[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 188 (Friday, September 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59672-59677]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23660]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0803; FRL-9901-52-OW]

Draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
General Permit for Stormwater Discharges From Industrial Activities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA's Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are today
proposing for public comment the draft 2013 National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general permit for stormwater
discharges from industrial activity, also referred to as the Multi-
Sector General Permit (MSGP). This draft permit, once finalized, will
replace the existing permit covering stormwater discharges from
industrial facilities in EPA's Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, and 10 that
will expire September 29, 2013, and will provide coverage for
industrial facilities in areas where EPA is the NPDES permitting
authority in EPA's Regions 7 and 8. This draft permit is similar to the
existing permit and will authorize the discharge of stormwater in
accordance with the terms and conditions described therein. EPA
proposes to issue this permit for five (5) years. EPA seeks comment on
the draft permit and on the accompanying fact sheet.

DATES: Comments on the draft general permit must be received on or
before November 26, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2012-0803, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail to: Water Docket, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
Docket Center, Attention: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0803, Mail Code:
28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2012-
0803. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or email. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit

an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and
other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk
or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit
the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hardcopy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at a docket facility. The Office
of Water (OW) Docket Center is open from 8:30 until 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The OW Docket Center
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the Docket address is OW
Docket, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20004. The 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>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on the draft
NPDES general permit, contact the appropriate EPA Regional office
listed in Section I.F of this notice, or Bryan Rittenhouse, EPA
Headquarters, Office of Water, Office of Wastewater Management at tel.:
202-564-0577 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This supplementary information is organized
as follows:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. How can I get copies of these documents and other related
information?
    C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
    D. Will public hearings be held on this action?
    E. What process will EPA follow to finalize the permit?
    F. Who are the EPA regional contacts for this permit?
II. Background of Permit
III. Scope and Applicability of the Multi-Sector General Permit
    A. Geographic Coverage
    B. Categories of Facilities Covered
    C. Summary of Significant Proposed Changes From the 2008 Multi-
Sector General Permit
IV. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
V. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
VI. Analysis of Economic Impacts

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This draft MSGP regulates stormwater discharges from industrial
facilities in the 30 sectors shown below:

    Sector A--Timber Products.
    Sector B--Paper and Allied Products Manufacturing.
    Sector C--Chemical and Allied Products Manufacturing.
    Sector D--Asphalt Paving and Roofing Materials Manufactures and
Lubricant Manufacturers.
    Sector E--Glass, Clay, Cement, Concrete, and Gypsum Product
Manufacturing.
    Sector F--Primary Metals.
    Sector G--Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing).
    Sector H--Coal Mines and Coal Mining-Related Facilities.
    Sector I--Oil and Gas Extraction and Refining.
    Sector J--Mineral Mining and Dressing.
    Sector K--Hazardous Waste Treatment Storage or Disposal.
    Sector L--Landfills and Land Application Sites.
    Sector M--Automobile Salvage Yards.
    Sector N--Scrap Recycling Facilities.
    Sector O--Steam Electric Generating Facilities.
    Sector P--Land Transportation.
    Sector Q--Water Transportation.
    Sector R--Ship and Boat Building or Repairing Yards.
    Sector S--Air Transportation Facilities.
    Sector T--Treatment Works.
    Sector U--Food and Kindred Products.
    Sector V--Textile Mills, Apparel, and other Fabric Products
Manufacturing.
    Sector W--Furniture and Fixtures.
    Sector X--Printing and Publishing.
    Sector Y--Rubber, Miscellaneous Plastic Products, and
Miscellaneous Manufacturing Industries.
    Sector Z--Leather Tanning and Finishing.
    Sector AA--Fabricated Metal Products.
    Sector AB--Transportation Equipment, Industrial or Commercial
Machinery.
    Sector AC--Electronic, Electrical, Photographic and Optical
Goods.
    Sector AD--Reserved for Facilities Not Covered Under Other
Sectors and Designated by the Director.

    Coverage under this draft MSGP is available to operators of
eligible facilities located in areas where EPA is the permitting
authority and has made this general permit available for use. A list of
eligible areas is included in Appendix C of the draft MSGP. Eligibility
for coverage is limited to new dischargers and existing dischargers, as
defined in Appendix A of the draft permit, and new owner/operators of
an existing discharger. EPA notes that coverage is also available to
facilities that have commenced discharging prior to the date this
permit issued, but were not covered under the 2008 MSGP or another
NPDES permit.

B. How can I get copies of these documents and other related
information?

    1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this
action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0803. The official public
docket is the collection of materials that is available for public
viewing at the Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) WJC West
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Although all documents in the docket are listed in an index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Publicly available docket materials are available in hard
copy at the EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room, 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 Water Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    2. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the United States government on-line source for
Federal regulations at http://www.regulations.gov. Electronic versions
of this final permit and fact sheet are available on EPA's NPDES Web
site at http://www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/msgp.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through the
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may
use EPA Dockets at 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. For additional information about EPA's
public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. Although not all docket materials may be available
electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available
docket materials through the Docket Facility identified in Section
I.B.1.

