[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 48 (Monday, March 12, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14512-14513]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5903]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2256-003.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: 2012-03-02 CAISO CPM OOS Filing to be effective 2/16/
2012.
    Filed Date: 3/2/12.
    Accession Number: 20120302-5172.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4055-001; ER10-2977-001; ER11-3987-002; ER10-
1290-002; ER10-3211-002; ER10-2814-001; ER10-3026-001.
    Applicants: Copper Mountain Solar 1, LLC.
    Description: Sempra Supplement to Notice of Change in Status.
    Filed Date: 3/2/12.
    Accession Number: 20120302-5208.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-458-004.
    Applicants: Quantum Choctaw Power, LLC.
    Description: Quantum Choctaw Power Compliance Filing to be
effective 2/14/2012.
    Filed Date: 3/2/12.
    Accession Number: 20120302-5112.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1196-000.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.
    Description: Schedule 4 & 10--Energy & Generator Imbalance Changes
to be effective 3/5/2012.
    Filed Date: 3/2/12.
    Accession Number: 20120302-5119.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1197-000.
    Applicants: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation.
    Description: Vermont Yankee Notice of Cancellation of MBR Tariff to
be effective 3/21/2012.
    Filed Date: 3/2/12.
    Accession Number: 20120302-5173.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/23/12.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES12-25-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
    Description: Application of NorthWestern Corporation for
Authorization under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act to Issue
Securities and Request for Shortened Comment Period.
    Filed Date: 3/2/12.
    Accession Number: 20120302-5200.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/23/12.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access
transmission tariff filings:

    Docket Numbers: OA07-28-005.
    Applicants: Avista Corporation.
    Description: Avista Corporation's Informational Filing of
Operational Penalty Assessments and Distributions as Required by Order
Nos. 890 and 890-A.
    Filed Date: 3/2/12.
    Accession Number: 20120302-5203.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/23/12.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following qualifying
facility filings:

    Docket Numbers: QF12-252-000.
    Applicants: Elk Hills Power, LLC.
    Description: Elk Hills Power, LLC submits FERC Form 556 Notice of
Certification of Qualifying Facility Status for a Cogeneration
Facility.
    Filed Date: 3/1/12.
    Accession Number: 20120301-5252.
    Comment Date: None Applicable.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 5, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-5903 Filed 3-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


From:	Bob Wright/RTP/USEPA/US

To:	Ragan Tate/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc:	James Drummond/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, John Schakenbach/DC/USEPA/US@EPA,
Justina Fugh/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Conniesue Oldham/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Joe
Elkins/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, <EMAIL_ADDRESS>Michael
Papp/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Patricia Embrey/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Sara
Schneeberg/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date:	06/25/2008 04:04 PM

Subject:	Tony Kovar's 2005 Thoughts regarding ISO 17025 Accreditation

The attached file contains an interesting discussion about Scott
Specialty Gases' attitude in January 2005 regarding ISO 17025
accreditation.  It might be useful in future discussions with Air
Liquide.  Bob Wright

1.	Require ISO 17025 accreditation for producers of environmental
calibration gases:.

ISO 17025 is an extremely expensive certification and does not guarantee
that a better protocol product will be manufactured. In fact, a gas
manufacturer, holding certification to the ISO 17025 standard,
registered at least 1 failure in the recent blind audit. The high cost
of accreditation to the ISO 17025 standard would create an economic
inequity among gas manufacturers, creating a competitive advantage
favoring large manufacturers.

Technically, one of the core concepts of the ISO 17025 standard is the
manner by which uncertainty is propagated.  In order to assert
accreditation of a laboratory to the ISO 17025 standard as a
requirement, the protocol would need to be changed so the calculation of
uncertainty would match the conventions dictated by ISO 17025.  As
previously stated (see item 2), we do not view this as a valuable change
to the existing protocol.

----- Forwarded by Bob Wright/RTP/USEPA/US on 03/27/2008 03:20 PM -----

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
01/28/2005 02:23 PM

To

Bob Wright/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Joe
Elkins/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Conniesue Oldham/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Subject

EPA Protocol comments

      Robert S. Wright

      Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division

      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

      Mail Code E343-03, Room E330L

      Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

      E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
      Dear Bob,

      Thank you very much for giving us another opportunity to provide
you

      with input on changes to the Green Book for producing EPA
Protocols.

