[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 28, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 95489-95492]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31136]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 578

[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0136]
RIN 2127-AL82

Civil Penalties

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule; response to petition for reconsideration; response
to petition for rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: On July 5, 2016, NHTSA published an interim final rule
updating the maximum civil penalty amounts for violations of statutes
and regulations administered by NHTSA, pursuant to the Federal Civil
Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015. This
decision responds to a petition for partial reconsideration of that
interim final rule. After carefully considering the issues raised, the
Agency grants some aspects of the petition, and denies other aspects.
This decision amends the relevant regulatory text accordingly. This
decision also responds to a petition for rulemaking on a similar topic.

DATES: Effective date: This rule is effective January 27, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rebecca Yoon, Office of the Chief
Counsel, NHTSA, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on CAFE Penalties and Interim Final Rule

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
administers Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards under 49
U.S.C. 32901 et seq. Vehicle manufacturers that produce passenger cars
and light trucks for sale in the United States are subject to these
standards,\1\ and are subject to civil penalties for failure to meet
the standards.\2\ Manufacturers generally meet the standards by
applying technology to their vehicles to improve their fleet-wide fuel
economy, but may also apply credits earned from over-compliance with
standards in another year or purchased from another manufacturer. If a
manufacturer does not have credits to apply, and does not apply
sufficient fuel economy-improving technologies to their vehicles to
meet their fleet-wide standards, then that manufacturer is liable for
civil penalties.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 49 U.S.C. 32911(b).
    \2\ 49 U.S.C. 32912(b).
    \3\ Civil penalties are remitted to the U.S. Treasury.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Congress has prescribed the formula for calculating a civil penalty
for violation of a CAFE standard. That formula multiplies the penalty
rate times the number of tenths-of-a-mile-per-gallon by which a non-
compliant fleet falls short of an applicable CAFE standard, times the
number of vehicles in that non-compliant fleet.\4\ For many years, the
penalty rate has been $5.50 per tenth-of-a-mile-per-gallon. As an
illustration, assume that Manufacturer A produced 1,000,000 light
trucks in model year 2010. Assume further that A has a light truck
standard of 20 mpg for MY 2010, and an achieved light truck average
fuel economy level of 19.7 mpg in that model year. If A has no credits
to apply, then A's assessed civil penalty under this historical penalty
rate would be:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 49 U.S.C. 32912(b).

$5.50 (penalty rate) x 3 (tenths of an mpg) x 1,000,000 (vehicles in
Manufacturer A's light truck fleet) = $16,500,000 due for A's light
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
truck fleet for MY 2010.

To date, few manufacturers have actually paid civil penalties, and the
amounts of CAFE penalties paid generally have been relatively low.
Additionally, since the introduction of credit trading and transfers
for MY 2011 and after, many manufacturers have taken advantage of those
flexibilities rather than paying civil penalties for non-compliance.
    The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements
Act (November 2, 2015) (the ``Act'') prescribed an inflation adjustment
for many civil monetary penalties, including CAFE's civil penalty rate.
In that Act, Congress generally required Federal agencies that
administer civil monetary penalties to make an initial ``catch-up''
adjustment for inflation through an interim final rule by July 1, 2016,
and then to make subsequent annual adjustments for inflation (see Pub.
L. 114-74, Sec. 701). NHTSA developed an interim final rule (IFR)
implementing the Agency's responsibilities under that Act, and that IFR
published in the Federal Register on July 5, 2016. The NHTSA IFR
included adjustments for all civil monetary penalties administered by
the Agency, including those prescribed by the CAFE program. In
accordance with the Act and OMB guidance, the updated penalty rate
increased from $5.50 per tenth of a mile per gallon (mpg) to $14 per
tenth of an mpg.\5\ NHTSA stated in implementation guidance that it
issued following the IFR that the Agency intended to apply the $14 rate
to any penalties assessed on and after August 4, 2016, beginning with
penalties applicable to violations for MY 2015, and also applying to
any violations from prior model years that resulted from recalculation
of a manufacturer's previous CAFE levels.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ NHTSA's explanation of its process, including reliance on
OMB guidance for calculating the initial adjustment required by the
Act, is set forth in the interim final rule at 81 FR 43524-26 (Jul.
5, 2016). The interim final rule also discusses the ``rounding
rule'' under the prior version of the Federal Civil Penalties
Inflation Adjustment Act, which prevented NHTSA from raising the
$5.50 rate after 1997.
    \6\ Memorandum, ``Implementation of the Federal Civil Penalties
Inflation Adjustment Act Improvement Act of 2015 for the Corporate
Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Program,'' July 18, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Industry Petition for Reconsideration

    The Auto Alliance and Global Automakers jointly petitioned NHTSA
for reconsideration of the interim final rule with regard to the
inflation adjustment for CAFE non-compliance penalties (hereafter, the
Alliance and Global petition will be referred to as the ``Industry
Petition'') on August 1, 2016. The Industry Petition asked that NHTSA
not apply the penalty increase to non-compliances associated with
``model years that have already been completed or for which a company's
compliance plan has already been set.'' Specifically, the Industry
Petition stated that:

    Our most significant concern with the IFR is that it would apply
retroactively to the 2014 and 2015 Model Years (which have been
completed for all manufacturers but for which the compliance files
are not all closed), to the 2016 Model Year (which is complete for
many manufacturers) and to the 2017 and 2018 Model Years (for which
manufacturers have already set compliance plans based on guidance
from NHTSA, including the [historical penalty amounts of $5.50 per
tenth of an mpg]). Applying the increased civil penalties in this
manner is profoundly unfair to manufacturers, does not improve the
effectiveness of this penalty, and does nothing to further the
policies underlying the CAFE statute.

