[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 146 (Wednesday, July 29, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45541-45544]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15534]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0612; FRL-10012-02-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; SC; NOX SIP Call and Removal of CAIR

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 South
Carolina through letters dated April 12, 2019, and July 11, 2019, to
establish a SIP-approved state control program to comply with the
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) SIP call obligations for electric
generating units (EGUs) and large non-EGUs. EPA is also approving the
removal of the SIP-approved portions of the State's Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR) Program rules from the South Carolina SIP. In
addition, EPA is approving into the SIP state regulations that
establish an alternative monitoring option for certain sources.

DATES: This rule is effective August 28, 2020.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0612. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials can either
be retrieved electronically via www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation
Branch, Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your
inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday
through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gobeail McKinley, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is
(404) 562-9230. Ms. McKinley can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), which
EPA has traditionally termed the good neighbor provision, states are
required to address the interstate transport of air pollution.
Specifically, the good neighbor provision requires that each state's
implementation plan contain adequate provisions to prohibit air
pollutant emissions from within the state that will significantly
contribute to nonattainment of the national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS), or that will interfere with maintenance of the
NAAQS, in any other state.
    In October 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA finalized the ``Finding of
Significant Contribution and Rulemaking for Certain States in the Ozone
Transport Assessment Group Region for Purposes of Reducing Regional
Transport of Ozone'' (``NOX SIP Call''). The NOX
SIP Call required eastern states, including South Carolina, to submit
SIPs that prohibit excessive emissions of ozone season NOX
by implementing statewide emissions budgets.\1\ The NOX SIP
Call addressed the good neighbor provision for the 1979 ozone NAAQS and
was designed to mitigate the impact of transported NOX
emissions, one of the precursors of ozone. EPA developed the
NOX Budget Trading Program, an allowance trading program
that states could adopt to meet their obligations under the
NOX SIP Call. This trading program allowed the following
sources to participate in a regional cap and trade program: Generally
EGUs with capacity greater than 25 megawatts (MW); and large industrial
non-EGUs, such as boilers and combustion turbines, with a rated heat
input greater than 250 million British thermal units per hour (MMBtu/
hr). The NOX SIP Call also identified potential reductions
from cement kilns and stationary internal combustion engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 63 FR 57356 (October 27, 1998). As originally
promulgated, the NOX SIP Call also addressed good
neighbor obligations under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, but EPA
subsequently stayed and later rescinded the rule's provisions with
respect to that standard. See 65 FR 56245 (September 18, 2000); 84
FR 8422 (March 8, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To comply with the NOX SIP Call requirements, South
Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC)
promulgated provisions at Regulation 61-62.96, Subparts A through I.
EPA approved the provisions into South Carolina's SIP in 2002.\2\ The
provisions required EGUs and large non-EGUs in the State to participate
in the NOX Budget Trading Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See 67 FR 43546 (June 28, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2005, EPA published CAIR, which required eastern states,
including South Carolina, to submit SIPs that prohibited

emissions consistent with ozone season (and annual) NOX
budgets. See 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005). CAIR addressed the good
neighbor provision for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and 1997 fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) NAAQS and was designed to mitigate the impact
of transported NOX emissions with respect to not only ozone
but also PM2.5. CAIR established several trading programs
that EPA implemented through Federal implementation plans (FIPs) for
EGUs greater than 25 MW in each affected state, but not large non-EGUs;
states could submit SIPs to replace the FIPs that achieved the required
emission reductions from EGUs and/or other types of sources.\3\ When
the CAIR trading program for ozone season NOX was
implemented beginning in 2009, EPA discontinued administration of the
NOX Budget Trading Program; however, the requirements of the
NOX SIP Call continued to apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ CAIR had separate trading programs for annual sulfur dioxide
emissions, seasonal NOX emissions and annual
NOX emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 9, 2007, EPA approved an ``abbreviated SIP'' for South
Carolina, consisting of regulations governing allocation of
NOX allowances to EGUs for use in the trading programs
established pursuant to CAIR, and related rules allowing additional
sources to opt into the CAIR programs. See 72 FR 57209. The abbreviated
SIP was implemented in conjunction with a FIP for South Carolina that
specified requirements for emissions monitoring, permit provisions, and
other elements of CAIR programs.
    On October 16, 2009, EPA approved a ``full SIP'' for South
Carolina, through which various CAIR implementation provisions became
governed by State rules rather than Federal rules.\4\ Consistent with
CAIR's requirements, EPA approved a SIP revision in which South
Carolina regulations: (1) Sunsetted its NOX Budget Trading
Program requirements, (2) removed NOX SIP Call
implementation requirements (i.e., South Carolina Regulation 61-62.96,
Subparts A through I, ``Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Budget
Program''), and (3) incorporated CAIR (i.e., South Carolina Regulation
61-62.96, Subparts AA through II, AAA through III, and AAAA through
IIII, ``Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) and Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2) Budget Trading Program''). See 74 FR 53167 (October
16, 2009). Participation of EGUs in the CAIR ozone season
NOX trading program addressed the State's obligation under
the NOX SIP Call for those units, and South Carolina also
chose to require non-EGUs subject to the NOX SIP Call to
participate in the same CAIR trading program. In this manner, South
Carolina's CAIR rules incorporated into the SIP addressed the State's
obligations under the NOX SIP Call with respect to both EGUs
and non-EGUs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 74 FR 53167.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit (D.C. Circuit) initially vacated CAIR in 2008, but ultimately
remanded the rule to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental
benefits provided by CAIR. See North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896,
modified on rehearing, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008). The ruling
allowed CAIR to remain in effect temporarily until a replacement rule
consistent with the court's opinion was developed. While EPA worked on
developing a replacement rule, the CAIR program continued to be
implemented with the NOX annual and ozone season trading
programs beginning in 2009 and the SO2 annual trading
program beginning in 2010.
    Following on the D.C. Circuit's remand of CAIR, EPA promulgated the
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) to replace CAIR and address the
good neighbor provisions for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 76 FR
48208 (August 8, 2011). Through FIPs, CSAPR required EGUs in eastern
states, including South Carolina, to meet annual and ozone season
NOX emission budgets and annual SO2 emission
budgets implemented through new trading programs. Implementation of
CSAPR began in January 1, 2015.\5\ CSAPR also contained provisions that
would sunset CAIR-related obligations on a schedule coordinated with
the implementation of the CSAPR compliance requirements. Participation
by a state's EGUs in the CSAPR trading program for ozone season
NOX generally addressed the state's obligation under the
NOX SIP Call for EGUs. CSAPR did not initially contain
provisions allowing states to incorporate large non-EGUs into that
trading program to meet the requirements of the NOX SIP Call
for non-EGUs. EPA also stopped administering CAIR trading programs with
respect to emissions occurring after December 31, 2014.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 79 FR 71663 (December 3, 2014) and 81 FR 13275 (March
14, 2016).
    \6\ See 79 FR 71663 (December 3, 2014) and 81 FR 13275 (March
14, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After litigation that reached the Supreme Court, the D.C. Circuit
generally upheld CSAPR but remanded several state budgets to EPA for
reconsideration, including the Phase 2 ozone season NOX
budget for South Carolina. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795
F.3d 118, 129-30 (D.C. Cir. 2015). EPA addressed the remanded ozone
season NOX budgets in the CSAPR Update, which also partially
addressed eastern states' good neighbor obligations for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. See 81 FR 74504 (October 26, 2016). The air quality modeling for
the CSAPR Update projected that South Carolina would not contribute
significantly to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance in
downwind areas for either the 1997 ozone NAAQS or the 2008 ozone NAAQS
as of 2017, and the EGUs in the state therefore are no longer subject
to a NOX ozone season trading program under either CSAPR or
the CSAPR Update.\7\ The CSAPR Update also reestablished an option for
most states to meet their ongoing obligations for non-EGUs under the
NOX SIP Call by including the units in the CSAPR Update
trading program, but since South Carolina's EGUs do not participate in
that trading program, the option is not available to South Carolina.
Because South Carolina's EGUs and non-EGUs no longer participate in any
CSAPR or CSAPR Update trading program for ozone season NOX
emissions, the NOX SIP Call regulations at 40 CFR
51.121(r)(2) as well as anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR 51.905(f)
and 40 CFR 51.1105(e) require these sources to maintain compliance with
NOX SIP Call requirements in some other way.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In the CSAPR Update, EPA relieved EGUs in South Carolina
from the obligation to participate in the original CSAPR
NOX ozone season trading program for purposes of
addressing the good neighbor requirements for the 1997 ozone NAAQS
and did not require the EGUs to participate in the new CSAPR Update
trading program for purposes of addressing the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See
40 CFR 52.38(b)(2)(ii)-(iii). EGUs in South Carolina remain subject
to CSAPR state trading programs for annual NOX and
SO2 emissions for purposes of addressing the
PM2.5 NAAQS under the state trading program rules
codified in South Carolina regulation 61-62.97 that were adopted
into the State's SIP. See 82 FR 47936. EPA acknowledges the D.C.
Circuit's decision in Wisconsin v. EPA, 938 F.3d 303 (Sept. 13,
2019), remanding the CSAPR Update with respect to the adequacy of
the rulemaking to address the good neighbor obligations with respect
to the 2008 ozone NAAQS; however, the court's decision does not
address the determinations made in the CSAPR Update regarding
state's obligations with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS as those
determinations were not challenged in the course of the litigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under 40 CFR 51.121(i)(4) of the NOX SIP Call
regulations as originally promulgated, where a state's SIP contains
control measures for EGUs and large non-EGUs, the SIP must also require
these sources to monitor emissions according to the provisions of 40
CFR part 75, which generally entail the use of continuous emission
monitoring systems (CEMS). South

