[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 48 (Wednesday, March 12, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14033-14034]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05386]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1196; FRL-9907-69-OAR]

Recent Postings of Broadly Applicable Alternative Test Methods

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the broadly applicable alternative test
method approval decisions the EPA has made under and in support of New
Source Performance Standards (NSPS), the National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), and the Consolidated Federal Air
Rule under the Clean Air Act (CAA) in 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: An electronic copy of each alternative
test method approval document is available on the EPA's Web site at
www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/approalt.html. For questions about this notice,
contact Ms. Lula H. Melton, Air Quality Assessment Division, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards (E143-02), Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: 919-541-
2910; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For
technical questions about individual alternative test method decisions,
refer to the contact person identified in the individual approval
documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this notice apply to me?

    This notice will be of interest to entities regulated under 40 Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 60, 61, 63, and 65, state, local,
and tribal agencies, and the EPA Regional Offices responsible for
implementation and enforcement of regulations under 40 CFR parts 60,
61, 63, and 65.

B. How can I get copies of this information?

    You may access copies of the broadly applicable alternative test
method approval documents from the EPA's Web site at www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/approalt.html.

II. Background

    Broadly applicable alternative test method approval decisions made
by the EPA in 2013 under the NSPS, 40 CFR part 60, the NESHAP, 40 CFR
parts 61 and 63, and the Consolidated Federal Air Rule, 40 CFR part 65
are identified in this notice (see Table 1). Source owners and
operators may voluntarily use these broadly applicable alternative test
methods subject to their specific applicability. Use of these broadly
applicable alternative test methods does not change the applicable
emission standards.
    As explained in a previous Federal Register notice published at 72
FR 4257 (January 30, 2007) and found on the EPA's Web site at
www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/approalt.html, the EPA Administrator has the
authority to approve the use of alternative test methods to comply with
requirements under 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63. This authority is found
in sections 60.8(b)(3), 61.13(h)(1)(ii), and 63.7(e)(2)(ii). A similar
authority is granted in 40 CFR part 65 under section 65.158(a)(2). In
the past, we have performed thorough technical reviews of numerous
requests for alternatives and modifications to test methods and
procedures. Based on these reviews, we have often found that these
changes or alternatives would be equally valid and appropriate to apply
to other sources within a particular class, category, or subcategory.
Consequently, we have concluded that, where a method modification or an
alternative method is broadly applicable to a class, category, or
subcategory of sources, it is both more equitable and efficient to
approve its use for all appropriate sources and situations at the same
time.
    It is important to clarify that alternative methods are not
mandatory but permissive. Sources are not required to employ such a
method but may choose to do so in appropriate cases. Source owners or
operators should review the specific broadly applicable alternative
method approval decision on the EPA's Web site at www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/approalt.html before electing to employ it. As per 63.7(f)(5), by
electing to use an alternative method for 40 CFR part 63 standards, the
source owner or operator must continue to use the alternative method
until approved otherwise.
    The criteria for approval and procedures for submission and review
of broadly applicable alternative test methods are outlined at 72 FR
4257 (January 30, 2007). We will continue to announce approvals for
broadly applicable alternative test methods at www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/approalt.html and annually publish a notice that summarizes approvals
for broadly applicable alternative test methods.
    This notice comprises a summary of seven such approval documents
added to our Technology Transfer Network from January 1, 2013, through
December 31, 2013. The alternative method decision letter/memo number,
the reference method affected, sources allowed to use this alternative,
and the modification or alternative method allowed are summarized in
Table 1 of this notice. Please refer to the complete copies of these
approval documents available at www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/approalt.html as
Table 1 serves only as a brief summary of the broadly applicable
alternative test methods.
    If you are aware of reasons why a particular alternative test
method approval that we issued should not be broadly applicable, we
request that you make us aware of the reasons in writing, and we will
revisit the broad approval. Any objection to a broadly applicable
alternative test method, as well as the resolution of that objection,
will be announced at www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/approalt.html and in the
subsequent Federal Register notice. If we decide to retract a broadly
applicable test method, we would continue to grant case-by-case
approvals, as appropriate, and would (as states, local and tribal
agencies and the EPA Regional Offices should) consider the need for an
appropriate transition period for users either to request case-by-case
approval or to transition to an approved method.