Industry Petition at 3.
    In the alternative, the Industry Petition requested that if NHTSA
decided to apply the penalty increase to MYs 2014-2018, the Agency
should recalculate the adjusted penalty rate

using 2007 as the ``base year'' for calculating the inflation
adjustment. As another alternative, the Industry Petition sought a
finding that immediately increasing the penalty to $14 would cause a
``negative economic impact,'' thereby requiring a smaller initial
penalty increase. See Public Law 114-74, Sec. 701(c) (providing for an
exception to the otherwise-applicable penalty increase, if the Agency
finds through a rulemaking proceeding that the increase would cause a
``negative economic impact,'' a term that the statute does not
define).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Because the Agency is granting the Industry Petition's
request to apply inflation-adjusted penalties only to MY 2019 and
after, the Agency need not address the Industry Petition's
alternative requests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Petition for Rulemaking To Raise Civil Penalty Rate

    The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) petitioned NHTSA on
October 1, 2015, just over a month prior to passage of the Act, to
conduct a rulemaking to raise the civil penalty rate for CAFE standard
violations under NHTSA's then-existing statutory authority. The CBD
petition stated correctly that NHTSA had not adjusted the $5.50 civil
penalty rate for inflation since 1997, and requested that the Agency
follow the procedure laid out at 49 U.S.C. 32912(c) to undertake a
rulemaking to raise the amount to the maximum then allowed by Congress,
$10 per tenth-of-an-mpg. A month later, Congress changed the statutory
landscape by enacting the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment
Act Improvements Act of 2015.

IV. NHTSA Response to Petitions

    Having carefully considered the issues raised by the petitioners,
NHTSA will grant the Industry Petition in part and deny it in part.
Beginning with model year 2019, NHTSA will apply the full penalty
prescribed by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment
Improvements Act of 2015. NHTSA is required by the Act to continue
adjusting the civil penalty for inflation each year, so the penalty
rate applicable to MY 2019 and after fleets will be $14 per tenth-of-
an-mpg, plus any adjustment(s) for inflation that occur between now and
a violation's assessment. The Agency concludes that this decision also
effectively addresses the issue raised by the CBD Petition. The
discussion below presents the Agency's analysis and conclusion.

A. Model Years 2014-2016

    NHTSA agrees with the Industry Petitioners that applying the $14
civil penalty rate to violations of CAFE standards in model years prior
to the enactment of the Act would not result in additional fuel
savings, and thus would seem to impose retroactive punishment without
accomplishing Congress' specific intent in establishing the civil
penalty provision of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (``EPCA'').
Model years typically begin prior to their respective calendar year. By
November 2, 2015 (the date of enactment of the civil penalties
adjustment Act), nearly all manufacturers subject to the CAFE standards
had completed both model years 2014 and 2015, and no further vehicles
in those model years were being produced in significant numbers. This
argument is even stronger considering that all manufacturers would have
completed these model years prior to July 5, 2016, the date of the IFR.
If all the vehicles for a model year have already been produced, then
there is no way for their manufacturers to raise the fuel economy level
of those vehicles in order to avoid higher penalty rates for non-
compliance.
    In the specific context of EPCA as amended, the purpose of civil
penalties for non-compliance is to encourage manufacturers to comply
with the CAFE standards. See 49 CFR 578.2 (section addressing penalties
states that a ``purpose of this part is to effectuate the remedial
impact of civil penalties and to foster compliance with the law''); see
generally, 49 U.S.C. 32911-32912; United States v. General Motors, 385
F.Supp. 598, 604 (D.D.C. 1974), vacated on other grounds, 527 F.2d 853
(D.C. Cir. 1975) (``The policy of the Act with regard to civil
penalties is clearly to discourage noncompliance''). Assuming that
higher civil penalty rates are intended, in the particular context of
CAFE, to provide greater incentives for manufacturers to comply with
applicable standards, then raising penalty rates for model years
already completed and thus unchangeable would be not only
retroactive,\8\ but incapable of serving the purpose of causing greater
compliance with CAFE standards. Based on the governing statutory
framework and the specific CAFE regulatory scheme, NHTSA believes that
Congress would not have intended retroactive application of an
inflation adjustment to overcome this core substantive purpose and
intent of EPCA. This analysis compels the conclusion that applying an
increased penalty rate to MYs 2014 and 2015 would not be appropriate,
nor would applying it to MY 2016, which was underway by November 2,
2015 and over halfway complete by July 5, 2016.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Retroactivity is not favored in the law. The Supreme Court
has stated that ``congressional enactments . . . will not be
construed to have retroactive effect unless their language requires
this result.'' Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244, 280
(1994), citing Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital, 488 U.S.
204, 208 (1988). NHTSA believes that in the specific context of the
CAFE program and the statutes that govern it, Congress could not
have intended to impose higher civil penalty rates for time periods
when they would not incentivize increased fuel economy.
    \9\ The decision not to apply the increased penalties
retroactively is similar to the approach taken by various other
federal agencies in implementing the Federal Civil Penalties
Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015. See, e.g.,
Department of Justice, Interim final rule with request for comments:
Civil Monetary Penalties Inflation Adjustment, 81 FR 42491 (June 30,
2016) (applying increased penalties only to violations after
November 2, 2015, the date of the Act's enactment); Federal Aviation
Administration, Interim Final Rule: Revisions to Civil Penalty
Inflation Adjustment Tables, 81 FR 43463 (July 5, 2016) (applying
increased penalties only to violations after August 1, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Model Years 2017 and 2018

    The Industry Petition asserts that manufacturers have set their
product and compliance plans for MY 2017 and 2018 based on the CAFE
penalty provisions in place prior to July 2016, and that it is too late
at this juncture to make significant changes to those plans and avoid
non-compliances (for the manufacturers already intending not to
comply). The Agency determined above that it is not appropriate to
apply an increased penalty rate to CAFE non-compliance in past model
years, i.e., MY 2016 and before, which could not be changed in response
to a higher penalty rate. The next question presented by the Industry
Petition is how to address future model years' vehicles whose fuel
economy levels cannot be changed at this juncture.
    For immediate future model years (i.e., 2017 and 2018), the
theoretical possibility exists that manufacturers could respond to a
higher penalty rate by increasing their fleet fuel economy and thus
achieving CAFE compliance or mitigating their non-compliance. However,
because of industry design, development, and production cycles, vehicle
designs (including drivetrains, which are where many fuel economy
improvements are made) are often fixed years in advance, making
adjustments to fleet fuel economy difficult without a lead time of
multiple years.
    Here, the Industry Petitioners assert that their plans for what
technology to put on which MYs 2017 and 2018 vehicles are, at the point
the IFR was issued, fixed and inalterable. NHTSA takes manufacturers'
product cycles into account when NHTSA sets fuel economy standards. For
example,

