[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 236 (Friday, December 7, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72970-72975]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29688]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 122

[EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0195; FRL-9758-9]
RIN 2040-AF42

Revisions to Stormwater Regulations To Clarify That an NPDES
Permit Is Not Required for Stormwater Discharges From Logging Roads

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is revising its Phase I stormwater regulations to
clarify that stormwater discharges from logging roads do not constitute
stormwater discharges associated with industrial activity and that a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is not
required for these stormwater discharges.

DATES: This final rule is effective on January 7, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The record for this rulemaking is available for inspection
and copying at the Water Docket, located at the EPA Docket Center (EPA/
DC), EPA West 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. The
record is also available via the EPA Dockets at http://www.regulations.gov under docket number EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0195.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on this
notice, you may contact Jeremy Bauer, EPA Headquarters, Office of
Water, Office of Wastewater Management via email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Applicability

    This action does not impose requirements on any entity. The action
clarifies the status of stormwater discharges from logging roads. Those
with an interest in such discharges may be interested in this action.
If you have questions regarding the applicability of this rule, consult
the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.

B. Copies of This Document and Other Information

    This document is available for download at http://www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/forestroads or under docket EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0195.

II. Background

A. Purpose

    The EPA is promulgating this final rule to address the stormwater
discharges identified under Northwest Environmental Defense Center v.
Brown, 640 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2011) (NEDC).
    The final rule clarifies that, for the purposes of assessing
whether stormwater discharges are ``associated with industrial
activity,'' the only facilities under SIC code 2411 that are
``industrial'' are: rock crushing, gravel washing, log sorting, and log
storage. This clarifies, contrary to the Ninth Circuit's decision in
NEDC, that discharges of stormwater from silviculture facilities other
than the four specifically named silviculture facilities identified
above do not require an NPDES permit.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This rulemaking responds to the uncertainty created by the
Ninth Circuit's holding in NEDC that certain channeled discharges of
stormwater from logging roads constitute point source discharges,
bringing them within the Section 402 NPDES permitting framework.
This final rule, by clarifying what constitutes a discharge
``associated with industrial activity,'' makes clear that such
discharges do not require NPDES permits even if they are point
source discharges. We note that the Supreme Court has granted review
of the NEDC case for the October 2012 term.

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

B. Statutory Authority and Regulatory History

    The objective of the Clean Water Act is to restore and maintain the
chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters. 33
U.S.C. 1251(a). To that end, the Act provides that the discharge of any
pollutant by any person shall be unlawful, except in compliance with
other provisions of the statute. Generally, the Act provides for a
permit program for the addition to waters of the United States of a
pollutant from a point source, defined as ``any discernible, confined
and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch,
channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling
stock, concentrated animal feeding operation, or vessel or other
floating craft, from which pollutants are or may be discharged.'' 33
U.S.C. 1362(14). In 1987 Congress amended the Clean Water Act by adding
section 402(p), that created a temporary moratorium on NPDES permits
for stormwater discharges, except for certain listed categories, and
gave the EPA discretion to designate other stormwater discharges for
regulation. 33 U.S.C. 1342(p).
    For the initial phase, section 402(p)(1) created a temporary
moratorium on NPDES permits for stormwater discharges from point
sources except for those listed in section 402(p)(2), which includes
discharges for which a permit had already been issued; discharges from
large municipal separate storm sewer systems; and ``industrial
discharges.'' Congress did not define industrial discharges, allowing
the EPA to define the term. For subsequent phases, section 402(p)(5)
directs the EPA to conduct studies, in consultation with the states,
for ``identifying those stormwater discharges or classes of stormwater
discharges for which permits are not required''; ``determining to the
maximum extent practicable, the nature and extent of pollutants in such
discharges''; and ``establishing procedures and methods to control
stormwater discharges to the extent necessary to mitigate impacts on
water quality.'' Section 402(p)(6) directs the Agency to issue
regulations, in consultation with state and local officials, based on
such studies. The section allows the EPA flexibility in issuing
regulations to address designated stormwater discharges where
appropriate and does not require the use of NPDES permits or any
specific regulatory approach. Specifically, the section states that the
regulations ``shall establish priorities, establish requirements for
state stormwater management programs, and establish expeditious
deadlines'' and may include ``performance standards, guidelines,
guidance, and management practices and treatment requirements, as
appropriate.'' 33 U.S.C. 1342(p)(6). This flexibility is unique to
stormwater discharges and is different than the treatment of stormwater
discharges listed in section 402(p)(2)(B) of the Act, which requires a
permit for a stormwater discharge ``associated with industrial
activity.''
    Prior to the 1987 Amendments, there were numerous questions
regarding the appropriate means of regulating stormwater discharges
within the NPDES program due to the water quality impacts of
stormwater, the variable nature of stormwater, the large number of
stormwater discharges, and the limited resources of permitting
agencies. The EPA undertook numerous regulatory actions, which resulted
in extensive litigation, in an attempt to address these unique
discharges.
    The EPA's Silvicultural Rule (40 CFR 122.27) predates the 1987
amendments to the Clean Water Act that created section 402(p) for
stormwater controls. The Agency defined silvicultural point source as
part of the Silvicultural Rule to specify which silvicultural
discharges were to be included in the NPDES program. The rule defines
silvicultural point source to mean any ``discernible, confined and
discrete conveyance related to rock crushing, gravel washing, log
sorting, or log storage facilities which are operated in connection
with silvicultural activities and from which pollutants are discharged
into waters of the United States'' and further explains that ``the term
does not include non-point source silvicultural activities such as
nursery operations, site preparation, reforestation and subsequent
cultural treatment, thinning, prescribed burning, pest and fire
control, harvesting operations, surface drainage, or road construction
and maintenance from which there is natural runoff.''
    In 1990, following the 1987 amendments that directed the Agency to
develop regulations requiring permits for large municipal separate
storm sewer systems and stormwater ``discharges associated with
industrial activity,'' the EPA promulgated the Phase I stormwater
regulations. (55 FR 47990, November 16, 1990). The EPA defined in the
Phase I regulations ``storm water discharge associated with industrial
activity'' which is not defined by the Act. In describing the scope of
the term ``associated with industrial activity,'' several members of
Congress explained in the legislative history that the term applied if
a discharge was ``directly related to manufacturing, processing or raw
materials storage areas at an industrial plant.'' (Vol. 132 Cong. Rec.
H10932, H10936 (daily ed. October 15, 1986); Vol. 133 Cong. Rec. H176
(daily ed. January 8, 1987)). The Phase I rule clarified the regulatory
definition of ``associated with industrial activity'' by adopting the
language used in the legislative history and supplementing it with a
description of various types of areas (e.g., material handling sites,
sites used for the storage and maintenance of material handling
equipment, etc.) that are directly related to an industrial process and
to industrial facilities identified by the EPA. The supplemental
language in the Phase I rule also includes the term ``immediate access
road.'' The EPA considers ``immediate access roads'' to refer to roads
which are exclusively or primarily dedicated for use by the industrial
facility. See 55 FR 47990, 48009 (Nov. 16, 1990). These ``immediate
access roads'' do not include public access roads that are state,
county, or federal roads such as highways or Bureau of Land Management
roads which happen to be used by the facility. See id. The Phase I
regulation defines the term ``storm water discharge associated with
industrial activity'' to include stormwater discharges from facilities
identified in the rule by standard industrial classification or ``SIC''
code at 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14). The Phase I regulation included in the
definition of that term SIC code 24 (Lumber and Wood Products) which
includes 2411 (logging), but the Agency also had specified in the Phase
I rule that the term does not include discharges from facilities or
activities excluded from the NPDES program under other parts of the
EPA's regulations, including the Silvicultural Rule. As discussed
above, the EPA had previously specified under the Silvicultural Rule
which silvicultural discharges were to be included in the NPDES program
(40 CFR 122.27). The EPA intended to regulate those same
``silvicultural point source[s]'' under the Phase I rule (i.e., rock
crushing, gravel washing, log sorting, and log storage facilities) and
to exclude from the Phase I regulation stormwater runoff from other
silvicultural activities. For the ``silvicultural point source[s]''
(i.e., rock crushing, gravel washing, log sorting, and log storage
facilities) regulated

