalPeak Power LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5203.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: EC19-44-000.
    Applicants: FirstLight Hydro Generating Company, FirstLight CT
Housatonic LLC, FirstLight CT Hydro LLC, FirstLight MA Hydro LLC,
Northfield Mountain LLC.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203
of the Federal Power Act, et al. of FirstLight Hydro Generating
Company, et al.
    Filed Date: 1/2/19.
    Accession Number: 20190102-5198.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/19.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3310-014; ER18-53-002.
    Applicants: New Harquahala Generating Company, LLC, CXA La Paloma,
LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Update for the Southwest Region
of New Harquahala Generating Company, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/2/19.
    Accession Number: 20190102-5077.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/4/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-296-001.
    Applicants: Phibro Americas LLC.
    Description: Supplement to December 10, 2018 Notice of Non-Material
Change in Status of Phibro Americas LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5258.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-784-004.
    Applicants: Upstream Wind Energy LLC.
    Description: Triennial Report of Upstream Wind Energy LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/21/18.
    Accession Number: 20181221-5428.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/19/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2312-001.
    Applicants: Enel Green Power Diamond Vista Wind Project, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Enel Green
Power Diamond Vista Wind Project, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5201.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-29-006.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing to Migrate
ExxonMobil NITSA-NOA to Tariff ID 41 to be effective 10/8/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5196.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-389-001.
    Applicants: Marco DM Holdings, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to market-based rate
tariff revision to be effective 1/21/2019.
    Filed Date: 1/2/19.
    Accession Number: 20190102-5113.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-743-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to AC2-071 WMPA SA
No. 4911 to be effective 1/26/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5093.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-744-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to the OATT and OA
re: GDECS--Phase 4 to be effective 3/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5098.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-745-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to OATT, Sch. 12-
Appendices re: 2019 RTEP Annual Cost Allocations to be effective 1/1/
2019.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5103.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-746-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Termination of West Stanislaus
Irrigation District TFA under WAPA SA (SA 59) to be effective 3/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5186.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-747-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Mississippi, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Notice of Succession to be
effective 12/31/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5195.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-748-000.
    Applicants: New England Power Pool Participants Committee.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: January 2019 Membership
Filing to be effective 12/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5207.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-749-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: ESM Construction Agreement--
Sigurd to be effective 12/20/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5235.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-750-000.
    Applicants: The Empire District Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Filing to Modify Formula
Rates to Address Fed. Tax Reform & Request for Waivers to be effective
1/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5253.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-751-000.
    Applicants: Buffalo Ridge II LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Reactive Power Rate Schedule
to be effective 3/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5255.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-752-000.
    Applicants: East Avenue Energy, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: East Avenue Energy LLC
Cancellation of MBR Aurthority to be effective 1/2/2019.
    Filed Date: 1/2/19.
    Accession Number: 20190102-5070.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-753-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of WMPA/SA
No. 4705; Queue No. AC1-197 to be effective 2/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 1/2/19.
    Accession Number: 20190102-5110.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-754-000.
    Applicants: AEP Texas Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: AEPTX-Woodward Mountain Wind
I Interconnection Agreement First Amd & Restated to be effective 12/12/
2018.
    Filed Date: 1/2/19.
    Accession Number: 20190102-5141.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/19.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following qualifying
facility filings:

    Docket Numbers: QF19-636-000.
    Applicants: Tata Chemicals (Soda Ash) Partners.
    Description: Form 556 of Tata Chemicals (Soda Ash) Partners.
    Filed Date: 12/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20181231-5283.
    Comments Due: None-Applicable.

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

    Dated: January 2, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-00019 Filed 1-7-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 140 (Friday, July 22, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43760-43764]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15422]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2016-0688; FRL-9955-01-R6]

Air Approval Plans; Louisiana; Repeal of Excess Emissions Related
Provisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA, the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Louisiana,
through the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ), on
November 20, 2016. The submittal is in response to the EPA's national
SIP call of June 12, 2015, concerning excess emissions during periods
of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction (SSM). The submittal requests the
removal of certain provisions identified in the 2015 SIP call from the
Louisiana SIP. EPA is also proposing to determine that the removal of
the substantially inadequate provisions from the SIP corrects certain
deficiencies identified in the June 12, 2015 SIP call.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 22, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2016-0688 at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to
[email protected]. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please contact Mr. Alan Shar, (214) 665-
6691, [email protected]. For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the EPA
Region 6 Office, 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, Texas 75270. While
all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information
may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g.,
copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available at either
location (e.g., CBI).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Alan Shar, Regional Haze and
SO2 Section, EPA Region 6 Office, 1201 Elm Street, Suite
500, Dallas, Texas 75270,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected] Out of an
abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA
Region 6 office may be closed to the public to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID-19. We encourage the public to submit comments via
https://www.regulations.gov, as there will be a delay in processing
mail and no courier or hand deliveries will be accepted. Please call or
email the contact listed above if you need alternative access to
material indexed but not provided in the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' means the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. EPA's 2015 SSM SIP Action
    B. Louisiana's Provisions Related to Excess Emissions
II. Analysis of SIP Submission
    A. Removal of LAC 33:III.1507(A) and LAC 33:III.1507(B)
Exemptions
    B. Removal of LAC 33:III.1107(A) Exemption
    C. Removal of LAC 33:III.2153(B)(1)(i) Exemption
    D. Removal of LAC 33:III.2307(C)(1)(a) and LAC
33:III.2307(C)(2)(a) Exemptions
III. Proposed Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Environmental Justice Considerations
VI. Statutory and Executive Orders Reviews

