[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 57 (Monday, March 27, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15216-15217]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05942]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER17-1243-000]

Twin Buttes Wind II LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding
Twin Buttes Wind II LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is April 10, 2017.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 21, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-05942 Filed 3-24-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 18, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 180)]
[Notices]
[Page 47938]
[DOCID:fr18se09-56]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL09-74-000]

Green Energy Express LLC ; Notice of Filing

September 11, 2009.
    Take notice that on September 9, 2009, Green Energy Express LLC
(Green Energy) filed a Petition for Declaratory Order requesting that
the Commission approve certain rate incentives for Green Energy
Transmission Line Project (Project). The Project includes a 70-mile
double-circuit 500kV alternating current transmission line and a new
500 kilovolt/230 kV substation, as well as an advanced technology fast-
acting phase shifter that will enable the transport of up to 2,000
megawatts of power from otherwise location-constrained renewable
generation resources near and around the existing Eagle Mountain
Substation in eastern Riverside County, California to load centers in
Southern California.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 9, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-22475 Filed 9-17-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 203 (Thursday, October 20, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65101-65103]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27119]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 203 / Thursday, October 20, 2011 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 23

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1131; Special Conditions No. 23-255-SC]

Special Conditions: Embraer S.A.; Model EMB 500; Single-Place
Side Facing Seat Dynamic Test Requirements

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the installation of a
single-place side facing seat on Embraer S.A. EMB 500 aircraft. Side-
facing seats are considered a novel design, and their installation in a
part 23 airplane was not envisaged and is not adequately addressed in
14 CFR part 23. The FAA has determined that the existing regulations do
not provide adequate or appropriate safety standards for occupants of
single-place side-facing seats. In order to provide a level of safety
that is equivalent to that afforded to occupants of forward and aft
facing seating, additional airworthiness standards, in the form of
special conditions, are necessary.

DATES: The effective date of these special conditions is October 12,
2011.
    We must receive your comments by November 21, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number [FAA-2011-1131]
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery of Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 8 a.m., and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information
the commenter provides. Using the search function of the docket web
site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all comments
received into any FAA docket, including the name of the individual
sending the comment (or signing the comment for an association,
business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement can
be found in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m., and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bob Stegeman, Federal Aviation
Administration, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone (816)
329-4140; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has determined that notice and
opportunity for prior public comment hereon are impracticable because
these procedures would significantly delay issuance of the approval
design and thus delivery of the affected aircraft. In addition, the
substance of these special conditions has been subject to the public
comment process in several prior instances with no substantive comments
received. The FAA therefore finds that good cause exists for making
these special conditions effective upon issuance.

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. We ask
that you send us two copies of written comments.
    We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning these special conditions. You can inspect the docket before
and after the comment closing date. If you wish to review the docket in
person, go to the address in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble
between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
    We will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing
date for comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is
possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change
these special conditions based on the comments we receive.

Background

    On December 26, 2009, Embraer S.A. applied for a change to Type
Certificate No. A59CE for installation of a side-facing belted
passenger seat in the EMB-500 airplane. The implication of the term
belted is that the passenger seat will be used during takeoff and
landing and so must comply with the provisions of 14 CFR 23.562 and
23.785 (in addition to the certification basis as established in type
certificate A59CE) and any additional requirements that the FAA
determines are applicable. In this case, the approval of a side facing
seat to these provisions is considered new and novel and as such will
require special conditions and specific methods of compliance to
certificate.
    14 CFR part 23 was amended August 8, 1988, by Amendment 23-36, to
revise the emergency landing conditions that must be considered in the
design of the airplane. Amendment 23-36 revised the static load
conditions in Sec.  23.561, and added a new Sec.  23.562 that required
dynamic testing for all seats approved for occupancy during takeoff and
landing. The intent of Amendment 23-36 is to provide an improved level
of safety for occupants on part 23 airplanes. Because most seating is

forward-facing in part 23 airplanes, the pass/fail criteria developed
in Amendment 23-36 focused primarily on these seats. Since the
regulations do not address side-facing seats, these criteria should be
documented in Special Conditions.
    The FAA decision to review compliance with these regulations stems
from the fact that the current regulations do not provide adequate and
appropriate standards for the type certification of this type of seat.
    These requirements are substantially similar to other single place
side facing seat installations approved for use on several different
part 23 and part 25 aircraft.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of Sec.  21.101, Embraer S.A. must show that
the model EMB 500, as changed, continues to meet the applicable
provisions of the regulations incorporated by reference in Type
Certificate No. A59CE or the applicable regulations in effect on the
date of application for the change. The regulations incorporated by
reference in the type certificate are commonly referred to as the
``original type certification basis.''
    The following model is covered by this special condition:

Embraer S.A. EMB 500

    For the model listed above, the certification basis also includes
all exemptions, if any; equivalent level of safety findings, if any;
and special conditions not relevant to the special conditions adopted
by this rulemaking action.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 23) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the side facing seat as installed on
this Embraer S.A. model 500 because of a novel or unusual design
feature, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of
Sec.  21.16.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in Sec.  11.19, under
Sec.  11.38 and they become part of the type certification basis in
accordance withSec.  21.101.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same novel or
unusual design feature, or should any other model already included on
the same type certificate be modified to incorporate the same novel or
unusual design feature, the special conditions would apply to that
model as well.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Embraer S.A., model EMB 500 will incorporate the following
novel or unusual design features:
    A side facing passenger seat intended for taxi/takeoff and landing

Discussion

    The seat is to incorporate design features that reduce the
potential for injury in the event of an accident. In a severe impact,
the occupant will be restrained by a 2-point seatbelt and bear on an
adjacent padded wall. In addition to the design features intended to
minimize occupant injury during an accident sequence, the adjacent
forward wall/bulkhead interior structure will have padding, which will
provide some protection to the head of the occupant.
    The Code of Federal Regulations states performance criteria for
forward and aft facing seats and restraints in an objective manner.
However, none of these criteria are adequate to address the specific
issues raised concerning side-facing seats. Therefore, the FAA has
determined that, in addition to the requirements of part 21 and part
23, special conditions are needed to address the installation of this
seat installation/restraint.
    Accordingly, these special conditions are for the Embraer S.A.
model EMB 500 side facing seat location. Other conditions may be
developed, as needed, based on further FAA review and discussions with
the manufacturer and civil aviation authorities.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Embraer model 500. Should Embraer S.A. apply at a later date for a
change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating
the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would
apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on one model of airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability
and affects only the applicant who applied to the FAA for approval of
these features on the airplane.
    The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the
notice and comment period in several prior instances and has been
derived without substantive change from those previously issued. It is
unlikely that prior public comment would result in a significant change
from the substance contained herein. Therefore, because a delay would
significantly affect the certification of the airplane, which is
imminent, the FAA has determined that prior public notice and comment
are unnecessary and impracticable, and good cause exists for adopting
these special conditions upon issuance. The FAA is requesting comments
to allow interested persons to submit views that may not have been
submitted in response to the prior opportunities for comment described
above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 23

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Signs and symbols.