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

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark all of the information that you
claim to be CBI. For CBI information on computer disks mailed to EPA,
mark the surface of the disk as CBI. Also identify electronically the
specific information contained in the disk or that you claim is CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the specific information claimed as
CBI, you must submit a copy that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI for inclusion in the public document. Information marked
as CBI will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set
forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    For public commenters, 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 in EPA's electronic public
docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment
contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment
containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that
material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's
electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the
copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket.
    Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or
delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public
docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the docket will
be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where
practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph
will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief
description written by the docket staff.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify this permit by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and
page number).
     Where possible, respond to specific questions or organize
comments by referencing a section or part of the permit.
     Explain why you agree or disagree, suggest alternatives,
and suggest substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible.
     To ensure that EPA can read, understand, and therefore
properly respond to comments, the Agency would prefer that commenters
cite, where possible, the paragraph(s) or section in the fact sheet or
permit to which each comment refers.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

D. Will public hearings be held on this action?

    EPA has not scheduled any public hearings to receive public comment
concerning the draft permit. All persons will continue to have the
right to provide written comments during the public comment period.
However, interested persons may request a public hearing pursuant to 40
CFR 124.12 concerning the draft permit. Requests for a public hearing
must be sent or delivered in writing to the same address as provided
above for public comments prior to the close of the comment period.
Requests for a public hearing must state the nature of the issues
proposed to be raised in the hearing. Pursuant to 40 CFR 124.12, EPA
shall hold a public hearing if it finds, on the basis of requests, a
significant degree of public interest in a public hearing on the draft
permit. If EPA decides to hold a public hearing, a public notice of the
date, time and place of the hearing will be made at least 30 days prior
to the hearing. Any person may provide written or oral statements and
data pertaining to the draft permit at the public hearing.

E. What process will EPA follow to finalize the permit?

    After the close of the public comment period, EPA intends to issue
a final permit to replace the current 2008 MSGP, which expires
September 29, 2013. This permit will not be issued until all
significant comments have been considered and appropriate changes made
to the permit. EPA's responses to public comments received will be
included in the docket as part of the final permit issuance. Once the
final permit becomes effective, eligible operators of industrial
facilities may seek authorization under the new MSGP. Any industrial
facility operator obtaining permit coverage prior to the expiration
date of the 2008 MSGP will automatically remain covered under that
permit until the earliest of:
     The operator is authorized for coverage under a reissued
permit or a replacement version of the permit following the timely
submittal of a complete and accurate NOI requesting coverage under the
new permit; or
     The operator submits a Notice of Termination; or
     EPA issues an individual permit for the facility's
stormwater discharges; or
     EPA formally decides not to reissue the general permit, at
which time EPA will identify a reasonable time period for covered
dischargers to seek coverage under an alternative general permit or an
individual permit. Coverage under the permit will cease at the end of
this time period.

F. Who are the EPA regional contacts for this final permit?

    For EPA Region 1, contact David Gray at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 2, contact Sergio Bosques at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 3, contact Kaitlyn Bendik at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 5, contact Brian Bell at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 6, contact Nelly Smith at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 7, contact Mark Matthews at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 8, contact Gregory Davis at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 9, contact Eugene Bromley at tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For EPA Region 10, contact Margaret McCauley at tel.: (206) 553-
1772 or email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
II. Background

    Section 405 of the Water Quality Act of 1987 (WQA) added section
402(p) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), which directed the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to develop a phased approach to regulate
stormwater discharges under the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) program. EPA published a final regulation on
the first phase on this program on November 16, 1990, establishing
permit application requirements for ``stormwater

discharges associated with industrial activity.'' See 55 FR 48063. EPA
defined the term ``stormwater discharge associated with industrial
activity'' in a comprehensive manner to cover a wide variety of
facilities. See 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14). EPA proposes to issue the MSGP
under this statutory and regulatory authority. This draft permit, once
finalized, will replace the existing permit covering stormwater
discharges from industrial facilities in EPA's Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9
and 10 that will expire September 29, 2013, and will provide coverage
for industrial facilities in areas where EPA is the NPDES permitting
authority in EPA's Regions 7 and 8.

III. Scope and Applicability of the Multi-Sector General Permit

A. Geographic Coverage

    This draft permit provides coverage for sectors of industrial point
source discharges that occur in areas not covered by an approved state
NPDES program. The geographic coverage of this permit is listed in
Appendix C of the permit. EPA notes that, unlike the 2008 MSGP,
facilities located in EPA Regions 7 and 8 will be covered by the
permit.

B. Categories of Facilities Covered

    This permit regulates stormwater discharges from industrial
facilities in 30 sectors, as shown above in section I.A.

