[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 32 (Thursday, February 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9220-9221]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3663]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC12-2-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities; Comment Request

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Comment request.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is submitting the information
collection FERC-550, Oil Pipeline Rates: Tariff Filings, to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for review of the information collection
requirements. Any interested person may file comments directly with OMB
and should address a copy of those comments to the Commission as
explained below. The Commission issued a Notice in the Federal Register
(76 FR 76702, 12/08/2011) requesting public comments. FERC received no
comments on the FERC-550 and is making this notation in its submittal
to OMB.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by March 19,
2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified by the OMB Control No.
1902-0089, should be sent via email to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission Desk Officer. The Desk Officer may also be
reached via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, identified by the Docket No. IC12-2-000, by
either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web Site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-550, Oil Pipeline Rates: Tariff Filings.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0089.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-550 information
collection requirements with no changes to the reporting requirements.
    Abstract: The Commission uses the information collected under the
requirements of FERC-550 to implement the statutory provisions of Parts
1, 6, and 15 of the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA) (Pub. L. 337, 34
Stat. 584). Jurisdiction over oil pipelines as it relates to the
establishment of valuations for pipelines was transferred from the
Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to FERC, pursuant to sections 306
and 402 of the Department of Energy Organization Act (DOE Act), 42
U.S.C. 7155 and 7172, and Executive Order No. 12009, 42 FR 46267
(September 17, 1977).
    18 CFR Parts 341-348 specifies the filing requirements for proposed
oil pipeline rates. The data that oil pipelines file is the basis for
Commission analyses of the rates they plan to charge to transport crude
oil and petroleum products. The Commission uses its analyses: (1) To
determine if the proposed charges result in just and reasonable rates
for the oil pipeline's transportation services and (2) to help the
Commission decide whether it should suspend, accept or reject the
proposed rates.
    Type of Respondents: Oil pipeline companies.
    Estimate of Annual Burden \1\: The Commission estimates the total
Public Reporting Burden for this information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

                                                FERC-550 (IC12-2-000): Oil Pipeline Rates: Tariff Filings
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                      Average  burden
                                                                        Number of      responses per   Total number of     hours per     Estimated total
                                                                       respondents       respondent       responses         response      annual burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                (A)              (B)    (A) x (B) = (C) ...............               (C) x (D)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oil pipeline companies.............................................             128                4              512               11            5,632
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The total estimated annual cost burden to respondents is
$385,499.24 [5,632 hours / 2,080 \2\ hours/year = 2.70769 years *
$142,372 \3\ = $385,499.24].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 2,080 hours = 40 hours/week * 52 weeks (1 year).
    \3\ Average annual salary per employee in 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: February 10, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-3663 Filed 2-15-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 7 (Tuesday, January 12, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2433-2434]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00395]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2021-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2069]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency; DHS.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: On December 1, 2020, FEMA published in the Federal Register a
proposed flood hazard determination notice that contained an erroneous
table. This notice provides corrections to that table. The table
provided here represents the proposed flood hazard determinations and
communities affected for Boulder County, Colorado and Incorporated
Areas.

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before April 12, 2021.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), and where
applicable, the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report for each community
are available for inspection at both the online location and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the table below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2069, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed in the table below, in
accordance with Section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of
1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and are also used to calculate the appropriate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM
and FIS report become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP may only be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_fact_sheet.pdf.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the table below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard determinations shown on the Preliminary FIRM and
FIS report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR
67.6(b) is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations will also be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
are made final.