under the Phase I rule, the term ``storm water discharge associated
with industrial activity'' includes ``immediate access roads'' (40 CFR
122.26(b)(14)(ii)). Unlike ``immediate access roads'' associated with
industrial facilities, many logging roads have multiple uses, including
recreation and general transportation, and commonly extend over long
distances (i.e.; may not provide ``immediate access'' to an industrial
site). The intent of the EPA in this rulemaking is that the NPDES
program requirements be implemented with regard to ``immediate access
roads'' in the same way they were implemented prior to the decision by
the Ninth Circuit.
    In developing the second phase of stormwater regulations, the EPA
submitted to Congress in March 1995 a report that presented the nature
of stormwater discharges from municipal and industrial facilities that
were not already regulated under the Phase I regulations (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. 1995. Storm Water
Discharges Potentially Addressed by Phase II of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System Storm Water Program: Report to Congress.
Washington, DC. EPA 833-K-94-002). On December 8, 1999, the EPA
published the Phase II stormwater regulations to address stormwater
discharges from small municipal separate storm sewer systems and
construction sites that disturb one to five acres. (64 FR 68722,
December 8, 1999). The EPA retains the authority to designate
additional stormwater discharges for regulation at a later date under
either CWA section 402(p)(2)(E) or 402(p)(6).
    The Phase II regulations for stormwater controls were challenged in
Environmental Defense Center v. US EPA, 344 F.3d 832 (9th Cir. 2003)
(EDC v. EPA). In that case, petitioners contended that the EPA
arbitrarily failed to regulate discharges from forest roads under the
Phase II rule. The court held that the EPA failed to consider the
petitioners' comments and remanded the issue to the EPA ``so that it
may consider in an appropriate proceeding Petitioner's contention that
Sec.  402(p)(6) requires the EPA to regulate forest roads. The EPA may
then either accept Petitioners' arguments in whole or in part, or
reject them on the basis of valid reasons that are adequately set forth
to permit judicial review.'' Id. at 863.
    More recently, in Northwest Environmental Defense Center v. Brown,
640 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2011) (NEDC), a citizen suit was filed alleging
violations of the Clean Water Act for discharging stormwater from
ditches alongside two logging roads in state forests without a permit.
The court held that because the stormwater runoff from the two roads in
question is collected by and then discharged from a system of ditches,
culverts and channels, there was a point source discharge of industrial
stormwater for which an NPDES permit is required. As discussed above,
the Agency specified in the Phase I rule that the term ``storm water
discharge associated with industrial activity'' does not include
discharges from facilities or activities excluded from the NPDES
program under other parts of the EPA's regulations, including the
aforementioned Silvicultural Rule. The EPA intends through this
regulation to more clearly limit Phase I applicability to only those
silvicultural facilities that are ``rock crushing, gravel washing, log
sorting, and log storage facilities.''
    In response to the partial remand under Environmental Defense
Center, Inc. (EDC) v. US EPA, 344 F.3d 832 (9th Cir. 2003), the Agency
continues to review available information on the water-quality impacts
of stormwater discharges from forest roads, which include logging roads
as discussed above, as well as existing practices to control those
discharges and is considering a range of options to address such
discharges, which could include designating a subset of stormwater
discharges from forest roads for regulation under the Agency's section
402(p) rulemaking authority. The EPA believes that the broad range of
flexible approaches under section 402(p)(6) may be well suited to
address the complexity of forest road ownership, management, and use.
    In the interim, the EPA notes that Congress has directed that
permits are not required for stormwater discharges for logging roads.
Under the continuing resolution passed in September, 2012, until March
27, 2013, the Administrator may not require an NPDES permit or directly
or indirectly require any state to require a permit, for discharges of
stormwater runoff from roads, the construction, use, or maintenance of
which are associated with silvicultural activities.