C. Summary of Significant Proposed Changes From the 2008 Multi-Sector
General Permit

    The proposed MSGP, once finalized, will replace the 2008 MSGP,
which was issued for a five-year term on September 29, 2008 (see 73 FR
56572). The draft permit is similar to the existing permit, and is
structured in nine (9) parts: General requirements that apply to all
facilities (e.g., eligibility of discharges, effluent limitations,
stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) requirements, monitoring
and reporting requirements) (Parts 1-7), industrial sector-specific
conditions (Part 8), and specific requirements applicable to facilities
within individual states or Indian Country (Part 9). Additionally, the
appendices provide draft forms for the Notice of Intent (NOI), the
Notice of Termination (NOT), the Conditional No Exposure Exclusion,
Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR), and the annual report, as well as
step-by-step procedures for determining eligibility with respect to
protecting historic properties and endangered species, and for
calculating site-specific, hardness-dependent benchmarks.
    This draft MSGP includes several new or modified requirements from
the 2008 MSGP. These proposed changes are summarized below and are
discussed in more detail in the draft MSGP fact sheet.
    1. NEPA Review for Dischargers Subject to any New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS). Previous versions of the MSGP required
those facilities constructed after the promulgation of their industry's
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) to determine and document in
their SWPPP either ``No Significant Impact'' under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), or to complete an Environmental Impact
Statement in accordance with an environmental review conducted by EPA.
For the 2013 MSGP, EPA plans to prepare an Environmental Assessment
(EA) to analyze the potential environmental impacts of the permit. The
EA will consider the potential environmental impacts from the discharge
of pollutants in stormwater discharges from new sources associated with
industrial facilities where EPA is the permitting authority to
determine whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
Therefore, under the proposed 2013 MSGP, industrial discharges subject
to NSPS do not have to independently make such a determination.
    2. Electronic Reporting. The draft MSGP requires that all NOIs,
NOTs, annual reports, Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs), and certain
other reporting information be submitted electronically, unless the
operator has received one of the following waivers from the EPA
Regional office: (1) The operator's headquarters is physically located
in a geographic area (i.e., zip code or census tract) that is
identified as under-served for broadband Internet access in the most
recent report from the Federal Communications Commission; or (2) the
industrial owner/operator has limitations regarding available computer
access or computer capability. An operator who wishes to use paper
submittals must contact the appropriate EPA Region to obtain a waiver
from submitting reports electronically. Waivers are only granted for a
one-time use for a single information submittal, i.e., an initial
waiver does not apply for the entire term of the permit. If information
needs to submit information on paper after the first waiver, the
operator must apply for a new waiver.
    3. Allowable Non-Stormwater Discharges. Previous MSGP versions
authorized any washwater to be discharged as long as there were no
detergents or toxic/hazardous spill material present in the discharge.
In addition to detergents, hazardous cleaning products have been
specifically prohibited from being discharged under the 2013 MSGP. The
2013 draft permit also prohibits the discharge of wash waters that have
come into contact with oil and grease deposits or any other toxic or
hazardous materials, unless the deposits have been cleaned up using dry
clean-up methods. Additionally, because the act of washing (especially
power washing) by its very nature tends to mobilize particulates and
other potential pollutants present on pavement, specific effluent
limits have been included to ensure particulates and other potential
pollutants mobilized by pavement washing are controlled via treatment
controls before they are discharged, unless the pavement wash waters
were treated by the control measures in Part 2.1.2.
    4. Endangered Species Requirements. The draft 2013 MSGP
incorporates changes to the procedures operators are required follow to
establish their eligibility with regard to protection of threatened and
endangered species and critical habitat (Appendix E and Part <IP_ADDRESS>)
as a result of EPA's consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act. These changes are to better ensure that the criteria
chosen are adequately protective of threatened and endangered species
and their critical habitats and consistent with the Endangered Species
Act. Using the same decision making process to determine the operator's
eligibility criteria when threatened and endangered species are in
proximity to the industrial facility (i.e., its ``action area), EPA is
now requiring the process be documented by filling out and submitting a
worksheet. Because the criteria and the procedures operators are
required to follow in making their eligibility determination in
Appendix E have changed, all operators seeking coverage under the 2013
MSGP must make their Part <IP_ADDRESS> eligibility determination in
accordance with the requirements in the new permit (i.e., operators
cannot check the same criteria they selected in the 2008 MSGP without
following the procedures in Appendix E).
    5. Historic Properties Preservation. The procedures for determining
operator eligibility regarding historic properties were also revised in
the draft 2013 MSGP Appendix F as a result of EPA's consultation under
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. EPA has included
a more detailed set of steps to help operators more conclusively
determine whether historic