Correction

    In the proposed flood hazard determination notice published at 85
FR 77232 in the December 1, 2020, issue of the Federal Register, FEMA
published a table titled ``Boulder County, Colorado, and Incorporated
Areas''. This table contained inaccurate information as to the
community map repository for Town of Superior featured in the table.
    In this document, FEMA is publishing a table containing the
accurate information. The information provided below should be used in
lieu of that previously published.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Boulder County, Colorado and Incorporated Areas
        Project: 19-08-0003S Preliminary Date: September 30, 2019
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Boulder........................  Park Central, 1739 Broadway,
                                          Boulder, CO 80302.
City of Longmont.......................  Development Services Center,
                                          385 Kimbark Street, Longmont,
                                          CO 80501.
Town of Erie...........................  Town Hall, 645 Holbrook Street,
                                          Erie, CO 80516.
Town of Jamestown......................  Town Hall, 118 Main Street,
                                          Jamestown, CO 80455.
Town of Lyons..........................  Town Hall, 432 5th Avenue,
                                          Lyons, CO 80540.
Town of Nederland......................  Town Hall, 45 West 1st Street,
                                          Nederland, CO 80466.
Town of Superior.......................  Public Works and Utilities
                                          Department, 405 Center Drive,
                                          Suite E, Superior, CO 80027.
Town of Ward...........................  Town Hall, 1 Columbia Street,
                                          Ward, CO 80481.
Unincorporated Areas of Boulder County.  Boulder County Community
                                          Planning and Permitting
                                          Department, 2045 13th Street,
                                          Boulder, CO 80302.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2021-00395 Filed 1-11-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register: January 15, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 10)]
[Notices]
[Page 2503-2504]
[DOCID:fr15ja08-69]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. 2007N-0495]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Medical Device User Fee Amendments of 2007; Foreign
Small Business Qualification Certification, FDA Form 3602A

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice.

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

SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an
opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(the PRA), Federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an existing collection of
information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the
notice. This notice solicits comments on FDA Form 3602A, which will
allow a foreign business to qualify as a ``small business'' and pay
certain medical device user fees at reduced rates.

DATES:  Submit written or electronic comments on the collection of
information by March 17, 2008.

ADDRESSES:  Submit electronic comments on the collection of information
to: http://www.fda.gov/dockets/ecomments or http://www.regulations.gov.
Submit written comments on the collection of information to the
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should
be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading
of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Denver Presley Jr., Office of the
Chief Information Officer (HFA-250), Food and Drug Administration, 5600
Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857,<PHONE_NUMBER>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Medical Device User Fee Amendments of 2007; Foreign Small Business
Qualification Certification, Form FDA 3602A--(21 U.S.C.379j) (OMB
Control Number 0910-0613--Extension)

    The FDA Amendments Act of 2007 includes the ``Medical Device User
Fee Amendments of 2007'' (the 2007 Amendments), which reauthorizes
medical device user fees for fiscal years (FY) 2008 through 2012 and
which makes significant changes to the medical device user fee
provisions of the act. The 2007 Amendments provide a new way for a
foreign business to qualify as a small business eligible to pay a
significantly-lower fee when a medical device user fee must be paid.
    Before passage of the 2007 Amendments, the only way a business
could qualify as a small business was to submit a Federal (U.S.) income
tax return showing its gross receipts or sales that did not exceed a
statutory threshold, currently, $100 million. If a business could not
provide a Federal income tax return, it did not qualify as a small
business and had to pay the standard (full) fee. Because many foreign
businesses have not, and cannot, file a Federal (U.S.) income tax
return, this requirement has effectively prevented those businesses
from qualifying for the small business fee rates. Thus, foreign
governments, including the European Union, have objected.
    In lieu of a Federal income tax return, the 2007 Amendments will
allow a foreign business to qualify as a small

business by submitting a certification from its national taxing
authority, the foreign equivalent of our Internal Revenue Service. This
certification, referred to as a ``National Taxing Authority
Certification,'' must:
     Be in English;
     Be from the national taxing authority of the country in
which the business is headquartered;
     Provide the business' gross receipts or sales for the most
recent year, in both the local currency and in U.S. dollars, and the
exchange rate used in converting local currency to U.S. dollars;
     Provide the dates during which the reported receipts or
sales were collected; and
     Bear the official seal of the national taxing authority.
    The new FDA Form 3602A, ``FY 2008 MDUFMA Foreign Small Business
Qualification Certification,'' will collect the information required by
the statute and allows a foreign business to qualify for the same small
business benefits as a domestic U.S. business.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                     Table 1.--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden\1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 No. of        Annual Frequency     Total Annual        Hours per
                      FDA Form 3602A                          Respondents        per Response        Responses           Response         Total Hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sections I and II (completed by the business seeking                     229                  1                229                  1                229
 small business status)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section III (completed by the foreign national taxing                     33                  7                231                  1                231
 authority)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total                                                                                460
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    This burden estimate is based on an examination of 510(k) premarket
notifications received during FY 2006 and FDA's estimation of the time
to collect the required information to complete FDA Form 3602A. The
evidence supporting each FDA Form 3602A must be reviewed by a foreign
national taxing authority to complete Section III, the National Taxing
Authority Certification, of each FDA Form 3602A. Because this is a new
activity, and neither FDA nor any foreign national taxing authority has
any data that would provide an objective measure of the effort required
to complete Section III, FDA is estimating that the burden will be the
same as FDA experiences in reviewing FDA Form 3602, ``FY 2008 MDUFMA
Small Business Qualification Certification For a Business Headquartered
in the United States,'' approved under OMB control number 0910-0508.
    FDA believes most entities that submit FDA Form 3602A will not have
any affiliates, and very few will have more than three or four
affiliates. Based on our experience with FDA Form 3602, FDA believes
each business will require 1 hour to complete Sections I and II.
Because this is a new requirement, FDA does not have any data on the
time that will be required to complete Section III, the National Taxing
Authority Certification.
    Please note that in January 2008, the FDA Web site is expected to
transition to the Federal Dockets Management System (FDMS). FDMS is a
Government-wide, electronic docket management system. After the
transition date, electronic submissions will be accepted by FDA through
the FDMS only. When the exact date of the transition to FDMS is known,
FDA will publish a Federal Register notice announcing that date.