Citation

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113 and 44701; 14 CFR 21.16 and
21.101; and 14 CFR 11.38 and 11.19.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for Embraer S.A., model 500 airplanes.

Single-Place Side Facing Seat Dynamic Test Requirements

    In addition to the provisions of 14 CFR 23.562, the following will
apply:
    The following minimum acceptable standards for dynamic seat
certification of the single side-facing seat are as follows:
    (a) Existing Criteria. As referenced by Sec.  23.785(b), all injury
protection criteria of Sec. Sec.  23.562(c)(1) through (c)(7) apply to
the occupants of the side-facing seats. Head injury criteria (HIC)
assessments are only required for head contact with the seat and/or
adjacent structures.
    (b) Body-to-wall/furnishing contact. The seat must be installed aft
of a structure such as an interior wall or furnishing that will contact
the pelvis, upper arm, chest, or head of an occupant seated next to the
structure. A conservative representation of the structure and its
stiffness must be included in the tests. It is required that the
contact surface of this structure must be covered with at least two
inches of energy absorbing protective padding (foam or equivalent),
such as Ensolite.
    (c) Thoracic Trauma. Testing with a Side Impact Dummy (SID), as
defined by 49 CFR Part 572, Subpart F, or its equivalent, must be
performed in order to establish Thoracic Trauma Index (TTI) injury
criteria. TTI acquired with the SID must be less than 85, as defined in
49 CFR Part 572, Subpart F. SID TTI data must be processed as defined
in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) Part 571.214, section
S11.5.

Rational analysis, comparing an installation with another installation
where TTI data were acquired and found acceptable, may also be viable.
    (d) Pelvis. Pelvic lateral acceleration must not exceed 130g.
Pelvic acceleration data must be processed as defined in FMVSS Part
571.214, section S11.5.
    (e) Shoulder Strap Loads. Where upper torso straps (shoulder
straps) are used for occupants, tension loads in individual straps must
not exceed 1,750 pounds. If dual straps are used for restraining the
upper torso, the total strap tension loads must not exceed 2,000
pounds.
    (f) Compression Loads. The compression load measured between the
pelvis and the lumbar spine of the ATD may not exceed 1,500 pounds.
    (g) Emergency Evacuation. The airplane configuration must meet the
emergency evacuation requirements of its certification basis with the
seat occupied.
    (h) Test Requirements in Sec.  23.562 dynamic loads. The tests in
Sec.  23.562(a) (b) and (c) must be conducted on the side-facing seat.
Floor deformation is required except for a seat that is cantilevered to
the bulkhead.
    The following are the agreed to methods of compliance and testing
requirements:

General Test Guidelines

    (a) One longitudinal test with the SID anthropomorphic test dummy
(ATD) or its equivalent, undeformed floor, no yaw, and with all lateral
structural supports (armrests/walls) must be accomplished.

--Pass/fail injury assessments: TTI and pelvic acceleration.

    (b) One longitudinal test with the Hybrid II ATD, deformed floor,
with 10 degrees yaw, and with all lateral structural supports
(armrests/walls) must be accomplished.

--Pass/fail injury assessments: HIC and upper torso restraint load, and
restraint system retention.

    (c) Vertical (15 G's) test must to be conducted with modified
Hybrid II ATDs with existing pass/fail criteria.
    (d) The ATD can be tethered for the floor deformation test.
    (e) The seatbelt is not required to have a TSO Authorization but
will need to comply with the TSO-C22g Minimum Performance Standards
(MPS).

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on October 12, 2011.
John Colomy,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-27119 Filed 10-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 207 (Thursday, October 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65092-65093]
[FR Doc No: 2022-23392]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2022-0343; OMB Control Number 1625-0126]

Collection of Information Under Review by Office of Management
and Budget

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the
U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an Information Collection Request (ICR),
abstracted below, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension
of its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0126,
Requirements for Vessels that Perform Certain Aquaculture Support
Operations; without change. Our ICR describes the information we seek
to collect from the public. Review and comments by OIRA ensure we only
impose paperwork burdens commensurate with our performance of duties.

DATES: You may submit comments to the Coast Guard and OIRA on or before
November 28, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Comments to the Coast Guard should be submitted using the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Search for
docket number [USCG-2022-0343]. Written comments and recommendations to
OIRA for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30
days of publication of this notice to https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
    Find this particular information collection by selecting
``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using
the search function.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the internet
at https://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available
from: Commandant (CG-6P), Attn: Paperwork Reduction Act Manager, U.S.
Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, Stop 7710,
Washington, DC 20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A.L. Craig, Office of Privacy
Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for questions
on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an
application to OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a
Coast Guard collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains
information describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's
likely burden on the affected public, an explanation of the necessity
of the Collection, and other important information describing the
Collection. There is one ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be
granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) the practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. These comments
will help OIRA determine whether to approve the ICR referred to in this
Notice.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments to Coast Guard or OIRA must contain the
OMB Control Number of the ICR. They must also contain the docket number
of this request, [USCG-2022-0343], and must be received by November 28,
2022].

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public
comments, are in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that website's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments to the Coast Guard will
be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will
include any personal information you have provided. For more about
privacy and submissions to the Coast Guard in response to this
document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020). For more about privacy and submissions to OIRA in
response to this document, see the https://www.reginfo.gov, comment-
submission web page. OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs online at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain after the comment period for each
ICR. An OMB Notice of Action on each ICR will become available via a
hyperlink in the OMB Control Number: 1625-0126.

Previous Request for Comments

    This request provides a 30-day comment period required by OIRA. The
Coast Guard published the 60-day notice (87 FR 44413, July 26, 2022)
required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That notice elicited no comments.
Accordingly, no changes have been made to the Collection.

Information Collection Request

    Title: Requirements for Vessels that Perform Certain Aquaculture
Support Operations.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0126.