      We at Scott Specialty Gases value your efforts with regards to the

      Protocol document and are eager to provide you with our input on
the

      current document and the proposed changes that you presented in
your

      email. Our attached response takes the suggestions presented in
your

      email, and addresses each one individually. In addition, where

      appropriate, we have inserted additional ideas that were not

      specifically called out in your email.

      Our objective at Scott Specialty Gases has been to produce the
best

      Protocol calibration mixtures possible, because we understand the

      significant impact that these mixtures have on the end users. If
they

      are off specification by as little as 2%, the impact on the power

      companies is in the hundreds of millions of dollars. As a result,
we

      want to make sure that the protocol document helps improve the

      product, while allowing for the greatest of technical freedom, so

      that producers like Scott Specialty Gases, can continue to
innovate

      and improve the product offering.

      (See attached file: EPA Protocol Revisions 01-28-2005.doc)

      If there are any questions with regards to our responses, please
let

      me know.

      Tony Kovar

      Corp Dir. of Mfg.

      Scott Specialty Gases

<PHONE_NUMBER>


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 189 (Thursday, September 29, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66823-66826]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23298]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2016-0493: FRL-9953-04-Region 10]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Washington:
General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In reviewing past State Implementation Plan (SIP) actions, the
Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) discovered minor typographical errors related
to the EPA's previous approvals of Chapter 173-400 Washington
Administrative Code, General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources. The
EPA is taking direct final action to correct these errors. This direct
final action makes no substantive changes to the SIP and imposes no new
requirements.

DATES: This rule is effective on November 28, 2016, without further
notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by October 31, 2016. If
the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2016-0493 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Hunt, Air Planning Unit, Office
of Air and Waste (OAW-150), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10,
1200 Sixth Ave, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101; telephone number: (206)
553-0256; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

I. Introduction

    In final actions published October 3, 2014 (79 FR 59653) and April
29, 2015 (80 FR 23721), the EPA approved Washington Administrative Code
(WAC) 173-400-110 New Source Review (NSR) for Sources and Portable
Sources and WAC 173-400-112 Requirements for New Sources in
Nonattainment Areas--Review for Compliance with Regulations with
certain exceptions. One of the listed exceptions was ``the part of 400-
110(4)(e)(f)(i)'' related to toxic air pollutants. The EPA notes that
``400-110(4)(e)(f)(i)'' does not exist under Chapter 173-400 WAC. The
correct citation is ``400-110(4)(f)(i).'' Similarly, both final
approvals contained regulatory text under 40 CFR part 52.2470(c) which
listed an exception for WAC 173-400-112(8). WAC 173-400-112(8) does not
exist in the version of Chapter 173-400 WAC adopted by Ecology on
November 28, 2012, which the EPA reviewed and approved. This exception,
related to toxic air pollutants, was a holdover from a previous
approval action (60 FR 28726, June 2, 1995). This exception was
inadvertently copied as part of 40 CFR 52.2470(c) Table 2--Additional
Regulations Approved for Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology)
Direct Jurisdiction. Both typographical errors were also inadvertently
copied in the regulatory text of a November 17, 2015 final approval for
the Benton Clean Air Agency, under 40 CFR 52.2470(c) Table 4--
Additional Regulations Approved for the Benton Clean Air Agency (BCAA)
Jurisdiction, which generally relies on the regulations contained in
Chapter 173-400 WAC (80 FR 71695).

II. Final Action

    The EPA has determined that the typographical errors referenced
above should be corrected at this time. The EPA is publishing this rule
without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial action and anticipates no adverse comment. However, in
the ``Proposed Rules'' section of this Federal Register, the EPA is
publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to
approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed. This rule will
be effective on November 28, 2016 without further notice unless the EPA
receives adverse comment by October 31, 2016. If the EPA receives
adverse comment, the EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take
effect. The EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final
rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second
comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting
must do so at this time. Please note that if the 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, the EPA may
adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of
an adverse comment.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is correcting minor typographical errors related to the
incorporation by reference contained in 40 CFR 52.2470(c) Table 2--
Additional Regulations Approved for Washington Department of Ecology
(Ecology) Direct Jurisdiction and Table 4--Additional Regulations
Approved for the Benton Clean Air Agency (BCAA) Jurisdiction. These
materials have been approved by the EPA for inclusion in the SIP, have
been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully
federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the
effective date of the final rulemaking of the EPA's approval, and will
be incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in
the next update to the SIP compilation.\1\ The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 10 Office (please contact
the person identified in the ``For Further Information Contact''
section of this preamble for more information).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the 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 Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     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 the 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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land in
Washington except as specifically noted below and is also not approved
to apply in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Washington's SIP is approved to apply on non-trust land within the
exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation, also known as
the 1873 Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement
Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided state and
local agencies in Washington authority over activities on non-trust
lands within the 1873 Survey Area.
    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 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 November 28, 2016. 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 this Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that the 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, Particulate matter, Reporting,
and Recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 14, 2016.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    For the reasons stated above, 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart WW--Washington