    Dated: January 9, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. E8-569 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 23, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8051-8052]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3459]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP10-50-000]

Petal Gas Storage, L.L.C.; Notice of Application

February 12, 2010.
    Take notice that on January 29, 2010, Petal Gas Storage, L.L.C.
(Petal), 1100 Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas, 77002, filed with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission an abbreviated application
pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), as amended, and
part 157 of the Commission's regulations for authorization to convert
an existing salt-brine production cavern, referred to as Cavern No.
12A, to natural gas storage and to connect the converted cavern to its
existing natural gas storage facilities with approximately 1,525 feet
of 16-inch-diameter natural gas pipeline. All of the proposed
facilities are located east of Hattiesburg, Mississippi, in Forrest
County, within Petal's existing natural gas storage complex. The
project would increase Petal's total storage capacity by approximately
8.2 Bcf consisting of 5.0 Bcf of working gas and 3.2 Bcf of cushion gas
all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with
the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be
viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding the application should be directed to
Patricia A. Totten, Vice President and Regulatory Counsel, Petal Gas
Storage, L.L.C., 1100 Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas 77002, (713)
381-3939,<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax), or via e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either complete
its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's
public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of
Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify Federal and State agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all Federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``e-Library'' link. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for
TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to
intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR

385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10).
A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list
maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies
of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A
party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and
must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the
proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of
Commission orders in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the
instructions on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing'' link.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.
    Comment Date: March 5, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-3459 Filed 2-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 16, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 135)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 38787-38793]
[DOCID:fr16jy07-10]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 51 and 52

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0903; FRL-8439-6]
RIN 2060-AA02

 Public Hearings and Submission of Plans

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action finalizes changes to EPA's regulations specifying
the public hearing requirements for State Implementation Plan (SIP)
submissions, identifying the method for submission of SIPs and
preliminary review of plans; and the criteria for determining the
completeness of plan submission requirements to reflect the changes to
the public hearing and plan submission requirements. It also updates
the addresses to several Regional offices.

DATES: This rule is effective August 15, 2007.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0903. All documents in the docket are listed on the
http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not
placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at

the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general questions concerning this
rule, please contact Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Mr. Lakeman can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information presented in this preamble
is organized as follows:

I. Background
II. Comments and Responses
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On March 13, 2007, (72 FR 11307) EPA published a proposed rule to
change the requirements of 40 CFR 51.102, 51.103 and Appendix V to Part
51. Also, administrative changes to 40 CFR 52.02 and 52.16 to update
the addresses for several of the EPA Regional offices were published.
    The Clean Air Act (CAA) provides that each revision to a SIP
submitted by a State must be adopted by such State ``after reasonable
notice and public hearing.'' EPA's regulations on public hearings in 40
CFR 51.102(a) states ``Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (c) of
this section, States must