III. EPA's Proposed Revisions and Public Comments Received on Proposed
Rule

A. Proposed Revisions

    The EPA proposed to revise 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(ii) to clarify that
for the purposes of defining stormwater discharges associated with
industrial activity, the only activities under SIC code 2411 that are
``industrial'' are rock crushing, gravel washing, log sorting, and log
storage. This revision does not remove any existing exemptions. Though
the existing language in 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(ii) excepts SIC code
2434, wood kitchen cabinets, the wood kitchen cabinets category remains
covered in a separate subsection. See id. at 122.26(b)(14)(xi) (listing
``Facilities covered under Standard Industrial Classifications 20, 21,
22, 23, 2434 * * *'' as engaging in industrial activity for purposes of
the industrial stormwater regulations).

B. Public Comments

    The EPA received 85 comment letters on its ``Notice of Proposed
Revisions to Stormwater Regulations to Clarify That an NPDES Permit is
not Required for Stormwater Discharges From Logging Roads'' (77 FR
53834, September 4, 2012). The Agency had previously announced its plan
to propose these revisions in an earlier notice, ``Notice of Intent to
Revise Stormwater Regulations To Specify That an NPDES Permit is Not
Required for Stormwater Discharges From Logging Roads and To Seek
Comment on Approaches for Addressing Water Quality Impacts From Forest
Road Discharges'' (77 FR 30473, May 23, 2012). While the EPA has
reviewed and is considering the comments received in response to the
May 23 Notice of Intent, the Agency explained in its September 4
proposal that the EPA is not developing responses to those comments as
part of this rulemaking.
    The EPA has reviewed and considered all of the comments received on
the proposed revisions. Many commenters expressed support for the EPA's
proposal. Most agreed with the objective to clarify the applicability
of Phase I stormwater regulations but some suggested alternate language
or approaches to reach that objective. For example, some suggested that
the EPA simply state in its regulations that stormwater discharges from
logging roads do not require a NPDES permit. Others recommended that
the EPA assert that logging roads are nonpoint sources and therefore
would not require a NPDES permit.
    The EPA believes that the final language clarifies the
applicability of Phase I stormwater regulations to stormwater
discharges from logging roads. The final language indicates explicitly
which facilities are included in the definition of stormwater
discharges ``associated with industrial activity'' (i.e., ``Facilities
classified within Standard Industrial Classification 24, Industry Group
241

that are rock crushing, gravel washing, log sorting, or log storage
facilities operated in connection with silvicultural activities'').
Moreover, the final language further explains that ``not included are
all other types of silvicultural facilities.''
    Many commenters suggested that the EPA delay finalizing the rule
until after the Supreme Court rules on Decker v. Northwest
Environmental Defense Center, No. 11-388, and Georgia-Pacific West v.
Northwest Environmental Defense Center, No. 11-347. Some suggested that
the Agency should have sought relief from the Supreme Court or
Congress. The EPA disagrees with these commenters because today's
action ends any uncertainty created by the Ninth Circuit's holding in
NEDC administratively by clarifying what constitutes a discharge
``associated with industrial activity'' in connection with
silvicultural activities. By moving to finalize this rule
expeditiously, the EPA is providing the regulatory certainty needed in
the wake of the Ninth Circuit's decision and is reaffirming the EPA's
long-standing regulatory position regarding the applicability of
stormwater regulations to logging roads. In doing so, this final rule
cancels out any on-the-ground impact of the Ninth Circuit's decision.
Further, the EPA actions are consistent with amicus curiae briefs filed
by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) on May 24 and again on
September 4, which described to the public and to the Supreme Court the
administrative steps that the EPA would take to clarify
``expeditiously'' that an NPDES permit is not required for stormwater
discharges from logging roads.
    Some commenters disagreed with the EPA's proposal, asserting that
at least a subset of stormwater discharges from logging roads is truly
industrial in nature and that those discharges should require NPDES
permits. The EPA clarifies the applicability of Phase I stormwater
regulations to stormwater discharges from logging roads and the
Agency's rationale in section II.B of this preamble. As the EPA notes,
the Agency did not intend logging roads themselves to be regulated as
industrial facilities and its view has not changed since EPA first
issued the Phase I stormwater rule. The EPA is revising that rule to
clarify the Agency's original intent.
    Some commenters asserted that the water quality impacts of
stormwater discharges from logging roads and other forest roads are
well-documented and suggested that the Agency should regulate them.
Other commenters pointed to existing programs and suggested that a
national regulation is unnecessary. Some asserted that existing state,
federal, and tribal programs are insufficient to protect water quality.
Others commented that the Agency already has all of the information it
needs in order to regulate stormwater discharges from forest roads and
suggested that if information gaps remain, the Agency should specify
what information is needed and indicate on what schedule that
information will be collected.
    The EPA is not proposing new regulations for stormwater discharges
from forest roads, including logging roads, at this time. While the EPA
has not developed a specific schedule for addressing stormwater
discharges from forest roads, the Agency notes that, in response to the
partial remand under EDC v. US EPA, the Agency continues to review
available information on the water quality impacts of stormwater
discharges from forest roads, which include logging roads, as well as
existing practices to control those discharges and is considering a
range of options to address such discharges, which could include
designating a subset of stormwater discharges from forest roads for
regulation under the Agency's section 402(p) rulemaking authority. The
EPA believes that the broad range of flexible approaches under section
402(p)(6) may be well-suited to address the complexity of forest road
ownership, management, and use.

IV. Final Rule

    The EPA has made no revisions to the proposed rule. The EPA is
revising 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(ii) to clarify that for the purposes of
defining stormwater discharges associated with industrial activity, the
only activities under SIC code 2411 that are ``industrial'' are rock
crushing, gravel washing, log sorting, and log storage. This revision
does not remove any existing exemptions. Though the existing language
in 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(ii) excepts SIC code 2434, wood kitchen
cabinets, the wood kitchen cabinets category remains covered in a
separate subsection. See id. at 122.26(b)(14)(xi) (listing ``Facilities
covered under Standard Industrial Classifications 20, 21, 22, 23, 2434
* * *'' as engaging in industrial activity for purposes of the
industrial stormwater regulations.)
    As discussed in this preamble, the EPA did not intend logging roads
themselves to be regulated as industrial facilities, but, in light of
NEDC, the EPA is modifying 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14) to clarify the Agency's
intent. The EPA believes that stormwater discharges from forest roads,
including logging roads, should be evaluated under section 402(p)(6) of
the Clean Water Act because the section allows for a broad range of
flexible approaches, including non-permitting approaches, that may be
better suited to address the complexity of forest road ownership,
management, and use.