Carolina triggered this requirement by including control measures in
their SIP for these types of sources, and the requirement has remained
in effect despite the discontinuation of the NOX Budget
Trading Program after the 2008 ozone season. On March 8, 2019, EPA
revised some of the regulations that were originally promulgated in
1998 to implement the NOX SIP Call.\8\ The revision gave
states covered by the NOX SIP Call greater flexibility
concerning the form of the NOX emissions monitoring
requirements that the states must include in their SIPs for certain
emissions sources. The revision amends 40 CFR 51.121(i)(4) to make part
75 monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting optional, such that SIPs
may establish alternative monitoring requirements for NOX
SIP Call budget units that meet the general requirements of 40 CFR
51.121(f)(1) and (i)(1). Under the updated provision, a state's
implementation plan would still need to include some form of emissions
monitoring requirements for these types of sources, consistent with the
NOX SIP Call's general enforceability and monitoring
requirements at Sec.  51.121(f)(1) and (i)(1), respectively, but states
would no longer be required to satisfy these general NOX SIP
Call requirements specifically through the adoption of 40 CFR part 75
monitoring requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See ``Emissions Monitoring Provisions in State
Implementation Plans Required Under the NOX SIP Call,''
84 FR 8422.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 12, 2019, and July 11, 2019,\9\ SC DHEC's letters
requested that EPA update South Carolina's SIP to reflect the
reinstated NOX SIP Call requirements at Regulation 61-62,
``Air Pollution Control Regulations and Standards,'' provide additional
monitoring flexibilities for certain units subject to the State's
NOX SIP Call regulations, and remove CAIR requirements.
Additionally, the July 11, 2019, submission includes a demonstration
under CAA section 110(l) intended to show that the April 12, 2019 SIP
revision does not interfere with any applicable CAA requirements. On
May 5, 2020 (85 FR 26635), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) proposing to establish a SIP-approved state control
program to comply with NOX SIP call obligations for EGUs and
large non-EGUs. EPA also proposed approving the removal of the SIP-
approved portions of the CAIR Program rules from the South Carolina SIP
and approve into the SIP state regulations that establish an
alternative monitoring option for certain sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ This submission also includes amended regulations which are
not part of the federally-approved SIP and are not addressed in this
notice such as: Amended Regulation 61-62.61, ``South Carolina
Designated Facility Plan and New Source Performance Standards;''
amended Regulation 61-62.63, ``National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (``NESHAP'') for Source Categories;''
amended Regulation 61-62.68, ``Chemical Accident Prevention
Provisions;'' and amended Regulation 61-62.70, ``Title V Operating
Permit Program.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    See EPA's May 5, 2020 (85 FR 26635), NPRM for further detail on
these changes and EPA's rationale for approving them. EPA did not
receive public comments on the May 5, 2020, NPRM.