conduct one or more public hearings on the following prior to adoption
and submission to EPA.'' The completeness criteria indicate that a
complete submission must include ``Evidence that public notice was
given of the proposed change consistent with procedures approved by
EPA, including the date of publication of such notice'' and
``Certification that public hearings(s) were held in accordance with
the information provided in the public notice and the State's laws and
constitution, if applicable.'' 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V (2.1)(f) and
(g). Following these public hearing requirements, states hold public
hearings on any revision to a SIP. Many of these plan revisions are
minor or noncontroversial in nature and no member of the public or the
regulated community attends or participates in the hearing. These
hearings consume both valuable time and resources. Rather than
requiring a public hearing for all SIP revisions, EPA proposed to
revise these regulations to allow states to determine those actions for
which there may be little or no interest by the public or the regulated
community and, for those actions, to provide the public the opportunity
to request a public hearing. If no request for public hearing is made,
then the State would have fulfilled the requirements of 40 CFR
51.102(a) and no public hearing is required to be held.
    Whether or not a public hearing is held, the State is required to
provide a 30-day period for the written submission of comments from the
public.
    Forty CFR 51.103(a) and (b) require states to submit ``five copies
of the plan to the appropriate Regional Office.'' The completeness
criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V(2.1)(d) provide that a complete
submission must include ``indication of the changes made to the
existing approved plan, where applicable.'' Since the time these
regulations were promulgated, electronic access to documents has become
readily available and there is no longer the same need for the State to
provide multiple printed copies of the submitted plan. EPA proposed to
revise these regulations to allow the Regions and the states
flexibility to determine the number of printed and electronic copies of
the plan submission necessary to ensure full public access to the
submitted plan (including identification of the changes made) and to
allow the agency to review the plan for approvability. EPA also
proposed to revise 40 CFR 52.02 and 52.16, to reflect the current
addresses for the Region 3, Region 4, Region 7 and Region 8 offices.

II. Comments and Responses

    EPA received comments on the proposed action. The majority of
commenters were in support of the proposed action and suggested minor
changes to the proposed action. Following is a summary of the comments
received and EPA's response to those comments.
    Comment: One commenter is concerned that the proposed requirement
for states to pre-schedule a public hearing and then cancel it if no
one requests the hearing would ``(1) create confusion for the public,
(2) require the additional expense of more legal notices to notify the
public that a hearing has been cancelled, and (3) confuse and disrupt
the schedule of court reporters set to cover the hearings.'' The
commenter suggests that ``States only schedule a public hearing on a
`nonsubstantive or noncontroversial'' topic if requested.'' The
commenter understands that ``adoption of a minor amendment or submittal
of a minor SIP revision may be delayed by a few weeks if a hearing is
not `prescheduled'' and publicized at the same time as a 30-day comment
period.''
    The commenter also requests that EPA (1) review and consider the
Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) approach to ``administrative
modifications'' as published in the Federal Register on February 14,
2007 (72 FR 7224); and (2) define minor SIP revisions that would be
considered ``nonsubstantive or noncontroversial'' and would require a
30 day comment period but no public hearing.
    Response: This rule revision is designed to provide states some
flexibility in the public hearing process. It is EPA's intent to help
states reduce the cost of holding public hearings that are not attended
by the public, not lengthen the comment period by another 30 days.
While one approach is to announce the public hearing when the proposed
SIP revision is made available for comment and then to cancel the
hearing if not requested, another approach the State may take is the
one suggested by the commenter--i.e., the State may allowing the public
the opportunity to request a public hearing in the initial notice and
then (if a hearing is requested) publish a new 30 day notification
(using the same media as the initial 30 day notification) announcing
that a public hearing will be held and providing when and where it will
be held. We are modifying the regulatory text to allow for this
approach.
    EPA agrees with the commenter that the cancellation of a public
hearing without providing some means for the public to determine if the
hearing is cancelled may ``create confusion for the public.'' To avoid
confusion, the State should clearly indicate in the notice how it will
inform the public of whether the hearing will be held. One option is to
announce the cancellation of a hearing in the same medium as the notice
was originally published. Another option would be to include a web
address (Uniform Resource Locator) where a cancellation notice will be
posted and a phone number the public may call to determine if the
public hearing has been cancelled. We are revising the regulatory text
to make clear that the State must notify the public that the hearing
has been cancelled.
    EPA has not used the phrase ``nonsubstantive or noncontroversial''
in its regulation. Rather, we have simply used that term to describe
the types of SIP revisions that states have identified as frequently
not attracting attendance at a public hearing. We see no need to define
that term since it has no regulatory meaning.
    Comment: One commenter requests clarification on whether the
language in 40 CFR 51.102(a) that states ``If no request for a public
hearing is received during the 30-day notification period and the
original notice announcing the 30-day notification period clearly
states that if no request for a public hearing is received the hearing
will be cancelled, then the public hearing may be cancelled.'' is
mandatory language for public hearing notices or permissive language.
    Response: The intent of this language is to allow states the
flexibility in the public hearing process. The State may choose whether
it wishes to hold a public hearing or whether it wishes to hold a
public hearing only if so requested. If it chooses to hold a public
hearing only if requested, then the State should use the language in
italics above (or substantially similar language) to convey that the
hearing will be cancelled if no one requests a hearing.
    Comment: One commenter is concerned that ``while many of the
documents can be provided electronically, there may be occasions where
an exhibit or other document may not lend itself to an electronic
format.'' The commenter requests that a provision be added to the rule
that will allow a State to submit five hard copies of any portion of
the submittal that cannot be submitted electronically and, for the
remainder of the submittal,