0
2. In Sec.  52.2470, amend paragraph (c) by:
0
a. In Table 2--Additional Regulations Approved for Washington
Department of Ecology (Ecology) Direct Jurisdiction, revising entries
173-400-110 and 173-400-112; and
0
b. In Table 4--Additional Regulations Approved for the Benton Clean Air
Agency (BCAA) Jurisdiction, revising entries 173-400-110 and 173-400-
112.
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  52.2470   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

   Table 2--Additional Regulations Approved for Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) Direct Jurisdiction
 [Applicable in Adams, Asotin, Chelan, Columbia, Douglas, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield, Grant, Kittitas, Klickitat,
   Lincoln, Okanogan, Pend Oreille, San Juan, Stevens, Walla Walla, and Whitman counties, excluding facilities
 subject to Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) jurisdiction, Indian reservations (excluding non-
 trust land within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation), and any other area where the EPA
  or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. These regulations also apply statewide for
 facilities subject to the applicability sections of WAC 173-400-700, 173-405-012, 173-410-012, and 173-415-012]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          State
        State citation             Title/subject     effective date   EPA approval date        Explanations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400--General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
173-400-110...................  New Source Review          12/29/12  9/29/16 [Insert     Except: 173-400-
                                 (NSR) for Sources                    Federal Register    110(1)(c)(ii)(C); 173-
                                 and Portable                         citation].          400-110(1)(e); 173-400-
                                 Sources.                                                 110(2)(d); The part of
                                                                                WAC 173-400-
                                                                                110(4)(b)(vi) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``not for use
                                                                                with materials
                                                                                containing toxic air
                                                                                pollutants, as listed
                                                                                in chapter 173-460
                                                                                WAC,'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(e)(iii) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``where toxic
                                                                                air pollutants as
                                                                                defined in chapter 173-
                                                                                460 WAC are not
                                                                                emitted'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(f)(i) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``that are not
                                                                                toxic air pollutants
                                                                                listed in chapter 173-
                                                                                460 WAC'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(h)(xviii) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``, to the
                                                                                extent that toxic air
                                                                                pollutant gases as
                                                                                defined in chapter 173-
                                                                                460 WAC are not
                                                                                emitted'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(h)(xxxiii) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``where no
                                                                                toxic air pollutants
                                                                                as listed under
                                                                                chapter 173-460 WAC
                                                                                are emitted'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(h)(xxxiv) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``, or <=1%
                                                                                (by weight) toxic air
                                                                                pollutants as listed
                                                                                in chapter 173-460
                                                                                WAC'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(h)(xxxv) that
                                                                                says,  ``or
                                                                                <=1% (by weight) toxic
                                                                                air pollutants'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(h)(xxxvi) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``or <=1% (by
                                                                                weight) toxic air
                                                                                pollutants as listed
                                                                                in chapter 173-460
                                                                                WAC'';
                                                                                400-110(4)(h)(xl),
                                                                                second sentence; The
                                                                                last row of the table
                                                                                in 173-400-110(5)(b)
                                                                                regarding exemption
                                                                                levels for Toxic Air
                                                                                Pollutants.

                                                  * * * * * * *
173-400-112...................  Requirements for           12/29/12  9/29/16 [Insert     .......................
                                 New Sources in                       Federal Register
                                 Nonattainment                        citation].
                                 Areas--Review for
                                 Compliance with
                                 Regulations.