II. 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, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of South
Carolina Regulation 61-62.96 titled, ``Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
Budget Program,'' effective January 25, 2019, which reinstates
applicable portions of EPA's 40 CFR part 96 NOX SIP Call
regulations and establishes alternative emission monitoring
requirements for certain units. Also, in this rule, EPA is finalizing
the removal of South Carolina Regulation 61-62.96 Subparts AA through
II, AAA through III, and AAAA through IIII entitled, ``Nitrogen Oxides
(NOX) and Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Budget Trading
Program,'' from the South Carolina State Implementation Plan, which is
incorporated by reference in accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR
part 51. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials
generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4
Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).
Therefore, the these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion
in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan,
are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA
as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and
will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal
Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Actions

    EPA is approving South Carolina's SIP April 12, 2019, and July 11,
2019, SIP revisions and incorporating Regulation 61-62.96 entitled,
``Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Budget Program,'' and Regulation 61-
62.96, Subpart H, Section 96.70 into the SIP. In addition, EPA is
approving removal of the State's CAIR regulations at Regulation 61-
62.96 Subparts AA through II, AAA through III, and AAAA through IIII
entitled, ``Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) and Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2) Budget Trading Program,'' from the SIP. EPA has
concluded that these revisions will not interfere with attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or any other
applicable requirement of the CAA.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, these
actions merely approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and do
not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
For that reason, these actions:
     Are not significant regulatory actions subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Are not Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory actions because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Do not impose information collection burdens under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are certified as not having significant economic impacts
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Do not contain any unfunded mandates or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Do not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and

     Do 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).
    Because these actions merely approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and do not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law, this action for the State of South Carolina does
not have Tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Therefore, this action will not impose
substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.
The Catawba Indian Nation (CIN) Reservation is located within the
boundary of York County, South Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba Indian
Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code Ann. 27-16-120 (Settlement Act), ``all
state and local environmental laws and regulations apply to the
[Catawba Indian Nation] and Reservation and are fully enforceable by
all relevant state and local agencies and authorities.'' The CIN also
retains authority to impose regulations applying higher environmental
standards to the Reservation than those imposed by state law or local
governing bodies, in accordance with the Settlement Act.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by September 28, 2020. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides.

    Dated: July 13, 2020.
Mary Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    Accordingly, 40 CFR part 52 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 PP--South Carolina

0
2. Section 52.2120(c) is amended by revising the entry for ``Regulation
No. 62.96'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2120   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                     EPA-Approved South Carolina Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            State
          State citation               Title/subject      effective     EPA approval date        Explanation
                                                             date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Regulation No. 62.96.............  Nitrogen Oxides         1/25/2019  7/29/2020, [Insert
                                    (NOX) Budget                       citation of
                                    Program.                           publication].

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-15534 Filed 7-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 196 (Thursday, October 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61068-61072]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24057]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC14-16-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-537, FERC-
725F, FERC-725I); Consolidated Comment Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of information collections and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 USC 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the
requirements and burden \1\ of the information collections described
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Commission defines burden as the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain,
retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency. For further explanation of what is included in the
information collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal
Regulations 1320.3.

DATES: Comments on the collections of information are due December 8,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. IC14-16-
000) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Please reference the specific collection number and/or title in
your comments.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading

comments and issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the information collection
requirements for all collections described below with no changes to the
current reporting requirements. Please note that each collection is
distinct from the next.
    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collections of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the Commission, including whether the information will have
practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the
burden and cost of the collections of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance
the quality, utility and clarity of the information collections; and
(4) ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.

FERC-537, Gas Pipeline Certificates: Construction, Acquisition and
Abandonment

    OMB Control No.: 1902-0060.
    Abstract: The information collected under the requirements of FERC-
537 is used by the Commission to implement the statutory provisions of
the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA) \2\ and the Natural Gas Act
(NGA). \3\ Under Section 7(c) of the NGA, natural gas pipeline
companies must obtain Commission authorization to undertake the
construction or extension of any facilities, or to acquire or operate
any such facilities or extensions. A natural gas company must also
obtain Commission approval under Section 7(b) of the NGA prior to
abandoning any jurisdictional facility or service. Under the NGA and
the NGPA, interstate and intrastate pipelines must also obtain
authorization for certain transportation and storage services and
arrangements, particularly a Part 284, Subpart G--Blanket
Certificate.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 3301-3432.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 717-717w.
    \4\ 18 CFR 284.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The information collected is necessary to certificate interstate
pipelines engaged in the transportation and sale of natural gas, and
the construction, acquisition, and operation of facilities to be used
in those activities, to authorize the abandonment of facilities and
services, and to authorize certain NGPA transactions. If a certificate
is granted, the natural gas company can construct, acquire, or operate
facilities, plus engage in interstate transportation or sale of natural
gas. Conversely, approval of an abandonment application permits the
pipeline to cease service and/or discontinue the operation of such
facilities. Authorization under NGPA Section 311(a) allows the
interstate or intrastate pipeline applicants to render certain
transportation services.
    The data required to be submitted consists of identification of the
company and responsible officials, factors considered in the location
of the facilities and the detailed impact on the project area for
environmental considerations. Also to be submitted are the following:
     Flow diagrams showing proposed design capacity for
engineering design verification and safety determination;
     Commercial and economic data presenting the basis for the
proposed action; and
     Cost of the proposed facilities, plans for financing, and
estimated revenues and expenses related to the proposed facility for
accounting and financial evaluation.
    The Commission implements these filing requirements in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) under 18 CFR Parts 157.5-.11; 157.13-.20;
157.53; 157.201-.209; 157.211; 157.214-.218; 284.8; 284.11; 284.126;
284.221; 284.224.
    Type of Respondent: Natural Gas Pipelines.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden for the information collection as:

                 FERC-537--Gas Pipeline Certificates: Construction, Acquisition, and Abandonment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Annual number of                       Average burden      Total annual
    Number of        responses per     Total number of    hours & cost per    burden hours &        Cost per
   respondents         respondent         responses         response \5\    total annual cost    respondent ($)
(1)                            (2)      (1)*(2) = (3)                (4)      (3)*(4) = (5)          (5) / (1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            389                1.2                467                133             62,111            $11,257
                                                                  $9,377         $4,379,059
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A more granular breakdown of the average burden hour figure (i.e.
133 hours per response) follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The estimates for cost per response are derived using the
following formula: Average Burden Hours per Response * $70.50 per
Hour = Average Cost per Response. The cost per hour figure is the
FERC average salary. Subject matter experts found that industry
employment costs closely resemble FERC's regarding the FERC-537
information collection.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Number of       Number of    Avg. hours per
  Regulation section 18 CFR . . .          Regulation topic         respondents      responses       response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
157.5-.11; & 157.13-.20............  Interstate certificate and              149              82             500
                                      abandonment applications.
157.53.............................  Exemptions.................             149             0.5             100
157.201-.209; 157.211; 157.214-.218  Blanket Certificates prior              149              46             200
                                      notice filings.
157.201-.209; 157.211; 157.214-.218  Blanket Certificates--                  198             294              50
                                      annual reports.
284.11.............................  NGPA Sec. 311 Construction--            198             294              50
                                      annual reports.

284.8..............................  Capacity Release--record                  0             N/A              75
                                      keeping.
284.126(a)&(c).....................  Intrastate bypass, semi-                 37              48              30
                                      annual transportation &
                                      storage--reports.
284.221............................  Blanket Certificates--one             \6\ 0             N/A             100
                                      time filing, inc. new
                                      tariff and rate design
                                      proposal.
284.224............................  Hinshaw Blanket                           5               5              75
                                      Certificates.
157.5-.11; & 157.13-.20............  Non-facility certificate or               0             N/A              75
                                      abandonment applications.
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    TOTALS.........................  ...........................         \1\ 389             467         \2\ 133
                                                                        distinct                        average,
                                                                       entities.                       weighted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Distinct entities.
\2\ Average weighted.