submit two hard copies and an electronic copy.
    Response: We believe that the rule already provides this
flexibility. The rule as written allows for the State to submit either
``five hard copies or at least two hard copies with an electronic
version of the hard copy.'' The rule also allows the State in
conjunction with the Regional Office (in the statement ``unless
otherwise agreed to by the State and Regional Office'') to resolve
unique situations as they arise.
    Comment: One commenter recommends the rule include a requirement
for notifying the public when a public hearing will be cancelled and
how the public will be notified of the cancellation.
    Response: EPA agrees with commenter and has revised the rule to
address this concern.
    Comment: Several commenters are not sure how the revised 40 CFR
51.102(a) is supposed to work and state ``Under both the existing and
proposed rule, the comment period consists of 30-days, with the hearing
held on the 30th day. As proposed, whether or not the State would
actually hold a hearing would not be known by the State until the
actual day of the hearing, day 30. How will the public know whether or
not a hearing is being held? How would the State notify the public? The
public would have no advance notice in which to plan to attend or not
and the State would have no time in which to inform the public, whether
through the current requirement for a newspaper advertisement, or
through other electronic means.'' Commenters recommend revising section
(a) to read ``Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of
this section and within the 30-day notification period as required by
paragraph (e) of this section, States must provide notice, provide the
opportunity to submit written comments and allow the public the
opportunity to request a public hearing.'' A new section (d) was
suggested to read ``No hearing will be required for any plan change if
the change is identified by the State to consist of minor or
administrative revisions that are likely to be of little public
interest. As required in paragraph (a) of the proposal, the State must
provide the public the opportunity to request a public hearing in the
notice announcing the 30-day notification period. If the State provides
the public the opportunity to request a public hearing and a request is
received, the State must provide a new 30-day notification period of
the hearing in accordance with paragraph (e) and conduct the hearing at
the end of the notification period. If no request for a public hearing
is received during the initial 30-day notification period and the
original notice announcing the 30-day notification period clearly
states that if no request for a public hearing is received there will
be no hearing, then no public hearing will be conducted.''
    Response: This rule revision is designed to provide states
flexibility in the public hearing process. Under this rule states have
several options they can employ in the public hearing process. Here are
a few examples:
    1. Choose to hold a public hearing and provide the public with the
meeting logistics (when and where) in the 30-day notification. States
may choose to use this option because they believe the revision(s) will
draw public interest and therefore plan to hold a public hearing.
    2. Provide the public the opportunity to request a hearing. States
may choose to use this option for revisions they believe will not
elicit public interest. For example, in the initial notice, the State
would include a scheduled public hearing 35 days from the date of the
notice and inform the public that if a hearing is not requested by the
end of the 30th day, the public hearing will be cancelled. If a hearing
is not requested the State would post on the 31st day a cancellation
notice in the manner announced at the time of the initial notice (e.g.,
in a newspaper, the State Register, or on a Web site notifying the
public that the hearing was cancelled).
    3. Publish a 30-day notice to inform the public of revisions to the
SIP and requiring that any request for a public hearing must be
submitted within 30-days. If a public hearing is requested, the State
would publish a new notice providing 30-days notice of the time and
place of the public hearing.
    We are not adopting the specific language suggested by the
commenter. We believe the regulatory language would allow the State to
elect to use any of the options noted above.
    EPA is not creating an exception to the public hearing requirement
for ``minor or administrative revisions'' in this rule. Such a line-
drawing exercise is difficult, as some things that may appear minor or
administrative to one person may have more significant implications
than initially believed or may not be minor or insignificant to another
person. Providing the opportunity for a public hearing for all changes
will allow the public (rather than the State) to decide which revisions
are minor and administrative and on which members of the public do not
need a public hearing and which revisions members of the public believe
may have more significance and for which they need a public forum with
the State Agency.
    Comment: Several commenters objected to the revised language in 40
CFR 51.103(b) regarding requests for preliminary review of plans by
EPA. The commenter states: ``Currently, we make requests for
preliminary review by email with a link to the State Web site where the
notice and proposal are located. Requiring additional paper copies goes
directly against the intent of this regulatory action. While we
understand the need to maintain more formal documentation for the
official submittal in paragraph (a), the same requirements for
paragraph (b) do not make sense for an optional, voluntary action.''
and recommends revising the language to include ``or an entirely
electronic submittal.''
    Response: As an initial matter, the current rule requires that
requests be accompanied by five hard copies . Thus, the commenter
incorrectly indicates that the EPA's proposed rule is adding
constraints. To the contrary, the regulatory language would provide
flexibility by allowing requests to ``be accompanied by five hard
copies or at least two hard copies with an electronic version of the
hard copy'' and providing latitude with the clause ``unless otherwise
agreed to by the State and Regional Office.'' This provision would
allow the State and the Regional Office to agree to an entirely
electronic submittal, where appropriate, but retains the requirement
for hard copy submissions where no such agreement is reached.
    Comment: Several commenters requested that Section 2.1(d) of
Appendix V of Part 51--Criteria for Determining the Completeness of
Plan Submissions, be revised because ``Computer terminology comes and
goes, not all systems are entirely compatible, and whatever is
specified in the CFR now will likely need to be revisited.'' Commenters
recommended the language to read ``If the State submits an electronic
copy, it must be an exact duplicate of the hard copy, including signed
documents, with changes indicated. The specific electronic formats to
be used are to be agreed upon by the State and the Regional Office.
Files need to be submitted in manageable amounts (e.g., a file for each
section or chapter, depending on size, and separate files for each
distinct document) as agreed to by the State and Regional Office.''
    Response: EPA agrees with the commenters that computer technology
will continue to change, however, revising the language is not needed.
EPA believes it has provided enough