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

* * * * *

          Table 4--Additional Regulations Approved for the Benton Clean Air Agency (BCAA) Jurisdiction
 [Applicable in Benton County, excluding facilities subject to Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC)
  jurisdiction, Indian reservations and any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
  tribe has jurisdiction, and facilities subject to the applicability sections of WAC 173-400-700, 173-405-012,
                                          173-410-012, and 173-415-012]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       State/local
     State/local citation          Title/subject     effective date   EPA approval date        Explanations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Washington Department of Ecology Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400--General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
173-400-110...................  New Source Review          12/29/12  9/29/16 [Insert     Except: 173-400-
                                 (NSR) for Sources                    Federal Register    110(1)(c)(ii)(C); 173-
                                 and Portable                         citation].          400-110(1)(e); 173-400-
                                 Sources.                                                 110(2)(d); The part of
                                                                                WAC 173-400-
                                                                                110(4)(b)(vi) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``not for use
                                                                                with materials
                                                                                containing toxic air
                                                                                pollutants, as listed
                                                                                in chapter 173-460
                                                                                WAC,'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(e)(iii) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``where
                                                                                toxic air
                                                                                pollutants as
                                                                                defined in chapter
                                                                                173-460 WAC are not
                                                                                emitted'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(f)(i) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``that are
                                                                                not toxic air
                                                                                pollutants listed
                                                                                in chapter 173-460
                                                                                WAC'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(h)(xviii) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``, to the
                                                                                extent that toxic
                                                                                air pollutant gases
                                                                                as defined in
                                                                                chapter 173-460 WAC
                                                                                are not emitted'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(h)(xxxiii) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``where no
                                                                                toxic air
                                                                                pollutants as
                                                                                listed under
                                                                                chapter 173-460 WAC
                                                                                are emitted'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(h)(xxxiv) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``, or <=1%
                                                                                (by weight) toxic
                                                                                air pollutants as
                                                                                listed in chapter
                                                                                173-460 WAC'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(h)(xxxv) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``or <=1%
                                                                                (by weight) toxic
                                                                                air pollutants'';
                                                                                The part of 400-
                                                                                110(4)(h)(xxxvi) that
                                                                                says,
                                                                                ``or <=1%
                                                                                (by weight) toxic
                                                                                air pollutants as
                                                                                listed in chapter
                                                                                173-460 WAC''; 400-
                                                                                110(4)(h)(xl),
                                                                                second sentence;
                                                                                The last row of the
                                                                                table in 173-400-
                                                                                110(5)(b) regarding
                                                                                exemption levels for
                                                                                Toxic Air Pollutants.

                                                  * * * * * * *
173-400-112...................  Requirements for           12/29/12  9/29/16 [Insert     .......................
                                 New Sources in                       Federal Register
                                 Nonattainment                        citation].
                                 Areas--Review for
                                 Compliance with
                                 Regulations.

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-23298 Filed 9-28-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: June 15, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 114)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 33694-33696]
[DOCID:fr15jn10-11]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0364]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Delta Independence Day Foundation Celebration,
Mandeville Island, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the
navigable waters off the North Eastern shoreline of Mandeville Island,
CA for the Delta Independence Day Foundation Celebration Fireworks
Display. This safety zone is being established to ensure the safety of
participants and spectators from the dangers associated with the
pyrotechnics. Unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from
entering into, transiting through, or remaining in the safety zone
without permission of the Captain of the Port or his designated
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 10 a.m. July 02, 2010 through 10
p.m. on July 04, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2010-0364 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, selecting the Advanced Docket
Search option on the right side of the screen, inserting USCG-2010-0364
in the ``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also
available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility
(M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call Ensign Liezl Nicholas, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San
Francisco, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists, as it would be impracticable to publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule, because the event
would occur before the rulemaking process would be completed. Because
of the immediate dangers posed by the pyrotechnics used in this
fireworks display, the safety zone is necessary to provide for the
safety of event participants, spectators, spectator craft, and other
vessels transiting the event area.

Background and Purpose

    The Delta Independence Day Foundation will sponsor a fireworks
display on July 04, 2010, 300 feet from the North Eastern shoreline of
Mandeville Island, CA. The fireworks display is meant for entertainment
purposes. This safety zone is issued to establish a temporary
restricted area around the fireworks barge during the loading of the
pyrotechnics, during the transit of the barge to the display location,
and during the fireworks display. This restricted area around the
launch site is necessary to protect spectators, vessels, and other
property from the hazards associated with the pyrotechnics on the
fireworks barge. The Coast Guard has granted the event sponsor a marine
event permit for the fireworks display.