    Summary: This information is required to ensure that a vessel
engaged in certain aquaculture operations has applied for and received
a waiver in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 12102(d)(1). A vessel owner or
operator must notify Coast Guard and provide a copy of the waiver.
    Need: The Coast Guard regulations are prescribed 46 CFR part 106.
The Coast Guard uses the information in this collection to ensure
compliance with the requirements.
    Forms: None.
    Respondents: Owners and operators of aquaculture operations.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has increased from 2
hours to 3 hours a year, due to an increase in the estimated annual
number of responses.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. et seq.,
chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: October 20, 2022.
Kathleen Claffie,
Chief, Office of Privacy Management, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2022-23392 Filed 10-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1

									February 5, 2007

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:		Science Chapter: Revised Environmental Fate Studies and
Environmental Fate Assessment of Dipropylene Glycol

FROM			A. Najm Shamim, Ph.D., Chemist

			Regulatory Management Branch II

			Antimicrobials Division (7510P)

To:			Sanyvette Williams, Science Coordinator for

			Propylene and Dipropylene Glycols RED

			Antimicrobials Division (7510P)

					And

			Michelle Centra, Chemical Review Manager

			Diane Isbell, Acting Team Leader

			Mark Hartman, Branch Chief

			Regulatory Management Branch II

			Antimicrobials Division (7510P)

	Environmental Fate Science Chapter and Fate Assessment on Dipropylene
Glycol is submitted for Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

	Environmental Fate Assessment:

	Dipropylene glycol has a log KOW of -1.07 and is not bioaccumulative.
Highly miscible in water, dipropylene glycol does not hydrolyze, has a
low binding constant with soils, and is very mobile in soils.  Due to
high mobility in soil and slow biodegradation, the possibility exists
for dipropylene glycol to contaminate ground and surface water systems
if outdoor use occurs.  However, considering the registered pesticide
uses, this is not likely.  Soil grab samples and river die-away test
data pertaining to the biodegradation of dipropylene glycol in soil and
natural waters were not available from the open literature.  A few
aerobic biological screening studies that utilized settled waste water,
sewage or activated sludge for inocula, indicate that dipropylene glycol
should biodegrade slowly in the environment. The air half-life is
estimated to be 13 hours due to the induced photochemical reaction with
hydroxyl-radical in the atmosphere; hence, its presence in the
atmosphere is not likely to pose any problem.

	Environmental Fate Science Chapter For Dipropylene Glycol:

	Dipropylene Glycol is registered with OPP as an active product and is
used as a solvent, and a plasticizer in polyester and alkyd resins, and
in reinforced plastics.  OPP has no data base on environmental fate
studies for dipropylene glycol as a solvent or plasticizer.  For the
reregistration eligibility decision (RED) process, the Agency has relied
on the fate properties of Dipropylene Glycol obtained from the open
literature. The following fate properties were obtained from an open
literature search.

	Vapor Pressure: 3.19 x 10-2 mm Hg at 25 oC (1)

	Henry law Constant (air/water partition coefficient): 3.58 x 10-9
atm-cu m/mole at 25 oC (1)

	KOC (organic carbon ratio in soil): 6 (1)

	Log KOW (octanol/water partition coefficient):  - 1.07 (1)

	Does not Photolyze as it does not absorb UV light at wave length > 290
nm (1)

	Soil grab samples and river die-away test data pertaining to the
biodegradation of dipropylene glycol in soil and natural waters were not
available in open-literature.  A few aerobic biological screening
studies, which utilized settled waste water, sewage or activated sludge
for inocula, indicate that dipropylene glycol should biodegrade slowly
in the environment. (2, 3)

	Miscible in water (1)

	Does not undergo direct air photolysis, but half life in air
(estimated) is 13 hours due to induced photochemical reaction of
atmospheric hydroxyl radical.  Physical removal of dipropylene glycol
from air by precipitation and dissolution in clouds may occur.(4)

	Low absorptivity and therefore very high mobility in soil. (1)

	Aquatic hydrolysis, oxidation, volatilization, bioconcentration, and
absorption to sediment are not expected to be significant fate processes
for dipropylene glycol because of its high miscibility in water and lack
of a hydrolyzable hydrogen within its chemical structure.  Because of a
low Henry’s Law Constant, it has a low potential to partition from
surface water to air.  Dipropylene glycol has low absorptivity and
therefore, highly mobile in soil.  Biodegradeability of dipropylene
glycol should be slow, but may still be an important removal mechanism
from aerobic soil.  The low KOW indicates that it is not likely to
bioaccumulate in aquatic organisms like fish.  With a vapor pressure of
0.129 mm Hg at 25 oC, dipropylene glycol exists almost entirely in the
vapor phase in the atmosphere and degrades rapidly by reaction with
photochemically produced hydroxyl radicals (half-life of 13 hours).

	Surface Water and Ground Water Contamination:

Dipropylene glycol may be released into surface water and ground water
via effluents at sites where it is produced or used as a solvent,
plasticizer or in reinforced plastic.  Due to the high mobility in soil
and the slow biodegradation, the possibility exists for dipropylene
glycol to contaminate water systems.

					BIBLIOGRAPHY

	Hazard Substances Databank (HSDB), A Database of the National Library
of Medicine’s TOXNET System.

	Bridie A, et al. (1979) “BOD and COD of some petrochemical.”  Water
Research 13: 627-630.

	Niemi G, et al.  (1987) “Structural features associated with
degradable and persistent chemicals.”  Env Toxicol Chem 6: 515-527.

	Environmental Fate Database.  A Database of the Syracuse Research
Corporation (SRC).