because NHTSA recognizes that manufacturers' product and compliance
plans are difficult to alter significantly for years ahead of a given
model year,\10\ the Agency includes product cadence in its assessment
of CAFE standards, by limiting application of technology in its
analytical model to years in which vehicles are refreshed or
redesigned. NHTSA believes that this approach facilitates continued
fuel economy improvements over the longer term by accounting for the
fact that manufacturers will seek to make improvements when and where
they are most cost-effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ One of the Industry Petitioners, the Alliance, submitted
supplemental materials describing the activities and events that
make up product cycles, which support this point. See Docket No.
NHTSA-2016-0136.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In an analogous context, EPCA provides that when DOT amends a fuel
economy standard to make it more stringent, that new standard must be
promulgated ``at least 18 months before the beginning of the model year
to which the amendment applies.'' 49 U.S.C. 32902(a)(2). The 18 months'
notice requirement for increases in fuel economy standards represents a
congressional acknowledgement of the importance of advance notice to
vehicle manufacturers to allow them the lead time necessary to adjust
their product plans, designs, and compliance plans to address changes
in fuel economy standards. Similarly here, affording manufacturers lead
time to adjust their products and compliance plans helps them to
account for such an increase in the civil penalty amount. In this
unique case, the 18-month lead time for increases in the stringency of
fuel economy standards provides a reasonable proxy for appropriate
advance notice of the application of substantially increased--here
nearly tripled--civil penalties.
    Given that NHTSA issued the IFR in July 2016, 18 months from that
date would be January 2018, which would encompass MY 2017 for most
manufacturers and models and part of MY 2018. Based on the Industry
Petition, comments, and agency expertise, NHTSA believes that, in this
instance, applying the adjusted penalties only for MY 2019 and after
provides a reasonable amount of lead time for manufacturers to adjust
their plans and products to take into account the substantial change in
penalty level.
    For future model years for which the vehicles to be produced and
their technologies are essentially fixed (i.e., MYs 2017-2018), it is
conceivable that some manufacturers might be able to change production
volumes of certain lower- or higher-fuel-economy models, which could
help them to reduce or avoid CAFE non-compliance penalties. However, in
this particular instance, compelling such a result through the
immediate application of higher penalty rates to product design
decisions that have already been made and cannot be changed would be
contrary to a fundamental congressional purpose of the CAFE program.
The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) amendments of 2007
required that fuel economy standards be attribute-based, demonstrating
congressional intent that the CAFE program be responsive to consumer
demand. See 49 U.S.C. 32902(b)(3). Applying higher civil penalty rates
in a way that would force manufacturers to disregard consumer demand
(e.g., by restricting the availability of vehicles that consumers want)
would be inconsistent with that fundamental statutory command.
Providing some lead time, as here, mitigates that concern.
    In order to reconcile competing statutory objectives in the unique
context of multi-year vehicle product cycles, NHTSA will grant the
Industry Petition insofar as it seeks to apply the penalty increase
only for model years 2019 and after. For CAFE standard non-compliances
that occur(ed) for model years 2014-2018, NHTSA intends to assess civil
penalties at the rate of $5.50 per tenth of an mpg. Beginning with
model year 2019, NHTSA will apply the full penalty prescribed by the
Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Improvements Act of 2015.
NHTSA is required by the Act to continue adjusting the civil penalty
for inflation each year, so the penalty rate applicable to MY-2019-and-
after fleets will be $14 per tenth-of-an-mpg, plus any adjustment(s)
for inflation that occur between now and then. See Public Law 114-74,
Sec. 701(b)(2).
    NHTSA believes this approach appropriately harmonizes the two
congressional directives of adjusting civil penalties to account for
inflation and maintaining attribute-based, consumer-demand-focused
standards, applied in the context of the presumption against
retroactive application of statutes. See, e.g., Bowen v. Georgetown
Univ. Hosp., 488 U.S. 204, 208. This decision increases civil penalties
starting with the model year that manufacturers, in this particular
instance, are reasonably able to design and produce vehicles in
response to the increased penalties. See Industry Petition at 4-6
(seeking application of the adjusted civil penalties only to MY 2019
and after).
    In summary, NHTSA partially grants the Industry Petition for
Reconsideration insofar as it seeks implementation of the civil
penalties adjustment only to MY 2019 and after, and denies the Industry
Petition in all other respects.
    This action also effectively responds to the petition for
rulemaking from CBD to increase the civil penalty rate as permitted by
EPCA/EISA. The civil penalty rate beginning in MY 2019 will be
substantially higher than the CBD petition requested, and NHTSA
believes that the increased penalty will accomplish CBD's goal of
encouraging manufacturers to apply more fuel-saving technologies to
their vehicles in those future model years. To the extent that the CBD
Petition requests an earlier penalty rate increase, it is denied for
the reasons set forth in this decision.

V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

A. Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. This rulemaking
document was not reviewed under Executive Order 12866 or Executive
Order 13563, and has been determined not to be ``significant'' under
the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures
and the policies of the Office of Management and Budget.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    NHTSA has also considered the impacts of this rule under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I certify that this rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The
following provides the factual basis for this certification under 5
U.S.C. 605(b). The amendments only affect manufacturers of motor
vehicles. Low-volume manufacturers can petition NHTSA for an alternate
CAFE standard under 49 CFR part 525, which lessens the impacts of this
rulemaking on small businesses by allowing them to avoid liability for
potential penalties under 49 CFR 578.6(h)(2). Small organizations and
governmental jurisdictions will not be significantly affected as the
price of motor vehicles and equipment ought not change as the result of
this rule.

C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132 requires NHTSA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local
officials

in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is
defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have
``substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Under
Executive Order 13132, the agency may not issue a regulation with
Federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local governments, or the agency consults
with State and local governments early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation.
    This rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. The reason
is that this rule applies to motor vehicle manufacturers. Thus, the
requirements of Section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Public Law 104-4,
requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the cost,
benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more
than $100 million annually. Because NHTSA does not believe that this
rule will necessarily have a $100 million effect, no Unfunded Mandates
assessment will be prepared.

E. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This rule does not have a retroactive or preemptive effect.
Judicial review of this rule may be obtained pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 702.
That section does not require that a petition for reconsideration be
filed prior to seeking judicial review.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, we state
that there are no requirements for information collection associated
with this rulemaking action.

G. Privacy Act

    Please note that anyone is able to search the electronic form of
all 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 DOT's complete Privacy Act statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 578

    Fuel economy, Motor vehicles, Penalties.

    In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 578 is amended as
set forth below.

PART 578--CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES

0
1. The authority citation for 49 CFR part 578 is revised to read as
follows:

    Authority: Pub. L. 101-410, Pub. L. 104-134, Pub. L. 109-59,
Pub. L. 114-74, Pub L. 114-94, 49 U.S.C. 32902 and 32912; delegation
of authority at 49 CFR 1.81, 1.95.

0
2. Section 578.6 is amended by revising paragraph (h) to read as
follows:

Sec.  578.6  Civil penalties for violations of specified provisions of
Title 49 of the United States Code.

* * * * *
    (h) Automobile fuel economy. (1) A person that violates 49 U.S.C.
32911(a) is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty
of not more than $40,000 for each violation. A separate violation
occurs for each day the violation continues.
    (2) Except as provided in 49 U.S.C. 32912(c), beginning with model
year 2019, a manufacturer that violates a standard prescribed for a
model year under 49 U.S.C. 32902 is liable to the United States
Government for a civil penalty of $14, plus any adjustments for
inflation that occurred or may occur (for model years before model year
2019, the civil penalty is $5.50), multiplied by each .1 of a mile a
gallon by which the applicable average fuel economy standard under that
section exceeds the average fuel economy--
    (i) Calculated under 49 U.S.C. 32904(a)(1)(A) or (B) for
automobiles to which the standard applies produced by the manufacturer
during the model year;
    (ii) Multiplied by the number of those automobiles; and
    (iii) Reduced by the credits available to the manufacturer under 49
U.S.C. 32903 for the model year.
* * * * *

    Issued on: December 21, 2016.
Mark R. Rosekind,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-31136 Filed 12-27-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: January 24, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 16)]
[Notices]
[Page 4205]
[DOCID:fr24ja08-71]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP08-50-000]

Trunkline Gas Company, LLC; Errata Notice

January 16, 2008.
    On January 14, 2008, the Commission issued a ``Notice of Request
Under Blanket Authorization (Notice) in the above docketed proceeding.
That Notice is corrected as follows:
    In paragraph three of the Notice, ``Stephen T. Veach'' should be
replaced with ``Stephen T. Veatch,'' ``Trunkline Gas Company'' should
be replaced with ``Trunkline Gas Company, LLC'' and Mr. Veatch's e-mail
address should be changed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    On Page 2, the notice inadvertently has a ``comment date of
February 4, 2008.'' Please disregard the February 4, 2008 comment date.
The notice correctly states and provides that: ``Any person or the
Commission's Staff may, within 60 days after the issuance of the
instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the
Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or
notice of intervention and, pursuant to section 157.205 of the
Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205), a
protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed
therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized
effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is
filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for
filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an
application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.''

 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-1151 Filed 1-23-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 128)]
[Notices]
[Page 32199-32200]
[DOCID:fr07jy09-102]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Thursday, July 9,
2009 at 1 p.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be
present.

    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), (8), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of
the scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Casey, as duty officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday,
July 9, 2009 will be:

institution and settlement of injunctive actions; institution and
settlement of administrative proceedings; adjudicatory matters;
regulatory matter regarding financial institutions; and other
matters related to enforcement proceedings.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact: The Office of the
Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 2, 2009.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-16035 Filed 7-2-09; 11:15 am]


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 140 (Monday, July 22, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43877-43878]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17522]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0062; FRL-9534-6]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request: Procedures for Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act and Assessing the Environmental Effects Abroad
of EPA Actions (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``40 CFR Part 6: Procedures for
Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act and Assessing the
Environmental Effects Abroad of EPA Actions'' (EPA ICR No. 2243.07, OMB
Control No. 2020-0033) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is
currently approved through August 31, 2013. Public comments were
previously requested via the Federal Register (78 FR 12308) on February
22, 2013 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an
additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR
is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before August 21,
2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2005-0062, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method) or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jessica Trice, Office of Federal
Activities, Mail Code 2252A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202)
564-6646; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42
U.S.C. 4321-4347 establishes a national policy for the environment. The
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) oversees the NEPA
implementation. CEQ's Regulations at 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508 set
the standard for NEPA compliance. They also require agencies to
establish their own NEPA implementing procedures. EPA's procedures for
implementing NEPA are found in 40 CFR Part 6. Through this part, EPA
adopted the CEQ Regulations and supplemented those regulations for
actions by EPA that are subject to NEPA requirements. EPA actions
subject to NEPA include the award of wastewater treatment construction
grants under Title II of the Clean Water Act, EPA's issuance of new
source National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits
under section 402 of the Clean Water Act, certain research and
development projects, development and issuance of regulations, EPA
actions involving renovations or new construction of facilities, and
certain grants awarded for projects authorized by Congress through the
Agency's annual Appropriations Act. EPA is collecting information from
certain applicants as part of the process of complying with either NEPA
or Executive Order 12114 (``Environmental Effects Abroad of Major
Federal Actions''). EPA's NEPA regulations apply to the actions of EPA
that are subject to NEPA in order to ensure that environmental
information is available to the Agency's decision-makers and the public
before decisions are made and before actions are taken. When EPA
conducts an environmental assessment pursuant to its Executive Order
12114 procedures, the Agency generally follows its NEPA procedures.
Compliance with the procedures is the responsibility of EPA's
Responsible Officials, and for applicant proposed actions applicants
may be required to provide environmental information to EPA as part of
the environmental review process. For this Information Collection
Request (ICR), applicant-proposed projects subject to either NEPA or
Executive Order 12114 (and that are not addressed in other EPA
programs' ICRs) are addressed through the NEPA process.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by
this action are certain grant or permit applicants who must submit
environmental information documentation to EPA for their projects to
comply with NEPA or Executive

Order 12114, including Wastewater Treatment Construction Grants Program
facilities, State and Tribal Assistance Grant recipients and new source
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permittees.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.
    Estimated number of respondents: 312 (total).
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 38,472 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $3,607,085 (per year), includes $8,452
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the total estimated
respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB.
However, a slight increase to the estimated O&M costs has occurred
related to CE documentation and have been adjusted in the renewal ICR
based on inflationary changes.