Discussion of Rule

    This safety zone will apply to navigable waters from the surface to
the sea floor in the San Joaquin River, during loading of pyrotechnics
onto the fireworks barge at Dutra Corp Yard, Rio Vista, CA, during
transit to the launch location and until the completion of the
fireworks display. The temporary safety zone applies to the navigable
waters around and under the fireworks barge during loading and transit
within a radius of 100 feet, from 10 a.m. on July 02, 2010 until 9:30
p.m. on July 4, 2010. At 9:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. on July 04, 2010, the
area to which the temporary safety zone applies will increase in size
to encompass the navigable waters around and under the barge within a
radius of 1,000 feet. The fireworks launch site will be located
approximately 300 feet off the shore in position 38[deg]03'19.37'' N.,
121[deg]31'54.34'' W. (NAD 83).
    The effect of the temporary safety zone will be to restrict
navigation in the vicinity of the fireworks site while the fireworks
are loaded onto the barge, while the barge in transiting to the display
location, and until the conclusion of the scheduled display. Except for
persons or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no
person or vessel may enter or remain in the restricted area. These
regulations are needed to keep spectators and vessels a safe distance
away from the fireworks barge to ensure the safety of participants,
spectators, and transiting vessels.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    Although this rule restricts access to the waters encompassed by
the safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be significant
because of the small area and short duration of the safety zone.
Furthermore, the local waterway users will be notified via public
Broadcast

Notice to Mariners to ensure the safety zone will result in minimum
impact. The entities most likely to be affected are pleasure craft
engaged in recreational activities.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule may affect owners and operators of pleasure craft engaged
in recreational activities and sightseeing. This rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
for several reasons: (i) Vessel traffic can pass safely around the
area, (ii) vessels engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing
have ample space outside of the effected portion of the areas off
Stockton, CA to engage in these activities, (iii) this rule will
encompass only a small portion of the waterway for a limited period of
time, and (iv) the maritime public will be advised in advance of this
safety zone via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not affect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 0023.1 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves establishing,
disestablishing, or changing Regulated Navigation Areas and security or
safety zones.
    An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the

docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-314 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-314  Safety Zone; Delta Independence Day Foundation
Celebration, Mandeville Island, CA.

    (a) Location. This temporary safety zone is established for the
waters off the North Eastern shoreline of Mandeville, CA. The fireworks
launch site will be located approximately 300 feet off the shore in
position 38[deg]03'19.37'' N., 121[deg]31'54.34'' W. (NAD 83).
    During the transit to the launch location and until the completion
of the fireworks display, from 10 a.m. on July 02, 2010 until 9:30 p.m.
on July 4, 2010, the temporary safety zone applies to the navigable
waters around and under the fireworks barge during loading and transit
within a radius of 100 feet. From 9:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. on July 04,
2010, the temporary safety zone applies to the navigable waters around
and under the barge within a radius of 1,000 feet.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast
Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or
assisting the Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP) in the
enforcement of the safety zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in Sec.  165.23,
entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or a designated representative.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the COTP or a designated representative to obtain
permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or
operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to
them by the COTP or the designated representative. Persons and vessels
may request permission to enter the safety zone on VHF-16 or through
the 24-hour Command Center at telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (d) Effective period. This section is effective from 10 a.m. on
July 02,2010 through 10 p.m. on July 04, 2010.

    Dated: May 28, 2010.
P.M. Gugg,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2010-14292 Filed 6-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 22, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30245-30248]
[FR Doc No: 2012-12307]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0313]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zones; Annual Fireworks Events in the Captain of the Port
Detroit Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR 165.941 by adding
three permanent safety zones within the Captain of the Port Detroit
Zone. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life and
property on navigable waters during each event. This action is intended
to restrict vessel traffic in portions of the Captain of the Port
Detroit Zone.

DATES: Comments and related materials must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before June 21, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2012-0313 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email ENS Benjamin Nessia, Response Department, Marine
Safety Unit Toledo, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2012-0313), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (via http://www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a
comment online via www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received
by the Coast Guard when the comment is successfully transmitted. If you
submit a comment via fax, hand delivery, or mail, it will be considered
as having been received by the Coast Guard when the comment is received
at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your
name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in
the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have
questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number USCG-2012-0313 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery,
submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by
mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period
and may change the rule based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number USCG-2012-0313 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation to
use the Docket Management Facility.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008 issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting, but you may submit a
request for one using one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be
beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will
hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal
Register.