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 145 (Friday, July 27, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35636-35637]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16070]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2013-0327; FRL--9981-22-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Portland Cement Plants (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), NSPS for Portland Cement Plants
(EPA ICR No. 1051.14, OMB Control No. 2060-0025), to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR,
which is currently approved through August 31, 2018. Public comments
were previously requested via the Federal Register on June 29, 2017
during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30
days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given
below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency
may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before August 27,
2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2013-0327, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method); or by email to: [email protected]; or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email
to [email protected]. Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats,

information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov, or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: Owners and operators of affected facilities are required
to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements for the
General Provisions (40 CFR part 60, subpart A), as well as the specific
requirements at 40 CFR part 60, subpart F. This includes submitting
initial notifications, performance tests and periodic reports and
results, and maintaining records of the occurrence and duration of any
startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected
facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is
inoperative. These reports are used by EPA to determine compliance with
the standards.
    Form numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Portland cement plants.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart F).
    Estimated number of respondents: 95 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially and semiannually.
    Total estimated burden: 14,500 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $2,290,000 (per year), which includes
$767,000 in annualized capital startup and/or operation and maintenance
costs.
    Changes in the estimates: There is a small adjustment decrease in
the respondent labor hours and the total capital and O&M costs from the
most-recently approved ICR due to a decrease in the number of
respondents. Consistent with past ICRs, this ICR uses the most recent
data from EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program to estimate the
respondent universe, which shows a decrease of 1 respondent as compared
to the previous ICR.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2018-16070 Filed 7-26-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 142 (Tuesday, July 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43335-43337]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18028]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2009-D-0268]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Labeling of Certain
Beers Subject to the Labeling Jurisdiction of the Food and Drug
Administration

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA).

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by August
23, 2012.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-New and
title ``Labeling of Certain Beers Subject to the Labeling Jurisdiction
of the Food and Drug Administration.'' Also include the FDA docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domini Bean, Office of Information
Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., PI50-400T,
Rockville, MD 20850<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Labeling of Certain Beers Subject to the Labeling Jurisdiction of the
Food and Drug Administration--(OMB Control Number 0910-New)

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of August 17, 2009 (74 FR 41438) (the
August 17, 2009, notice), FDA published a notice of availability of the
draft guidance document entitled ``Labeling of Certain Beers Subject to
the Labeling Jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration'' (the
draft guidance). Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the
draft guidance at http://www.fda.gov/FoodGuidances. This guidance, when
finalized, will provide industry with information on how to label beers
that are subject to FDA's labeling laws and regulations. This draft
guidance was issued in light of the ruling by the Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) (formerly The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
and Firearms (ATF)) clarifying that certain beers do not meet the
definition of a ``malt beverage'' under the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (the FAA Act). Because these beers are not subject
to the labeling provisions of the FAA Act, they are subject to the
labeling provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the
FD&C Act) and the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (FPLA). FDA, in the
draft guidance, also reminds manufacturers that the labeling of wine
beverages containing less than 7 percent alcohol by volume, such as
wine coolers, diluted wine beverages, dealcoholized or partially
dealcoholized wine and ciders, is also subject to FDA labeling
requirements.
    As reflected in the 1987 Memorandum of Understanding between FDA
and TTB's predecessor Agency, the ATF (Ref. 1), TTB is responsible for
the issuance and enforcement of regulations with respect

to the labeling of distilled spirits, wines, and malt beverages under
the FAA Act.
    The TTB has clarified that certain beers, which are not made from
both malted barley and hops but are instead made from substitutes for
malted barley (such as sorghum, rice, or wheat) or are made without
hops, do not meet the definition of a malt beverage under the FAA Act.
(See TTB Ruling 2008-3.) (Ref. 2). TTB stated in its ruling that such
products (other than sake, which is classified as a wine under the FAA
Act) are not subject to the labeling, advertising, and other provisions
of the TTB regulations issued under the FAA Act. Therefore, these beers
are subject to the labeling requirements under FDA's regulations.
However, as explained in the TTB ruling, some TTB labeling requirements
such as the Government Health Warning Statement under the Alcoholic
Beverage Labeling Act and certain marking requirements under the
Internal Revenue Code continue to apply to these products.
    The guidance is intended to assist manufacturers in labeling beers
that are subject to FDA's labeling laws and regulations. In general,
FDA requires that food products under its labeling jurisdiction be
truthfully and informatively labeled in accordance with the FD&C Act
and the FPLA, and FDA's implementing regulations. These FDA labeling
requirements are explained in the guidance document.
    In the August 17, 2009, notice, FDA published a request for public
comment on the proposed collection of information. FDA received one
letter in response to the notice, containing multiple comments. Several
comments in this letter were generally supportive of FDA's information
collection provisions in the guidance. Additional comments were outside
the scope of the four collection of information topics on which the
notice solicits comments and will not be discussed in this document.
    (Comment 1) One comment stated that FDA should require alcohol
content labeling for the beers discussed in the guidance, including the
percent alcohol by volume (%ABV); the amount of alcohol (in fluid
ounces (oz) or grams) per serving; the definition of a ``standard
drink'' (i.e., 12 fluid oz of regular beer, 5 fluid oz of wine, or 1.5
fluid oz of 80-proof distilled spirits); the number of standard drinks
per container; and, the advice on moderate drinking, such as ``The
Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommends no more than one drink per
day for women, two drinks per day for men.'' The comment stated that
when a consumer sees a beverage such as ``sorghum beer'' or ``wheat
beer'' labeled the same way that all other FDA regulated beverages are
labeled, the consumer may not know that it is an alcoholic beverage.
    (Response) FDA appreciates the concerns discussed in the comment.
As explained in the guidance, certain TTB labeling requirements apply
to these products. For example, these non-malt beers, like all alcohol
beverages, are required to bear the health warning statement under the
Alcoholic Beverage Labeling Act (27 U.S.C. 213-215). FDA's guidance
documents do not establish legally enforceable requirements, and
therefore cannot include mandatory language such as ``shall, must,
required, or requirement'' unless specific regulatory or statutory
requirements are cited. To the extent that the comment requests FDA to
engage in rulemaking, the comment is outside the scope of the comment
request on the four collection of information topics as they relate to
the provisions of the draft guidance document.
    The guidance is intended to assist manufacturers in labeling beers
that are subject to FDA's labeling laws and regulations. All labeling
regulations discussed in this guidance have been previously approved by
OMB in accordance with the PRA under OMB control number 0910-0381. The
regulations approved under OMB control number 0910-0381 include
Sec. Sec.  101.3, 101.4, 101.5, 101.9, 101.22, and 101.105 (21 CFR
101.3, 101.4, 101.5, 101.9, 101.22, and 101.105). The proposed
information collection seeks to add manufacturers of certain beers that
do not meet the definition of a ``malt beverage'' under the FAA Act as
new respondents to these labeling regulations. The proposed information
collection also seeks OMB approval of allergen labeling of these beers
under section 403(w)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 343(w)(1)), which
was added by the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of
2004 (FALCPA).
    Section 101.3 of FDA's food labeling regulations requires that the
label of a food product in packaged form bear a statement of identity,
(i.e., the name of the product), including as appropriate, the form of
the food or the name of the food imitated. Section 101.4 prescribes the
requirements for the declaration of ingredients on the label or
labeling of food products in packaged form, including using the common
or usual name of each ingredient. Section 101.5 requires that the label
of a food product in packaged form specify the name and place of
business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor and, if the food
producer is not the manufacturer of the food product, its connection
with the food product. Section 101.9 requires that nutrition
information be provided for all food products intended for human
consumption and offered for sale, unless an exemption in Sec.  101.9(j)
applies to the product. Section 101.22 contains labeling requirements
for the disclosure of spices, flavorings, colorings, and chemical
preservatives (Sec.  101.22(j)) in food products. Section 101.105
specifies requirements for the declaration of the net quantity of
contents on the label of a food in packaged form.
    Under the FD&C Act, as amended by the FALCPA, the food source name
of any ``major food allergen'' present must be declared (section
403(w)(1) of the FD&C Act). Section 201(qq) of the FD&C Act, (21 U.S.C.
321(qq)), defines ``major food allergen'' as milk, egg, fish,
Crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, wheat, peanuts, and soybeans, as well
as any food ingredient that contains protein derived from one of them,
with the exception of highly refined oils.
    Description of respondents: The respondents to this collection of
information are manufacturers of beers that are subject to FDA's
labeling laws and regulations.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                           Table 1--Estimated Annual Third Party Disclosure Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of
                                     Number of      disclosures    Total annual   Average burden
            Citation                respondents         per         disclosures   per disclosure    Total hours
                                                    respondent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21 CFR 101.3 and 101.22.........              12               2              24            0.5               12
21 CFR 101.4....................              12               2              24            1                 24
21 CFR 101.5....................              12               2              24            0.25               6
21 CFR 101.9....................              12               2              24            4                 96