latitude with the clause ``unless otherwise agreed to by the State and
Regional Office'' to address future changes in media.
    Comment: Several commenters also encourage EPA to provide the same
flexibility for 111(d)/129 plans.
    Response: The regulatory provisions addressed in the proposed rule
concern SIP submissions and thus are not the appropriate place to
address 111(d)/129 plans. EPA will take the commenter's request under
advisement and may consider similar treatment for 111(d)/129 plans may
be considered at a later time.
    Comment: The commenter requests ``that the requirements for
reasonable public notice, as defined in 40 CFR 51.102(d), be
strengthened to ensure that the public, and in particular the
`regulated community,' are made aware of the proposed plan or plan
revision and associated opportunity to submit comments and/or request a
public hearing.'' The commenter believes ``that when a proposed plan or
plan revision involves a control measure that the `regulated community'
is responsible for implementing, states should be required to
explicitly communicate with the affected regulated community to ensure
that they are aware of the proposed plan or plan revision and the
associated opportunity to submit comments and/or request a public
hearing.'' Also, the commenter states that ``the `prominent
advertisement' requirement has typically been met by placing a notice
of the public hearing in the State register. Such notices may satisfy
the State's requirements for public notice, but in our view they fall
far short of reasonable public notice if the proposed plan or plan
revision involves a control measure that a regulated community is
responsible for implementing.'' The commenter wants the following
statement added to 40 CFR 51.102(d) ``Notification directly to any
regulated community responsible for implementing a control measure
included in the proposed plan or plan revision.''
    Response: While we agree that ensuring that the regulated community
is aware of planning obligations that may affect them, the
recommendation is not practicable. Moreover, our experience is that the
states attempt to diligently work with the regulated community (and all
stakeholders) when developing SIPs. As and initial matter, the
recommendation is not practical because it is unclear. Would it impose
a burden on the State to contact and provide direct notification to any
source that may potentially be affected by regulation? If so, we think
the burden would be impossible for the State to meet in many
circumstances. Some source categories could include 100's or 1000's of
sources and the State would not be able to identify all such sources.
Additionally, there may be issues of whom the State is required to
notify. For example, if a State made changes to its inspection and
maintenance program, would it be obligated to provide direct
notification to every owner of a car registered on the State? Also,
there may be countless service stations that perform these tests. Would
the State be required to maintain a list of every such station? As
noted, we believe States generally work with the regulated community in
developing programs that may affect them. Typically, such work is a
necessary component of developing control strategies since States must
understand how sources operate, including the types of equipment they
use, and what are the types and amount of emissions. We continue to
encourage States to improve outreach efforts in developing SIPs and we
believe the use of the internet has provided greater public access to
information.
    Comment: One commenter requests that EPA change the requirement for
two hard copies to one hard copy.
    Response: We believe a change is unnecessary because the rule
provides flexibility for the State and Regional Office to agree on one
hard copy and an electronic copy, if they determine that is
appropriate.