I. Background

A. EPA's 2015 SSM SIP Action

    On February 22, 2013, the EPA issued a Federal Register notice of
proposed rulemaking outlining EPA's policy at the time with respect to
SIP provisions related to periods of SSM. EPA analyzed specific SSM SIP
provisions and explained how each one either did or did not comply with
the CAA with regard to excess emission events.\1\ For each SIP
provision that the EPA determined to be inconsistent with the CAA, the
EPA proposed to find that the existing SIP provision was substantially
inadequate to meet CAA requirements and thus proposed to issue a SIP
call under CAA section 110(k)(5). On September 17, 2014, the EPA issued
a document supplementing and revising what the Agency had previously
proposed on February 22, 2013, in light of a D.C. Circuit decision that
determined the CAA precludes authority of the EPA to create affirmative
defense provisions. EPA outlined its updated policy that affirmative
defense SIP provisions are not consistent with CAA requirements. EPA
proposed in the supplemental proposal document to apply its revised
interpretation of the CAA to specific affirmative defense SIP
provisions and proposed SIP calls for those provisions where
appropriate (79 FR 55920, September 17, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for
Rulemaking; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls To
Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of
Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction, (78 FR 12460) Feb. 22, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 12, 2015, pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5), the EPA
finalized ``State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for
Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to
SIPs; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls To Amend
Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup,
Shutdown and Malfunction,'' (80 FR 33839 June 12, 2015), hereafter
referred to as the ``2015 SSM SIP Action.'' The 2015 SSM SIP Action
clarified, restated, and updated the EPA's interpretation that SSM
exemption and affirmative defense SIP provisions are inconsistent with
CAA requirements. The 2015 SSM SIP Action found that certain SIP
provisions in 36 states were substantially inadequate to meet CAA
requirements and issued a SIP call to those states to submit SIP
revisions to address the inadequacies. EPA established an 18-month
deadline by which the affected states had to submit such SIP revisions.
States were required to submit corrective revisions to their SIPs in
response to the SIP calls by November 22, 2016.
    EPA issued a Memorandum in October 2020 (2020 Memorandum), which
stated that certain provisions governing SSM periods in SIPs could be
viewed as consistent with CAA requirements.\2\ Importantly, the 2020
Memorandum stated that it ``did not alter in any way the determinations
made in the 2015 SSM SIP Action that identified specific state SIP
provisions that were substantially inadequate to meet the requirements
of the Act.'' Accordingly, the 2020 Memorandum had no direct impact on
the SIP call issued to Louisiana in 2015. The 2020 Memorandum did,
however, indicate the EPA's intent at the time to review SIP calls that
were issued in the 2015 SSM SIP Action to determine whether the EPA
should maintain, modify, or withdraw particular SIP calls through
future agency actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ October 9, 2020, Memorandum ``Inclusion of Provisions
Governing Periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunctions in State
Implementation Plans,'' from Andrew R. Wheeler, Administrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 30, 2021, EPA's Deputy Administrator withdrew the 2020
Memorandum and announced EPA's return to the policy articulated in the
2015 SSM SIP Action (2021 Memorandum).\3\ As articulated in the 2021
Memorandum, SIP provisions that contain exemptions or affirmative
defense provisions are not consistent with CAA requirements and,
therefore, generally are not approvable if contained in a SIP
submission. This policy approach is intended to ensure that all
communities and populations, including overburdened communities,
receive the full health and environmental protections provided by the
CAA.\4\ The 2021 Memorandum also retracted the prior statement from the
2020 Memorandum of EPA's plans to review and potentially modify or
withdraw particular SIP calls. That statement no longer reflects the
EPA's intent. EPA intends to implement the principles laid out in the
2015 SSM SIP Action as the agency takes action on SIP submissions,
including Louisiana's SIP submittal provided in response to the 2015
SIP call.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ September 30, 2021, Memorandum ``Withdrawal of the October
9, 2020, Memorandum Addressing Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunctions
in State Implementation Plans and Implementation of the Prior
Policy,'' from Janet McCabe, Deputy Administrator.
    \4\ Section J, June 12, 2015 (80 FR 33985).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Louisiana's Provisions Related to Excess Emissions

    As a part of EPA's June 12, 2015 SSM SIP Action, EPA made a finding
that certain provisions in the Louisiana SIP are substantially
inadequate to meet CAA requirements because they contain exemptions
from otherwise applicable SIP emission limitations, and thus

issued a SIP call \5\ with respect to these provisions. The SIP-called
provisions included the following sections of the Louisiana
Administrative Code (LAC), Title 33, Part III air rules that had been
previously approved into the Louisiana SIP: 33:III.2153(B)(1)(i), LAC
33:III.2201(C)(8), LAC 33:III.1107(A), LAC 33:III.1507(A)(1), LAC
33:III.1507(B)(1), LAC 33:III.2307(C)(1)(a) and LAC
33:III.2307(C)(2)(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ CAA section 110(k)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 20, 2016, LDEQ repealed LAC 33:III.2153(B)(1)(i), LAC
33:III.1107(A), LAC 33:III.1507(A)(1), LAC 33:III.1507(B)(1), LAC
33:III.2307(C)(1)(a) and LAC 33:III.2307(C)(2)(a) from State law. Then
by letter dated November 22, 2016, LDEQ requested the removal of the
aforementioned provisions from the Louisiana SIP, in response to EPA's
2015 SSM SIP Action.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ On June 9, 2017, LDEQ submitted a SIP revision related to
LAC 33:III.2201(C)(8); however, we are not proposing to act on that
SIP submittal at this time. We intend to take action on the
revisions to LAC 33:III.2201(C)(8) separately in a future rulemaking
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Analysis of SIP Submission

A. Removal of LAC 33:III.1507(A) and LAC 33:III.1507(B) Exemptions

    LAC 33:III.1507(A) and LAC 33:III.1507(B) were approved by the EPA
into the Louisiana SIP on July 15, 1993 (80 FR 33975-6). These
provisions apply to sulfuric acid plants not subject to the
requirements in 40 CFR 60.82 and 60.83 of 40 CFR part 60, subpart H.
LAC 33:III.1507(A) states that ``a four-hour (continuous) start-up
exemption from the SO2 and sulfuric acid mist emission
limitations of LAC 33:III.1503(A) will be authorized by the
administrative authority for facilities not subject to 40 CFR 60.82 and
60.83.'' \7\ LAC 33:III.1507(B) provides a similar exemption from the
SO2 and sulfuric acid mist emission limitations in LAC
33:III.1503(A) ``where upsets have caused excessive emissions and on-
line operating changes will eliminate a temporary condition.'' \8\ In
its November 22, 2016 SIP submittal, LDEQ reports that no sulfuric acid
plants are eligible for the aforementioned exemptions because 40 CFR
part 60, subpart H (Standards of Performance for Sulfuric Acid Plants)
applies to every sulfuric acid plant located within the State. If EPA
approves the removal of these repealed provisions from the SIP, all
sulfuric acid plants in Louisiana will be subject to the emission
limitations in LAC 33:III.1503(A) of the Louisiana SIP and no longer be
able to use the two exemptions that were provided by LAC 33:III.1507(A)
and LAC 33:III.1507(B).\9\ Furthermore, the removal of these two
exemptions from the Louisiana SIP will not result in any emission
increases and will not interfere with the attainment of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), reasonable further progress, or
any other requirement of the CAA. Therefore, the proposed approval to
remove LAC 33:III.1507(A) and LAC 33:III.1507.B from the Louisiana SIP
is consistent with the requirements of CAA sections 110(l) and 193.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ EPA issued a SIP call for LAC 33:III.1507(A)(1) on June 12,
2015 (80 FR 33967). However, LDEQ's November 22, 2016 SIP submittal
requests removal of LAC 33:III.1507(A) (comprised of (A)(1) and
(A)(2)) from the Louisiana SIP. LAC 33:III.1507(A)(2) states,
``[t]his provision is applicable to infrequent start-ups only.
Before the exemption can be granted the administrative authority
must determine the excess emissions were not the result of failure
to maintain or repair equipment. In addition, the duration of excess
emission must be minimized and no ambient air quality standard may
be jeopardized.'' LAC 33:III.1507(A)(2) and LAC 33:III.1507(A)(1)
are interrelated and the EPA is proposing to approve LDEQ's request
to remove both provisions--LAC 33:III.1507(A)(1) and (A)(2)--from
the Louisiana SIP.
    \8\ EPA issued a SIP call for LAC 33:III.1507(B)(1) on June 12,
2015 (80 FR 33967). However, LDEQ's November 22, 2016 SIP submittal
requests removal of LAC 33:III.1507(B) (comprised of (B)(1) and
(B)(2)) from the Louisiana SIP. LAC 33:III.1507(B)(2) states,
``[t]his provision is applicable to infrequent on-line adjustments
only. Before the exemption can be granted the administrative
authority must determine the excess emissions were not the result of
failure to maintain or repair equipment. In addition, the duration
of excess emissions must be minimized and no ambient air quality
standard may be jeopardized.'' LAC 33:III.1507(B)(2) and LAC
33:III.1507(B)(1) are interrelated and the EPA is proposing to
approve LDEQ's request to remove both provisions--LAC
33:III.1507(B)(1) and (B)(2)--from the Louisiana SIP.
    \9\ As noted earlier, LDEQ repealed the exemptions in LAC
33:III.1507(A) and LAC 33:III.1507(B) as a matter of state law on
October 20, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Removal of LAC 33:III.1107(A) Exemption