V. Economic Impact

    The final rule clarifies existing regulations and does not impose
new regulatory requirements. As a result this action has no economic,
public health, or environmental impacts.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Review

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is a ``significant regulatory action.'' Accordingly, the EPA
submitted this action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011) and any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been
documented in the docket for this action.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
as it serves only to clarify existing regulations. However, the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously approved the information
collection requirements contained in the existing regulations (40 CFR
122.26) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2040-0004. The OMB
control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR
part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    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
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that 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 rule on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business ``as defined by the Small
Business Administration's (SBA)

regulations at 13 CFR 121.201;'' (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.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule
will not impose any requirements on small entities. Rather, the rule
clarifies that stormwater discharges from logging roads do not
constitute stormwater discharges associated with industrial activity
and that an NPDES permit is not required for these stormwater
discharges.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action contains no federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for state, local, or tribal governments or the private
sector. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or
tribal governments or the private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. This action
clarifies existing regulations and has no economic impact. Thus, it
does 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 (64 FR 43255, November
2, 1999).

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    The action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it is not economically significant as defined
in Executive Order 12866. Moreover, this action clarifies existing
regulations and has no economic, public health, or environmental
impacts.

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

    The action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Additionally, the change does not
involve the installation of treatment or other components that use a
measurable amount of energy.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards 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
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs the EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the EPA decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    The action clarifies existing regulations and makes no change to
existing standards.

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.
Agencies must do this by identifying and addressing as appropriate any
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.
    The EPA has determined that this action does 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. The action clarifies existing regulations and has no
economic, public health, or environmental impacts.

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. 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 rule will be effective January 7, 2013.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 122

    Environmental protection, Water pollution control.

    Dated: November 30, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 122 is amended
as follows:

PART 122--EPA ADMINISTERED PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT
DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM

0
1. The authority citation for part 122 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

Subpart B--Permit Application and Special NPDES Program
Requirements

0
2. Section 122.26 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(14)(ii) to read
as follows:

Sec.  122.26  Storm water discharges (applicable to State NPDES
programs, see Sec.  123.25).

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (14) * * *
    (ii) Facilities classified within Standard Industrial
Classification 24, Industry Group 241 that are rock crushing, gravel
washing, log sorting, or log storage facilities operated in connection
with silvicultural activities defined in 40 CFR 122.27(b)(2)-(3) and
Industry Groups 242 through 249; 26 (except 265 and 267), 28 (except
283), 29, 311, 32 (except 323), 33, 3441, 373;

(not included are all other types of silviculture facilities);
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-29688 Filed 12-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 19, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 87668-87670]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27932]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Part 744

[Docket No.<PHONE_NUMBER>]
RIN 0694-AJ50

Removals From the Unverified List

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) is amending the
Export Administration Regulations (EAR) by removing four persons, all
under the destination of People's Republic of China (China), from the
UVL because BIS was able to verify their bona fides.

DATES: This rule is effective: December 15, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin J. Kurland, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Export Enforcement, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email at
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The UVL, found in supplement no. 6 to part 744 of the EAR (15 CFR
parts 730-774), contains the names and addresses of foreign persons who
are or have been parties to a transaction, as described in Sec.  748.5
of the EAR, involving the export, reexport, or transfer (in-country) of
items subject to the EAR. These foreign persons are added to the UVL
because BIS or federal officials acting on BIS's behalf were unable to
verify their bona fides (i.e., legitimacy and reliability relating to
the end-use and end user of items subject to the EAR) through an end-
use check. These checks, such as a pre-license check (PLC) or a post-
shipment verification (PSV), cannot be completed satisfactorily for
reasons outside the U.S. Government's control.
    There are any number of reasons why these checks cannot be
completed to the satisfaction of the U.S. Government. Section
744.15(c)(1) of the EAR provides illustrative examples of those
circumstances, including reasons unrelated to the cooperation of the
foreign party subject to the end-use check. Such examples include: (i)
During the conduct of an end-use check, the subject of the check is
unable to demonstrate the disposition of items subject to the EAR; (ii)
The existence or authenticity of the subject of an end-use check cannot
be verified (e.g., the subject of the check cannot be located or
contacted); (iii) Lack of cooperation by the host government authority
prevents an end-use check from being conducted.
    BIS's inability to confirm the bona fides of foreign persons
subject to end-use checks raises concerns about the suitability of such
persons as participants in future exports, reexports, or transfers (in-
country) of items subject to the EAR; it also indicates a risk that
such items may be diverted to prohibited end uses and/or end users.
Under such circumstances, there may not be sufficient information to
add the foreign person at issue to the Entity List under Sec.  744.11
of the EAR. Therefore, BIS may add the foreign person to the UVL.
    As provided in Sec.  740.2(a)(17) of the EAR, the use of license
exceptions for exports, reexports, and transfers (in-country) involving
a party or parties to the transaction who are listed on the UVL is
suspended. Additionally, under Sec.  744.15(b) of the EAR, there is a
requirement for exporters, reexporters, and transferors to obtain (and
maintain a record of) a UVL statement from a party or parties to the
transaction who are listed on the UVL before proceeding with exports,
reexports, and transfers (in-country) to such persons, when the
exports, reexports and transfers (in-country) are not subject to a
license requirement. Finally, pursuant to Sec.  758.1(b)(8), Electronic
Export Information (EEI) must be filed in the Automated Export System
(AES) for all exports of tangible items subject to the EAR where any
party to the transaction, as described in Sec.  748.5(d) through (f),
is listed on the UVL.
    Requests for the removal of a UVL entry must be made in accordance
with Sec.  744.15(d) of the EAR. Decisions regarding the removal or
modification of a UVL entry will be made by the Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Export Enforcement, based on a demonstration by the
listed person of their bona fides.