properties are within the industrial facility's ``area of potential
effect''. This may include greater interaction with knowledgeable
sources such as state or tribal historic preservation authorities or a
qualified consultant in the historical or archeological fields. The
eligibility criteria were also slightly revised for the proposal. All
operators seeking coverage under the 2013 MSGP must make their Part
<IP_ADDRESS> eligibility determination in accordance with the requirements
in the new permit (i.e., operators cannot check the same criteria they
selected in the 2008 MSGP without following the procedures in Appendix
F).
    6. SWPPP and Its Availability. To provide greater access to the
SWPPP to the public and other stakeholders, the draft MSGP requires
that permittees either provide a uniform resource locator (URL) for the
SWPPP on the NOI form, or provide selected information from the SWPPP
on the NOI form. The information from the SWPPP that would have to be
added to the NOI includes: A description of onsite industrial
activities exposed to stormwater, including potential spill and leak
areas; the pollutants associated with each industrial activity exposed
to stormwater and/or authorized non-stormwater; a description of
control measures employed to comply with the non-numeric technology-
based effluent limits in Part 2.1.2 and Part 8, and any other measures
taken to comply with the requirements in Part 2.2; and a schedule for
good housekeeping and maintenance and schedule for all inspections
required in Part 4. EPA has also identified certain effluent limit
requirements that can be copied verbatim into the SWPPP without
providing additional documentation because they do not involve the
site-specific selection of a control measure or are specific activity
requirements.
    7. Effluent Limit Clarifications. Several of the effluent limits in
Part 2 of the draft MSGP include a greater level of specificity in
order to make the requirements more clearly articulated, transparent,
and enforceable. EPA believes that these clarifications will help
permittees to better understand how to comply with the effluent limits.
The effluent limits in Part 2 for which EPA has made clarifications
include requirements for minimizing exposure, good housekeeping,
maintenance, spill prevention and response procedures, and employee
training.
    8. Corrective Action. The draft MSGP includes additional
specificity with regard to what is considered to be an adequate
corrective action. The corrective action deadlines in the proposed MSGP
are similar to the corresponding deadlines in Part 3.3 of the 2008
MSGP, but have been modified to further specify what actions must be
taken by the deadlines. The draft permit now requires that corrective
action steps be taken immediately (i.e., on the same day the condition
was found) in order to ensure that pollutant discharges are minimized
and that a permanent solution is implemented expeditiously. The draft
MSGP also requires that subsequent action must be taken to install a
new or modified control and make operational, or complete the repair,
before the next storm event if possible, and within 14 calendar days
from the discovery of the condition.
    9. Annual Reports and Routine Inspections. Annual reporting in the
draft MSGP has been changed to submitting a summary of the past year's
routine facility inspections and quarterly visual assessments of
discharges, instead of a summary of the results of the single
comprehensive site assessment, as required in the previous permit. EPA
has eliminated the comprehensive site assessment requirement and
instead will rely on the four required routine facility inspections,
which are similar to the comprehensive site assessment requirements in
the 2008 MSGP. Corrective action reporting in the draft permit remains
unchanged from the 2008 MSGP.
    10. Benchmark Values for Saline Waters. The draft MSGP has included
additional non-hardness dependent metals benchmarks for facilities that
discharge into saline waters. The addition of these benchmarks was
necessary to provide an appropriate indicator of the performance of the
measures undertaken to meet the effluent limitations contained in the
permit where stormwater is discharged into saline waters. Benchmark
values in the 2008 MSGP for these metals were based on acute or chronic
aquatic life freshwater criteria. These additional saline benchmark
values are based on available acute ambient water quality criteria for
arsenic, cadmium, copper, cyanide, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium,
silver and zinc.
    11. Industry Sector-specific Requirements. The draft MSGP includes
changes to the several of the sector-specific requirements in Part 8 as
summarized below.
     Sector G, Metal Mining; Sector H, Coal Mining; and Sector
J, Mineral Mining and Dressing--Consistent with the 2008 MSGP, the
draft 2013 MSGP enables operators for these sectors to include coverage
for construction and exploration activities under this permit, instead
of being separately covered under the Construction General Permit
(CGP). The draft MSGP includes updated sector-specific requirements for
these sectors that are consistent with the reissued 2012 CGP.
     Sector S, Air Transportation--The draft MSGP includes
added sector-specific requirements for Sector S that are based on the
final Effluent Limitation Guidelines (ELG) for airplane and airport
deicing operations.
    12. Discharges to a CERCLA Site. The draft MSGP makes facilities
discharging to CERCLA sites as defined in Appendix A and listed in
Appendix P ineligible for coverage under the permit unless the
applicable EPA Regional Office is first notified and has determined
that the facility is eligible for permit coverage. In determining
eligibility for coverage, the EPA Regional Office may evaluate whether
the facility has included appropriate controls and implementation
procedures designed to ensure that the discharge will not lead to
recontamination of aquatic media at the CERCLA Site.
    EPA has also included in the fact sheet a request for comment on
potential permit requirements for certain toxic pollutants in
industrial stormwater discharges. EPA is concerned that current 2008
and draft 2013 Multi-Sector General Permit requirements may not
adequately prevent certain, particularly problematic toxic pollutants
in stormwater discharges from causing sediment contamination and
recontamination of Superfund cleanup sites and/or presenting an
imminent and substantial endangerment to human health or welfare or the
environment. One approach under consideration is to identify and list
in the permit certain toxic pollutants of concern that are especially
problematic and to make ineligible under the MSGP any discharge of
these pollutants above the detection limit. The industrial operator
would have to either eliminate such discharges or apply for an
individual permit. EPA requests comment on this approach where highly
toxic pollutants in stormwater discharges are linked to sediment
contamination that may recontaminate or over time create future
Superfund sites or that present or may present an imminent and
substantial endangerment to human health, or welfare, or the
environment. EPA also solicits comment on what criteria should be used
to identify the toxic pollutants that would be subject to such a
provision. Additionally, EPA solicits comments on alternative
approaches to address this problem.