    LAC 33:III.1107(A) was originally approved by the EPA into the
Louisiana SIP on March 8, 1989 (54 FR 9795), and later codified on July
5, 2011 (76 FR 38977). LAC 33:III.1107(A) allows LDEQ to grant an
exemption from the provisions of LAC 33:III.1105 (establishing a 20%
opacity limit during certain flaring events) ``during start-up and
shutdown periods if the flaring was not the result of failure to
maintain or repair equipment.'' If EPA approves the removal of these
repealed provisions from the SIP, sources with flaring events covered
by LAC 33:III.1105 will no longer be able to use the exemption that had
been provided by LAC 33:III.1107(A).\10\ Furthermore, the removal of
this exemption from the Louisiana SIP will not result in any emission
increases and will not interfere with the attainment of the NAAQS,
reasonable further progress, or any other requirement of the CAA.
Therefore, the proposed approval to remove LAC 33:III.1107(A) from the
Louisiana SIP is consistent with the requirements of CAA sections
110(l) and 193.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ As noted earlier, LDEQ repealed the exemption in LAC
33:III.1107(A) as a matter of state law on October 20, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Removal of LAC 33:III.2153(B)(1)(i) Exemption

    LAC 33:III.2153(B)(1)(i) was originally approved by the EPA into
the Louisiana SIP on June 20, 2002 (67 FR 41840), and later codified on
July 5, 2011 (76 FR 38977). LAC 33:III.2153 (limiting volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions from industrial wastewater) requires
``affected VOC wastewater streams'' to be controlled. More
specifically, LAC 33:III.2153(B)(1)(d)(i) requires vents on covers and
on certain junction boxes to be ``equipped with either a control device
or a vapor recovery system that maintains a minimum control efficiency
of 90 percent VOC removal or a VOC concentration of less than or equal
to 50 parts per million by volume.'' LAC 33:III.2153(B)(1)(i) provides
that the requisite control device or recovery device is ``not . . .
required to meet the 90 percent removal efficiency or 50 parts per
million volume basis concentration during periods of malfunction or
maintenance on the devices for periods not to exceed 336 hours per
year.'' If EPA approves the removal of these repealed provisions from
the SIP, sources with affected VOC wastewater streams subject to LAC
33:III.2153 will no longer be able to use the exemption that had been
provided by LAC 33:III.2153(b)(1)(i).\11\ Furthermore, the removal of
this exemption from the Louisiana SIP will not result in any emission
increases and will not interfere with the attainment of the NAAQS,
reasonable further progress, or any other requirement of the CAA.
Therefore, the proposed approval to remove LAC 33:III.2153(B)(1)(i)
from the Louisiana SIP is consistent with the requirements of CAA
sections 110(l) and 193.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ As noted earlier, LDEQ repealed the exemption in LAC
33:III.2153(B)(1)(i) as a matter of state law on October 20, 2016.

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

D. Removal of LAC 33:III.2307(C)(1)(a) and LAC 33:III.2307(C)(2)(a)
Exemptions

    LAC 33:III.2307(C)(1)(a) and LAC33:III.2307(C)(2)(a) were
originally approved by the EPA into the Louisiana SIP on March 8, 1989
(54 FR 9795), and later codified on July 5, 2011 (76 FR 38977). LAC
33:III.2307(C) applies to nitric acid plants that are not subject to 40
CFR part 60, subpart G (Standards of Performance for Nitric Acid
Plants). LAC 33:III.2307(C)(1)(a) provides a four-hour start-up
exemption from the NOX emission limitation of LAC
33:III.2307(D), while LAC 33:III.2307(C)(2)(a) provides a similar
exemption where upsets have caused excessive emissions and on-line
operating changes will eliminate a temporary condition. If EPA approves
the removal of these repealed provisions from the SIP, nitric acid
plants subject to the NOX emission limitation of LAC
III.2307(D) will no longer be able to use the exemptions that had been
provided by LAC 33:III.2307(C)(1)(a) and LAC 33:III.2307(C)(2)(a).\12\
Furthermore, the removal of this exemption from the Louisiana SIP will
not result in any emission increases and will not interfere with the
attainment of the NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or any other
requirement of the CAA. Therefore, the proposed approval to remove LAC
33:III.2307(C)(1)(a) and LAC 33:III.2307(C)(2)(a) from the Louisiana
SIP is consistent with the requirements of CAA sections 110(l) and 193.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ As noted earlier, LDEQ repealed the exemptions in LAC
33:III.2307(C)(1)(a) and LAC 33:III.2307(C)(2)(a) as a matter of
state law on October 20, 2016. In its November 22, 2016 SIP
submittal, LDEQ notes that it identified only one nitric acid plant
not subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart G--namely, the Nitric Acid
Train 4 (NNA4-1, EQT 0007) located at PCS Nitrogen Fertilizer's
(PCS's) Geismar Agricultural Nitrogen & Phosphate Plant (Agency
Interest No. 3732). LDEQ also noted that a Consent Decree between
EPA, LDEQ, and PCS (Civil Action No. 14-707-BAJ-SCR), entered
February 26, 2014, required PCS to install NOX control
equipment (i.e., selective catalytic reduction, or SCR) on Nitric
Acid Train 4, and therefore the exemptions provided by LAC
33:III.2307(C) are no longer needed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proposed Action

    The EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Louisiana SIP
submitted by LDEQ on November 22, 2016, in response to EPA's national
SIP call of June 12, 2015 concerning excess emissions during periods of
SSM. We are proposing to approve the removal of LAC 33:III.1107(A), LAC
33:III.1507(A), LAC 33:III.1507(B), LAC 33:III.2153(B)(1)(i), LAC
33:III.2307(C)(1)(a), and LAC 33:III.2307(C)(2)(a) from the Louisiana
SIP in accordance with section 110 of the Act. The EPA is further
proposing to determine that this SIP revision corrects the deficiencies
identified in the June 12, 2015 SIP call related to the above-
referenced provisions. EPA is not reopening the 2015 SSM SIP Action and
is only taking comment on whether the proposed SIP revision is
consistent with CAA requirements and whether it address the substantial
inadequacies in the specific Louisiana SIP provisions identified in the
2015 SSM SIP Action.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this action, we are proposing to include in a final rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are proposing to incorporate by
reference revisions to Louisiana's regulations, as described in the
Proposed Action section above. The EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these documents generally available electronically through
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the EPA Region 6 office.