    Dated: March 5, 2014.
Mary E. Henigin,
Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

  Table 1--Approved Alternative Test Methods and Modifications to Test
 Methods Referenced in or Published Under Appendices in 40 CFR Parts 60,
        61, 63 and 65 Made Between January 2013 and December 2013
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            As an
  Alternative method    alternative or
 decision letter/memo  modification to     For . . .      You may . . .
         No.                . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALT-098..............  Method 18--      Flares subject   Use SUMMA
                        Measurement of   to the general   cannisters in
                        Gaseous          control device   lieu of Tedlar
                        Organic          provisions of    bags for
                        Compound         40 CFR part      determination
                        Emissions by     60, section      of heat
                        Gas              60.18.           content.
                        Chromatography.
ALT-099..............  Method 2--       Sources subject  Use optical
                        Determination    to 40 CFR        flow meters to
                        of Stack Gas     60.18(f)(4)      measure flare
                        Velocity and     and              gas flow rate
                        Volumetric       63.11(b)(7)(i).  provided the
                        Flow Rate                         calibrations
                        (Type S Pitot                     are maintained
                        Tube), Method                     within the
                        2A--Direct                        manufacturer's
                        Measurement of                    recommended
                        Gas Volume                        frequency.
                        Through Pipes
                        and Small
                        Ducts, Method
                        2C--Determinat
                        ion of Gas
                        Velocity and
                        Volumetric
                        Flow Rate in
                        Small Stacks
                        or Ducts
                        (Standard
                        Pitot Tube),
                        or Method 2D--
                        Measurement of
                        Gas Volume
                        Flow Rates in
                        Small Pipes
                        and Ducts.
ALT-100..............  Method 18--      Sources subject  Use of
                        Measurement of   to sampling      alternative
                        Gaseous          and analysis     sampling and
                        Organic          procedures for   analytical
                        Compound         flare gas fuel   procedures in
                        Emissions by     heat content     Method 18 for
                        Gas              (BTU value)      flare gas heat
                        Chromatography.  measurement      content.
                                         required by 40
                                         CFR
                                         60.18(f)(3).
ALT-101..............  ASTM test        Sources subject  Use ASTM D6377-
                        methods cited    to 40 CFR part   10--Standard
                        in the           60, subparts     Test Method
                        subparts         K, Ka, and Kb;   for
                        listed in the    40 CFR part      Determination
                        next column.     61, subpart      of Vapor
                                         FF; 40 CFR       Pressure of
                                         part 63,         Crude Oil:
                                         subparts G, Y,   VPCRX
                                         CC, EEEE, and    (Expansion
                                         GGGGG; and 40    Method) to
                                         CFR part 65,     determine
                                         subpart C.       vapor
                                                          pressures of
                                                          crude oils
                                                          that have a
                                                          vapor pressure
                                                          within the
                                                          range of 25 to
                                                          180kPa at 37.8
                                                          [deg]C.
ALT-102..............  NIST--certified  Sources subject  Use gases
                        reference gas    to 40 CFR part   certified to
                        specifications   60, subpart Ja-  within two
                        described in     Standards of     percent of the
                        Section 16.2.4   Performance      manufacturer's
                        of PS-2.         for Petroleum    listed
                                         Refineries for   concentrations
                                         Which            .
                                         Construction,
                                         Reconstruction
                                         , or
                                         Modification
                                         Commenced
                                         After May 14,
                                         2007.
ALT-103..............  Method 101A--    Analysis of      Use EPA SW-846,
                        Mercury from     sewage sludge    Method 7471A
                        Sewage Sludge    sources          and 7471B--
                        Incinerators     subject to 40    Mercury in
                        and Method       CFR part 61,     Solid or
                        105--Determina   subpart E for    Semisolid
                        tion of          samples          Waste (Manual
                        Mercury in       collected by     Cold-Vapor
                        Wastewater       Methods 105      Technique) in
                        Treatment        and 101A.        lieu of
                        Plant Sewage                      analytical
                        Sludges.                          procedures
                                                          required in
                                                          EPA Method 105
                                                          for analysis
                                                          of sewage
                                                          sludge samples
                                                          and Method
                                                          7470A--Mercury
                                                          in Liquid
                                                          Waste (Manual
                                                          Cold-Vapor
                                                          Technique) as
                                                          an alternative
                                                          method for
                                                          analyzing
                                                          samples
                                                          collected by
                                                          Method 101A.
ALT-104..............  Method 10--      Sources subject  Use the South
                        Carbon           to 40 CFR part   Coast Air
                        Monoxide--NDIR.  63, subpart      Quality
                                         ZZZZ--National   Management
                                         Emission         District
                                         Standards for    (SCAQMD)
                                         Hazardous Air    Method 100.1--
                                         Pollutants for   Instrumental
                                         Stationary       Analyzer
                                         Reciprocating    Procedures for
                                         Internal         Continuous
                                         Combustion       Gaseous
                                         Engines.         Emission
                                                          Sampling for
                                                          measurement of
                                                          carbon
                                                          monoxide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Source owners or operators should review the specific broadly
applicable alternative method approval letter on the EPA's Web site at
www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/approalt.html before electing to employ it.