Removals From the UVL

    This final rule removes four persons from the UVL because BIS was
able to verify their bona fides. This rule removes Chengde Oscillator
Electronic Technology Co., China National Erzhong Group, Ningbo III
Lasers Technology Co., Ltd., and Xinjiang East Hope New Energy Company
Ltd., all under the destination of China. BIS is removing these four
persons pursuant to Sec.  744.15(c)(2) of the EAR.

Rulemaking Requirements

Executive Order Requirements

    Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distribute impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This final rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866.
    This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications as
that term is defined under Executive Order 13132.

Paperwork Reduction Act Requirements

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required
to respond to, nor is subject to a penalty for failure to comply with,
a collection of information, subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA), unless
that collection of information displays a currently valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number.
    The UVL additions contain collections of information approved by
OMB under the following control numbers:

 OMB Control Number 0694-0088--Simple Network Application
Process and Multipurpose Application Form
 OMB Control Number 0694-0122--Miscellaneous Licensing
Responsibilities and Enforcement
 OMB Control Number 0694-0134--Entity List and Unverified List
Requests,
 OMB Control Number 0694-0137--License Exemptions and
Exclusions.

    BIS believes that the overall increases in burdens and costs will
be minimal and will fall within the already approved amounts for these
existing collections. Additional information regarding these
collections of information--including all background materials--can be
found at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain by using the search
function to enter either the title of the collection or the OMB Control
Number.

Administrative Procedure Act and Regulatory Flexibility Act
Requirements

    Pursuant to Section 1762 of ECRA (50 U.S.C. 4821), this action is
exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553)
requirements for notice of proposed rulemaking and opportunity for
public participation.
    Further, no other law requires notice of proposed rulemaking or
opportunity for public comment for this final rule. Because a notice of
proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment are not
required under the Administrative Procedure Act or by any other law,
the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601 et seq.) are not applicable.

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 744

    Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Terrorism.

    Accordingly, part 744 of the Export Administration Regulations (15
CFR parts 730 through 774) is amended as follows:

PART 744--END-USE AND END-USER CONTROLS

0
1. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 744 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  50 U.S.C. 4801-4852; 50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.; 50
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22
U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3 CFR,
1978 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p.
608; E.O. 12938, 59 FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994

Comp., p. 950; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228;
E.O. 13099, 63 FR 45167, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p. 208; E.O. 13222, 66
FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. 13224, 66 FR 49079, 3 CFR,
2001 Comp., p. 786; Notice of November 8, 2022, 87 FR 68015, 3 CFR,
2022 Comp., p. 563; Notice of September 7, 2023, 88 FR 62439
(September 11, 2023).

0
2. Supplement No. 6 to Part 744 is amended under CHINA, PEOPLE'S
REPUBLIC OF, by removing the entries for ``Chengde Oscillator
Electronic Technology Co.'', ``China National Erzhong Group'', ``Ningbo
III Lasers Technology Co., Ltd.'', and ``Xinjiang East Hope New Energy
Company Ltd''.

Thea D. Rozman Kendler,
Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2023-27932 Filed 12-15-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


[Federal Register: May 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 94)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 27512-27514]
[DOCID:fr17my10-35]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2010-0139; FRL-9151-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
District of Columbia; Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve submittals from the District of
Columbia (the District) pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA) sections
110(k)(2) and (3). These submittals address the infrastructure elements
specified in the CAA section 110(a)(2), necessary to implement,
maintain, and enforce the 1997 8-hour ozone and fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. This proposed action is limited to the
following infrastructure elements which were subject to EPA's
completeness findings pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(1) for the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS dated March 27, 2008, and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS dated October 22, 2008: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E),
(F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 16, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2010-0139 by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2010-0139, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
     Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III
address. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2010-0139. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business
hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
Copies of the State submittal are available at the District of Columbia
Department of the Environment, Air Quality Division, 51 N Street, NE.,
Washington, District of Columbia 20002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose Quinto,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by e-
mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS (62
FR 38856) and a new PM2.5 NAAQS (62 FR 38652). The revised
ozone NAAQS is based on 8-hour average concentrations. The 8-hour
averaging period replaced the previous 1-hour averaging period, and the
level of the NAAQS was changed from 0.12 parts per million (ppm) to
0.08 ppm. The new PM2.5 NAAQS established a health-based
standard of 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) based on a
3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and a
24-hour standard of 65 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of the
98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. EPA strengthened the 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS from 65 [micro]g/m\3\ to 35 [micro]g/m\3\ on
October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144).
    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) that provide for the implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of new or revised NAAQS within three years
following the promulgation of such NAAQS. In March of 2004,
Earthjustice initiated a lawsuit against EPA for failure to take action
against States that had not made SIP submissions to meet the
requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour ozone
and PM2.5 NAAQS, i.e., failure to make a ``finding of
failure to submit the required SIP 110(a) SIP elements.'' On March 10,
2005, EPA entered into a Consent Decree with Earthjustice that
obligated EPA to make official findings, in accordance with section
110(k)(1) of the CAA as to whether States have made complete SIP
submissions, pursuant to sections 110(a)(1) and (2), by December 15,
2007 for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and by October 5, 2008 for the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA made completeness findings for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16205) and on October
22, 2008 (73 FR 62902) for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. These
completeness findings did not include findings relating to: (1) Section
110(a)(2)(C) to the extent that such subsection refers to a permit
program as required by Part D Title I of the CAA; (2) section
110(a)(2)(I); and (3) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), which has been addressed
by a separate finding issued by EPA on April 25, 2005 (70 FR 21147).
Therefore, this action does not cover these specific elements.