IV. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993))
this action is a ``significant regulatory action.'' Accordingly, EPA
submitted this action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and any changes made in
response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket for
this action.

V. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    In compliance with Executive Order 13175, EPA has consulted with
tribal officials to gain an understanding of and, where necessary, to
address tribal implications of the draft MSGP. In the course of this
consultation, EPA undertook the following activities:
     December 11, 2012--EPA presented an overview of the
current MSGP and potential changes in the draft 2013 MSGP to the
National Tribal Caucus.
     December 12, 2012--EPA presented an overview of the
current MSGP and potential changes in the draft 2013 MSGP to the
National Tribal Water Council.
     December 12, 2012--EPA mailed out notification letters out
to Tribal Leaders initiating consultation and coordination on the
renewal of the MSGP. The initiation letter was posted on the tribal
portal Web site at http://www.epa.gov/tribal/consultation.
     January 15, 2013--EPA held an informational teleconference
open to all tribal representatives, and reserved the last part of the
teleconference for official consultation comments. EPA also invited
tribes to submit written comments on the permit renewal. The
presentation was posted on the tribal portal Web site at http://www.epa.gov/tribal/consultation.
    EPA also encourages tribes to participate in the public review
process by submitting comments through regulations.gov.

VI. Analysis of Economic Impacts

    EPA expects the economic impact on entities covered under this
permit, including small businesses, to be minimal. A copy of EPA's
economic analysis, titled, ``Cost Impact Analysis for the Multi-Sector
General Permit (MSGP)'' is available in the docket for this permit. The
economic impact analysis indicates that while there will be some
incremental increase in the costs of complying with the new permit,
these costs will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

    Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

    Dated: September 17, 2013.
Michael Kenyon,
Acting Deputy Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
    Dated: September 17, 2013.
Jose C. Font,
Director, Caribbean Environmental Protection Division, EPA Region 2.
    Dated: September 17, 2013.
Jon M. Capacasa,
Director, Water Protection Division, EPA Region 3.
    Dated: September 17, 2013.
Tinka G. Hyde,
Director, Water Division, EPA Region 5.
    Dated: September 16, 2013.
William K. Honker,
Director, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region 6.
    Dated: September 16, 2013.
Karen Flournoy,
Director, Water, Wetlands, and Pesticides Division, EPA Region 7.
    Dated: September 16, 2013.
Derrith R. Watchman-Moore,
Assistant Regional Administrator, Office of Partnerships and Regulatory
Assistance, EPA Region 8.
    Dated: September 13, 2013.
John Kemmerer,
Acting Director, Water Division, EPA Region 9.
    Dated: September 17, 2013.
Daniel D. Opalski,
Director, Office of Water and Watersheds, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2013-23660 Filed 9-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 29, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57932-57934]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23561]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2019-0239]

Hours of Service of Drivers: Application for Exemption; Small
Business in Transportation Coalition

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of application for exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that the Small Business in Transportation
Coalition (SBTC) seeks reconsideration of its application for exemption
from the electronic logging device (ELD) rule that was denied by the
Agency on July 17, 2019. SBTC has resubmitted its application for
exemption from the ELD requirements for all motor carriers with fewer
than 50 employees, including, but not limited to, one-person private
and for-hire owner-operators of commercial motor vehicles used in
interstate commerce. SBTC believes that the exemption would not have
any adverse impacts on operational safety as motor carriers and drivers
would remain subject to the hours-of-service (HOS) regulations as well
as the requirements to maintain paper records of duty status (RODs).
FMCSA requests public comment on SBTC's application for
reconsideration.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 29, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Number FMCSA-2019-0239 by any of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. See the
Public Participation and Request for Comments section below for further
information.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to www.regulations.gov at any time or visit Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The on-line FDMS is available 24 hours each
day, 365 days each year.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records

notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Pearlie Robinson, FMCSA Driver and
Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle
Safety Standards; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email: [email protected]. If
you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and
related materials.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (FMCSA-2019-0239), indicate the specific section of this
document to which the comment applies, and provide a reason for
suggestions or recommendations. You may submit your comments and
material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so the Agency can contact you if it has questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comments online, go to www.regulations.gov and put
the docket number, ``FMCSA-2019-0239'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and
click ``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on ``Comment
Now!'' button and type your comment into the text box in the following
screen. Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual
or on behalf of a third party and then submit. If you submit your
comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no
larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they
reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard
or envelope. FMCSA will consider all comments and material received
during the comment period and may grant or not grant this application
based on your comments.

II. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs). FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption
request in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must
provide the public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant
to the application, including any safety analyses that have been
conducted. The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public
comment on the request.
    The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted,
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying or granting the application
and, if granted, the name of the person or class of persons receiving
the exemption, and the regulatory provision from which the exemption is
granted. The notice must also specify the effective period and explain
the terms and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be renewed
(49 CFR 381.300(b)).

III. Background

    On December 16, 2015, FMCSA published the Electronic Logging
Devices and Hours of Service Supporting Documents final rule (80 FR
78292). The ELD rule applies to most motor carriers and drivers who are
required to keep RODS. The compliance date for the ELD requirement was
December 18, 2017.
    On June 5, 2018, FMCSA published SBTC's application for exemption
and requested public comment (83 FR 26140). SBTC reports it is a non-
profit trade organization with more than 8,000 members. SBTC states
that it ``represents, promotes, and protects the interest of small
businesses in the transportation industry. Through the exemption
application, SBTC sought relief from the ELD requirements for small
private, common and contract motor carriers with fewer than 50
employees.'' SBTC argued:

    ``[T]he ELD rule is not a ``safety regulation'' per se as the
FMCSA has concluded. Rather it is a mechanism intended to enforce a
safety regulation by regulating the manner in which a driver records
and communicates his compliance. That is, it is merely a tool to
determine compliance with an existing rule that regulates over-the-
road drivers' driving and on duty time, namely the actual safety
regulation: the [hours-of- service] regulations codified at 49 CFR
395.3 and 395.5. However, the ELD rule is not a safety regulation
itself. Therefore, it is our position that this rule does not itself
impact safety, and that the level of safety will not change based on
whether or not our exemption application is approved. That would
require a change to the [hours-of-service rules].''

    On July 9, 2018, FMCSA extended the public comment period at the
request of the SBTC (83 FR 31836). The Agency received more than 1,900
comments to the docket [Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0180]. Most of the
comments favored granting the exemption. On July 17, 2019, the Agency
published notice of its decision to deny SBTC's application for
exemption (84 FR 34250) and listed the following reasons for the
denial:
     Failing to provide the name of the individual or motor
carrier that would be responsible for the use or operation of CMVs
under the exemption [49 CFR 381.310(b)(2)];
     Failing to provide an estimate of the total number of
drivers and CMVs that would be operated under the terms and conditions
of the exemption [Sec.  381.310(c)(3)]; and
     Failing to explain how an equivalent level of safety would
be achieved [Sec.  381.310(c)(5)].

IV. Request for Reconsideration of Agency Decision

    Through this application SBTC is requesting FMCSA to reconsider its
denial of the exemption from the ELD rule. SBTC provided responses to
each of FMCSA's reasons for denying its application. According to SBTC
the reason for not providing an estimate of the number of drivers and
CMVs that would be operating under the exemption is that SBTC is a
trade group, not a single carrier. SBTC argues that a trade group would
not know the number of employees eligible for the exemption. SBTC
deferred that question to the Agency because FMCSA is the custodian of
MCS-150 industry data. SBTC believes that it has identified the
percentage of carriers that would be affected by the exemption but does
not know a way to extrapolate the number of drivers from the estimated
3.5 million truck drivers in the U.S. without deferring to FMCSA for
that information.
    A copy of SBTC's application for reconsideration of the Agency's
denial is available for review in the docket for this notice.

V. Equivalent Level of Safety

    To ensure an equivalent level of safety, SBTC suggests a return to
paper logs. According to SBTC, ``Paper logs were deemed sufficient to
ensure adequate levels of safety for generations, more than 80 years.
And the FMCSA has already issued numerous exemptions that require
carriers to revert to tracking their hours of service using paper logs
in lieu of ELDs . . .'' SBTC supports its argument with the belief that
ELDs have caused reckless

speeding and pose national security threats. SBTC urges FMCSA to look
carefully at the unintended consequences of the ELD rule when deciding
whether or not to grant the exemption. SBTC also suggests that FMCSA
temporarily grant the exemption ``if for no other reason than to press
the pause button while [FMCSA] studies these unintended consequences
and their adverse effects on safety. We contend this would indeed
achieve a greater level of overall safety than the current status
quo.''

    Issued on: October 23, 2019.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-23561 Filed 10-28-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: October 12, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 196)]
[Notices]
[Page 62612-62613]
[DOCID:fr12oc10-139]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy,
Washington, DC 20549-0213.