[FR Doc. 2014-05386 Filed 3-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency's Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request U. S. EPA, OECA, Manufacturing, Energy and Transportation Div 2. OMB control number b. G None a 2060  0183 __ __ __ __

3. Type of information collection ( check one) a. G New collection b. G Revision of a currently approved collection c. X Extension of a currently approved collection d. G Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e. G Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired f. G Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one) a. X Regular b. G Emergency  Approval requested by: / / c. G Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? G Yes X No For b f, note item A2 of Supporting Statement Instructions 6. Requested expiration date a. X Three years from approval date b. G Other Specify: / /___

7. Title NESHAP SUBPART FF Benzene Waste Operations 8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable) 1541.06 9. Keywords Air pollution control, Clean Air Act, Environmental protection 10. Abstract These standards apply to owners and operators of chemical manufacturing plants, coke by product recovery plants, and petroleum refineries as well as owners and operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste generated from the above facilities. The standards require waste treatment and air emission controls at those facilities that do not qualify for specific exemptions. Each facility that manages 10 Mg/ yr or more of the benzene in their waste must initially determine which streams must be controlled. Specific exemptions from control are allowed when it is demonstrated that 1) a waste stream contains less than 10 parts per million by weight ( ppmw) of benzene, or 2) a waste stream is process wastewater with a flow rate of less than 0.02 liter per minute or with a total mass of less than 10 megagrams per year.

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. P Business or other for profit e. Federal Government c. Not for profit institutions f. State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. G Voluntary b. G Required to obtain or retain benefits c. P Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 240 b. Total annual responses 240 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 0 % c. Total annual hours requested 17,028 d. Current OMB inventory 17,028 e. Difference 0 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 2. Adjustment 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars)

a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) 0 c. Total annualized cost requested 0 d. Current OMB inventory 0 e. Difference 0 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change 2. Adjustment 15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. __ Application for benefits e. __ Program planning or management b. __ Program evaluation f. __ Research c. __ General purpose statistics g. _ P_ Regulatory or compliance d. __ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply) a. X Recordkeeping b. Q Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. X On occasion 2. Q Weekly 3. Q Monthly 4. Q Quarterly 5. X Semi annually 6. Q Annually 7. Q Biannually 8. Q Other ( describe) 17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes X No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) Name: Rafael Sanchez Phone: 202 564 7028 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, 1 certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

© It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3): ( I) Why the information is being collected; ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( I) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement. Signature of Program Office Official John B. Rasnic Director, Manufacturing, Energy and Transportation Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Joseph Retzer, Director Regulatory Information Division Office of Policy Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 88 (Friday, May 6, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27145-27147]
[FR Doc No: 2022-09697]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0223; FRL-9724-01-OCSPP]

Notice of Receipts of Requests To Voluntarily Cancel Certain
Pesticide Registrations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA is issuing a notice of receipt of a
request by a registrant to voluntarily cancel a certain pesticide
registration. EPA intends to grant the request at the close of the
comment period for this announcement unless the Agency receives
substantive comments within the comment period that would merit its
further review of the request, or unless the registrant withdraws its
request. If the request is granted, any sale, distribution, or use of
the product listed in this notice will be permitted after the
registration has been cancelled only if such sale, distribution, or use
is consistent with the terms as described in the final order.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 2, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0223, through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Submit written withdrawal request by mail to: Registration Division
(7502P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. ATTN: Christopher
Green.
    Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is closed to visitors with
limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status
information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Green, Registration
Division (7502P), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide
users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution,
or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action.

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

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
Regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    This notice announces receipt by the Agency of a request from a
registrant to cancel a certain pesticide product registered under FIFRA
section 3 (7 U.S.C. 136a) or 24(c) (7 U.S.C. 136v(c)). The registration
is listed in sequence by registration number (or company number and
24(c) number) in Table 1 of this unit.
    Unless the Agency determines that there are substantive comments
that warrant further review of the request or the registrant withdraws
their request, EPA intends to issue an order in the Federal Register
canceling the affected registration.