FERC-725F, Mandatory Reliability Standards for Nuclear Plant Interface
Coordination

    OMB Control No.: 1902-0249.
    Abstract: The Commission requires the information collected by the
FERC-725F to implement the statutory provisions of section 215 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA) (16 U.S.C. 824o). On August 8, 2005, the
Electricity Modernization Act of 2005, which is Title XII, Subtitle A,
of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005), was enacted into law.\7\
EPAct 2005 added a new section 215 to the FPA, which required a
Commission-certified Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) to develop
mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, which are subject to
Commission review and approval. Once approved, the Reliability
Standards may be enforced by the ERO subject to Commission oversight,
or the Commission can independently enforce Reliability Standards.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The number for these filings is accounted for in other
regulatory categories in FERC-537.
    \7\ Energy Policy Act of 2005, Public Law 109-58, Title XII,
Subtitle A, 119 Stat. 594, 941 (2005), 16 U.S.C. 824o.
    \8\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 3, 2006, the Commission issued Order No. 672,
implementing section 215 of the FPA.\9\ Pursuant to Order No. 672, the
Commission certified one organization, North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC), as the ERO. The Reliability Standards
developed by the ERO and approved by the Commission apply to users,
owners and operators of the Bulk-Power System as set forth in each
Reliability Standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric Reliability
Organization; and Procedures for the Establishment, Approval, and
Enforcement of Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,204, order on reh'g, Order No. 672-A, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,212 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 19, 2007, NERC filed its petition for Commission
approval of the Nuclear Plant Interface Coordination Reliability
Standard, designated NUC-001-1. In Order No. 716, issued October 16,
2008, the Commission approved the standard while also directing certain
revisions.\10\ Revised Reliability Standard, NUC-001-2, was filed with
the Commission by NERC in August 2009 and subsequently approved by the
Commission January 21, 2010.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Mandatory Reliability Standard for Nuclear Plant Interface
Coordination, Order No. 716, 125 FERC ] 61,065, at P 189 & n.90
(2008), order on reh'g, Order No. 716-A, 126 FERC ] 61,122 (2009).
    \11\ North American Electric Reliability Corporation, 130 FERC ]
61,051 (2010). When the revised Reliability Standard was approved
the Commission did not go to OMB for approval. It is assumed that
the changes made did not substantively affect the information
collection and therefore a formal submission to OMB was not needed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of Reliability Standard NUC-001-2 is to require
``coordination between nuclear plant generator operators and
transmission entities for the purpose of ensuring nuclear plant safe
operation and shutdown.'' \12\ The Nuclear Reliability Standard applies
to nuclear plant generator operators (generally nuclear power plant
owners and operators, including licensees) and ``transmission
entities,'' defined in the Reliability Standard as including a nuclear
plant's suppliers of off-site power and related transmission and
distribution services. To account for the variations in nuclear plant
design and grid interconnection characteristics, the Reliability
Standard defines transmission entities as ``all entities that are
responsible for providing services related to Nuclear Plant Interface
Requirements (NPIRs),'' and lists eleven types of functional entities
(heretofore described as ``transmission entities'') that could provide
services related to NPIRs.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Reliability Standard NUC-001-2 at http://www.nerc.com/files/NUC-001-2.pdf.
    \13\ The list of functional entities consists of transmission
operators, transmission owners, transmission planners, transmission
service providers, balancing authorities, reliability coordinators,
planning authorities, distribution providers, load-serving entities,
generator owners and generator operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FERC-725F information collection requirements include establishing
and maintaining interface agreements, including record retention
requirements. These agreements are not filed with FERC but with the
appropriate entities as established by the Reliability Standard.
    Type of Respondent: Nuclear operators, nuclear plants, transmission
entities.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: The Commission  estimates the average
annual burden  for this information collection as:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Average burden   Total annual
                                                                           Annual number   Total number    hours & cost   burden hours &     Cost per
                 FERC-725F                      Number of respondents      of responses    of responses    per response    total annual   respondent ($)
                                                                          per respondent                       \14\            cost
                                            (1).........................             (2)   (1)*(2) = (3)             (4)   (3)*(4) = (5)       (5) / (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New agreements (Reporting)................  10 nuclear operators + 20                  1              30           1,080          32,400         $79,736
                                             transmission entities.                                              $79,736      $2,392,092
New Agreements (Record Keeping)...........  10 nuclear operators + 20                  1              30             108           3,240           3,133
                                             transmission entities.                                               $3,133         $93,992
Modifications to agreements (Reporting)...  65 nuclear plants + 130                    2             390           66.67          26,000           9,844
                                             transmission entities \15\.                                          $4,922      $1,919,581
Modifications to Agreements (Record         65 nuclear plants + 130                    2             390            6.67           2,600             387
 Keeping).                                   transmission entities.                                                 $193         $75,426
    Total.................................  ............................        \16\ 420  ..............          64,240  ..............  ..............
                                                                                $4,481,091
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FERC-725I, Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Northeast Power
Coordinating Council