V. Environmental Justice Considerations

    Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
The EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' The EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean
that ``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.'' \13\ EPA is providing
additional analysis of environmental justice associated with this
action for the purpose of providing information to the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental-justice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA reviewed demographic data, which provides an assessment of
individual demographic groups of the populations living within
Louisiana.\14\ The EPA then compared the data to the national average
for each of the demographic groups.\15\ The results of the demographic
analysis indicate that, for populations within Louisiana, the percent
people of color (persons who reported their race as a category other
than White alone (not Hispanic or Latino)) is similar to the national
average (41.6 percent of Louisiana's population compared to 39.9
percent nationally). The percent of persons who reported their race as
Black or African American alone is significantly higher than the
national average (32.8 percent versus 13.4 percent). The percentage of
Louisiana's population living in poverty is 17.8 percent, which is
higher than the national average of 11.4 percent. The percent of people
over 25 with a high school diploma in Louisiana is similar to the
national average (85.9 percent versus 88.5 percent), while the percent
with a Bachelor's degree or higher is lower than the national average
(24.9 percent versus 32.9 percent).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See the United States Census Bureau's QuickFacts on
Louisiana at https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/LA,US/PST045221.
    \15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Communities in close proximity to industrial sources may be subject
to disproportionate environmental impacts of excess emissions. Short-
and/or long-term exposure to air pollution has been associated with a
wide range of human health effects including increased respiratory
symptoms, hospitalization for heart or lung diseases, and even
premature death.\16\ Excess emissions during startups, shutdowns, and
malfunctions can be considerably higher than emissions under normal
steady-state operations. As to all population groups within Louisiana,
as explained below, we believe that this proposed action will be
beneficial and may reduce impacts. Exemptions for excess emissions
during periods of SSM undermine the ability of the SIP to attain and
maintain the NAAQS, to protect Prevention of Significant Deterioration
increments, to improve visibility and to meet other CAA requirements.
Such exemption provisions have the potential to lessen the incentive
for development of control strategies that are effective at reducing
emissions during certain modes of sources' operations such as startups
and shutdowns or to take prompt steps to rectify malfunctions. Removal
of these exemption provisions from the

Louisiana SIP will bring the treatment of excess emissions in the SIP
into line with CAA requirements; thus, sources in the State will no
longer be able to use the repealed exemptions and will have greater
incentives to control their air emissions. This proposed action is
intended to ensure that all communities and populations across
Louisiana and downwind areas, including overburdened communities,
receive the full human health and environmental protection provided by
the CAA. We believe that this rule, if finalized, will not have
disproportionately high or adverse human health or environmental
effects on communities with environmental justice concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-management-process/managing-air-quality-human-health-environmental-and-economic#what
(URL dated 03/16/2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Act. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the proposed rule does not have tribal implications and will
not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November
9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

     Dated: July 13, 2022.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2022-15422 Filed 7-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 153 (Monday, August 10, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47859-47862]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19499]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0258; FRL-9926-72-Region 9]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Arizona;
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead (Pb) and the 2008 8-Hour
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Arizona
to address the requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) for the 2008 Lead (Pb) and 2008 ozone national ambient
air quality standards (NAAQS). Section 110(a) of the CAA requires that
each State adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance,
and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by EPA. We refer to such SIP
revisions as ``infrastructure'' SIPs because they are intended to
address basic structural SIP requirements for new or revised NAAQS
including, but not limited to, legal authority, regulatory structure,
resources, permit programs, monitoring, and modeling necessary to
assure attainment and maintenance of the standards. In addition, we are
approving several state provisions addressing CAA conflict of interest
and monitoring requirements into the Arizona SIP.