John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2013-17522 Filed 7-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 5, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 391-393]
[FR Doc No: 2021-28445]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 232

[Release Nos. 33-11016; 34-93827; 39-2542; IC-34444]

Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is
adopting amendments to Volume II of the Electronic Data Gathering,
Analysis, and Retrieval system (``EDGAR'') Filer Manual (``Filer
Manual'') and related rules and forms. The EDGAR system was upgraded on
December 20, 2021.

DATES: Effective date: January 5, 2022. The incorporation by reference
of the Filer Manual is approved by the Director of the Federal Register
as of January 5, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions regarding the amendments
to Volume II of the Filer Manual and related rules, please contact
Rosemary Filou, Deputy Director and Chief Counsel, or Jane Patterson,
Senior Special Counsel, in the EDGAR Business Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
For questions concerning Inline XBRL tagging requirements for Business
Development Companies, please contact Heather Fernandez in the Division
of Investment Management at<PHONE_NUMBER>. For questions concerning
form types SBSE-CCO-RPT and SBSE-CCO-RPT/A, please contact Kelly Shoop,
Branch Chief, and Katherine Lesker, Special Counsel, in the Division of
Trading and Markets at<PHONE_NUMBER>. For questions regarding the DEI
Taxonomy additions for auditor information, please contact Chris
Windsor, Senior Special Counsel, in the

Division of Corporation Finance at<PHONE_NUMBER>. For questions
regarding a validation added to EDGAR for Form ATS-N, please contact
Tyler Raimo, Assistant Director, in the Division of Trading and Markets
at<PHONE_NUMBER>. For questions concerning taxonomies or schemas,
please contact the Office of Structured Disclosure in the Division of
Economic and Risk Analysis at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are adopting an updated Filer Manual,
Volume II: ``EDGAR Filing,'' Version 60 (December 2021) and amendments
to 17 CFR 232.301 (``Rule 301''). The updated Filer Manual is
incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations.

I. Background

    The Filer Manual contains technical specifications needed for
filers to make submissions on EDGAR. Filers must comply with the
applicable provisions of the Filer Manual in order to assure the timely
acceptance and processing of filings made in electronic format.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Rule 301 of Regulation S-T.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Edgar System Changes and Associated Modifications to Volume II of
the Filer Manual

    EDGAR is being updated in Release 21.4, and was previously updated
in Release 21.3.1, and corresponding amendments to Volume II of the
Filer Manual will be made to reflect these changes, as described
below.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Release 21.4 will be deployed on or about December 20, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 14, 2016, the Commission adopted rules to implement
provisions of Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act. Rule 15Fk-1(c) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires security-based swap dealers
and security-based swap participants (``SBS Entities'') to submit an
annual report to the Commission, prepared and signed by the chief
compliance officer, containing prescribed information concerning the
SBS Entities' compliance programs.\3\ Release 21.4 introduces two new
submission types for SBS Entities' chief compliance officer to submit
the annual compliance report and any subsequent amendments to the
report on EDGAR: SBSE-CCO-RPT and SBSE-CCO-RPT/A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Rule 15Fk-1(c) under the Exchange Act [17 CFR 240.15Fk-
1(c)].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 8, 2020, the Commission adopted rule and form amendments
that modify the registration, communications, and offering processes
for business development companies (``BDCs'') and registered closed-end
investment companies (collectively, ``funds'') under the Securities Act
of 1933, Regulations S-K and S-T, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and the Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Offering Reform Rules'').\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Offering Reform for Closed-End Investment
Companies, Release 33-10771 (Apr. 8, 2020) [85 FR 33290 (June 1,
2020)]. The compliance dates for the new structured data
requirements of the rulemaking are August 1, 2022 (for funds that
file a short-form shelf registration statement on Form N-2), and
February 1, 2023 (for all other funds).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Offering Reform Rules include new structured data requirements
for BDCs, which will be required to use Inline XBRL to tag their
financial statements. In addition, all funds that file on Form N-2 will
be required to use Inline XBRL to tag Form N-2 cover page
information.\5\ Funds must also tag information provided in response to
Items 3.1, 4.3, 8.2.b, 8.2.d, 8.3.a, 8.3.b, 8.5.b, 8.5.c, 8.5.e,
10.1.a-d, 10.2.a-c, 10.2.e, 10.3, and 10.5 (``specified prospectus
disclosures'') that is included in any registration statement or post-
effective amendment filed on Form N-2, or for any forms of prospectus
filed pursuant to Rule 424 under the Securities Act of 1933 that
include or amend such information. The Offering Reform Rules also
require funds that file a short-form shelf registration statement on
Form N-2 (``seasoned issuers'') to use Inline XBRL to tag any specified
prospectus disclosures that appear in Exchange Act reports that are
incorporated by reference into their registration statement (e.g.,
Forms 10-K, 10-Q, 8-K, N-CSR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ BDCs and registered closed-end funds that file on Forms 10-
K, 10-Q, or 8-K must also tag the cover page of such filings
pursuant to the requirements of Rule 406 of Regulation S-T.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In conjunction with the Offering Reform Rules, EDGAR will be
updated to support the 2021Q4 Closed-End Funds (CEF) Taxonomy, and the
EDGAR Filer Manual will be revised to update the submission types that
will accept XBRL and to describe certain validations specific to the
CEF Taxonomy.
    Further, on October 13, 2021, the Commission adopted rules and form
amendments to modernize filing fee disclosure and payment methods for
operating companies, BDCs, and most registered closed-end funds.\6\
Effective January 31, 2022, such filers will be required to disclose
their filing fee calculation table(s) and related information in a new
filing fee exhibit for most fee bearing forms within the scope of the
rules. The new exhibit, which will be titled ``EX-FILING FEES,'' will
initially be filed in an unstructured format. Filing instructions for
the new filing fee exhibits are included in Volume II of the Filer
Manual with a note to filers that the instructions are effective on
January 31, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Filing Fee Disclosure and Payment Methods Modernization,
Release 33-10997 (Oct. 13, 2021) [86 FR 70166 (Dec. 9, 2021)].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also, the following updates will be made to Volume II of the Filer
Manual:
     A validation will be added within EDGAR to ensure that if
a filer indicates that certain information can be found on a website
URL that is listed in Item 6 of Form ATS-N, the website URL has, in
fact, been included. If the filer has not included the website, EDGAR
will suspend the filing and send a suspension message to the filer.
     On December 18, 2020, Congress enacted the ``Holding
Foreign Companies Accountable Act'' (``HFCAA''), which includes
submission and disclosure requirements for registrants that the
Commission identifies as having filed an annual report on Forms 20-F,
40-F, 10-K, and N-CSR with an audit report issued by a registered
public accounting firm that is located in a foreign jurisdiction and
that the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (``PCAOB'') has
determined it is unable to inspect or investigate completely because of
a position taken by an authority in that jurisdiction.\7\ On December
2, 2021, the Commission adopted amendments \8\ to finalize interim
final rules \9\ that revised Forms 20-F, 40-F, 10-K, and N-CSR to
implement the disclosure and submission requirements of the HFCAA. The
final amendments, among other things, mandated that filers provide
certain XBRL information about firms providing audit reports for
financial statements included in annual reports filed on Forms 20-F,
40-F, 10-K, and N-CSR for fiscal years ending on or after December 18,
2021, which will begin to be made in early 2022.\10\ In order for
registrants to comply with the final amendments, EDGAR will be updated
to support the latest version of DEI-2021Q4 Taxonomy, and all
registrants will be required to use the updated taxonomy, or a
subsequently adopted version of the taxonomy, for any annual