Background and Purpose

    Currently, 33 CFR 165.941 permanently lists fifty-six permanent
safety zones within the Captain of the Port Detroit Zone. Each of these
fifty-six permanent safety zones corresponds to an annually recurring
fireworks display. A recent survey within the Captain of the Port
Detroit Zone revealed four additional recurring events that we believe
require a safety zone because these events will present dangers to the
boating public. The likely combination of large numbers of
inexperienced recreational boaters, congested waterways, darkness
punctuated by bright flashes of light, alcohol use, and debris falling
into the water could easily result in serious injuries or fatalities.
Three of these four additional fireworks displays recur within a single
month each year. The other one of these events, the Put-In-Bay Chamber
of Commerce Fireworks, recurs four times a year--twice in June and
twice in September.

Each of these additional fireworks events typically recurs during the
same week of its respective month, but the exact date and times of each
of these events differs each year.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    To mitigate the dangers presented by these four recurring fireworks
displays, the Captain of the Port Detroit has determined that four
safety zones are necessary. Thus, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33
CFR 165.941 by adding four permanent safety zones. These proposed
safety zones would be enforced in the following locations and at the
following times:
    The proposed safety zone for the Catawba Island Club Fireworks,
Catawba Island, OH, would encompass all waters of Lake Erie within a
250-yard radius of the fireworks launch site located at position 41-
34'-18.10'' N, 082-51'-18.70'' W (NAD 83). This proposed zone would be
enforced one evening during the last week in May.
    The proposed safety zone for the Put-In-Bay Chamber of Commerce
Fireworks, Put-In-Bay, OH, would encompass all the waters of Lake Erie
within a 1000-foot radius of the fireworks launch site located at
position 41-39'-19'' N, 082-48'-57'' W (NAD 83). This proposed zone
would be enforced one evening during the third week in June, one
evening during the last week in June, one evening during the first week
in September, and one evening during the second week in September.
    The proposed safety zone for the Bay Point Fireworks Display,
Marblehead, OH, would encompass all the waters of Lake Erie within a
250-yard radius of the fireworks launch site located at position
41[deg]30'29.23'' N, 082[deg]43'8.45'' W (NAD 83). This proposed zone
would be enforced one evening during the first week in July.
    The proposed safety zone for the Marysville Days Fireworks,
Marysville, MI, would encompass all waters of the St. Clair River
bounded by the arc of a circle with a 600-foot radius with its center
in approximate position 42[deg]54'25'' N, 082[deg]27'58'' W (NAD 83).
This proposed zone would be enforced one evening during the last week
in June.
    The Captain of the Port Detroit will use all appropriate means to
notify the public when the safety zones in this proposal will be
enforced. Consistent with 33 CFR 165.7(a), such means of may include,
among other things, publication in the Federal Register, Broadcast
Notice to Mariners, Local Notice to Mariners, or, upon request, by
facsimile (fax). Also, the Captain of the Port will issue a Broadcast
Notice to Mariners notifying the public if enforcement of a safety zone
in this section is cancelled prematurely.
    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within each of these proposed
safety zones during a period of enforcement is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Detroit, or his designated
representative. The Captain of the Port or his designated
representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant''
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS). We conclude that this proposed rule is not a
significant regulatory action because we anticipate that it will have
minimal impact on the economy, will not interfere with other agencies,
will not adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan recipients,
and will not raise any novel legal or policy issues. The safety zones
established by this proposed rule would be relatively small and
enforced for relatively short time. Also, each safety zone is designed
to minimize its impact on navigable waters. Furthermore, each safety
zone has been designed to allow vessels to transit unrestricted to
portions of the waterways not affected by the safety zones. Thus,
restrictions on vessel movements within any particular area are
expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions, moreover, vessels may
still transit through each safety zone when permitted by the Captain of
the Port. On the whole, the Coast Guard expects insignificant adverse
impact to mariners from the activation of these safety zones.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: the owners and operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in the above portions of Lake Erie and
the Saint Clair River during the period that any of the proposed safety
zones is being enforced.
    These proposed safety zones will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities for all of the reasons
discussed in the above Regulatory Planning and Review section. If you
think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction
qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule would have a
significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
If this proposed rule would affect your small business, organization,
or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please contact ENS Benjamin
Nessia, Response Department, Marine Safety Unit Toledo, Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The Coast
Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or
complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast
Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of

compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that
Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this
proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not affect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and
would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that
might disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
involves the establishment of safety zones and thus, is categorically
excluded under paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any
comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR Part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

    1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. chapters 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

Sec.  165.941  Safety Zones; Annual Fireworks Events in the Captain of
the Port Detroit Zone.