DATES: This final rule is effective on September 9, 2015.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action, identified by
Docket ID Number EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0258. The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov
and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne, San Francisco,
California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index,
some information may be publically available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material) and some may not be publically
available in either location (e.g., confidential business information
(CBI)). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed
directly below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Buss, Office of Air Planning,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. EPA's Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    CAA section 110(a)(1) requires each state to submit to EPA, within
three years after the promulgation of a primary or secondary NAAQS or
any revision thereof, an infrastructure SIP revision that provides for
the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of such NAAQS. Section
110(a)(2) sets the content requirements of such a plan, which generally
relate to the information and authorities, compliance assurances,
procedural requirements, and control measures that constitute the
``infrastructure'' of a state's air quality management program. These
infrastructure SIP elements required by section 110(a)(2) are as
follows:
     Section 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control
measures.
     Section 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data
system.
     Section 110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control
measures and regulation of new and modified stationary sources.
     Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): Interstate pollution transport.
     Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate and international
pollution abatement.
     Section 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority,
conflict of interest, and oversight of local and regional government
agencies.
     Section 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and
reporting.
     Section 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency episodes.
     Section 110(a)(2)(H): SIP revisions.
     Section 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government
officials, public notification, PSD, and visibility protection.
     Section 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling and submittal
of modeling data.
     Section 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
     Section 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by
affected local entities.
    Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by
the three-year submittal deadline of section 110(a)(1) and are
therefore not addressed in this action. These two elements are: (i)
Section 110(a)(2)(C) to the extent it refers to permit programs
required under part D (nonattainment NSR), and (ii) section
110(a)(2)(I), pertaining to the nonattainment planning requirements of
part D. As a result, this action does not address infrastructure for
the nonattainment NSR portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) or the whole of
section 110(a)(2)(I).
    On November 12, 2008, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) issued a revised NAAQS for Pb.\1\ That action triggered a
requirement for states to submit an infrastructure SIP to address the
applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years of
issuance of the revised NAAQS. On October 14, 2011, EPA issued
``Guidance on Section 110 Infrastructure SIPs for the 2008 Pb NAAQS'',
referred to herein as EPA's 2011 Pb Guidance.\2\ Depending on the
timing of a given submittal, some states relied on the earlier draft
version of this guidance, referred to herein as EPA's 2011 Draft Pb
Guidance.\3\ EPA issued additional guidance on infrastructure SIPs on
September 13, 2013.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 73 FR 66964 (November 12, 2008). The 1978 Pb standard (1.5
[micro]g/m\3\ as a quarterly average) was modified to a rolling 3
month average not to be exceeded of 0.15 [micro]g/m\3\. EPA also
revised the secondary NAAQS to 0.15 [micro]g/m\3\and made it
identical to the revised primary standard. Id.
    \2\ See Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, to Regional Air Division Directors,
Regions 1-10 (October 14, 2011).
    \3\ ``DRAFT Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections
110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS),'' June 17, 2011 version.
    \4\ See Memorandum dated September 13, 2013 from Stephen D.
Page, Director, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to
Regional Air Directors, EPA Regions 1-10, ``Guidance on
Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean
Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)'' (referred to herein as
``2013 Infrastructure SIP Guidance'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 27, 2008, EPA issued a revised NAAQS for 8-hour Ozone.\5\
That action triggered a requirement for states to submit an
infrastructure SIP to address the applicable requirements of section
110(a)(2) within three years of issuance of the revised NAAQS. EPA did
not, however, prepare guidance at that time for states in submitting I-
SIP revisions for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS.\6\ On September 13, 2013, EPA
issued ``Guidance of Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),'' which
provides advice on the development of infrastructure SIPs for the 2008
ozone NAAQS (among other pollutants) as well as infrastructure SIPs for
new or revised NAAQS promulgated in the future.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
    \6\ Preparation of guidance for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS was
postponed given EPA's reconsideration of the standard. See 78 FR
34183 (June 6, 2013).
    \7\ See Memorandum dated September 13, 2013 from Stephen D.
Page, Director, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to
Regional Air Directors, EPA Regions 1-10, ``Guidance on
Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean
Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)'' (referred to herein as
``2013 Infrastructure SIP Guidance'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) has
submitted several infrastructure SIP revisions pursuant to EPA's
promulgation of the NAAQS addressed by this rule, including the
following:
     October 14, 2011--``Arizona State Implementation Plan
Revision under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(1) and (2); 2008 Lead
NAAQS,'' to address all of the CAA section 110(a)(2) requirements,
except for section 110(a)(2)(G),\8\ for the 2008 Pb NAAQS (2011 Pb I-
SIP Submittal).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In a separate rulemaking, EPA fully approved Arizona's SIP
to address the requirements regarding air pollution emergency
episodes in CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. 77 FR 62452 (October 15, 2012). Although ADEQ did not submit
an analysis of Section 110(a)(2)(G) requirements, we discuss them in
our TSD, which is in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     December 27, 2012--``Arizona State Implementation Plan
Revision under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(1) and (2); 2008 8-hour
Ozone NAAQS,'' to address all of the CAA section 110(a)(2) requirements
for the 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS (2012 Ozone I-SIP Submittal).
     December 6, 2013--``Submittal of Maricopa County Rule 100
revising the Maricopa County Portion of the Arizona State
Implementation Plan for Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure'' from Eric
Massey, Director of ADEQ (2013 Maricopa County Submittal). Maricopa
County Rule 100 was submitted to address a deficiency in section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) of the SIP for Maricopa County concerning conflict of
interest requirements for hearing boards.
     December 19, 2013--``Submittal of Pima County Rules
revising the Pima County Portion of the Arizona State Implementation
Plan for Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure'' from Eric Massey, Director
of ADEQ (2013 Pima County Submittal). This submittal included Pima
County Rule 17.04.190 ``Composition,'' adopted September 28, 1993; Pima
County Rule 17.12.040 ``Reporting for Compliance Evaluations,'' adopted
September 28, 1993; and Pima County Rule 17.24.040 ``Reporting
Requirements,'' adopted April 19, 2005 for inclusion into the Arizona
SIP. These rules were submitted to address deficiencies in section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) of the SIP concerning conflict of interest
requirements for hearing boards and section 110(a)(2)(F) of the SIP
concerning stationary source monitoring and reporting.

     September 4, 2014--``Submittal of Pinal County Rule 1-3-
140 Revising the Pinal County Portion of the Arizona State
Implementation Plan for Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure'' from Eric
Massey, Director of ADEQ (2014 Pinal County Submittal). This submittal
included Pinal County Rule 1-3-140 ``Definitions,'' adopted July 23,
2014 for inclusion into the Arizona SIP. Pinal County Rule 1-3-140 was
submitted to address a deficiency in section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) of the
SIP for Pinal County concerning conflict of interest requirements for
hearing boards.

II. EPA's Response to Comments

    The public comment period on EPA's proposed rule opened on November
24, 2014, the date of its publication in the Federal Register at 79 FR
69796, and closed on December 24, 2014. During that period, EPA did not
receive any comments.

III. Final Action

    Under CAA section 110(k)(3) and based on the evaluation and
rationale presented in the proposed rule, the technical support
document and this final rule, EPA is approving the 2011 Pb I-SIP
Submittal, the 2012 Ozone I-SIP Submittal, the 2013 Maricopa County
Submittal, the 2013 Pima County Submittal and the 2014 Pinal County
Submittal with respect to the following infrastructure SIP
requirements:
     Section 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control
measures.
     Section 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data
system.
     Section 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority,
conflict of interest, and oversight of local and regional government
agencies.
     Section 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and
reporting.
     Section 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency episodes.
     Section 110(a)(2)(H): SIP revisions.
     Section 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
     Section 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by
affected local entities.
    In addition, we are approving into the SIP certain regulatory
provisions included in the 2013 Pima County and Maricopa County
Submittals, and in the 2014 Pinal County Submittal, as discussed in the
TSD.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Copies of these Arizona county regulations are included in
the 2013 Pima County and Maricopa County Submittals, and 2014 Pinal
County Submittal, which are available in the docket for this action
and online at http://regulations.gov, docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2014-0258.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are not acting today on those elements of the infrastructure SIP
that address the requirements of sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D), (J) and
(K) of the Act. On October 29, 2012, ADEQ submitted ``New Source Review
State Implementation Plan Submission'' and on July 2, 2014 submitted
``Supplemental Information to 2012 New Source Review State
Implementation Plan Submission''. These submissions address the
permitting portions of I-SIP elements in sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D),
(J) and (K) of the Act and will be addressed in a subsequent
rulemaking.
    Section 110(l) of the Act prohibits EPA from approving any SIP
revision that would interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP) or any
other applicable requirement of the Act. All of the elements of the
infrastructure SIP that we are approving, as explained in the TSD,
improve the SIP by replacing obsolete statutes or regulations and by
updating the state and local agencies' SIP implementation and
enforcement authorities. We have determined that our approval of the
elements discussed above complies with CAA section 110(l) because the
SIP revision would not interfere with the on-going process for ensuring
that requirements for RFP and attainment of the NAAQS are met, and the
SIP revision clarifies and updates the SIP. Our TSD contains a more
detailed discussion of our evaluation.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the
Arizona Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set
forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available electronically through
www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office
(see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Lead, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 19, 2015.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Editorial Note: This document was received for publication by
the Office of the Federal Register on August 4, 2015.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart D--Arizona