                          Table 1--Registrations With Pending Requests for Cancellation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Company
        Registration No.            No.                Product name                    Active ingredients
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
432-1623.......................        432  Storcide II Grain, Bin and         Deltamethrin & Chlorpyrifos-
                                             Warehouse Insecticide.             methyl.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 2 of this unit includes the name and address of record for
the registrant of the product in Table 1 of this unit, in sequence by
EPA company number. This number corresponds to the first part of the
EPA registration number of the product listed in this unit.

          Table 2--Registrant Requesting Voluntary Cancellation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     EPA Company No.                 Company name and address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
432.....................  Bayer Environmental Science, A Division of
                           Bayer CropScience, LP, 700 Chesterfield
                           Parkway West, Chesterfield, MO 63017.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    Section 6(f)(1) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136d(f)(1)) provides that a
registrant of a pesticide product may at any time request that any of
its pesticide registrations be canceled. FIFRA further provides that,
before acting on the request, EPA must publish a notice of receipt of
any such request in the Federal Register.
    Section 6(f)(1)(B) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136d(f)(1)(B)) requires that
before acting on a request for voluntary cancellation, EPA must provide
a 30-day public comment period on the request for voluntary
cancellation or use termination. In addition, FIFRA section 6(f)(1)(C)
(7 U.S.C. 136d(f)(1)(C)) requires that EPA provide a 180-day comment
period on a request for voluntary cancellation or termination of any
minor agricultural use before granting the request, unless:
    1. The registrants request a waiver of the comment period, or
    2. The EPA Administrator determines that continued use of the
pesticide would pose an unreasonable adverse effect on the environment.
    The registrant in Table 1 of Unit II has not requested that EPA
waive the 180-day comment period. Accordingly, EPA will provide a 180-
day comment period on the proposed requests.

IV. Procedures for Withdrawal of Request

    Registrants who choose to withdraw a request for cancellation
should submit such withdrawal in writing to the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. If the product has been subject to a
previous cancellation action, the effective date of cancellation and
all other provisions of any earlier cancellation action are
controlling.

V. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks

    Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products
that are currently in the United States and that were packaged,
labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the
cancellation action. For this voluntary cancellation request, the
registrant indicates that the registrant has no existing stocks of the
affected product listed in Table 1 of Unit II. Therefore, no existing
stocks provision is needed for the registrant. The cancellation will be
effective on the date of publication of the cancellation order in the
Federal Register. Thereafter, registrants will be prohibited from
selling or distributing the pesticide identified in Table 1 of Unit II,
except for export consistent with FIFRA section 17 (7 U.S.C. 136o) or
for proper disposal. Persons other than the registrant will generally
be allowed to sell, distribute, or use existing stocks until such
stocks are exhausted, provided that such sale, distribution, or use is
consistent with the terms of the previously approved labeling on, or
that accompanied, the canceled product.

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: April 29, 2022.
Marietta Echeverria,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2022-09697 Filed 5-5-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 230 (Thursday, November 29, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71140-71145]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28908]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2010-0198, FRL-9755-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Connecticut; NOX Emission Trading Orders as Single Source
SIP Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision submitted by the State of Connecticut. This revision
allows facilities to create and/or use emission credits to comply with
the NOX emission limits required by Regulations of
Connecticut State Agencies (RCSA) section 22a-174-22 (Control of
Nitrogen Oxides) using NOx Emission Trading Orders (trading orders).
The intended effect of this action is to propose approval of the
individual trading orders to allow facilities to determine the most
cost-effective way to comply with the state regulation. This action is
being taken in accordance with the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 31,
2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R01-OAR-2010-0198 by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>
    4. Mail: ``Docket Identification Number EPA-R01-OAR-2010-0198'',

Donald Dahl, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits, Toxics,
and Indoor Programs Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code
OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Donald Dahl,
Air Permits, Toxics, and Indoor Programs Unit, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square, 5th floor, (OEP05-2), Boston, MA
02109-3912. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding
legal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-
2010-0198. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov, or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' systems,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
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 www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office
Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible,
you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding
legal holidays.
    In addition to the publicly available docket materials available
for inspection electronically in the Federal Docket Management System
at www.regulations.gov, and the hard copy available at the Regional
Office, which are identified in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal
Register, copies of the state submittals are also available for public
inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the State
Air Agency. The Bureau of Air Management, Department of Environmental
Protection, State Office Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106-
1630.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Dahl, Air Permits, Toxics, and
Indoor Programs Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5
Post Office Square, Suite 100, (OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, phone
number<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background and Purpose
II. What action is EPA proposing in today's notice?
III. What facilities are affected by today's action?
IV. Do these trading orders allow new facilities to use emission
credits to comply with RACT?
V. How did EPA review and evaluate these trading orders?
    A. What is EPA's analysis of the fundamental principle of
integrity?
    1. Integrity Element One--Surplus
    2. Integrity Element Two--Enforceable
    3. Integrity Element Three--Quantifiable
    4. Integrity Element Four--Permanent
    B. What is EPA's analysis of the fundamental principle of
equity?
    1. Equity Element One--General Equity
    2. Equity Element Two--Environmental Justice
    C. What is EPA's analysis of the fundamental principle of
environmental benefit?
    D. What is EPA's analysis regarding the RACT sources?
    E. Conclusion
VI. Proposed Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Purpose