21 CFR 101.105..................              12               2              24            0.5               12
Section 403(w)(1) of the FD&C                 12               2              24            1                 24
 Act............................
Guidance document entitled                    12               1              12            1                 12
 ``Labeling of Certain Beers
 Subject to the Labeling
 Jurisdiction of the Food and
 Drug Administration''..........
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............             186
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    FDA's estimate of the number of respondents in table 1 is based on
the number of regulatory submissions submitted to TTB for beers that do
not meet the definition of a ``malt beverage'' under the FAA Act. Based
on its records of submissions received from manufacturers of such
products, TTB estimates the number of respondents to be 12 and the
number of disclosures annually to be 24. Thus, FDA adopts TTB's
estimate of 12 respondents, and an annual number of disclosures per
respondent of 2, in table 1 of this document.
    FDA's estimate of the average burden per disclosure for each
regulation are based on FDA's experience with food labeling under the
Agency's jurisdiction. The estimated average burden per disclosure for
Sec. Sec.  101.3, 101.4, 101.5, 101.9, 101.22, and 101.105 in table 1
are equal to, and based upon, the estimated average burden per
disclosure approved by OMB in OMB control number 0910-0381. FDA further
estimates that the labeling burden of section 403(w)(1) of the FD&C
Act, which specifies requirements for the declaration of food
allergens, will be 1 hour based upon the similarity of the requirements
to that of Sec.  101.4. Finally, FDA estimates that a respondent will
spend 1 hour reading the guidance document.
    Thus, FDA estimates that 12 respondents will each label 2 products
annually, for a total of 24 labels. FDA estimates that the
manufacturers will spend 7.25 hours (0.5 hours + 1 hour + 0.25 hour + 4
hours + 0.5 hour + 1 hour = 7.25 hours) on each label to comply with
FDA's labeling regulations and the requirements of section 403(w)(1) of
the FD&C Act, for a total of 174 hours (24 labels x 7.25 hours = 174
hours). In addition, 12 respondents will each spend 1 hour reading the
guidance document, for a total of 12 hours. Thus, FDA estimates the
total hour burden of the proposed collection of information to be 186
hours (174 hours + 12 hours = 186 hours).
    The draft guidance also refers to previously approved collections
of information found in FDA regulations. The collections of information
in Sec. Sec.  101.3, 101.4, 101.5, 101.9, 101.22, and 101.105 have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0381.

II. References

    The following references have been placed on display in the
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, and may be seen by
interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
(FDA has verified the Web site addresses, but we are not responsible
for any subsequent changes to the Web sites after this document
publishes in the Federal Register.)
    1. Memorandum of Understanding 225-88-2000 between FDA and Bureau
of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, available at http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/PartnershipsCollaborations/MemorandaofUnderstandingMOUs/DomesticMOUs/ucm116370.htm.
    2. TTB Ruling 2008-3 dated July 7, 2008, available at http://www.ttb.gov/rulings/2008-3.pdf.

    Dated: July 16, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-18028 Filed 7-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 144 (Thursday, July 28, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45316-45317]
[FR Doc No: 2022-16190]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2004-0013; FRL-10089-01-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; EPA Program Information on Source Water
Protection (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), EPA Program Information on Source
Water Protection (EPA ICR Number 1816.08, OMB Control Number 2040-0197)
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through July 31,
2022. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal
Register on December 28, 2021, during a 60-day comment period. This
notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller
description of the ICR is given in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this announcement, including its estimated burden and cost
to the public. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before August 29,
2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OW-2004-0013 to EPA online using https://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA
Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
    Submit written comments and recommendations to OMB for the proposed
information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Sherri Comerford, Drinking Water
Protection Division, Prevention Branch, Office of Ground Water and
Drinking Water (MC 4606M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-
564-4639; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
https://www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The
telephone number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: EPA is collecting data from the states on their
advancement toward substantial implementation of protection strategies
for all community water systems (CWSs). EPA and states use this
voluntary collection of data to track and understand the progress
toward increasing the percentage of CWSs (and the populations they
serve) where risk is minimized through source water protection. Source
water protection data that states submit directly to the Source Water
Protection Information System (SDWIS) is accessible to the public via
EPA's website at: https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/safe-drinking-water-information-system-sdwis-federal-reporting.
Availability of this information, together with source water and
demographic indicators that are publicly available via EPA's Drinking
Water Mapping Application to Protect Source Waters (DWMAPS) on EPA's
website at: https://www.epa.gov/sourcewaterprotection/drinking-water-mapping-application-protect-source-waters-dwmaps, promote equity by
empowering communities to include these considerations in their own
analyses and outreach efforts.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: 51.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.
    Estimated number of respondents: 51 (total).
    Frequency of response: Annual.