report filed for a period ended after December 15, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, Public Law 116-
222 (Dec. 18, 2020).
    \8\ Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act Disclosure,
Release 34-93701 (Dec. 2, 2021) [86 FR 70027 (Dec. 9, 2021)].
    \9\ Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act Disclosure,
Release No. 34-91364 (Mar. 18, 2021) [86 FR 17528 (Apr. 5, 2021)].
    \10\ Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act Disclosure,
Release 34-93701 (Dec. 2, 2021) [86 FR 70027 (Dec. 9, 2021)].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Release 21.4 also introduces, and Release 21.3.1 introduced,
additional changes in EDGAR that do not require corresponding
amendments to the Filer Manual. See the ``Updates'' section of Volume
II of the Filer Manual.

IV. Amendments to Rule 301 of Regulation S-T

    Along with the adoption of the updated Filer Manual, we are
amending Rule 301 of Regulation S-T to provide for the incorporation by
reference into the Code of Federal Regulations of the current
revisions. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director
of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
    The updated EDGAR Filer Manual is available at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/filer-information/current-edgar-filer-manual. Typically, the
EDGAR Filer Manual is also available for website viewing and printing
in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Room 1580,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Operating conditions may limit access to the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

V. Administrative Law Matters

    Because the Filer Manual, the related rule amendments, relate
solely to agency procedures or practice and do not substantially alter
the rights and obligations of non-agency parties, publication for
notice and comment is not required under the Administrative Procedure
Act (``APA'').\11\ It follows that the amendments do not require
analysis under requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act \12\ or a
report to Congress under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A).
    \12\ 5 U.S.C. 601 through 612.
    \13\ 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The effective date for the updated Filer Manual and related rule
amendments is January 5, 2022. In accordance with the APA,\14\ we find
that there is good cause to establish an effective date less than 30
days after publication of these rules. The Commission believes that
establishing an effective date less than 30 days after publication of
these rules is necessary to coordinate the effectiveness of the updated
Filer Manual with the related system upgrades.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Statutory Basis

    We are adopting the amendments to Regulation S-T under the
authority in Sections 6, 7, 8, 10, and 19(a) of the Securities Act of
1933,\15\ Sections 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15B, 23, and 35A of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934,\16\ Section 319 of the Trust Indenture
Act of 1939,\17\ and Sections 8, 30, 31, and 38 of the Investment
Company Act of 1940.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, and 77s(a).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78c, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o, 78o-4, 78w, and 78ll.
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 77sss.
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, and 80a-37.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 232

    Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Securities.

Text of the Amendments

    In accordance with the foregoing, title 17, chapter II of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 232 REGULATION S-T--GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR
ELECTRONIC FILINGS

0
1. The general authority citation for part 232 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 77c, 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s(a), 77z-3,
77sss(a), 78c(b), 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o(d), 78w(a), 78ll, 80a-6(c),
80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, 80a-37, 7201 et seq.; and 18 U.S.C. 1350,
unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *

0
2. Section 232.301 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  232.301   EDGAR Filer Manual.

    Filers must prepare electronic filings in the manner prescribed by
the EDGAR Filer Manual, promulgated by the Commission, which sets forth
the technical formatting requirements for electronic submissions. The
requirements for becoming an EDGAR Filer and updating company data are
set forth in the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: ``General Information,''
Version 39 (September 2021). The requirements for filing on EDGAR are
set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: ``EDGAR
Filing,'' Version 60 (December 2021). All of these provisions have been
incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations, which
action was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You must comply with
these requirements in order for documents to be timely received and
accepted. The EDGAR Filer Manual is available at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/filer-information/current-edgar-filer-manual. Typically, the
EDGAR Filer Manual is also available for website viewing and printing
in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3
p.m. Operating conditions may limit access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room. You can also inspect the document at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, email [email protected], or
go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    By the Commission.

    Dated: December 20, 2021.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-28445 Filed 1-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 35 (Friday, February 21, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10064-10070]
[FR Doc No: 2020-02817]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2018-0634; FRL-10005-34-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Revisions to NOX SIP Call and CAIR
Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving under
the Clean Air Act (CAA) a request from the Indiana Department of
Environmental Management (IDEM) to revise the Indiana State
Implementation Plan (SIP) to incorporate the following: A new rule
concerning nitrogen oxide (NOX) emissions for the ozone
season from Electric Generating Units (EGUs) and large non-EGUs;
revisions concerning NOX emission rate limits for specific
source categories; the repeal of the NOX Budget Trading
Program; and the repeal of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
NOX ozone season trading program. This SIP revision will
ensure continued compliance by EGUs and large non-EGUs with the
requirements of the NOX SIP Call.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective April 21, 2020, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by March 23, 2020. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2018-0634 at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, 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. 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, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For 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: Eric Svingen, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What is the background of this SIP submission?
II. What is EPA's analysis of this SIP submission?
III. What action is EPA Taking?
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background of this SIP submission?