    On August 18, 2000, December 12, 2002, July 1, 2004, and January
13, 2006, the State of Connecticut submitted formal revisions to its
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These SIP revisions consist of 149
source-specific trading orders that allow 50 sources to trade emission
credits in order to comply with state regulations for reducing nitrogen
oxide (NOX) emissions. We previously approved source-
specific trading orders issued by Connecticut under this program on
September 28, 1999 (64 FR 52233) and March 23, 2001 (66 FR 16135).

II. What action is EPA proposing in today's notice?

    Today, EPA is proposing to approve 149 NOX Emission
Trading Orders that will allow facilities in Connecticut to generate
and or use emission credits for compliance with the NOX
emission limits that were established as part of Connecticut's strategy
to lower ozone levels, also known as reasonable available control
technology (RACT). EPA is not taking action on some of the orders
included in the July 1, 2004 submittal: Trading Order 8021 issued to
Pfizer, Trading Order 8246 issued to Sikorsky Aircraft, Trading Order
8110A issued to Yale University and Consent Order 7019A issued to
Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation. EPA is also not taking action on the
Creation Notice Nos. NJ-1, NJ-2, and NJ-4 included in the August 18,
2000 submittal. EPA will take action on these orders and creation
notices at a later date. Lastly, EPA is not taking action on Trading
Orders 8115, Modification 1 and 8115A issued to University of
Connecticut in Mansfield because these trading orders were superseded
by Trading Order 8115B which was included in the July 1, 2004
submittal.