    Total estimated burden: 288 hours (per year). Burden is defined at
5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $17,074 (per year).
    Changes in the estimates: EPA anticipates the annual totals for
estimated burden and costs at 288 hours and $17,074, respectively.
There is an expected decrease of hours in the total estimated
respondent burden compared to what was identified in the ICR currently
approved by OMB due to voluntary reporting that would decrease in
frequency from quarterly to annual reporting. State databases are fully
developed and tracking is routine, which EPA believes will result in
efficiencies that would allow states to minimize hourly burden and
cost.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-16190 Filed 7-27-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 214 (Monday, November 5, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66429-66431]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26978]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0614; FRL-9749-1]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
volatile organic compounds (VOC), carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of
nitrogen (NOX), oxides of sulfur (SOX), and
particulate matter (PM) emissions from glass melting furnaces. We are
approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the
Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal
and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by December 5, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2012-0614, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. 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.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly
available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Marinaro, EPA Region IX, (415)
972-3019<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date
that it was amended by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board.

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Local agency                  Rule No.            Rule title            Amended         Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD............................            4354   Limiting Emissions from        05/19/11         09/27/11
                                                        Glass Melting Furnaces.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 24, 2011, EPA determined that the submittal for SJVUAPCD
Rule 4354 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V,
which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    We approved an earlier version of Rule 4354 into the SIP on June
24, 2011 (76 FR 53640). The SJVUAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version on May 19, 2011 and CARB submitted them to us on
September 27, 2011.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?

    VOCs and NOX help produce ground-level ozone and smog,
which harm human health and the environment. PM, NOX and
SOX also contribute to effects that are harmful to human
health and the environment, including premature mortality, aggravation
of respiratory and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung function,
visibility impairment, and damage to vegetation and ecosystems. Section
110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control
VOC, NOX, SOX and PM emissions. The purpose of
this rule revision is to incorporate provisions for new oxy-fuel firing
technology. This technology, by design, operates in an oxygen-rich
environment in excess of the existing requirement, but still has
inherently low NOX emissions during start-up. The proposed
amendment prevents oxy-fuel fired glass melting furnaces from having to
comply with an unnecessary start-up requirement. EPA's technical
support document (TSD) has more information about this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act), and must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
for each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines
(CTG) document as well as each major source in nonattainment areas (see
sections 182(a)(2) and 182(f)), and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). In addition, SIPs must
implement Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) in PM 2.5
nonattainment areas (see CAA sections 189(a)(1) and 189(b)(1)).
    The SJVUAPCD regulates an ozone and PM 2.5 nonattainment area (see
40 CFR part 81), so Rule 4354 must fulfill RACT and the overall SIP
must fulfill RACM.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability, RACT and RACM requirements consistently include the
following:

1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations; Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal
Register Notice,'' (Blue Book), notice of availability published in
the May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,''
57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
4. ``State Implementation Plans for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment
Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM-10 Nonattainment Areas
Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation
of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 59 FR 41998
(August 16, 1994).
5. ``PM-10 Guideline Document,'' EPA 452/R-93-008, April 1993.
6. ``Fugitive Dust Background Document and Technical Information
Document for Best Available Control Measures,'' EPA 450/2-92-004,
September 1992.
7. ``State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the
General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of
Title I; Proposed Rule,'' (the NOX Supplement), 57 FR
55620, November 25, 1992.
8. ``Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs,'' U.S.
EPA, January 2001.
9. ``Interim White Paper--Midwest RPO Candidate Control Measure:
Glass Manufacturing'', Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium,
December 12, 2005.
10. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document--OX
Emissions from Glass Manufacturing'', US EPA, June 1994.
11. ``Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Reference
Document on Best Available Techniques in the Glass Manufacturing
Industry'', European Commission, December 2001.
12. ``State Implementation Plans (SIP): Policy Regarding Excess
Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup and Shutdown,'' EPA
memorandum, Steven A. Herman and Robert Perciasepe, August 11, 1999.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/excem.pdf.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, RACM/RACT, and SIP relaxations. The
TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule

    The TSD describes an additional rule revision that we recommend for
the next time the local agency modifies the rule but is not currently
the basis for rule disapproval.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate this rule into the federally
enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Review

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

In addition, this proposed action does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: October 17, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-26978 Filed 11-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 132 (Thursday, July 10, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39330-39333]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16087]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0241; FRL-9913-26-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Control of Commercial Fuel Oil Sulfur Limits for
Combustion Units

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. This revision will implement low-sulfur fuel oil
provisions that will reduce the amount of sulfur in fuel oils used in
combustion units, which will aid in reducing sulfur dioxide
(SO2) emissions and the formation of sulfates that cause
decreased visibility. This action is being taken under the Clean Air
Act (CAA).

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 10, 2014.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0241. All documents in the docket are listed in
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
electronic docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
confidential business information (CBI) 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 are available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for public inspection during normal
business hours at the Air Protection Division, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Becoat,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On February 20, 2014 (79 FR 9701), EPA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPR) seeking comment on EPA's proposed approval of
Pennsylvania's SIP revision that incorporates the Commonwealth's low-
sulfur fuel oil provisions into the SIP. The SIP revision was submitted
by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on February 25, 2013, adopting
revisions to 25 Pennsylvania Code (Pa. Code) Chapters 121, 123, and
139. In response to the NPR, EPA received one comment, dated March 24,
2014, from Ms. Jane Kozinski, Assistant Commissioner for the State of
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). A summary of
the NJDEP comment and EPA's response is provided in Unit III. (Summary
of Public Comment and EPA Response) of this final rulemaking action.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    The SIP revision incorporates Pennsylvania's low-sulfur fuel oil
provisions which apply to the owners and/or operators of the following:
(1) Refineries; (2) pipelines; (3) terminals; (4) retail outlet fuel
storage facilities and ultimate consumers; (5) commercial and
industrial facilities; and (6) facilities with a unit burning regulated
fuel oil to produce electricity and domestic home heaters. The SIP
revision implements low-sulfur fuel oil provisions that will reduce the
amount of sulfur in fuel oils used in combustion units and amends