    Under the ``good neighbor provision'' of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), states are required to address interstate transport
of air pollution. Specifically, the good neighbor provision provides
that each state's SIP must contain provisions prohibiting emissions
from within that state which will contribute significantly to
nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), or
interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS, in any other state.
    On October 27, 1998, EPA published the NOX SIP Call,
which required eastern states, including Indiana, to submit SIPs that
prohibit excessive emissions of ozone season NOX by
implementing statewide emissions budgets (63 FR 57356). The
NOX SIP Call addressed the good neighbor provision for the
1979 ozone NAAQS and was designed to mitigate the impact of transported
NOX emissions, one of the precursors of ozone. EPA developed
the NOX Budget Trading Program, an allowance trading program
that states could adopt to meet most of their obligations under the
NOX SIP Call. This trading program allowed certain sources
to participate in a regional cap and trade program: EGUs with capacity
greater than 25 megawatts; and large non-EGUs, such as boilers and
combustion turbines, with a rated heat input greater than 250 million
British thermal units (MMBtu) per hour. The NOX SIP Call
also identified potential reductions from Portland cement kilns and
stationary internal combustion engines. To meet the requirements of the
NOX SIP Call, IDEM initially promulgated two rules: 326 IAC
10-3, which established source-by-source emission rate limits and
monitoring requirements for Portland cement kilns and blast furnace
gas-fired boilers, and 326 IAC 10-4, which required EGUs and certain
other non-EGUs in the state to participate in the NOX Budget
Trading Program. On November 8, 2001, EPA published an action approving
into the SIP the original versions of 326 IAC 10-3 and 326 IAC 10-4 in
fulfillment of the ``Phase I'' requirements of the NOX SIP
Call (66 FR 56465). EPA has subsequently approved revised portions of
these rules into the SIP. On December 11, 2003, EPA approved Indiana
rule revisions that changed the regulatory approach selected by the
state for blast furnace gas-fired boilers at two sources, making such
units subject to the NOX Budget Trading Program at 326 IAC
10-4 instead of the source-by-source emission rate limits at 326 IAC
10-3 (68 FR 69025).\1\ On October 1, 2007, EPA approved into the SIP
326 IAC 10-5, which addressed emissions from stationary internal
combustion engines, as well as associated revisions to 326 IAC 10-3 and
326 IAC 10-4, in fulfillment of the ``Phase II'' requirements of the
NOX SIP Call (72 FR 55664).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The units subject to the change were existing and new blast
furnace gas-fired boilers at the ArcelorMittal Indiana Harbor East
(plant code 10474) and US Steel Gary Works (plant code 50733)
facilities. Blast furnace gas-fired boilers at other Indiana sources
remained subject to 326 IAC 10-3 rather than 326 IAC 10-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 12, 2005, EPA published CAIR, which required eastern states,
including Indiana, to submit SIPs that prohibited emissions consistent
with annual and ozone season NOX budgets and annual sulfur
dioxide (SO2) budgets (70 FR 25152). CAIR addressed the good
neighbor provision for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and 1997 fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) NAAQS and was designed to mitigate the impact
of transported NOX emissions, a precursor of both ozone and
PM2.5, as well as transported SO2 emissions,
another precursor of PM2.5. Like the NOX SIP
Call, CAIR also established several trading programs that states could
use as mechanisms to comply with the budgets. When the CAIR trading
program for ozone season NOX was implemented beginning in
2009, EPA discontinued administration of the NOX Budget
Trading Program, but the requirements of the NOX SIP Call
continued to apply. To meet the requirements of CAIR, IDEM promulgated
326 IAC 24-1, 326 IAC 24-2, and 326 IAC 24-3, which required EGUs to
participate in the CAIR annual SO2 and annual and ozone
season NOX trading programs. Participation by EGUs in the
CAIR trading program for ozone season NOX emissions
addressed the state's obligation under the NOX SIP Call for
those units. IDEM also opted to incorporate large non-EGUs previously
regulated under 326 IAC 10-4 into 326 IAC 24-3, to meet the obligations
of the NOX SIP Call with respect to those units through the
CAIR trading program as well. On October 22, 2007, EPA published an
action approving portions of 326 IAC 24-1, 326 IAC 24-2, and 326 IAC
24-3 into the Indiana SIP (72 FR 59480). On November 29, 2010, EPA
published an action approving additional sections of and revisions to
326 IAC 24-1, 326 IAC 24-2, and 326 IAC 24-3 into the Indiana SIP,
fully addressing the requirements of CAIR, along with associated
revisions to 326 IAC 10-3 and 326 IAC 10-4 (75 FR 72956). The approved
revision to 326 IAC 10-4 ``sunsetted'' all requirements for Indiana
EGUs and large non-EGUs under the NOX Budget Trading Program
in coordination with the implementation start date for the CAIR ozone
season NOX trading program.
    The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit (D.C. Circuit) remanded CAIR to EPA for replacement in 2008.
North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896, modified, 550 F.3d 1176 (2008).
While EPA worked on developing a replacement rule, implementation of
the CAIR program continued as planned with the NOX annual
and ozone season programs beginning in 2009 and the SO2
annual program beginning in 2010.
    On August 8, 2011, acting on the D.C. Circuit's remand, EPA
published the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) to replace CAIR
and to address the good neighbor provision for the 1997 ozone NAAQS,
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
(76 FR 48208). Through Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs), CSAPR
required EGUs in eastern states, including Indiana, to meet annual and
ozone season NOX budgets and annual SO2 budgets
implemented through new trading programs. CSAPR also contained
provisions that would sunset CAIR-related obligations on a schedule
coordinated with the implementation of the CSAPR compliance
requirements. After delays caused by litigation, EPA started
implementing the CSAPR trading programs in 2015, simultaneously
discontinuing administration of the CAIR trading programs.
Participation by