    OMB Control  No.: 1902-0258.
    Abstract: This information collection relates to two FERC approved
Protection and Control (PRC) regional Reliability Standards: PRC-002-
NPCC-01--Disturbance Monitoring, and PRC-006-NPCC-1--Automatic
Underfrequency Load-Shedding. These Northeast Power Coordinating
Council (NPCC) regional Reliability Standards require respondents to
provide recording capability necessary to monitor the response of the
Bulk-Power System to system disturbances, including scheduled and
unscheduled outages; requires each reliability coordinator to establish
requirements for its area's dynamic disturbance recording needs;
establishes disturbance data reporting requirements; and requires
planning coordinators to incrementally gather data, run studies, and
analyze study results to design or update the UFLS programs that are
required in the regional Reliability Standard in addition to the
requirements of the NERC Reliability Standard PRC-006-1.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The cost for reporting requirements is $73.83/hour and is
based on a composite loaded (wage plus benefits) average wage for an
electrical engineer, attorney, and administrative staff. The cost
for record keeping is $29.01 and is based on the loaded wage for a
file clerk. The wages are generated from Burueau of Labor Statistics
data retrieved September, 2014 from http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm. The loaded wage is calculated using BLS data
indicating, as of Sept 1, 2014, that wages make up 69.9% of total
salary (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm).
    \15\ This figure of 130 transmission entities is based on the
assumption that each agreement will be between 1 nuclear plant and 2
transmission entities (65 times 2 = 130). However, there is some
double counting in this figure because some transmission entities
may be party to multiple agreements with multiple nuclear plants.
The double counting does not affect the burden estimate and the
correct number of unique respondents will be reported to OMB. The
actual number of unique entities subject to this collection is 143.
    \16\ The recordkeeping ``responses'' are considered to be part
of (i.e. to be contained within the same quantity as) the Reporting
responses leading to a total number of unique responses of 420 (390
+ 30 = 420).
    \17\ The burden estimates for Reliability Standard PRC-006-1 are
included in Order No. 763 (Final Rule in RM11-20) and covered in
FERC-725A (OMB Control No. 1902-0244). OMB approved those
requirements on 7/9/2012 (ICR Reference No.<PHONE_NUMBER>-001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Reliability Standard PRC-002-NPCC-01 introduced several new
mandatory and enforceable requirements for the applicable entities.
However, when FERC approved this standard NPCC had (and continues to
have) criteria \18\ and published guidance \19\ addressing similar
requirements that the Reliability Standard made mandatory. Thus, it is
usual and customary for affected entities within NPCC to create,
maintain and store some of the same or equivalent information
identified in Reliability Standard PRC-002-NPCC-01. Therefore, many of
the requirements contained in PRC-002-NPCC-01 do not impose new burdens
on the affected entities.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Disturbance Monitoring Equipment Criteria (Aug. 2007),
available at https://www.npcc.org/Standards/Criteria/A-15.pdf
(Disturbance Monitoring Criteria).
    \19\ Guide for Application of Disturbance Recording Equipment
(Sept. 2006), available at https://www.npcc.org/Standards/Guides/B-26.pdf (Application Guide).
    \20\ 5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2) (2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several requirements contained in regional Reliability Standard
PRC-002-NPCC-01 were entirely new responsibilities for the applicable
entities when the Commission approved the standard and each of these is
listed in the estimated annual burden section below.
    Information collection burden for Reliability Standard PRC-006-
NPCC-01 is based on the time needed for planning coordinators and
generator owners to incrementally gather data, run studies, and analyze
study results to design or update the UFLS programs that are required
in the regional Reliability Standard in addition to the requirements of
the NERC Reliability Standard PRC-006-1.\21\ There is also burden on
the generator owners to maintain data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ The burden estimates for Reliability Standard PRC-006-1 are
included in Order No. 763 (Final Rule in RM11-20) and currently
covered in FERC-725A (OMB Control No. 1902-0244). OMB approved those
requirements on 7/9/2012 (ICR Reference No.<PHONE_NUMBER>-001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Respondent: Entities registered with the North American
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) as Generator Owners,
Transmission Owners, Reliability Coordinators and Planning Coordinators
    Estimate of Annual Burden: The number of respondents is based on
NERC's registry as of August 27, 2014. Entities registered for more
than one applicable function type have been accounted for in the
figures below. The Commission estimates the annual public reporting
burden for the information collection as:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Average burden   Total annual
                                                             Number of     Annual number   Total number    hours & cost   burden hours &     Cost per
           Information collection requirements              respondents    of responses    of responses    per  response   total annual   Respondent ($)
                                                                          per respondent                       \22\            cost
                                                                     (1)             (2)   (1)*(2) = (3)             (4)   (3)*(4) = (5)       (5) / (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R13: GO \23\ and TO to have evidence it acquired and                   1               1               1              10              10            $290
 installed dynamic disturbance recorders and a mutually                                                             $290            $290
 agreed upon implementation schedule with the RC (record
 retention).............................................

R14.5: GO and TO to have evidence of a maintenance and               166              12           1,992               5           9,960           3,660
 testing program for stand-alone disturbance monitoring                                                             $305        $607,560
 equipment including monthly verification of active
 analog quantities......................................
R14.7: GO and TO to record efforts to return failed                   33               1              33              10             330             610
 units to service if it takes longer than 90 days \24\..                                                            $610         $20,130
R14.7: GO and TO record retention.......................              33               1              33              10             330             290
                                                                                $290          $9,570
R17: RC provide certain disturbance monitoring equipment               5               1               5               5              25             305
 data to the Regional Entity upon request...............                                                            $305          $1,525
R17: RC record retention................................               5               1               5              10              50             290
                                                                                $290          $1,450
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................  ..............      \25\ 2,031  ..............          10,705  ..............  ..............
                                                                                $640,525
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    \22\ The estimates for cost per response are derived using the
following formula: Average Burden Hours per Response * XX per Hour =
Average Cost per Response. The hourly cost figure comes from the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm and http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm).
Record retention at a wage plus benefits cost of $29/hour and the
remaining costs are based on the wage plus benefits for an
electrical engineer at $61/hour.
    \23\ For purposes of these charts, generation owner is
abbreviated to GO, transmission owner is abbreviated to TO,
reliability coordinator is abbreviated to RC, and planning
coordinator is abbreviated to PC.
    \24\ We estimate that an entity will experience a unit failure
greater than 90 days once every five years. Therefore, 20 percent of
NPCC's 166 generator owners and transmission owners will experience
a unit failure of this duration each year.
    \25\ The recordkeeping ``responses'' for R14.7 and R17 are
considered to be part of (i.e. to be contained within the same
quantity as) the Reporting responses leading to a total number of
unique responses of 420 (390 + 30 = 420).

                                                          Reliability Standard PRC-006-NPCC-01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total annual
                                                             Number of     Annual number   Total number   Average burden  burden hours &     Cost per
           Information collection requirements              respondents    of responses    of responses    hours & cost    total annual   respondent ($)
                                                                          per respondent                   per  response       cost
                                                                     (1)             (2)   (1)*(2) = (3)             (4)   (3)*(4) = (5)       (5) / (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCs Design and document automatic UFLS program..........               6               1               6               8              48            $488
                                                                                $488          $2,928
PCs update and maintain UFLS program database...........               6               1               6              16              96             976
                                                                                $976          $5,856
GOs provide documentation and data to the planning                   145               1             145              16           2,320             976
 coordinator............................................                                                            $976        $141,520
GOs: record retention...................................             145               1             145               4             580             116
                                                                                $116         $16,820
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................  ..............  ..............             302  ..............           3,044  ..............
                                                                                $167,124
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: September 30, 2014.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-24057 Filed 10-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 170 (Thursday, September 1, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54463-54465]
[FR Doc No: 2011-22429]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9458-7]

Proposed Consent Decree, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed consent decree; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (``CAA'' or the ``Act''), 42 U.S.C. 7413(g), notice is hereby
given of a proposed consent decree to address a lawsuit filed by
WildEarth Guardians and Sierra Club in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California: WildEarth Guardians et al. v.
Jackson, No. 3:11-cv-00190-WHA (N.D. Cal.). On July 6, 2011, Plaintiffs
filed an amended complaint alleging that EPA failed, among other
things, to take final action under section 110(k)(2) and (3) of the CAA
to approve or disapprove, approve in part, or disapprove in part State
Implementation