II. Summary of State Submittal

    The District provided multiple submittals to satisfy section
110(a)(2) requirements, that are the subject of this proposed rule for
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS. The submittals dated December 6, 2007 and January 11, 2008
addressed the 110(a)(2) requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS;
the submittals dated August 25, 2008 and September 22, 2008 addressed
the 110(a)(2) requirements for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS; and the
submittal dated September 21, 2009 addressed the section 110(a)(2)
requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. These submittals
addressed the following infrastructure elements, that are the subject
of this proposed rule: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G),
(H), (J), (K), (L), and (M).
    EPA has analyzed the above identified submissions and is proposing
to make a determination that such submittals meet the requirements of
110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and
(M). A detailed summary of EPA's review of and rationale for approving
the District's submittals may be found in the Technical Support
Document (TSD) for this action which is available on line at http://
www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2010-0139.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the District of Columbia's submittals
that provide the basic program elements specified in the CAA sections
110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and
(M) necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 1997 8-hour ozone
and PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered before taking final action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this 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 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 proposed rule, pertaining to the District of
Columbia's section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements for the 1997
8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS, 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, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: May 5, 2010.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2010-11679 Filed 5-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 9, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13365-13366]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04944]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Hazardous Materials: Notice of Actions on Special Permits

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of actions on special permit applications.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations, notice is hereby given
that the Office of Hazardous Materials Safety has received the
application described herein.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 8, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation Washington, DC 20590.
    Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include
a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Burger, Chief, Office of
Hazardous Materials Safety General Approvals and Permits Branch,
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department
of Transportation, East Building, PHH-13, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
Southeast, Washington, DC 20590-0001,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of the applications are available for
inspection in the Records Center, East Building, PHH-13, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue Southeast, Washington DC.
    This notice of receipt of applications for special permit is
published in accordance with part 107 of the Federal hazardous
materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5117(b); 49 CFR 1.53(b)).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 02, 2022.
Donald P. Burger,
Chief, General Approvals and Permits Branch.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Regulation(s)
    Application No.            Applicant               affected          Nature of the special permits thereof
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Special Permits Data--Granted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10511-M...............  Schlumberger            173.304a.............  To modify the special permit to authorize
                         Technology Corp.                               an additional packaging configuration.
11650-M...............  Autoliv Asp, Inc......  173.301(a)(1),         To modify the special permit to authorize
                                                 173.302(a).            cylinder weld studs.
13112-M...............  Cobham Mission Systems  173.302a(a)(1).......  To modify the special permit to update
                         Orchard Park Inc.                              the drawing revision number of the
                                                                        packaging.
14919-M...............  Joyson Safety Systems   173.301(a)(1),         To modify the special permit to authorize
                         Acquisition LLC.        173.302a,              a different pressure test and
                                                 178.65(f)(2).          alternative safety control measures.
20907-M...............  Versum Materials Us,    171.23(a)(1),          To modify the special permit to replace
                         LLC.                    171.23(a)(3).          paragraph 7.b.(6) with a 5-year service
                                                                        life restriction.
20963-M...............  Lg Energy Solution      172.101(j)...........  To modify the special permit to include
                         Wroclaw SP ZOO.                                additional cells in the authorized
                                                                        battery modules.

21162-N...............  Hexagon Masterworks,    173.301(a)(1)........  To authorize the transportation in
                         Inc.                                           commerce of partially filled composite
                                                                        cylinders with Hydrogen gas with a
                                                                        maximum charged pressure less than 5% of
                                                                        the COPV designed service/operating
                                                                        pressure.
21299-N...............  Orbital Sciences LLC..  172.101(j)...........  To authorize the transportation in
                                                                        commerce of lithium batteries exceeding
                                                                        35 kg by cargo-only aircraft.
21310-N...............  Bollor[eacute]          172.101(j),            To authorize the transportation in
                         Logistics Germany       173.301(f),            commerce of certain Division 2.2
                         Gmbh.                   173.302a(a)(1),        liquefied or compressed gases in non-
                                                 173.304a(a)(2).        specification packages for use in
                                                                        cooling applications for spacecraft and/
                                                                        or satellites.
21311-N...............  Spaceflight, Inc......  173.185(e)(3)........  To authorize the transportation in
                                                                        commerce of prototype lithium batteries
                                                                        contained in equipment by motor vehicle.
21315-N...............  Umbra Lab, Inc........  173.185(b)...........  To authorize the transportation of
                                                                        lithium ion battery modules contained in
                                                                        equipment (spacecraft).
21327-N...............  Bollor[eacute]          173.301, 173.301,      To authorize the transportation of
                         Logistics Germany       173.302a(a)(1),        certain non-DOT specification containers
                         Gmbh.                   173.304a(a)(2).        containing certain Division 2.2 and 2.3
                                                                        liquefied and compressed gases.
21329-N...............  Environmental           173.185(f)(1),         To authorize the transportation in
                         Protection Agency.      173.185(f)(3).         commerce of waste lithium ion batteries
                                                                        from a Superfund Site for disposal or
                                                                        recycling.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Special Permits Data--Denied
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21292-N...............  Showa Chemicals of      173.304a(a)..........  To authorize the transportation in
                         America, Inc.                                  commerce of non-DOT specification
                                                                        cylinders fabricated to a foreign
                                                                        cylinder specification.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Special Permits Data--Withdrawn
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21298-N...............  Linde Gas & Equipment   173.301(f),            To authorize the transportation in
                         Inc.                    173.301(g)(1)(ii),     commerce of UN1070, nitrous oxide, in
                                                 173.304a(c).           cylinders interconnected by a manifold.
21312-N...............  Moxion Power Co.......  172.102..............  To authorize the transportation in
                                                                        commerce of lithium batteries installed
                                                                        in a cargo transport unit.
21340-N...............  Epic Chemistry LLC....  172.203(a),            To authorize discharge of certain Class
                                                 172.301(c),            3, Division 6.1, and Class 8, and Class
                                                 177.834(h).            9 liquids from a DOT Specification drum
                                                                        without removing the drum from the
                                                                        vehicle on which it is transported.
21341-N...............  Epic Chemistry LLC....  172.203(a),            To authorize the discharge of certain
                                                 172.302(c),            liquid hazardous materials from certain
                                                 177.834(h).            UN Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBCs)
                                                                        and DOT Specification 57 portable tanks
                                                                        without removing them from the vehicle
                                                                        on which they are transported.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-04944 Filed 3-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 64 (Wednesday, April 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20116-20117]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07685]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-D-0362]

Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration
Staff; Glass Syringes for Delivering Drug and Biological Products:
Technical Information To Supplement International Organization for
Standardization Standard 11040-4; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of draft guidance for industry and FDA staff entitled
``Glass Syringes for Delivering Drug and Biological Products: Technical
Information to Supplement International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) Standard 11040-4.'' These supplemental data are
necessary for FDA to ensure the safe and effective use of glass
syringes that comply with the ISO 11040-4 standard when connected to
devices (``connecting devices'') that comply with the ISO 594-2
standard.