0
2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(166), (167),
(168), (169), and (170) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (166) The following plan was submitted on October 14, 2011, by the
Governor's designee.
    (i) [Reserved]
    (ii) Additional materials.
    (A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
    (1) Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision under Clean Air Act
Section 110(a)(1) and (2); Implementation of the 2008 Lead National
Ambient Air Quality Standards, excluding the appendices.
    (167) The following plan was submitted on December 27, 2012 by the
Governor's designee.
    (i) [Reserved]
    (ii) Additional materials.
    (A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
    (1) Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision under Clean Air Act
Section 110(a)(1) and (2); 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, excluding the
appendices.
    (168) The following plan was submitted on December 6, 2013 by the
Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Maricopa County Air Quality Department.
    (1) Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations, Rule 100
(``General Provisions and Definitions''), section 100 (``General''),
subsection 108 (``Hearing Board''), revised September 25, 2013.
    (169) The following plan was submitted on December 19, 2013 by the
Governor's designee.
    (i) [Reserved]
    (ii) Additional materials.
    (A) Pima County Department of Environmental Quality.
    (1) Board of Supervisors of Pima County, Arizona, Ordinance No.
1993-128, Section 1, 17.040.190 ``Composition'' Section 6, 17.24.040
``Reporting for compliance evaluations'' adopted September 28, 1993.
    (2) Board of Supervisors of Pima County, Arizona, Ordinance 2005-
43, Chapter 17.12, Permits and Permit Revisions, section 2,17.12.040
``Reporting Requirements'' adopted April 19, 2005.
    (170) The following plan was submitted on September 4, 2014 by the
Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Pinal County Air Quality Control District.
    (1) Pinal County Board of Supervisors, Resolution No. 072314-AQ1,
1-3-140, Definitions, 74, Hearing Board, including new text that is
underlined and excluding removed text which was struck by the board,
effective July 23, 2014.
0
3. Section 52.123 is amended by revising paragraphs (l), (m), and (n)
to read as follows:

Sec.  52.123  Approval status.

* * * * *
    (l) 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS: The SIPs submitted on October 14, 2009
and August 24, 2012 are fully or partially disapproved for Clean Air
Act (CAA) elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(ii), (J) and (K) for all portions
of the Arizona SIP.
    (m) 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS: The SIPs submitted on October 14, 2009 and
August 24, 2012 are fully or partially disapproved for Clean Air Act
(CAA) elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(ii), (J) and (K) for all portions of
the Arizona SIP.
    (n) 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS: The SIPs submitted on October 14, 2009 and
August 24, 2012 are fully or partially disapproved for Clean Air Act
(CAA) elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) (interfere with measures in any
other state to prevent significant deterioration of air quality),
(D)(ii), (J) and (K) for all portions of the Arizona SIP.

[FR Doc. 2015-19499 Filed 8-7-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 25, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31783-31787]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11243]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Parts 154, 260, and 284

[Docket No. RM21-18-000]

Revised Filing and Reporting Requirements for Interstate Natural
Gas Company Rate Schedules and Tariffs

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission proposes to establish
a rule to require natural gas pipelines to submit all supporting
statements, schedules and workpapers in native format (e.g., Microsoft
Excel) with all links and formulas intact when filing a Natural Gas Act
section 4 rate case.

DATES: Comments are due June 24, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by Docket No. RM21-18-000, may be filed
in the following ways. Electronic filing through http://www.ferc.gov is
preferred.
     Electronic Filing: Documents must be filed in acceptable
native applications and print-to-PDF, but not in scanned or picture
format.
     For those unable to file electronically, comments may be
filed by USPS mail or by hand (including courier) delivery.
    [cir] Mail via U.S. Postal Service Only: Addressed to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    [cir] Hand (including courier) delivery: Deliver to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, MD 20852.
    The Comment Procedures Section of this document contains more
detailed filing procedures.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Tehseen Rana (Technical Information), Office of Energy Market
Regulation, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].
    Caitlin Tweed (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel,
888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

                                                         Paragraph Nos.

I. Introduction......................................                  1
II. Background.......................................                  3
III. Discussion......................................                  5
IV. Information Collection Statement.................                  9
V. Environmental Analysis............................                 25
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification.........                 26
VII. Comment Procedures..............................                 28
VIII. Document Availability..........................                 31

I. Introduction

    1. On June 24, 2021, American Gas Association, American Public Gas
Association, American Forest & Paper Association, Industrial Energy
Consumers of America, Process Gas Consumers Group and Natural Gas
Supply Association (collectively, Petitioners) filed a petition
requesting that the Commission institute a rulemaking to revise its
regulations, or at the minimum, issue an order revising and updating
the FERC Implementation Guide for Electronic Filing of Parts 35, 154,
284, 300 and 341 Tariff Filings (FERC Implementation Guide) to require
natural gas pipelines to submit all supporting statements, schedules
and workpapers in native format \1\ with all links and formulas intact
when filing a general Natural Gas Act (NGA) section 4 \2\ rate case
(Petition). Petitioners state that the Commission's current policy does
not ensure that Commission staff and stakeholders have access to all
the information needed to perform routine rate analyses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As stated in the FERC Implementation Guide, native format,
or native application format, ``refers to the software used to
create the file. When a file is submitted in native application
format it is submitted in the format of the software used to create
the file. For example, if the file is created in Microsoft Excel
2010, submit the file in an Excel format, generally denoted by an
extension of XLSX. All files submitted in native application format
must be saved and filed using one of the Commission's accepted
electronic document file formats. The list of FERC Acceptable File
Formats is available on www.ferc.gov.'' FERC Implementation Guide
for Electronic Filing of Parts 35, 154, 284, 300 and 341 Tariff
Filings (2016).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 717c.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. CenterPoint Energy Resources Corporation (CenterPoint), National
Grid Gas Delivery Companies (National

Grid),\3\ and Exelon Corporation, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, and
affiliates (collectively, Exelon) filed general comments in support of
the Petition. In its comments, CenterPoint states that the changes
proposed in the Petition may expedite proceedings by removing the
additional step where intervenors must submit separate requests for
supporting statements, schedules and workpapers in native format, in
effect reducing time and expense for all stakeholders. National Grid
states that when a natural gas pipeline does not file in native format,
a party's only recourse is either the time-consuming process of raising
the matter in protests and waiting for the Commission to direct the
filer to provide all statements, schedules and workpapers in native
format and subsequently the pipeline's compliance with those directives
or pursuing this necessary information even later in the process
through discovery. National Grid further states that these recourses
are not only inefficient but cost parties time waiting on workpapers
that allow for a complete and thorough assessment of the rate filing.
Exelon maintains that supporting statements, schedules and workpapers
should be provided in native format for stakeholders to review and
determine whether a natural gas pipeline's proposed rate increase is
just and reasonable and in conformance with Commission policies. Exelon
argues that it is difficult to conduct a thorough analysis of a rate
case if supporting statements, schedules and workpapers are submitted
in Adobe PDF format.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Brooklyn Union Gas Company d/b/a National Grid NY;
KeySpan Gas East Corporation d/b/a National Grid; Boston Gas Company
d/b/a National Grid; The Narragansett Electric Company d/b/a
National Grid; and Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation d/b/a National
Grid, all subsidiaries of National Grid USA, Inc. (collectively, the
National Grid Gas Delivery Companies).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background