associated definitions, sampling and test methods, and recordkeeping
and recording provisions. The low-sulfur fuel oil provisions will aid
in reducing SO2 emissions and the formation of sulfates that
cause decreased visibility. EPA believes that these regulations will
decrease SO2 emissions in the Commonwealth from certain fuel
combustion sources and therefore strengthen the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA
also believes that the additional SO2 emission reductions
and reductions in sulfates from Pennsylvania sources will assist the
Commonwealth in achieving further reasonable progress towards reducing
regional haze.\1\ The rationale for EPA's proposed action is explained
in the NPR and will not be restated here. Relevant support documents
for this action are available online at http://www.regulations.gov,
Docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0241.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA originally finalized a limited approval of the
Pennsylvania regional haze SIP on July 13, 2012. 77 FR 41279. Our
approval was limited due to Pennsylvania's reliance upon the Clean
Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) for certain emission requirements for
electric generating units. In response to a petition for review of
that final action in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit, EPA successfully moved for a voluntary remand without
vacatur. On April 30, 2014, EPA reissued its final limited approval
of the Pennsylvania SIP to implement the Commonwealth's regional
haze program for the first planning period through 2018. 79 FR
24340. EPA is approving Pennsylvania's SIP revision to incorporate
the low-sulfur fuel oil regulations as a SIP strengthening measure
and not to address any specific regional haze requirements in the
CAA or in 40 CFR 51.308.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of Public Comment and EPA Response

    Comment: NJDEP commented that Pennsylvania's SIP revision, which
incorporates low-sulfur fuel oil regulations to reduce the sulfur
content of distillate fuel oil to 500 parts per million (ppm), is not
consistent with standards adopted by nearby states, which limit sulfur
content to 15 ppm. NJDEP stated that a sulfur-content standard of 15
ppm would be consistent with the standard set in the Mid-Atlantic/
Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-VU)'s agreement on measures to control
air pollutants that contribute to regional haze. NJDEP expressed
concern that Pennsylvania's adoption of a higher sulfur-content
standard of 500 ppm may jeopardize continued progress to improve
visibility levels at the Brigantine Wilderness Area (Brigantine). NJDEP
stated that a sulfur-content standard of 15 ppm for distillate fuel oil
is a reasonable, cost-effective air pollution control measure necessary
to ensure that the reasonable progress goals (RPGs) at Brigantine are
met in the future. NJDEP also stated that a lower sulfur-content
standard of 15 ppm is a reasonable, cost-effective control measure for
SO2 and fine particulates and ``would make for a more
widely-marketable fuel across the northeastern and mid-Atlantic United
States.'' Further, NJDEP stated that in EPA's proposed approval of the
Pennsylvania regional haze SIP, ``Pennsylvania reports that sulfur
dioxide emission reductions from the closure of the Portland Power
[P]lant in northeastern Pennsylvania will offset sulfur dioxide
emissions expected from a 500 ppm sulfur content in distillate fuel oil
in Pennsylvania.'' NJDEP commented that, on the contrary, lowering the
sulfur content in distillate oil to 15 ppm would have a greater impact
on visibility at Brigantine than reductions at Portland because
emission reductions would occur over a widespread area from a large
number of sources, especially from fuel-burning sources in metropolitan
Philadelphia, which is frequently upwind of Brigantine.
    Response: EPA appreciates NJDEP's comment on the SIP revision and
acknowledges that Pennsylvania is a member state in MANE-VU.
Pennsylvania participated fully in the MANE-VU consultation process,
which resulted in a course of action for all participating states to
reduce emissions to collectively meet the RPGs in the MANE-VU
region.\2\ The MANE-VU ``Ask'' provided the MANE-VU states, including
Pennsylvania, with up to ten years to pursue adoption and
implementation of reasonable and cost-effective nitrogen oxides
(NOX) and SO2 emissions reduction measures. In
its regional haze SIP, Pennsylvania stated that it ``will pursue these
measures, as appropriate and necessary, and in five years at the time
of Pennsylvania's first periodic SIP report, expects to report on
progress toward adoption of these measures by 2018.'' With respect to
the low-sulfur fuel strategy, the MANE-VU ``Ask'' established two sets
of goals, one for the ``inner zone'' states of the MANE-VU region
(Delaware, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania, or portions thereof)
and one goal for the ``outer zone'' states. The ``inner zone'' goals
contained more aggressive compliance schedules and sulfur-content
limits than the ``outer zone'' goals. Nevertheless, states in the
``inner zone'' could choose to comply with the ``outer zone'' goals if
they experienced supply disruption issues, and the ``Ask'' effectively
provided all states until 2018 to complete the implementation of their
low-sulfur fuel strategies. Consistent with this approach, Pennsylvania
indicated in its regional haze SIP that, ``[b]ased on supply concerns,
Pennsylvania will pursue a strategy that will not be less stringent
than the outer zone strategy and would meet the sulfur content emission
limits listed above by 2018.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See ``Statement of the Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility
Union (MANE-VU) Concerning a Course of Action within MANE-VU toward
Assuring Reasonable Progress'' (January 20, 2007), also known as the
MANE-VU ``Ask,'' in Appendix M of the December 20, 2010 Pennsylvania
regional haze SIP submission available in the docket for EPA's
rulemaking approving the Pennsylvania regional haze SIP at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 13, 2012, EPA finalized a limited approval of the
Pennsylvania regional haze SIP (77 FR 41279). Subsequently,
Pennsylvania submitted its February 25, 2013 SIP revision to EPA that
included low-sulfur fuel regulations that met the ``outer zone''
strategy requirements and therefore do not require the sulfur content
of distillate oil be reduced to 15 ppm.\3\ As EPA explained in detail
in the technical support document (TSD) \4\ that accompanied our July
13, 2012 limited approval of the Pennsylvania regional haze SIP,
Pennsylvania had secured an additional 23,051 tons in SO2
reductions that were not anticipated at the time of the MANE-VU
``Ask.'' When these reductions are considered in combination with
reductions that will result from Pennsylvania's low-sulfur fuel
regulations, EPA believes that a 15 ppm limit on distillate oil is no
longer ``appropriate and necessary'' to achieve the goals of the MANE-
VU ``Ask'' during the first planning period ending in 2018.
Consequently, EPA believes that the Pennsylvania regional haze SIP
includes all measures necessary to obtain its share of the emission
reductions needed to meet the RPGs of downwind states including New
Jersey's and therefore has met the requirements of 40 CFR
51.308(d)(3)(ii). See 79 FR