III. What facilities are affected by today's action?

    EPA is proposing to approve NOX emission trading orders
for the facilities listed in the table below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Trading Order No(s).         Name of facility    Facility location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1494A, 8116 Modification, 8116A,  Connecticut         Hartford.
 8116B.                            Resources
                                   Recovery
                                   Authority.
1494 Modifications 2, 3, 4, 5,    Connecticut Light   Branford,
 and 6.                            and Power.          Greenwich,
                                                       Hartford,
                                                       Montville,
                                                       Middletown,
                                                       Milford, Preston,
                                                       Norwalk, and
                                                       Torrington.
8154 Modifications 1, 2, and 3,   Combustion          Windsor.
 8154A.                            Engineering.
1626, 1626 Modification 1, 8247.  Borough of          Naugatuck.
                                   Naugatuck.
8159, 8181, 8181A, 8181A          Connecticut Light   Milford.
 Modification 1, 8219, 8219A,      and Power/Devon
 8219A Modification 1, 8251,       Power LLC.
 8251 Modification 1.
8109............................  Hamilton            Windsor Locks.
                                   Sundstrand.
8093A, 8093B, 8093C, 8093C        Pfizer............  Groton.
 Modification 1, 8136, 8136A.
8119 Modification, 8119A, 8119A   City of Norwich,    Norwich.
 Modification 1.                   Department of
                                   Public Utilities.
8092 Modification, 8103           United              Bridgeport.
 Modifications 1 and 2, 8177       Illuminating/
 Modification 1, 8241, 8241        Wisvest-
 Modification 1, 8242, 8243,       Connecticut LLC/
 8244, 8244 Modification 1,        PSEG Power
 8253, 8253 Modification 1.        Connecticut LLC.
8115 Modification 2, 8115B......  University of       Storrs.
                                   Connecticut.
8107 Modifications 1 and 2,       Northeast Nuclear   Waterford.
 8152, 8152 Modification, 8152A,   Energy/Dominion
 8221, 8221A, 8222, 8222A.         Nuclear.
8180, 8180 Modification 1,        Connecticut Jet     Branford,
 8180A, 8180A Modification 1.      Power.              Greenwich, and
                                                       Torrington.
8114 Modifications 1 and 2,       CYTEC Industries..  Wallingford.
 8114A.
8117, 8117A, 8117B..............  Sprague Paperboard  Versailles.
8157, 8160, 8162, 8182, 8182A,    Connecticut Light   Middletown.
 8182A Modification 1, 8213,       and Power/
 8213A, 8213A Modification 1,      Middletown Power
 8214, 8214A, 8214A Modification   LLC.
 1, 8215, 8215A, 8215A
 Modification 1, 8227, 8227A,
 8227A Modification 1.
8156, 8161, 8183, 8183A, 8183A    Connecticut Light   Montville.
 Modification 1, 8216, 8216A,      and Power/
 8216A Modification 1, 8217,       Montville Power
 8217A, 8217A Modification 1.      LLC.
8158, 8184, 8184A, 8184A          Connecticut Light   Norwalk.
 Modification 1, 8218, 8218A,      and Power/Norwalk
 8218A Modification 1.             Power LLC.
8134, 8134A, 8248...............  United              East Hartford.
                                   Technologies.
8175, 8175 Modification 1,        Northeast           Berlin.
 8175A, 8175A Modification 1.      Generation
                                   Company.
8102 Modification, 8153, 8176     United              New Haven.
 Modification 1, 8240, 8240        Illuminating/
 Modification 1, 8243.             Wisvest-
                                   Connecticut LLC/
                                   PSEG Power
                                   Connecticut LLC.
8220, 8220A, 8220A Modification   Bristol Meyers      Wallingford.
 1.                                Squibb.
8124, 8124A.....................  Stone Container...  Uncasville.
8120, 8120A.....................  Sikorsky Aircraft.  Stratford.
8137 Modifications 1 and 2,       AlliedSignal and    Stratford.
 8137A.                            U.S. Army Tank.
8188............................  Allegheny Ludlum..  Wallingford.
8112, 8112A, 8112A Modification   United States       Groton.
 1, 8201CC.                        Naval Submarine
                                   Base.
8230............................  Jacobs Vehicle      Bloomfield.
                                   Systems.
8110 Modification...............  Yale University...  New Haven.
8123 Modification, 8123A........  Algonquin Gas       Cromwell.
                                   Transmission.
8250, 8261......................  Algonquin Windsor   Windsor Locks.
                                   Locks.
8249, 8249 Modification 1.......  Capitol District    Hartford.
                                   Energy Center.
8094 Modification...............  Ogden Martin......  Bristol.
8095 Modification...............  American Ref-Fuel.  Preston.
8100 Modification...............  Bridgeport Resco..  Bridgeport.
8101 Modification...............  Connecticut         Middletown.
                                   Department of
                                   Mental Health and
                                   Addiction
                                   Services.
8111 Modification...............  Uniroyal Chemical.  Naugatuck.
8118 Modification...............  South Norwalk       Norwalk.
                                   Electrical Works.
8130 Modification...............  Connecticut         Newtown.
                                   Department of
                                   Public Works.
8132 Modification...............  Bridgeport          Bridgeport.
                                   Hospital.
8141 Modification...............  Town of             Wallingford.
                                   Wallingford,
                                   Department of
                                   Public Utilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Do these trading orders allow new facilities to use emission
credits to comply with RACT?

    Most of the trading orders being approved today allow the same
facilities in Connecticut to continue to create or use emission credits
that were approved into the SIP on September 28, 1999 (64 FR 52233) and
March 23, 2001 (66 FR 16135). Facilities that are having their trading
orders approved for the first time are: Hamilton Sundstrand in Windsor
Locks, Borough of Naugatuck in Naugatuck, Bristol Meyers Squibb in
Wallingford, Capital District Energy Center in Hartford, Combustion
Engineering in Windsor, Stone Container in Uncasville, and Sprague
Paperboard in Versailles.

V. How did EPA review and evaluate these trading orders?

    EPA issued a guidance document ``Improving Air Quality With
Economic Incentive Programs'' (EIP Guidance). (See EPA-452/R-01-001,
January 2001). This guidance applies to discretionary

emission trading programs (EIPs) that are submitted to EPA for approval
as a revision of the State Implementation Plan to attain national
ambient air quality standards for criteria pollutants. This guidance
does not require review of previously approved programs and is not
EPA's final action on these discretionary emission trading programs.
EPA's final action on these discretionary emission trading programs
occurs when EPA acts on a State's request to revise the SIP. The EIP
Guidance is non-binding.
    Fundamental principles that apply to all EIPs are integrity
(meaning that credits are based on emission reductions that are
surplus, enforceable, quantifiable, and permanent), equity, and
environmental benefit. These fundamental principles can apply to an EIP
in its entirety (the programmatic level) or to individual sources (the
source-specific level). In addition, EIPs that allow sources to
purchase credits to demonstrate compliance with reasonable available
control technology (RACT) need to meet additional requirements
specified in section 16.13 of the EIP Guidance. EPA evaluated the
Connecticut trading orders against these three fundamental principles,
additional requirements for sources subject to RACT, and applicable
Clean Air Act requirements. Connecticut's trading orders are fully
consistent with these fundamental principles and the requirements for
sources subject to RACT, and EPA is approving these trading orders as
part of Connecticut's SIP.