    3. As required by Sec.  284.10 of the Commission's regulations,\4\
interstate natural gas pipelines generally have stated rates for their
services, which are approved in a rate proceeding under NGA sections 4
or 5 and remain in effect until changed in a subsequent section 4 or 5
proceeding. When a natural gas pipeline files under NGA section 4 to
change its rates, the Commission requires the pipeline to provide
detailed support for all the components of its cost of service.\5\
Further, section 4(c) of the NGA requires that a natural gas pipeline
file proposed changes in rates with the Commission 30 days prior to the
proposed effective date.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 18 CFR 284.10 (2021).
    \5\ 18 CFR 154.312 & 154.313 (2021).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 717c(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. Commission regulations require that natural gas pipelines filing
general section 4 rate cases provide certain statements (Statements A
through P).\7\ In 1995, the Commission issued its Filing and Reporting
Requirements for Interstate Natural Gas Company Rate Schedules and
Tariffs (Order No. 582), stating that Statements I, J and a portion of
H (containing state tax formulations) must be received in spreadsheet
format with formulas included, as the data provided in these statements
are essential to understanding a natural gas pipeline's position with
regard to cost allocation and rate design.\8\ The Commission found that
although these spreadsheets could be obtained through discovery, that
process is burdensome, often redundant of the initial filing and
inhibits better-informed protests.\9\ Subsequently, the FERC
Implementation Guide stated that the ``submission of spreadsheets in
native file format is preferred for Statements A through M, including
related schedules. Statements O and P may use any electronic format
that renders text, graphics, spreadsheets or data bases that the
Commission accepts (the list of FERC Acceptable File Formats is
available on http://www.ferc.gov).'' \10\ Furthermore, for Statements
I, J and a portion of H, the FERC Implementation Guide stated that if
spreadsheets in native format (e.g., Microsoft Excel) are not available
that the natural gas pipeline may submit using any of the
aforementioned acceptable electronic formats which the Commission
accepts.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 18 CFR 154.312.
    \8\ Filing and Reporting Requirements for Interstate Nat. Gas
Co. Rate Schedules & Tariffs, Order No. 582, 60 FR 52,960, 52,994
(Oct. 11, 1995), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,025 (1995), order on
clarification, 76 FERC ] 61,077 (1996) (Order on Clarification).
    \9\ In Order No. 703, the Commission confirmed this requirement
that pipelines submit spreadsheets in native format for Statements
I, J and a portion of H, including intact formulas. Filing Via the
Internet, Order No. 703, 72 FR 65659 (Nov. 23, 2007), 121 FERC ]
61,171 at P 26 (2007).
    \10\ FERC Implementation Guide for Electronic Filing of Parts
35, 154, 284, 300 and 341 Tariff Filings (2016).
    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    5. Pursuant to NGA section 4, we propose to establish a rule to
require natural gas pipelines to submit all statements, schedules and
workpapers in native format with formulas and links intact \12\ when
filing a general NGA section 4 rate case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ``Formulas and links intact'' includes formulas and links
within individual spreadsheets and between spreadsheets. For
example, the proposal will require that formulas and links within
Schedule I-2 be intact within Schedule I-2, and intact for any
progressive calculations that flow data from Schedule I-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. First, requiring all statements, schedules and workpapers to be
filed in native format will reconcile any ambiguity in the current
requirements with a formal requirement for all natural gas pipelines to
file accordingly. For example, in the Order on Clarification of Order
No. 582, the Commission states that if there are no underlying links
used to develop a spreadsheet (i.e., the spreadsheets are prepared
separately from each other) then links do not need to be created.
Currently, when a natural gas pipeline submits a section 4 rate case
filing, the Commission often cannot verify whether there were
underlying links used to develop a spreadsheet or whether a pipeline
severed those links before filing its rate case. We seek to address
this information gap and require natural gas pipelines to file
statements and schedules linking progressive calculations regardless of
how the statements and schedules were created. Furthermore, requiring
spreadsheets with links and formulas intact will enable rate case
participants to manipulate the cost-of-service components (including
billing determinants) to evaluate different rate outcomes without the
need to create their own rate models. This will expedite settlement
negotiations and will allow all rate case participants to evaluate the
filing on equal footing with the natural gas pipeline and without the
need to hire experts or rely on other parties to recreate a pipeline's
rate model.
    7. Second, submitting all statements, schedules and workpapers in
native format will provide for a timely and comprehensive analysis of a
rate case filing. If natural gas pipelines are required to submit all
statements, schedules and workpapers in native format with links and
formulas intact in the initial filing, stakeholders will be provided
with pertinent information to analyze the rates and determine if they
are just and reasonable. Parties can begin examining the entire filing
during the typical 12-day comment period and thus file more informed
protests. Furthermore, if natural gas pipelines are required to file
all statements and schedules with formulas and links intact, all rate
case participants will be able to evaluate the filing and any
settlement offers from the same baseline, as opposed to all parties
creating their own rate models. This will streamline the rate case
process, including settlement discussions, and

avoid parties exchanging multiple rounds of discovery and testimony
merely to understand the rate model's underlying calculations. The
Commission acknowledged this in the Order on Clarification of Order No.
582, stating: ``Requiring parties, including staff, to input all the
figures from the rate case and spend weeks and rounds of discovery to
recreate the pipeline's computations is grossly inefficient and unduly
burdensome. Receiving the rate case in a manipulable format is critical
given the 12-day period for comment and protest.'' \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Order on Clarification, 76 FERC at 61,455.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Third, the current regulations are outdated. Order No. 582 was
issued in 1995. Since then, information technology has significantly
improved. Section 4 rate cases are now generally developed using
Microsoft Excel and submitted electronically. The concerns raised in
the comments submitted in the rulemaking underlying Order No. 582 no
longer exist (e.g., outdated software programs, or submitting numerous
diskettes). With this rulemaking, we seek to update the filing
requirements to reflect current information technology capabilities. We
recognize that a final rule adopting these proposals could increase the
burden on natural gas pipelines associated with submitting section 4
rate case filings. Currently, natural gas pipelines are only required
to submit Statements I, J and the state income taxes portion of
Schedule H-3 in native format with formulas and links intact. One
specific burden mentioned in the Order on Clarification of Order No.
582 is the need to create links in files where they do not naturally
occur when the spreadsheet is developed. As stated above, the
Commission cannot verify whether underlying links exist or not but to
the extent natural gas pipelines will need to create links among
multiple spreadsheets that did not naturally occur when the
spreadsheets were generated, their filing burden will increase.
However, we do not anticipate that this requirement will be excessively
burdensome on natural gas pipelines, as any entity that wants to
calculate rates, including the pipeline, needs a linked rate model, and
must create one if it is not provided in the original rate case filing.