24340 (April 30, 2014) (reissuing limited approval of Pennsylvania's
regional haze SIP). However, EPA recognizes that a 15 ppm sulfur
content limit for distillate oil, if subsequently implemented, would
provide further SO2 emissions reductions from Pennsylvania
sources and further reasonable progress towards the national goal of
remedying visibility impairment in Class I areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Pennsylvania's low-sulfur fuel oil regulations include a
compliance date in 2016. The MANE-VU ``Ask'' provided for ``outer
zone'' states to implement a low-sulfur fuel oil strategy by 2014
and ``to further reduce the sulfur content of distillate oil to 15
ppm by 2018, depending on supply availability.'' See Pennsylvania's
December 20, 2010 regional haze SIP, Appendix M (MANE-VU ``Ask'').
Pennsylvania cited concerns with desulfurization capacity at
refineries when publishing its low-sulfur fuel oil regulations with
the 500 ppm sulfur limit for distillate oil and 2016 compliance
date. See 43 Pa. B. 806 (February 9, 2013).
    \4\ See ``Technical Support Document (TSD) for the Pennsylvania
Regional Haze State Implementation Plan--Mid Atlantic and Northeast
Visibility Union (MANE-VU) `Asks' Reasonable Progress Goals''
(January 17, 2012) available in the docket for EPA's rulemaking
approving the Pennsylvania regional haze SIP at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As EPA explained in the NPR for this rulemaking action, EPA
believes these regulations strengthen the Pennsylvania SIP and provide
additional SO2 and sulfate reductions that supplement
reductions from the Pennsylvania regional haze SIP. Therefore, EPA
concludes that the adoption of a low-sulfur fuel oil strategy will
provide Pennsylvania additional emission reductions furthering progress
towards reducing emissions that contribute to visibility impairment and
furthering reasonable progress in the first implementation period
towards RPGs for Class I areas outside the Commonwealth affected by
emissions from Pennsylvania's sources. While EPA appreciates NJDEP's
comment that 15 ppm distillate fuel oil is a reasonable, cost-effective
control measure, EPA has concluded that a 15 ppm limit on distillate
oil is no longer ``appropriate and necessary'' for Pennsylvania to
achieve the goals of the MANE-VU ``Ask'' during the first planning
period ending in 2018.
    While it is possible that a 15 ppm distillate fuel oil standard may
result in greater visibility improvement at Brigantine than the closure
of Portland as NJDEP alleges, EPA previously concluded in its TSD
supporting approval of Pennsylvania's regional haze SIP that
Pennsylvania's delay in implementing low-sulfur fuel oil regulations
was not anticipated to interfere with the ability of other states to
meet their respective RPGs.\5\ Based on our previous approval of
Pennsylvania's regional haze SIP, and particularly upon our conclusion
that a 15 ppm limit on distillate oil is no longer ``appropriate and
necessary'' to achieve the goals of the MANE-VU ``Ask,'' EPA believes
the approved Pennsylvania regional haze SIP adequately addresses
visibility impacts from Pennsylvania emission sources on Class I areas
outside the Commonwealth, including Brigantine, for the first
implementation period and ensures sufficient emission reductions for
Class I area states to meet their RPGs. See 77 FR 41279 and 79 FR
24340. Any significant changes in emissions of visibility-impairing
pollutants or impacts at Class I areas can be addressed when
Pennsylvania evaluates its progress made in the first implementation
period towards RPGs for the Class I areas outside the Commonwealth
affected by emissions from Pennsylvania's sources as required by 40 CFR
51.308(g). If Pennsylvania's assessment determines an adjustment to its
SIP is necessary to ensure reasonable progress, EPA regulations require
a SIP revision within a year of the five-year progress report. See 40
CFR 51.308(h)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ EPA notes that it was our conclusion in the TSD supporting
approval of Pennsylvania's regional haze SIP, and not
Pennsylvania's, that additional SO2 emission reductions
from Federally enforceable measures at point sources such as the
Portland Power Plant supported our conclusion that the delay in
implementing a low-sulfur fuel oil strategy was not anticipated to
interfere with the ability of other states to meet their respective
RPGs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, EPA appreciates NJDEP's comment regarding potential
increased availability and marketability of lower sulfur distillate
fuel oil if Pennsylvania were to implement a 15 ppm sulfur-content
standard. However, this comment is not relevant to this rulemaking
action and no further response is required.

IV. Final Action

    EPA has determined that the revisions made to 25 Pa. Code Chapters
121, 123, and 139 meet the SIP revision requirements of the CAA and is
approving the amendments to Pennsylvania's regulations for commercial
fuel oil sulfur limits for combustion units.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    This action, which makes a determination of attainment based on air
quality, will result in the suspension of certain Federal requirements
and/or will not impose any additional requirements beyond those imposed
by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rulemaking action does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the determination is not approved to apply
in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law.

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    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).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    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 8, 2014. 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, approving the implementation of low-sulfur fuel oil
provisions that will reduce the amount of sulfur in fuel oils used in
combustion units in Pennsylvania, 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, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: June 11, 2014.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

    Therefore, 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  52.2020, the paragraph (c)(1) table is amended by revising
the entries for Title 25, Chapters 121, 123, and 139, Sections 121.1,
123.22, 139.4, and 139.16 and adding entries for Title 25, Chapter 123,
Sections 123.22(f) and 123.22(g) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2020  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            State                                Additional
          State citation               Title/subject      effective     EPA approval date     explanation/ Sec.
                                                             date                             52.2063 citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Title 25--Environmental Protection Article III--Air Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Chapter 121--General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 121.1....................  Definitions.........     02/09/13  07/10/14 [insert      Added and amended
                                                                       Federal Register      definitions.
                                                                       citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Chapter 123--Standards for Contaminants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 123.22...................  Combustion units.        02/09/13  07/10/14 [insert      Amended sections
                                    [General                           Federal Register      123.22(a),
                                    provisions--air                    citation].            123.22(b),
                                    basins and non-air                                       123.22(c),
                                    basins.                                                  123.22(d), and
                                                                                123.22(e).

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 123.22(f)................  Combustion units--       02/09/13  07/10/14 [insert      New section.
                                    Sampling and                       Federal Register
                                    testing.                           citation].
Section 123.22(g)................  Combustion units--       02/09/13  07/10/14 [insert      New section
                                    Recordkeeping and                  Federal Register
                                    reporting.                         citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Chapter 139--Sampling and Testing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 139.4....................  References..........     02/09/13  07/10/14 [insert      Amended and added
                                                                       Federal Register      references.
                                                                       citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 139.16...................  Sulfur in fuel oil..     02/09/13  07/10/14 [insert      Amended to add cross
                                                                       Federal Register      references.
                                                                       citation].

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

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2014-16087 Filed 7-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P