Extension:
    Form BD-N/Rule 15b11-1; SEC File No. 270-498; OMB Control No.
3235-0556.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission

(``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Rule 15b11-1 (17 CFR 240.15b11-1) requires that futures commission
merchants and introducing brokers registered with the Commidity Futures
Trading Commission that conduct a business in security futures products
must notice-register as broker-dealers pursuant to Section 15(b)(11)(A)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.). Form
BD-N (17 CFR 249.501b) is the Form by which these entities must notice
register with the Commission.
    The total annual burden imposed by Rule 15b11-1 and Form BD-N is
approximately 8 hours, based on approximately 21 responses (10 initial
filings + 11 amendments). Each initial filing requires approximately 30
minutes to complete and each amendment requires approximately 15
minutes to complete. There is no annual cost burden.
    The Commission will use the information collected pursuant to Rule
15b11-1 to understand the market for securities futures product and
fulfill its regulatory obligations.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information has
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance
the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;
and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Comments should be directed to Jeffrey Heslop, Acting Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/c Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312 or
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: October 4, 2010.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-25501 Filed 10-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 137)]
[Notices]
[Page 40718-40720]
[DOCID:fr18jy06-60]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0172; FRL-8198-8]

Draft Staff Paper for Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of a draft for public review and comment.

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

SUMMARY: On or about July 18, 2006, the Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards (OAQPS) of EPA will make available for public review and
comment a draft document, Review of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone: Policy Assessment of Scientific and Technical
Information (Draft Staff Paper) (Chapters 1-5 and 7-8). Chapter 6
(Staff Conclusions on the Primary Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards) of the Draft Staff Paper will be made available on or about
July 25, 2006. The purpose of the Staff Paper is to evaluate the policy
implications of the key scientific and technical information contained
in a related EPA document, Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants, required under sections 108 and 109 of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) for use in the periodic review of the national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone.
    The OAQPS also will make available for public review and comment
related draft technical support documents, Ozone Population Exposure
Analysis for Selected Urban Areas (draft Exposure Analysis), Ozone
Health Risk Assessment for Selected Urban Areas (draft Risk
Assessment), and Technical Report on Ozone Exposure, Risk and Impact
Assessments for Vegetation (draft Environmental Assessment).

Availability of Documents

    The following documents are available for review by the CASAC Ozone
Panel in the form of printed copies and a CD-ROM containing these
electronic files or by downloading the documents from the EPA Web site:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ naaqs/standards/ozone/s-- o3--cr--sp.html for the Staff Paper and http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ standards/ozone/s--

o3-- cr--td.html for the technical support documents and staff memos.

DATES: Comments on the Draft Staff Paper, draft Exposure Analysis,
draft Risk Assessment, and draft Environmental Assessment should be
submitted on or before September 18, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2005-0172 by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0172, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mailcode 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of two copies.
     Hand Delivery: Public Reading Room, Room B102, EPA West
Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2005-0172. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov

or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''

system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured

and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the address listed above for

hand delivery of comments. This Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. David McKee, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (Mail Code C504-06), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the

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

II. Background on the Ozone NAAQS Review

    Section 108(a) of the CAA directs the Administrator to identify
certain pollutants which ``may reasonably be anticipated to endanger
public health and welfare'' and to issue air quality criteria for them.
These air quality criteria are to ``accurately reflect the latest
scientific knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of all
identifiable effects on public health or welfare which may be expected
from the presence of [a] pollutant in the ambient air * * *'' Under
section 109 of the CAA, EPA is then to establish NAAQS for each
pollutant for which EPA has issued criteria. Section 109(d) of the CAA
subsequently requires periodic review and, if appropriate, revision of
existing air quality criteria to reflect advances in scientific
knowledge on the effects of the pollutant on public health and welfare.
Also, EPA is to retain or, if appropriate revise, the NAAQS based on
the revised criteria, which have undergone review by the Clean Air
Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC).
    The CASAC, which is comprised of seven members appointed by the EPA
Administrator, was established under section 109(d)(2) of the CAA (42
U.S.C. 7409) as an independent scientific advisory committee, in part
to provide advice, information, and recommendations on the scientific
and technical aspects of issues related to air quality criteria and
NAAQS under sections 108 and 109 of the CAA. The CASAC is a Federal
advisory committee under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as
amended, 5 U.S.C., App. The CASAC Ozone Review Panel consists of the
members of the chartered CASAC, is supplemented by subject-matter
experts, and complies with the provisions of FACA.
    Ozone is one of six ``criteria'' pollutants for which EPA has
established air quality criteria and NAAQS. Presently, EPA is reviewing