IV. Information Collection Statement

    9. The information collection requirements contained in this NOPR
are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.\14\ OMB's
regulations require approval of certain information collection
requirements imposed by agency rules.\15\ Upon approval of a collection
of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and expiration
date. Respondents subject to the filing requirements of this proposed
rule will not be penalized for failing to respond to these collections
of information unless the collections of information display a valid
OMB control number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
    \15\ 5 CFR 1320.11 (2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. This NOPR will modify the currently approved information
collection associated with FERC-545, Gas Pipeline Rates: Rate Change
(Non-Formal) (OMB Control No. 1902-0154) (FERC-545) by updating the
requirements for submitting a rate case under section 4 of the NGA.
    11. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting Ellen Brown, Office of the Executive
Director, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE,
Washington, DC 20426 via email ([email protected]) or telephone
((202) 502-8663).
    12. The Commission solicits comments on the Commission's need for
this information, whether the information will have practical utility,
the accuracy of the burden estimates, ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected or retained,
and any suggested methods for minimizing respondents' burden, including
the use of automated information techniques.
    13. Please send comments concerning the collection of information
and the associated burden estimates to: Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street,
NW, Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission]. Due to security concerns, comments
should be sent electronically to the following email address:
[email protected]. Comments submitted to OMB should refer to
OMB Control No. 1902-0154.
    14. Please submit a copy of your comments on the information
collection to the Commission via the eFiling link on the Commission's
website at http://www.ferc.gov. If you are not able to file comments
electronically, please send a copy of your comments to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street
NE, Washington, DC 20426. Comments on the information collection that
are sent to FERC should refer to RM21-18-000.
    15. Title: Gas Pipeline Rates: Rate Change (Non-Formal).
    16. Action: Proposed modification of collection of information in
accordance with RM21-18-000.
    17. OMB Control No.: 1902-0154.
    18. Respondents for this Rulemaking: Gas pipelines filing an NGA
section 4 rate case.
    19. Frequency of Information Collection: As needed for section 4
rate cases.
    20. Necessity of Information: The proposed rule will require all
statements, schedules and workpapers submitted during a section 4 rate
case to be submitted in native format with all links and formulas
intact. The modification to this collection is intended to reduce the
overall burden for all parties involved in a section 4 rate case.
    21. Internal Review: The Commission has reviewed the changes and
has determined that such changes are necessary. These requirements
conform to the Commission's need for efficient information collection,
communication, and management within the energy industry. The
Commission has specific, objective support for the burden estimates
associated with the information collection requirements.
    22. The Commission estimates that the NOPR will affect the burden
\16\ and cost \17\ as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ ``Burden'' is the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For
further explanation of what is included in the information
collection burden, refer to 5 CFR 1320.3.
    \17\ The estimated hourly cost (salary plus benefits) provided
in this section is based on the salary figures for May 2021 posted
by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the Utilities sector
(available at https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_221000.htm) and
scaled to reflect benefits using the relative importance of employer
costs for employee compensation from June 2021 (available at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm). The hourly estimates for
salary plus benefits are: Computer and Information Systems Manager
(Occupation Code: 11-3021), $103.61; Computer and Information
Analysts (Occupation Code: 15-1120(1221), $67.99; Electrical
Engineer (Occupation Code: 7-2071), $72.15; Legal (Occupation Code:
23-0000), $142.25. The average hourly cost (salary plus benefits)
weighting all of the above skill sets evenly, is $96.50. We round it
to $97/hour.

                                         Proposed Modifications to FERC 545 From NOPR in Docket No. RM21-18-000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               A.                       B.              C.              D.                        E.                                  F.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Annual
                                                      Annual         estimated
                                     Number of       estimated       number of      Average burden hours & cost per     Total estimated burden hours &
      Area of modification          respondents      number of       responses                 response                total estimated cost (Column D x
                                                   responses per    (Column B x                                                    Column E)
                                                    respondent       Column C)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Section 4 Rate Case
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC 545: Annual Section 4 Rate                8               1               8  100 hours; $9,700.................  800 hours; $77,600.
 Cases.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    23. For the purposes of estimating burden in this NOPR, in the
table above, we conservatively estimate the annual total of general
section 4 rate cases to be eight. This number is higher than the
Commission's average number of section 4 rate cases, but we created our
estimate to allow for additional rate case submissions.
    24. FERC-545 is required to implement rates pursuant to sections 4,
5, and 16 of NGA, (15 U.S.C. 717 & 717o, Pub. L. 75-688, 52 Stat. 822
and 830). NGA sections 4, 5, and 16 authorize the Commission to inquire
into rate structures and methodologies and to set rates at a just and
reasonable level. Specifically, a natural gas pipeline must obtain
Commission authorization for all rates and charges made, demanded, or
received in connection with the transportation or sale of natural gas
in interstate commerce. The proposed modification as described in this
NOPR in Docket No. RM21-18-000 only impacts filings under section 4 of
the NGA. The collections associated with sections 5 and 16 remain
unchanged.

V. Environmental Analysis

    25. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental
Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may
have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.\18\ The
actions proposed to be taken here fall within categorical exclusions in
the Commission's regulations for rules regarding information gathering,
analysis, and dissemination, and for rules regarding sales, exchange,
and transportation of natural gas that require no construction of
facilities.\19\ Therefore, an environmental review is unnecessary and
has not been prepared in this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Reguls. Implementing the Nat'l Envt'l Pol'y Act, Order No.
486, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,783
(1987) (cross-referenced at 41 FERC ] 61,284).
    \19\ See 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii), 380.4(a)(5) & 380.4(a)(27)
(2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    26. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \20\ requires the
Commission to determine the effect of the NOPR on small entities. The
Commission intends to pose the least possible burden on all entities
both large and small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    27. The NOPR only applies to natural gas pipelines who file a
section 4 rate case. There are a total of 145 entities that may file a
rate change and may be impacted by the NOPR. The Small Business
Administration (SBA) defines a small entity in the category of,
``Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas'' \21\ by entities with fewer
than $30 million of annual receipts. Out of the total number of
entities, only five are small entities (~3% of the total population).
We estimate the annual additional costs of filing a section 4 rate case
to be $9,700. We further estimate an average of eight responses per
year and conservatively estimates that one may be a small entity.
Therefore, this proposed rule does not pose a significant change to
small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Small Business Administration NAICS Category 486210,
``Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas'' under 13 CFR chapter 1
part 121.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Comment Procedures

    28. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on
the matters and issues proposed in this rulemaking to be adopted,
including any related matters or alternative proposals that commenters
may wish to discuss. Comments are due June 24, 2022. Comments must
refer to Docket No. RM21-18-000, and must include the commenter's name,
the organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in
their comments. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public
files and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described
in the Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal
are not required to serve copies of their comments on other commenters.
    29. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically
via the eFiling link on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts most standard word processing
formats. Documents created electronically using word processing
software must be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format
and not in a scanned format. Commenters filing electronically do not
need to make a paper filing.
    30. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically
may file an original of their comment by USPS mail or by courier or
other delivery services. For submission sent via USPS only, filings
should be mailed to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of
the Secretary, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Submission of
filings other than by USPS should be delivered to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, MD 20852.

VIII. Document Availability

    31. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov). At
this time, the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's
Public Reference Room due to the President's March 13, 2020
proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning the Novel
Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19).
    32. From the Commission's Home Page on the internet, this
information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is
available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type
the docket number excluding the

last three digits of this document in the docket number field.
    33. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
website during normal business hours from the Commission's Online
Support at<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
[email protected], or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email the Public Reference Room at
[email protected].

    By direction of the Commission.

    Issued: May 19, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-11243 Filed 5-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P