III. Final Action

    EPA is finalizing the revisions as stated in the proposed rule and
has added a provision to capture the cancellation of public hearings,
in order to reduce the possibility of confusion regarding whether a
public hearing will be held. The provision will require States to
include in the initial notice announcing the 30 day notification
period, the method they will use to notify the public of whether the
hearing will be held and to include a phone number where the public can
call to determine if the public hearing has been cancelled.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
is therefore not subject to review under the EO.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
This action modifies the public hearing requirements for SIPs by
clarifying that public hearings need only be held when requested by the
public rather than automatically and provides a less costly alternative
to the pre-existing requirement to submit five printed copies of each
SIP revision. The present action does not establish any new information
collection burden. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedures Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's action on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business that is a
small industrial entity as defined in the U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) size standards. (See 13 CFR 121.); (2) a small
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town,
school district or special district with a population of less than
50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field. This action

modifies the public hearing requirements that apply to states for
purposes of submitting SIPs. It clarifies that public hearings need
only be held when requested by the public rather than automatically and
provides a less costly alternative to the pre-existing requirement to
submit five printed copies of each SIP revision. After considering the
economic impacts of today's action on small entities, I certify that
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation to why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including Tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
    Today's action does not include a Federal mandate within the
meaning of UMRA that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more
in any one year by either State, local, or Tribal governments in the
aggregate or to the private sector, and therefore, is not subject to
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. Also, EPA has
determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements that
might significantly or uniquely affect small governments and therefore,
is not subject to the requirements of sections 203. This action
modifies the public hearing requirements for SIPs by clarifying that
public hearings need only be held when requested by the public rather
than automatically and provides a less costly alternative to the pre-
existing requirement to submit five printed copies of each SIP
revision.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. This action modifies the public
hearing requirements for SIPs by clarifying that public hearings need
only be held when requested by the public rather than automatically and
provides a less costly alternative to the pre-existing requirement to
submit five printed copies of each SIP revision. Thus, Executive Order
13132 does not apply to this rule.

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

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This action does not have
``Tribal implications'' as specified in Executive Order 13175. This
action modifies the public hearing requirements for SIPs by clarifying
that public hearings need only be held when requested by the public
rather than automatically and provides a less costly alternative to the
pre-existing requirement to submit five printed copies of each SIP
revision. The Clean Air Act and the Tribal Authority Rule establish the
relationship of the Federal government and Tribes in developing plans
to attain the NAAQS, and this rule does nothing to modify that
relationship. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. This action
is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically
significant as defined in E.O. 12866, and because the Agency does not
have reason to believe the environmental health risks or safety risks
addressed by this rule present a disproportionate risk to children.
This action modifies the public hearing requirements for SIPs by
clarifying that public hearings need only be held when requested by the
public rather than automatically and provides a less costly alternative
to the pre-existing requirement to submit five printed copies of each
SIP revision.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    As noted in the proposed rule, Section 12(d) of the National

Technology Transfer Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Pub. L. No. 104-
113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards (VCS) in its regulatory activities unless to do so
would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA
directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the
Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS. This action
does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA did not consider
the use of any VCS.

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

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This action modifies the public hearing requirements for
SIPs by clarifying that public hearings need only be held when
requested by the public rather than automatically and provides a less
costly alternative to the pre-existing requirement to submit five
printed copies of each SIP revision.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule 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). This action will be effective August 15, 2007.

L. 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 District of Columbia Circuit by September 14, 2007. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review must be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. See CAA Section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 51 and 52

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Transportation, Volatile
organic compounds.

    Dated: July 10, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
Accordingly, 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 are amended as follows:

PART 51--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

0
2. Section 51.102 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory
text and (f) to read as follows:

Sec.  51.102  Public hearings.