A. What is EPA's analysis of the fundamental principle of integrity?

    The fundamental principle of integrity consists of the qualities of
being surplus, enforceable, quantifiable, and permanent.
1. Integrity Element One--Surplus
    Emission reductions are surplus if the reductions are not presently
relied upon in any other air quality-related programs such as the SIP,
SIP-related requirements such as transportation conformity, other
adopted state measures not in the SIP, Federal rules that focus on
reducing precursors of criteria pollutants such as new source
performance standards, or a consent decree. Emission reductions
measured by sources on a retrospective basis are surplus if the
source's actual emissions are below its baseline allowable or
historical actual emissions, whichever is lower, and the retrospective
inventories reflect actual emission information as appropriate.
    Each source-specific trading order Connecticut submitted creates
emission reduction credits (ERCs), establishes a baseline of 1990, and
sets emission limits based on the most stringent applicable emission
rate. Credits are only generated when a permitted facility's emissions
are below the emission rate and the baseline. Therefore the credits
produced are in addition to reductions from other requirements of the
Clean Air Act.
2. Integrity Element Two--Enforceable
    Emission reductions use, generation, and other required actions in
the EIP are enforceable on a programmatic basis if they are
independently verifiable, define program violations, and identify those
liable for violations. For enforceability, both the State and EPA
should have the ability to apply penalties and secure appropriate
corrective actions where applicable. Citizens should also have access
to all the emissions-related information obtained from the source so
that citizens can file suits against sources for violations. Required
actions must be practicably enforceable in accordance with other EPA
guidance on practicable enforceability. At the source- specific level,
the source must be liable for violations, the liable party must be
identifiable, and the State, the public, and EPA must be able to
independently verify a source's compliance. The EIP Guidance outlines
enforcement elements common to all trading EIPs in Chapter 6.0.
    Each facility participating in trading NOX credits has
been issued a source-specific trading order containing enforceable
conditions for quantifying, recording, and reporting ERCs. Each trading
order establishes the monitoring/testing protocol, quantifying
emissions based on either a periodic stack test for developing an
emission rate or continuous emission monitors that directly measure
NOX emissions. Each trading order establishes reporting
requirements which includes emissions based upon the approved
monitoring/testing protocol, the number of credits the source
generated, if any, and credits the source previously banked or
purchased to cover its emissions. The State also reviews all of the
sources subject to trading orders to determine which sources did not
meet the specific conditions of their trading orders. Connecticut has
authority to enforce the trading orders and the underlying RACT
requirements of Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies (RCSA)
section 22a-174-22 pursuant to RCSA section 22a-174-12. By approving
these source-specific trading orders, they will become part of the SIP
and be enforceable by both EPA and citizens.
3. Integrity Element Three--Quantifiable
    The generation or use of emission reductions by a source is
quantifiable on a source-specific basis if the source can reliably
calculate the amount of emissions and/or emission reductions occurring
during the implementation of the program, and replicate the
calculations. The EIP Guidance further states that when quantifying
results, sources must use the same methodology used to measure baseline
emissions, unless there are good technical reasons that this approach
is not appropriate. Common elements for quantifying results of an EIP
are included in Chapter 5.0 of the EIP Guidance. All EIPs should
incorporate provisions for predicting results, addressing uncertainty,
approving quantification protocols, and emission quantification
methods. For a reduction to be certified as an ERC, the reduction must
be real, quantifiable, and surplus at the time the ERC is generated.
    Each source-specific trading order contains a protocol for
quantifying emissions. Continuous Emission Monitors (CEMs) are used to
quantify emissions at electric generating units that are creating ERCs.
CEMs at these facilities are also used to determine if the source needs
to use ERCs to comply with NOX RACT. For sources without
CEMs, the protocol requires the source to determine a NOX
emission rate through stack testing. The source is also required to
maintain fuel use records. Each trading order contains an equation that
calculates NOX emissions on a mass basis using the results
from the most recent stack test, CEMs data and/or fuel records. The
generation and use of credits is therefore quantifiable.
4. Integrity Element Four--Permanent
    To satisfy the EIP Guidance expectations for permanence,
Connecticut's trading program must ensure that no emission increases
(compared to emissions if there was no EIP) occur over the time defined
in the SIP. On a source-specific basis, the permanence expectations are
met if the sources participating in the EIP commit to actions or
achieve reductions for a future period of time as defined in the EIP.
    Each source-specific trading order expires five years from the
issuance date. This allows Connecticut to determine every five years if
emission trading is still the best mechanism for reducing
NOX emissions at an individual source. Issuing new trading
orders every five years also allows the