    2. In Sec.  165.941(a), add paragraphs (57) through (60) to read as
follows:
    (57) Catawba Island Club Fireworks; Catawba Island, OH.
    (i) Location. All waters of Lake Erie within a 250-yard radius of
the fireworks launch site located at position 41-34'-18.10'' N, 082-
51'-18.70'' W (NAD 83).
    (ii) Expected date. This safety zone will be enforced one evening
during the last week in May.
    (58) Put-In-Bay Chamber of Commerce Fireworks, Put-In-Bay, OH.
    (i) Location. All waters of Lake Erie within a 1000-foot radius of
the fireworks launch site located at position 41-39'-19'' N, 082-48'-
57'' W (NAD 83). This area is located in the Put-In-Bay Harbor.
    (ii) Expected dates. This safety zone will be enforced one evening
during the third week in June, one evening during the last week in
June, one evening during the first week in September, and one evening
during the second week in September.
    (59) Bay Point Fireworks Display, Marblehead, OH:
    (i) Location. All waters of Lake Erie within a 250-yard radius of
the fireworks launch site located at position 41[deg]30'29.23'' N,
082[deg]43'8.45'' W (NAD 83).
    (ii) Expected date. This safety zone will be enforced one evening
during the first week in July.
    (60) Marysville Days Fireworks, Marysville, MI:
    (i) Location. All waters of the St. Clair River within a 600 foot
radius of the fireworks launch site located on land at position
42[deg]54'25'' N, 082[deg]27'58'' W (NAD 83).
    (ii) Expected date. This safety zone will be enforced one evening
during the LAST week in June.

    Dated: May 7, 2012.
J.E. Ogden,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. 2012-12307 Filed 5-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


MEMORANDUM

DATE: 	January 30, 2015

SUBJECT:	Wood Stove 10-year Amortization Period, Sensitivity Analysis of R&D Costs

FROM:	Jill Mozier, EC/R Inc.

TO:		Gil Wood, EPA/OAQPS
		David Cole, EPA/OAQPS
		Amanda Aldridge, EPA/OAQPS

	The purpose of this memorandum is to document a sensitivity analysis based on varying the amortization period for wood stove R&D costs. For both proposal and for final rule support, we amortized R&D costs over a 6-year period in order to spread R&D costs over a 6-year model development timeframe. For the final rule this 6-year period extends from the Step 1 compliance date (2015) to the Step 2 compliance date (2020, inclusive). Before proposal, two manufacturers noted that it will take from 5 to 6 years of intensive engineering and R&D efforts to have a model line consisting of 4 boxes ready-for-manufacture.  However, the Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association's (HPBA's) economic consultant, NERA, used a 10-year period for amortizing costs in their wood stove analysis (May 2014) submitted as Attachment 2 of HPBA's comment on the proposed rule.  We therefore amortized our estimated final rule costs for wood stove R&D over 10-years, as a sensitivity analysis.

	For comparison, the 6-year versus 10-year annual amortized costs are shown in the final two rows of Table 1, both at a 7% interest rate. The components of the tabulated cost estimates are discussed in the Manufacturer Cost Impacts memo. Tables 2a and 2b show the average annual cost per wood stove manufacturer and the nationwide annual costs using the 10-year amortization period. For comparison, Tables 3a and 3b show the same using the 6-year amortization period.