Plan (SIP) submittals or portions of submittals meeting applicable
requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA, for the States of
Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee,
Indiana, Maine, Ohio, New Mexico, Delaware, Kentucky, Nevada, Arkansas,
New Hampshire, South Carolina, Massachusetts, Arizona, Georgia and West
Virginia with regards to the 2006 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (``NAAQS''). The proposed consent decree establishes
deadlines for EPA to take these actions.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed consent decree must be received
by October 3, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OGC-2011-0618, online at http://www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred
method); by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by mail to EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; or by hand delivery or courier to
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. Comments on a disk or CD-ROM should be
formatted in Word or ASCII file, avoiding the use of special characters
and any form of encryption, and may be mailed to the mailing address
above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Geoffrey L. Wilcox, Air and Radiation
Law Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Additional Information About the Proposed Consent Decree

    The proposed consent decree would resolve a portion of a lawsuit
seeking to compel the Administrator to take final action under sections
110(k)(2) and (3) of the CAA to either approve or disapprove, approve
in part, or disapprove in part SIP submittals or portions of submittals
meeting applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. The
SIP submissions at issue are the ``infrastructure'' SIPs that States
are required to submit to meet the basic structural requirements to
provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS within the 20 named States. Under the consent decree,
various deadlines have been established for EPA to take final action
for the States of Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Mississippi, North
Carolina, Tennessee, Indiana, Maine, Ohio, New Mexico, Delaware,
Kentucky, Nevada, Arkansas, New Hampshire, South Carolina,
Massachusetts, Arizona, Georgia and West Virginia. No later than 15
business days after taking each action, EPA shall send the notice(s) of
such action to the Office of the Federal Register for review and
publication in the Federal Register. After EPA fulfills its obligations
under the decree, the Plaintiffs and EPA agree to file a joint motion
for voluntary dismissal, with prejudice.
    For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication
of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the
proposed consent decree from persons who were not named as parties or
intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of
Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree
if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that
such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent
with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of
Justice determines that consent to this consent decree should be
withdrawn, the terms of the agreement will be affirmed.

II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Consent
Decree

A. How can I get a copy of the consent decree?

    The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2011-0618) contains a copy of the proposed consent
decree. The official public docket is available for public viewing at
the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the OEI Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through
http://www.regulations.gov. You may use http://www.regulations.gov to
submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the
contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents
in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, key in the appropriate docket identification number then select
``search.''
    It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available
for public viewing online at http://www.regulations.gov without change,
unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information
claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute is not included in the official public docket or in the
electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material,
including copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not
be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only
in printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all
docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access
any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket
Center.

B. How and to whom do I submit comments?

    You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an e-mail address or other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD
ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or
contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included
as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot
read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you
for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    Use of the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments
to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments.
The electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address,

or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your
comment. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's
electronic mail (e-mail) system is not an ``anonymous access'' system.
If you send an e-mail comment directly to the Docket without going
through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address is
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's
electronic public docket.

    Dated: August 26, 2011.
Patricia Embrey,
Acting Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2011-22429 Filed 8-31-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 150 (Friday, August 5, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48017-48018]
[FR Doc No: 2022-16804]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10094-O1-OW]

Notice of Public Webinar of the Environmental Financial Advisory
Board (EFAB) via Teleconference

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public webinar.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s Environmental
Financial Advisory Board (EFAB) will hold a public webinar for the
third installment of a Pollution Prevention Finance Forum to support
the EFAB Pollution Prevention workgroup and its charge (https://www.epa.gov/waterfinancecenter/efab#meeting). Due to interest from the
full Board, this webinar is being opened to the public.

DATES: The webinar will be held on August 23, 2022, from 12 p.m. to
1:30 p.m. (Eastern Time).

ADDRESSES: The webinar will be conducted via teleconference only and is
open to the public. Interested persons must register in advance at the
weblink below to access the webinar.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public who wants
information about the webinar may contact Tara Johnson via telephone/
voicemail at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email to [email protected]. General
information concerning the EFAB is available at https://www.epa.gov/waterfinancecenter/efab.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background: The EFAB is an EPA advisory committee chartered under
the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, to provide
advice and recommendations to EPA on innovative approaches to funding
environmental programs, projects, and activities. Administrative
support for the EFAB is provided by the Water Infrastructure and
Resiliency Finance Center within EPA's Office of Water. Pursuant to
FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby given that the EFAB will hold a
public webinar for the following purpose:

    The Pollution Prevention Finance Forum is a series of webinars
that explore opportunities and challenges in financing
sustainability, with an initial focus on advancing opportunities for
small and medium-sized manufacturing businesses. The purpose of the
third Forum webinar is to assess partnership models and explore
potential partnership opportunities and distribution networks for
pollution prevention (P2) projects. P2, also known as source
reduction, is any practice that reduces, eliminates, or prevents
pollution at its source prior to recycling, treatment, or disposal.
More information can be found at https://www.epa.gov/p2.

    The webinar is open to the public, but no oral public comments will
be accepted during the webinar. Written public comments relating to the
Forum and the EFAB's Pollution Prevention workgroup should be provided
in accordance with the instructions below on written statements.
    Registration for the Meeting: Register for the webinar at https://www.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/WN_mzc_c2tRR06o-cBHZNS8Jg.
    Availability of Meeting Materials: Webinar materials (including an
agenda and background materials) will be available on EPA's website at
https://www.epa.gov/waterfinancecenter/efab#meeting.
    Procedures for Providing Public Input: Public comment for
consideration by EPA's federal advisory committees has a different
purpose from public comment provided to EPA program offices. Therefore,
the process for submitting comments to a federal advisory committee is
different from the process used to submit comments to an EPA program
office. Federal advisory committees provide independent advice to EPA.
Members of the public can submit comments on matters being considered
by the EFAB for consideration by members as they develop their advice
and recommendations to EPA.
    Written Statements: Written statements and questions should be
received by August 18, 2022, so that the information can be made
available to the EFAB for its consideration. Written statements and
questions should be sent via email to [email protected]. Members of the
public should be aware that their personal contact information, if
included in any written comments, may be posted to the EFAB website.
Copyrighted material will not be posted without explicit permission of
the copyright holder.
    Accessibility: For information on access or services for
individuals with disabilities or to request accommodations for a
disability, please register for the webinar and list any

special requirements or accommodations needed on the registration form
at least 10 business days prior to the meeting to allow as much time as
possible to process your request.