    (a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (c) of this section
and within the 30 day notification period as required by paragraph (d)
of this section, States must provide notice, provide the opportunity to
submit written comments and allow the public the opportunity to request
a public hearing. The State must hold a public hearing or provide the
public the opportunity to request a public hearing. The notice
announcing the 30 day notification period must include the date, place
and time of the public hearing. If the State provides the public the
opportunity to request a public hearing and a request is received the
State must hold the scheduled hearing or schedule a public hearing (as
required by paragraph (d) of this section). The State may cancel the
public hearing through a method it identifies if no request for a
public hearing is received during the 30 day notification period and
the original notice announcing the 30 day notification period clearly
states: If no request for a public hearing is received the hearing will
be cancelled; identifies the method and time for announcing that the
hearing has been cancelled; and provides a contact phone number for the
public to call to find out if the hearing has been cancelled. These
requirements apply for adoption and submission to EPA of:
* * * * *
    (f) The State must submit with the plan, revision, or schedule, a
certification that the requirements in paragraph (a) and (d) of this
section were met. Such certification will include the date and place of
any public hearing(s) held or that no public hearing was requested
during the 30 day notification period.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 51.103 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  51.103  Submission of plans, preliminary review of plans.

    (a) The State makes an official plan submission to EPA only when
the submission conforms to the requirements of appendix V to this part,
and the State delivers five hard copies or at least two hard copies
with an electronic version of the hard copy (unless otherwise agreed to
by the State and Regional Office) of the plan to the appropriate
Regional Office, with a letter giving notice of such action. If the
State submits an electronic copy, it must be an exact duplicate of the
hard copy.
    (b) Upon request of a State, the Administrator will provide
preliminary review of a plan or portion thereof submitted in advance of
the date such plan is due. Such requests must be made in writing to the
appropriate Regional Office, must indicate changes (such as, redline/
strikethrough) to the existing approved plan, where applicable and must
be accompanied by five hard copies or at least two hard copies with an
electronic version of the hard copy (unless otherwise agreed to by the
State and Regional Office).

Requests for preliminary review do not relieve a State of the
responsibility of adopting and submitting plans in accordance with
prescribed due dates.

0
4. Appendix V to Part 51 is amended by revising paragraphs (d) and (g)
under Section 2.1 to read as follows:

Appendix V of Part 51--Criteria for Determining the Completeness of
Plan Submissions

* * * * *
    2.1. * * *
    (d) A copy of the actual regulation, or document submitted for
approval and incorporation by reference into the plan, including
indication of the changes made (such as, redline/strikethrough) to the
existing approved plan, where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy
of the official State regulation/document signed, stamped and dated by
the appropriate State official indicating that it is fully enforceable
by the State. The effective date of the regulation/document shall,
whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself. If the State
submits an electronic copy, it must be an exact duplicate of the hard
copy with changes indicated, signed documents need to be in portable
document format, rules need to be in text format and files need to be
submitted in manageable amounts (e.g., a file for each section or
chapter, depending on size, and separate files for each distinct
document) unless otherwise agreed to by the State and Regional Office.
* * * * *
    (g) Certification that public hearing(s) were held in accordance
with the information provided in the public notice and the State's laws
and constitution, if applicable and consistent with the public hearing
requirements in 40 CFR 51.102.
* * * * *

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
6. Section 52.02 is amended by revising paragraphs (d)(2)(iii),
(d)(2)(iv), (d)(2)(vii), and (d)(2)(viii) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.02  Introduction.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) Delaware, District of Columbia, Pennsylvania, Maryland,
Virginia, and West Virginia. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 3,
1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029.
    (iv) Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30303.
* * * * *
    (vii) Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, KS
66101.
    (viii) Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and
Wyoming. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop
Street, Denver, CO 80202-1129.
* * * * *
    7. Section 52.16 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(3), (b)(4),
(b)(7) and (b)(8) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.16  Submission to Administrator.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) Delaware, District of Columbia, Pennsylvania, Maryland,
Virginia, and West Virginia. EPA Region 3, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029.
    (4) Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee. EPA Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30303.
* * * * *
    (7) Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. EPA Region 7, 901 North
5th Street, Kansas City, KS 66101.
    (8) Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and
Wyoming. EPA, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202-1129.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-13716 Filed 7-13-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P