the criteria and NAAQS for ozone. This review includes preparation of
two key documents, the Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (``Criteria Document'') and a related ``Staff
Paper.'' The purpose of the Staff Paper is to evaluate the policy
implications of the key scientific and technical information contained
in the Criteria Document and identify critical elements that EPA staff
believe should be considered in reviewing the NAAQS. The Staff Paper is
intended to ``bridge the gap'' between the scientific review contained
in the Criteria Document and the public health and welfare policy
judgments required of the Administrator in reviewing the NAAQS.
    In January 2005, a first external review draft of the Criteria
Document was released by EPA for public review and comment and for
review by the CASAC of EPA's Science Advisory Board (70 FR 4850,
January 31, 2005) at a public meeting held in May 2005. Comments
received from review of the first draft document were considered in
preparing the second draft Criteria Document released for public review
and comment in August 2005 (70 FR 51810, August 31, 2005). Based on
this document, the first Draft Staff Paper was released in November
2005 (70 FR 69761, November 17, 2005), and reviewed at a public meeting
on December 8, 2005. Based on the information contained in the final
Criteria Document, released in March 2006 (71 FR 10030, February 28,
2006), the second Draft Staff Paper includes assessments and analyses
related to: (1) Air quality characterization; (2) integration and
evaluation of health information; (3) exposure analysis; (4) health
risk assessment; and (5) evaluation of information on vegetation damage
and other welfare effects. The second Draft Staff Paper contains staff
conclusions and options with respect to possible retention or revision
of the current primary (health-based) and secondary (welfare-based)
standards and identifies alternative standards for consideration by the
Administrator.
    The draft Exposure Analysis, Risk Assessment and Environmental
Assessment technical support documents describe and present the results
from an ozone exposure analysis and health risk assessment in several
urban areas, and the impact of ozone on the environment. Draft plans
upon which these assessments are based, the Ozone Health Assessment
Plan: Scope and Methods for Exposure Analysis and Risk Assessment and
the Scope and Methods for Environmental Assessment Plan, were
previously reviewed by CASAC and the public. Comments received on those
plans have been considered in developing the draft Exposure Analysis,
Risk Assessment and Environmental Assessment technical support
documents being released at this time. The exposure analysis, risk
assessment, and environmental assessment methodologies and results are
also discussed in the second Draft Staff Paper.
    The EPA is soliciting advice and recommendations from the CASAC by
means of a peer review of the second Draft Staff Paper and drafts of
the Exposure Analysis, Risk Assessment, and Environmental Assessment at
an upcoming public meeting of the CASAC scheduled for August 24 and 25,
2006. A Federal Register notice will inform the public of the location
of that meeting. Following the CASAC meeting, EPA will consider
comments received from CASAC and the public in preparing a final Staff
Paper and final Exposure Analysis, Risk Assessment, and Environmental
Assessment technical support documents.

    Dated: July 13, 2006.
Mary E. Henigin,
Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
 [FR Doc. E6-11343 Filed 7-17-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 38 (Wednesday, February 26, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11067-11068]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03794]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM16-17-000]

Data Collection for Analytics and Surveillance and Market-Based
Rate Purposes; Notice of Technical Workshop

    On January 22, 2020, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) issued a notice that Commission staff will hold a
technical workshop on the relational database

being built in accordance with Order No. 860 (MBR Database).\1\ The
meeting will take place on February 27, 2020, from 9:00 a.m. to 2:30
p.m.\2\ (EST) in the Commission Meeting Room, at 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. All interested persons are invited to attend. For
those unable to attend in person, access to the meeting will be
available via webcast.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Data Collection for Analytics and Surveillance and Market-
Based Rate Purposes, Order No. 860, 168 FERC 61,039 (2019).
    \2\ Please note that the technical workshop was originally
scheduled to end at 12:30 p.m.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commission staff is hereby supplementing the January 22, 2020
notice with the agenda for discussion. During the meeting Commission
staff will provide an overview of the MBR Database, discuss how the MBR
Database will fit into the market-based rate program; and answer
questions presented live or via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Please note that matters pending before the Commission and subject
to ex parte limitations cannot be discussed at this meeting. An agenda
of the meeting is attached.
    Due to the nature of the discussion, those interested in
participating are encouraged to attend in person. All interested
persons (whether attending in person or via webcast) are asked to
register at https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/02-27-20-form.asp. There is no registration fee. Anyone with internet access can
listen to the meeting by navigating to www.ferc.gov's Calendar of
Events, locating the MBR Data Technical Workshop, and clicking on the
link to the webcast. The webcast will allow persons to listen to the
technical conference and email questions during the meeting to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please
send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>call toll free 1-866-208-3372
(voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER> with the
required accommodations.
    For more information about the technical workshop, please contact
Ryan Stertz at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
For logistics, contact Sarah McKinley at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: February 14, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.

Agenda

MBR Database Technical Workshop, Commission Meeting Room, February 27,
2020

9:00-9:10 a.m. Welcome and Introductions
9:10-9:35 a.m. Purpose of Database
9:35-10:15 a.m. Overview of MBR Portal and Features
10:15-11:15 a.m. Data Dictionary Walk-Through
11:15-11:45 a.m. Making submissions into the MBR database
11:45-12:00 p.m. Market-Based Rate Filing Process
12:00-12:30 p.m. Break
12:30-2:30 p.m. Question and Answer session

[FR Doc. 2020-03794 Filed 2-25-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P