    Dated: July 28, 2022.
Andrew D. Sawyers,
Director, Office of Wastewater Management, Office of Water.
[FR Doc. 2022-16804 Filed 8-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 245 (Tuesday, December 22, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 79474-79476]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32000]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 558

[Docket No. FDA-2015-N-0002]

New Animal Drugs for Use in Animal Feeds; Bacitracin
Methylenedisalicylate

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal
drug regulations to reflect approval of a supplemental new animal drug
application (NADA) filed by Pharmgate LLC for the use of a Type A
medicated article containing bacitracin methylenedisalicylate to
manufacture Type B and Type C medicated feeds for chickens, turkeys,
pheasants, quail, and feedlot cattle. This supplemental approval
reflects FDA's effectiveness conclusions that relied on the National
Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Drug Efficacy Study
Group's evaluation of the effectiveness of this drug as well
indications for use not subject to this review.

DATES: This rule is effective December 22, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Lucia, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-128), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of August 8, 2003
(68 FR 47332), as corrected October 7, 2003 (68 FR 57911), as part of
the Drug Efficacy Study Implementation (DESI) program, the Center for
Veterinary Medicine (CVM) announced the effective conditions of use for
several drug products and use combinations that were listed in 21 CFR
558.15. CVM proposed to withdraw the NADAs for those products or use
combinations lacking substantial evidence of effectiveness following a
90-day opportunity to supplement the NADAs with labeling conforming to
the relevant findings of effectiveness.
    In response to that notice of opportunity for a hearing (NOOH),
Pennfield Oil Co. (Pennfield), 14040 Industrial Rd., Omaha, NE 68144,
filed a hearing request for its approved, non-DESI finalized NADA 141-
137 for a bacitracin methylenedisalicylate Type A medicated article.
    In March 2015, Pennfield transferred sponsorship of NADA 141-137 to
Pharmgate LLC, 1015 Ashes Dr., Suite 102, Wilmington, NC 28405
(Pharmgate) (80 FR 13226, March 13, 2015). Subsequently, Pharmgate
filed a supplement to NADA 141-137 for PENNITRACIN MD 50G (bacitracin
Type A medicated article) with labeling conforming to the findings of
effectiveness in the 2003 NOOH. In addition, the submitted labeling
included indications for use approved by FDA that were not subject to
DESI findings of effectiveness (34 FR 7906, May 20, 1969).
    The supplemental NADA provides for use of a Type A medicated
article containing bacitracin methylenedisalicylate to manufacture Type
B and Type C medicated feeds for several production and therapeutic
indications in broiler and replacement chickens, growing turkeys,
growing pheasants, growing quail, and beef steers and heifers fed in
confinement for slaughter. The supplemental NADA is approved as of
October 6, 2015, and the regulations are amended in 21 CFR 558.76 to
reflect the approval. Pharmgate, as successor to Pennfield, has since
withdrawn the hearing request for NADA 141-137.
    Approval of this supplemental NADA did not require review of any
new safety or effectiveness data. Therefore, a freedom of information
summary was not prepared.
    The DESI evaluation was concerned only with the effectiveness of
the drug products and use combinations. Nothing in this document
constitutes a bar to further proceedings with respect to questions of
safety of the subject drugs in treated animals or of the drugs or their
metabolites in food products derived from treated animals.
    Products that comply with FDA's findings of effectiveness are
eligible for copying, as described in the ``Generic Animal Drug and
Patent Term Restoration Act; Eighth Policy Letter,'' August 21, 1991
(56 FR 41561). Accordingly, sponsors may now obtain approval of
abbreviated NADAs for this Type A medicated article.
    The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.33(a)(1) that this action
is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is
required.
    This rule does not meet the definition of ``rule'' in 5 U.S.C.
804(3)(A) because it is a rule of ``particular applicability.''
Therefore, it is not subject to the congressional review requirements
in 5 U.S.C. 801-808.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 558

    Animal drugs, Animal feeds.

    Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR part 558 is
amended as follows:

PART 558--NEW ANIMAL DRUGS FOR USE IN ANIMAL FEEDS

0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 558 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 354, 360b, 360ccc, 360ccc-1, 371.

0
2. Amend Sec.  558.76 as follows:
0
a. Revise the section heading and paragraph (a);
0
b. Redesignate paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) as paragraphs (c), (d), and
(e);
0
c. Add new paragraph (b); and
0
d. Revise newly redesignated paragraph (e)(1).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  558.76  Bacitracin methylenedisalicylate.