Finally, Tables 4 and 5 show the cost effectiveness (CE) of reducing PM2.5 from wood stoves based on the 10-year and 6-year amortization periods, respectively. Over the 20-year emitting lifespan, the estimated CE is $587 per ton based on the 10-year amortization period versus $519 per ton based on the 6-year amortization period. The CE calculations based on using the 10-year amortization period, entitled Revised Final Wood Heater NSPS PM25 CE 7% 1-23-15 Woodstove 10yr Amortization.xls, are provided with e-mail transmittal of this memo.
Table 1.  Estimated Wood Stove Capital Costs

                                 Capital Costs
                                Appliance Costs
                                     Notes

                                     High
                                      Low
                                     Mean
2013 dollars; All costs based on HPBA estimates under 7.5 to 4.5 g/hr scenario, with modifications
    R&D/Engineering Costs

Market research, aesthetic design, initial prototype design/construction/testing, formulate design changes, modify/test prototype
                                                                        $45,500
                                                                        $19,000
                                                                        $32,250

Adjust design/test until emission target is met
                                                                        $47,500
                                                                        $30,000
                                                                        $38,750

Construct final prototypes, safety test check, eng. drawings/specs, patent application
                                                                        $27,000
                                                                        $17,000
                                                                        $22,000

Confirm final prototype performance
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0

    R&D/Engineering Total costs
                                                                       $120,000
                                                                        $66,000
                                                                        $93,000

    Tooling

Steel Stove
                                                                        $31,200
                                                                         $9,700
                                                                        $20,450

Cast Iron Stove
                                                                        $62,000
                                                                        $31,000
                                                                        $46,500

    Average tooling cost
                                                                        $46,600
                                                                        $20,350
                                                                        $33,475

HPBA costs for equipment and integration not included because these are considered duplicative of R&D costs, above
Other Capital Cost components
                                                                        $14,000
                                                                         $6,000
                                                                        $10,000

Total Capital Cost per model
                                                                       $180,600
                                                                        $92,350
                                                                       $136,475

Fixed Costs per model
HBPA costs for personnel at lab and travel expenses not accepted as independent third party testing costs
     Certification

EPA testing, Confirmation safety testing or full safety testing, shipping of prototype
                                                                        $19,000
                                                                        $14,500
                                                                        $16,750

Owner's manual, labeling
                                                                         $3,500
                                                                         $1,800
                                                                         $2,650

     Roll-out
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
Roll-out considered normal business operation and not due to NSPS

Total Fixed Capital Cost per model
                                                                        $22,500
                                                                        $16,300
                                                                        $19,400

Total Costs per Model
                                                                       $203,100
                                                                       $108,650
                                                                       $155,875

Annualized capital cost per model (6-year)
                                                                        $42,610
                                                                        $22,794
                                                                        $32,702
Annualized over 6 years at 7%
Annualized capital cost per model (10-year)
                                                                        $28,917
                                                                        $15,469
                                                                        $22,193
Annualized over 10 years at 7%

      Table 2a. Average Annual Cost per Manufacturer under the Final NSPS using a 10-year Amortization Period (2015-2024)

      Table 2b. Nationwide Annual Costs under the Final NSPS using a 10-year Amortization Period (2015-2024)

      Footnotes:

      [1] Nationwide Annual Cost assumes R&D investment is amortized over 10 years (2015 through 2024). The analysis extends to year 2029 (based on a model brought to market in 2020 with a lifespan of 10 years), but because woodstoves already incur certification and reporting & recordkeeping costs under the existing 1988 NSPS, no additional costs are modeled after the 10-year amortization period.
      [2] For wood stoves, the analysis assumes that 26% meet Step 2 already so that 74% of the models will undergo re-design to meet the Step 2 level.
      Table 3a. Average Annual Cost per Manufacturer under the Final NSPS using a 6-year Amortization Period (2015-2020)

      Table 3b. Nationwide Annual Costs under the Final NSPS using a 6-year Amortization Period (2015-2020)

	Footnotes:

      [1] Nationwide Annual Cost assumes R&D investment is amortized over 6 years (2015 through 2020).

      [2] Since certification is required every 5 years, it is assumed that certification costs will be spread out so that 1/5 of the models certify each year.
      3 This analysis considers additional costs resulting from the NSPS. For wood stoves, the analysis assumes that 26% meet Step 2 already so that 74% of the models will undergo re-design to meet the Step 2 level. The costs modeled for years 2021 through 2029 exclude the ongoing certification and reporting & recordkeeping costs incurred by wood stove manufacturers who already had to certify and report under the existing 1988 NSPS.
Table 4. Cost Effectiveness of Wood Stoves Based on 10-year Amortization Period

Table 5. Cost Effectiveness of Wood Stoves Based on 6-year Amortization Period