State to take into account any new CAA requirements that become
effective after the initial trading order was issued.
    On an annual basis, sources must report to Connecticut all ERCs
generated and used. The State reviews each credit generated and assigns
an identification number to each credit. The annual reports allow the
State to determine both the generator and user of each credit. Because
each credit generated receives an individual identification number, the
State can reliably track their use.

B. What is EPA's analysis of the fundamental principle of equity?

    The equity principle is composed of two elements--general equity
and environmental justice.
1. Equity Element One--General Equity
    General equity means that an EIP ensures all segments of the
population are protected from public health problems and no segment of
the population receives a disproportionate share of a program's
disbenefits. EIPs should specifically protect communities from
disproportionate impacts from emission shifts and foregone emission
reductions.
    Connecticut has determined the majority of emission credits are
generated at a few electric generating units and some other large
industrial boilers that have continuous emission monitors. These
sources are large emitters that can economically decrease emissions on
a large scale. However, sources using emission credits are much smaller
emitters of NOX and are spread throughout the State.
Therefore, while the benefit of emissions reductions may be higher in
certain geographic areas, the impact from sources using credits will
not severely impact one geographic area over another.
2. Equity Element Two--Environmental Justice
    The environmental justice (EJ) element applies if the EIP covers
VOCs and could disproportionately impact communities populated by
racial minorities, people with low incomes, and/or Tribes. The
Connecticut trading program does not allow emission trading of VOC
credits. Therefore, today's actions allowing the trading of
NOX emission credits does not create an EJ issue.

C. What is EPA's analysis of the fundamental principle of environmental
benefit?

    All EIPs must be environmentally beneficial and can demonstrate
this principle through more rapid emission reductions or faster
attainment than would have occurred without the EIP.
    The discrete emission reduction credit (DERC) EIP meets the
expectations for the environmental benefit principle. The ability to
generate DERCs provides an incentive for early compliance and more
rapid emission reductions. Connecticut sources that create emission
credits through their respective trading orders must discount the
actual credits generated by 10%. In addition, Connecticut discounts the
credits generated or used at some sources depending on certain
conditions, such as an additional 10% discount rate for sources using
stack tests in lieu of continuous emission monitors. These various
discount rates result in greater emission reductions then would
otherwise be achieved without trading, resulting in an environmental
benefit.

D. What is EPA's analysis regarding the RACT sources?

    Sources must use the presumptive RACT limit in the baseline
calculation. Sources are not allowed to use an alternative RACT limit
in determining the baseline emission rate.
    Connecticut's trading orders use the lower of actual emissions in
1990 or the RACT emission limit established for the specific source
category, whichever is less. The source-specific trading orders do not
use an alternative RACT emission rate.
    The EIP Guidance also contains guidance for RACT emission limits
with long averaging times and prohibits emission credits generated
outside of the ozone season from being used during the ozone season.
    Connecticut's trading orders limit sources requiring credits for
excess emissions during ozone season to only use credits generated
during ozone season.

E. Conclusion

    EPA reviewed the source-specific trading orders with respect to the
expectations of the EIP Guidance and the requirements of the Clean Air
Act. EPA has concluded after review and analysis of the source-specific
trading orders that they are approvable.

VI. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the Connecticut SIP revision for the
NOX trading orders, which were submitted on August 18, 2000,
December 12, 2002, July 1, 2004, and January 13, 2006. EPA is
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this notice or on
other relevant matters. These comments will be considered before taking
final action. Interested parties may participate in the Federal
rulemaking procedure by submitting written comments to the EPA New
England Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal
Register.
    The Agency has reviewed this request for revision of the Federally-
approved State implementation plan for conformance with the provisions
of the 1990 amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The Agency has
made the determination that the SIP revision is approvable because it
is in accordance with the CAA and EPA regulations.

VII. 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 proposed 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 proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, 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.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 14, 2012.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 2012-28908 Filed 11-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P