DATES: Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this
draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the
guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by July 2, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single printed copies of the
draft guidance to the Office of Combination Products, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, rm. 5129; Silver
Spring, MD 20993. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist the
office in processing your requests. The guidance may also be obtained
by mail by calling the Office of Combination Products at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the
guidance document.
    Submit electronic comments on the draft guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Y. Love, Office of
Combination Products, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 32, rm. 5129, Silver Spring, MD 20993.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry
entitled ``Glass Syringes for Delivering Drug and Biological Products:
Technical Information to Supplement International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) Standard 11040-4.'' This document provides
guidance to sponsors seeking to rely on conformity to ISO Standard
11040-4 in submissions for glass syringes products. FDA has become
aware of adverse events and product quality events related to
connectivity problems when certain glass syringes are used with
connecting devices, including connecting devices to conform to the FDA-
recognized ISO 594-2 standard. Accordingly, FDA has determined that,
for glass syringes, demonstrating conformity to the ISO 11040-4
standard alone does not ensure that the glass syringe can be properly
connected to connecting devices. Therefore, this guidance document
identifies additional, technical information that should be included in
an investigational device exemption (IDE), humanitarian device
exemption (HDE), 510(k), or postmarket application (PMA) for a glass
syringe product, or in an investigational new drug application (IND), a
biologics license application (BLA), new drug application (NDA), or
abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) for a drug or biological
product that is delivered with such a glass syringe product, to
demonstrate that the glass syringe can be properly connected to
connecting devices.
    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the Agency's current thinking on ``Glass
Syringes for Delivering Drug and Biological Products: Technical
Information to Supplement International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) Standard 11040-4.'' It does not create or confer
any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the
public. An alternative approach may be used if such approach satisfies
the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

II. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the document at
either http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance refers to previously approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information
are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The
collections of information in 21 CFR part 314 for NDAs have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0001. The collections of
information in 21 CFR part 601 for BLAs have been approved under OMB
control number 0910-0338. The collections of information in 21 CFR part
814 subpart B for PMAs have been approved under OMB control number
0910-0231. The collections of information in FD&C Act subpart E for
510(k) notifications have been approved under OMB control number 0901-
0120.

    Dated: March 28, 2013.
Peter Lurie,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. 2013-07685 Filed 4-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register: December 21, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 243)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 67821-67823]
[DOCID:fr21de09-9]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2009-0818; FRL-9087-3]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South
Coast Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the
South Coast Air Quality Management District portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile
organic compound (VOC) emissions from the application of adhesives and
sealants, cleaning and degassing of storage tanks and pipelines, and
coating operations of metal containers, closures, and coils. We are
approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under the
Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on February 19, 2010 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by January 20, 2010. If we
receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number [EPA-R09-OAR-
2009-0818], by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
    2. E-mail<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 http://
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 http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://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 e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail 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. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), and some may not be publicly available 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: Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4126<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What Rules Did the State Submit?

    B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?
C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rules or Rule Revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?
    B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What Rules Did the State Submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they
were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California
Air Resources Board.

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Local agency                Rule No.              Rule title               Adopted        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD............................            1125  Metal Container, Closure,           03/07/08        04/06/09
                                                     and Coil Coating Operations.
SCAQMD............................            1149  Storage Tank and Pipeline           05/02/08        04/06/09
                                                     Cleaning and Degassing.
SCAQMD............................            1168  Adhesive and Sealant                01/07/05        04/29/09
                                                     Applications.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 13, 2009 and July 20, 2009, EPA determined that the
submittals for SCAQMD Rules 1125 and 1149 and SCAQMD Rule 1168 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 these Rules?

    We approved earlier versions of Rule 1125, Rule 1149, and Rule 1168
into the SIP on June 13, 1995(60 FR 31081), August 19, 1999(64 FR
45175), and December 12, 2003(68 FR 69320).

C. What is the Purpose of the Submitted Rules or Rule Revisions?

    VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human
health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States
to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. Rule 1125 lowers a
VOC limit, Rule 1149 expands the rule to include pipelines and Rule
1168 adjusts a few VOC limits. EPA's technical support document (TSD)
has more information about these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA Evaluating the Rules?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act), 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 (b)(2)), and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The South Coast Air Quality
Management District regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR
part 81), so Rule 1125, Rule 1149, and Rule 1168 must fulfill RACT.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the
following:
    1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
    2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    3. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions From Existing Stationary
Sources Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics,
Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks'' EPA-450/2-77-008, May 1977.
    4. ``Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Industrial
Adhesives'' EPA-453/R-08-005, September 2008.
    5. ``Determination of Reasonably Available Control Technology and
Best Available Retrofit Control Technology for Adhesives and Sealants''
CARB, December 1998.

B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSDs
have more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules

    The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that we recommend for
the next time the local agency modifies the rules.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we
receive adverse comments by January 20, 2010, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on February 19, 2010. This will incorporate
these rules into the Federally enforceable SIP.
    Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);

     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule 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.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 19, 2010. 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. Parties with objections to this direct final
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed
rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so
that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in
the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: October 23, 2009.
Jane Diamond,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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.