    (a) Specifications. (1) Type A medicated articles containing 10,
25, 30, 40, 50, 60, or 75 grams bacitracin methylenedisalicylate per
pound.
    (2) Type A medicated article containing 50 grams bacitracin
methylenedisalicylate per pound.
    (b) Sponsors. See sponsors in Sec.  510.600(c) of this chapter:
    (1) No. 054771 for use of products in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section as in paragraphs (e)(1)(i), (e)(1)(iii), (e)(1)(v) through
(xiii), and (e)(1)(xv) of this section.
    (2) No. 069254 for use of products in paragraph (a)(2) of this
section as in paragraphs (e)(1)(ii), (e)(1)(iv), (e)(1)(xiv), and
(e)(1)(xvi) of this section.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) It is used as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Combination in
          Bacitracin            grams per ton (g/    Indications for use        Limitations           Sponsor
 methylenedisalicylate amount          ton)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) 4 to 50 g/ton.............  .................  Chickens, turkeys, and  .....................          054771
                                                    pheasants: For
                                                    increased rate of
                                                    weight gain and
                                                    improved feed
                                                    efficiency.
(ii) 4 to 50 g/ton............  .................  Broiler and             .....................          069254
                                                    replacement chickens,
                                                    growing turkeys, and
                                                    growing pheasants:
                                                    For increased rate of
                                                    weight gain and
                                                    improved feed
                                                    efficiency.
(iii) 5 to 20 g/ton...........  .................  Quail not over 5 weeks  .....................          054771
                                                    of age: For increased
                                                    rate of weight gain
                                                    and improved feed
                                                    efficiency.
(iv) 5 to 20 g/ton............  .................  Growing quail: For      For use in quail not           069254
                                                    increased rate of       over 5 weeks of age.
                                                    weight gain and
                                                    improved feed
                                                    efficiency.
(v) 10 to 25 g/ton............  .................  Chickens: For           For first 7 months of          054771
                                                    increased egg           production.
                                                    production and
                                                    improved feed
                                                    efficiency for egg
                                                    production.
(vi) 10 to 30 g/ton...........  .................  Swine: For increased    For growing and                054771
                                                    rate of weight gain     finishing swine.
                                                    and improved feed
                                                    efficiency.
(vii) 10 to 30 g/ton..........  Chlortetracycline  Swine: For increased    Feed for not more              054771
                                 approximately      rate of weight gain     than 14 days;                 069254
                                 400, varying       and improved feed       bacitracin
                                 with body weight   efficiency; for         methylenedisalicylat
                                 and food           treatment of            e provided by No.
                                 consumption to     bacterial enteritis     054771;
                                 provide 10         caused by Escherichia   chlortetracycline
                                 milligrams (mg)    coli and Salmonella     provided by Nos.
                                 per pound of       choleraesuis and        054771 and 069254 in
                                 body weight per    bacterial pneumonia     Sec.   510.600(c) of
                                 day.               caused by Pasteurella   this chapter.
                                                    multocida susceptible
                                                    to chlortetracycline.
(viii) 10 to 30 g/ton.........  .................  Swine: For control of   Feed for not more              054771
                                                    porcine proliferative   than 14 days;
                                                    enteropathies           chlortetracycline
                                                    (ileitis) caused by     and bacitracin
                                                    Lawsonia                methylenedisalicylat
                                                    intracellularis         e as provided by No.
                                                    susceptible to          054771 in Sec.
                                                    chlortetracycline.      510.600(c) of this
                                                                            chapter.
(ix) 50 g/ton.................  .................  Broiler chickens: As    Feed continuously as           054771
                                                    an aid in the           sole ration.
                                                    prevention of
                                                    necrotic enteritis
                                                    caused or complicated
                                                    by Clostridium spp.
                                                    or other organisms
                                                    susceptible to
                                                    bacitracin.
                                                    Replacement chickens:
                                                    As an aid in the
                                                    prevention of
                                                    necrotic enteritis
                                                    caused or complicated
                                                    by Clostridium spp.
                                                    or other organisms
                                                    susceptible to
                                                    bacitracin.
(x) 100 to 200 g/ton..........  .................  Broiler chickens: As    Feed continuously as           054771
                                                    an aid in the control   sole ration. Start
                                                    of necrotic enteritis   at first clinical
                                                    caused or complicated   signs of disease,
                                                    by Clostridium spp.     vary dosage based on
                                                    or other organisms      severity of
                                                    susceptible to          infection,
                                                    bacitracin.             administer
                                                    Replacement chickens:   continuously for 5
                                                    As an aid in the        to 7 days or as long
                                                    control of necrotic     as clinical signs
                                                    enteritis caused or     persist, then reduce
                                                    complicated by          medication to
                                                    Clostridium spp. or     prevention level (50
                                                    other organisms         g/ton).
                                                    susceptible to
                                                    bacitracin.
(xi) 200 g/ton................  .................  Turkeys: As an aid in   Feed continuously as           054771
                                                    the control of          the sole ration.
                                                    transmissible
                                                    enteritis in growing
                                                    turkeys complicated
                                                    by organisms
                                                    susceptible to
                                                    bacitracin
                                                    methylenedisalicylate
                                                    . Quail: For the
                                                    prevention of
                                                    ulcerative enteritis
                                                    in growing quail due
                                                    to Clostridium
                                                    colinum susceptible
                                                    to bacitracin
                                                    methylenedisalicylate.
(xii) 250 g/ton...............  .................  1. Growing/finishing    As the sole ration.            054771
                                                    swine: For control of   Not for use in swine
                                                    swine dysentery         weighing more than
                                                    Treponema               250 pounds.
                                                    hyodysenteriae on       Diagnosis should be
                                                    premises with history   confirmed by a
                                                    of swine dysentery      veterinarian a when
                                                    but where signs of      results are not
                                                    the disease have not    satisfactory.
                                                    yet occurred; or
                                                    following an approved
                                                    treatment of the
                                                    disease condition.

                                                   2. Pregnant sows: For   As the sole ration.
                                                    control of              Feed to sows from 14
                                                    clostridial enteritis   days before through
                                                    caused by C.            21 days after
                                                    perfringens in          farrowing on
                                                    suckling piglets.       premises with a
                                                                            history of
                                                                            clostridial scours.
                                                                            Diagnosis should be
                                                                            confirmed by
                                                                            veterinarian when
                                                                            results are not
                                                                            satisfactory.
(xiii) To provide 70 mg per     .................  Feedlot beef cattle:    Administer                     054771
 head per day.                                      For reduction in the    continuously
                                                    number of liver         throughout the
                                                    condemnations due to    feeding period.
                                                    abscesses.
(xiv) To provide 70 mg per      .................  Beef steers and         Administer                     069254
 head per day.                                      heifers fed in          continuously
                                                    confinement for         throughout the
                                                    slaughter: For          feeding period.
                                                    reduction in the
                                                    number of liver
                                                    condemnations due to
                                                    abscesses.
(xv) To provide 250 mg per      .................  Feedlot beef cattle:    Administer                     054771
 head per day.                                      For reduction in the    continuously for 5
                                                    number of liver         days then
                                                    condemnations due to    discontinue for
                                                    abscesses.              subsequent 25 days,
                                                                            repeat the pattern
                                                                            during the feeding
                                                                            period.
(xvi) To provide 250 mg per     .................  Beef steers and         Administer                     069254
 head per day.                                      heifers fed in          continuously for 5
                                                    confinement for         days then
                                                    slaughter: For          discontinue for
                                                    reduction in the        subsequent 25 days,
                                                    number of liver         repeat the pattern
                                                    condemnations due to    during the feeding
                                                    abscesses.              period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

    Dated: December 16, 2015.
Bernadette Dunham,
Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.
[FR Doc. 2015-32000 Filed 12-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


 [Federal Register Volume 82, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 10, 2017)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 21717] [FR Doc No: 2017-09487]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

Tolerances and Exemptions for Pesticide Chemical Residues in Food

CFR Correction

0  In Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, parts 150 to 189,  revised as of July 1, 2016, on page 612, in Sec.  180.495, in the table  in paragraph (a), the second entry for ``Grape, raisin'' is removed.

[FR Doc. 2017-09487 Filed 5-9-17; 8:45 am]  BILLING CODE 1301-00-D


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 140 (Friday, July 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 43848]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15701]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL OP-OFA-026]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
Filed July 11, 2022 10 a.m. EST Through July 18, 2022 10 a.m. EST
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

    Notice: Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make
public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's
comment letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20220100, Final, NRC, NM, Holtec International's License
Application for a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility for Spent
Nuclear Fuel in Lea County, New Mexico, Review Period Ends: 08/22/2022,
Contact: Jill Caverly<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20220101, Draft, BLM, NV, Gibellini Vanadium Mine Project,
Comment Period Ends: 09/06/2022, Contact: Scott Distel<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20220102, Third Final Supplemental, USACE, CA, American River
Watershed, California Folsom Dam Raise Project: Updated Designs, Review
Period Ends: 08/22/2022, Contact: Kimberly Watts<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20220103, Final Supplement, USACE, LA, South Central Coast
Louisiana Final Supplemental Integrated Feasibility Study with
Environmental Impact Statement, Review Period Ends: 08/22/2022,
Contact: Joe Jordan<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 19, 2022.
Cindy S. Barger,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2022-15701 Filed 7-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P