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(362) (i)(B)and
(c)(366)(i)(B) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (362) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) South Coast Air Quality Management District.
    (1) Rule 1168, ``Adhesive and Sealant Applications,'' amended on
January 7, 2005.
* * * * *
    (366) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) South Coast Air Quality Management District.
    (1) Rule 1125, ``Metal Container, Closure, and Coil Coating
Operations,'' amended on March 7, 2008.
    (2) Rule 1149, ``Storage Tank and Pipeline Cleaning and
Degassing,'' amended on May 2, 2008.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-30152 Filed 12-18-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74225-74226]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29406]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0136]

Decision That Certain Nonconforming Motor Vehicles Are Eligible
for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Grant of Petitions.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces decisions by NHTSA that certain motor
vehicles not originally manufactured to comply with all applicable
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) are eligible for
importation into the United States because they are substantially
similar to vehicles originally manufactured for sale in the United
States and certified by their manufacturers as complying with the
safety standards, and they are capable of being readily altered to
conform to the standards or because they have safety features that
comply with, or are capable of being altered to comply with, all
applicable FMVSS.

DATES: These decisions became effective on the dates specified in Annex
A.

ADDRESSES: For further information contact Mr. Coleman Sachs, Office of
Vehicle Safety Compliance, NHTSA<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a motor vehicle that was not
originally manufactured to conform to all applicable FMVSS shall be
refused admission into the United States unless NHTSA has decided that
the motor vehicle is substantially similar to a motor vehicle
originally manufactured for importation into and/or sale in the United
States, certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of the same model year as
the model of the motor vehicle to be compared, and is capable of being
readily altered to conform to all applicable FMVSS.
    Where there is no substantially similar U.S.-certified motor
vehicle, 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B) permits a nonconforming motor vehicle
to be admitted into the United States if its safety features comply
with, or are capable of being altered to comply with, all applicable
FMVSS based on destructive test data or such other evidence as NHTSA
decides to be adequate.
    Petitions for eligibility decisions may be submitted by either
manufacturers or importers who have registered with NHTSA pursuant to
49 CFR part 592. As specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA publishes notice
in the Federal Register of each petition that it receives, and affords
interested persons an opportunity to comment on the petition. At the
close of the comment period, NHTSA decides, on the basis of the
petition and any comments that it has received, whether the vehicle is
eligible for importation. The agency then publishes this decision in
the Federal Register.
    NHTSA received petitions from registered importers to decide
whether the vehicles listed in Annex A to this notice are eligible for
importation into the United States. To afford an opportunity for public
comment, NHTSA published notice of these petitions as specified in
Annex A. The reader is referred to those notices for a thorough
description of the petitions.
    Comments: No substantive comments were received in response to the
petitions identified in Appendix A.
    NHTSA Decision: Accordingly, on the basis of the foregoing, NHTSA
hereby decides that each motor vehicle listed in Annex A to this
notice, which was not originally manufactured to comply with all
applicable FMVSS, is either substantially similar to a motor vehicle
manufactured for importation into and/or sale in the United States, and
certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, as specified in Annex A, and is
capable of being readily altered to conform to all applicable FMVSS or
has safety features that comply with, or are capable of being altered
to comply with, all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.
    Vehicle Eligibility Number for Subject Vehicles: The importer of a
vehicle admissible under any final decision must indicate on the form
HS-7 accompanying entry the appropriate vehicle eligibility number
indicating that the vehicle is eligible for entry. Vehicle eligibility
numbers assigned to vehicles admissible under this decision are
specified in Annex A.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), (a)(1)(B) and (b)(1); 49
CFR 593.7; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.7.

    Issued on: December 4, 2013.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

Annex A--Nonconforming Motor Vehicles Decided To Be Eligible for
Importation

1. Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0033

Nonconforming Vehicles: 1996 Chevrolet Impala Passenger Cars
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified Vehicles: 1996 Chevrolet Impala
Passenger Cars
Notice of Petition Published at: 78 FR 45997 (July 30, 2013)
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP-561 (effective date September 12, 2013)

2. Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0020

Nonconforming Vehicles: 2005 Jaguar XKR Passenger Cars
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified Vehicles: 2005 Jaguar XKR
Passenger Cars
Notice of Petition Published at: 78 FR 45999 (July 30, 2013)
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP-560 (effective date September 12, 2013)

3. Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0034

Nonconforming Vehicles: 2004 BMW 760i Passenger Cars
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified Vehicles: 2004 BMW 760i Passenger
Cars
Notice of Petition Published at: 78 FR 44621 (July 24, 2013)
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP-559 (effective date September 6, 2013)

4. Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0059, NHTSA-2013-0032

Nonconforming Vehicles: 2005, 2006 Mercedes-Benz SLR Passenger Cars
(Manufactured Prior to September 1, 2006)
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified Vehicles: 2005, 2006 Mercedes-Benz
SLR Passenger Cars (Manufactured Prior to September 1, 2006)
Notice of Petition Published at: 78 FR 38442 (June 26, 2013)
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP-558 (effective date August 2, 2013)

5. Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0062

Nonconforming Vehicles: 2002 BMW R1100 S Motorcycles
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified Vehicles: 2002 BMW R1100 S
Motorcycles
Notice of Petition Published at: 78 FR 29811 (May 21, 2013)
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP-557 (effective date July 26, 2013)

6. Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0061

Nonconforming Vehicles: 2003 BMW K1200 GT Motorcycles
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified Vehicles: 2003 BMW K1200 GT
Motorcycles
Notice of Petition Published at: 78 FR 29810 (May 21, 2013)
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP-556 (effective date July 26, 2013)

7. Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0037, NHTSA-2013-0032

Nonconforming Vehicles: 2005, 2006, 2007 Alpine B5 Series Passenger
Cars (Manufactured Prior to September 1, 2006)

Because there are no substantially similar U.S.--certified version
2005, 2006, 2007 Alpine B5 Series Passenger Cars (Manufactured Prior to
September 1, 2006) the petitioner sought import eligibility under 49
U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B).
Notice of Petition Published at: 78 FR 30961 (May 23, 2013)
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VCP-53 (effective date July 26, 2013)

8. Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0064

Nonconforming Vehicles: 1988-1996 Alpine B10 Series Passenger Cars
Because there are no substantially similar U.S.--certified version
1988-1996 Alpine B10 Series Passenger Cars the petitioner sought import
eligibility under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B).
Notice of Petition Published at: 78 FR 59092 (September 25, 2013)
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VCP-54 (effective date November 14, 2013)

[FR Doc. 2013-29406 Filed 12-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P