a state's EGUs in the CSAPR trading program for ozone season
NOX generally addressed the state's obligations under the
NOX SIP Call for EGUs. However, CSAPR did not initially
contain provisions allowing states to incorporate large non-EGUs into
that trading program to meet the requirements of the NOX SIP
Call for non-EGUs.
    On October 26, 2016, EPA published the CSAPR Update, which
established a new ozone season NOX trading program for EGUs
in eastern states, including Indiana, to address the good neighbor
provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (81 FR 74504). As under CSAPR,
participation by a state's EGUs in the new CSAPR trading program for
ozone season NOX generally addressed the state's obligations
under the NOX SIP Call for EGUs. The CSAPR Update also
expanded options available to states for meeting NOX SIP
Call requirements for large non-EGUs by allowing states to incorporate
those units into the new trading program.
    After evaluating the various options available following the CSAPR
Update, IDEM chose to meet the ongoing NOX SIP Call
requirements for most existing and new large non-EGUs by adopting a new
rule at 326 IAC 10-2 to make the portion of the state's NOX
SIP Call budget assigned to those non-EGUs enforceable without an
allowance trading mechanism. With respect to the blast furnace gas-
fired units formerly regulated under the NOX Budget Trading
Program (and then the CAIR ozone season NOX program), IDEM
chose instead to revise 326 IAC 10-3 to make the units subject to
source-by-source emission rate limits under that rule. Finally, IDEM
also repealed its CAIR trading program rules at 326 IAC 24-1, 326 IAC
24-2, and 326 IAC 24-3 and its already-sunsetted NOX Budget
Trading Program rule at 326 IAC 10-4. In its August 27, 2018
submission, IDEM requested that EPA approve these changes into the
Indiana SIP.
    On December 17, 2018, EPA approved a separate November 27, 2017
submission from IDEM, which modified the Indiana SIP to incorporate
rules requiring EGUs to participate in the CSAPR trading programs
pursuant to the SIP instead of the CSAPR FIPs (83 FR 64472). As part of
this action, EPA approved the removal of 326 IAC 24-1, 326 IAC 24-2,
and portions of 326 IAC 24-3 from the Indiana SIP. Following the
December 17, 2018 SIP action, 326 IAC 24-3-1, 326 IAC 24-3-2, 326 IAC
24-3-4, and 326 IAC 24-3-11 are the only portions of Indiana's original
CAIR rules at 326 IAC 24-1, 326 IAC 24-2, and 326 IAC 24-3 that remain
in the Indiana SIP. These provisions were left in place by the December
17, 2018 SIP action because they collectively establish ozone season
NOX monitoring requirements for affected non-EGUs, and at
the time of that action no other SIP-approved rules addressed
monitoring requirements for these units for NOX SIP Call
purposes.
    On March 8, 2019, EPA finalized updates to the NOX SIP
Call regulations to allow states to meet the NOX SIP Call's
monitoring requirements using approaches other than the monitoring
requirements under 40 CFR part 75 (84 FR 8422). Indiana's August 27,
2018 submission predates EPA's updates to the NOX SIP Call's
monitoring requirements and therefore does not include changes that
allow non-EGUs subject to the new rule at 326 IAC 10-2 to meet the
NOX SIP Call's monitoring requirements using approaches
other than part 75 monitoring. EPA is assisting IDEM with preparing a
submission that would make other monitoring approaches available to
these units and will address any such submission in a future
rulemaking.

II. What is EPA's analysis of this SIP submission?

    Indiana's August 27, 2018 submission requests that EPA update
Indiana's SIP to reflect the addition of a new rule at 326 IAC 10-2,
the revision of the existing rule at 326 IAC 10-3, and the repeal of
the rules at 326 IAC 10-4, 326 IAC 24-1, 326 IAC 24-2, and 326 IAC 24-
3. (As noted in section I, EPA has already approved the removal of 326
IAC 24-1, 326 IAC 24-2, and portions of 326 IAC 24-3 from the SIP in
response to a different SIP submission.) Additionally, Indiana's
submission includes a demonstration under section 110(l) of the CAA
showing that this SIP revision does not interfere with any applicable
CAA requirement.

A. New, Revised, and Repealed State Rules

    Given EPA's replacement of CAIR with CSAPR and EPA's previous
discontinuation of administration of the NOX Budget Trading
Program, Indiana has developed rule changes to address the
NOX SIP Call's ongoing requirements with respect to existing
and new large non-EGUs in a manner that does not rely on the
administration of a trading program. Specifically, to address all of
the affected non-EGUs formerly covered by the trading programs except
the blast furnace gas-fired units, the state adopted a new rule at 326
IAC 10-2 that establishes monitoring requirements and a cap on the
units' collective ozone season NOX mass emissions. To
address the blast furnace gas-fired units, the state revised the
existing rule at 326 IAC 10-3 to make the units subject to source-by-
source emission rate limits and monitoring requirements under that
rule. Indiana also repealed its remaining CAIR rules at 326 IAC 24-3-1,
326 IAC 24-3-2, 326 IAC 24-3-4, and 326 IAC 24-3-11 and its already-
sunsetted NOX Budget Trading Program rule at 326 IAC 10-4.
These rule changes have a state-effective date of August 26, 2018.
Indiana's August 27, 2018, submission includes a request that EPA
approve these rule changes into its SIP.
    The new rule at 326 IAC 10-2 that Indiana has adopted to address
the NOX SIP Call's ongoing requirements with respect to most
of the state's affected large non-EGUs is structured into nine
sections: 326 IAC 10-2-1 concerning applicability, 326 IAC 10-2-2
concerning definitions, 326 IAC 10-2-3 concerning monitoring
requirements, 326 IAC 10-2-4 concerning compliance dates for
monitoring, 326 IAC 10-2-5 concerning certification and recertification
of monitoring systems, 326 IAC 10-2-6 concerning data substitution for
periods of missing data, 326 IAC 10-2-7 concerning petitions for
approval of monitoring alternatives, 326 IAC 10-2-8 concerning
recordkeeping and reporting, and 326 IAC 10-2-9 concerning the ozone
season NOX budget. Under the applicability provisions, the
rule applies to all non-EGUs that would have been subject to the
state's NOX Budget Trading Program rule at 326 IAC 10-4
except the blast furnace gas-fired units that will become subject to
326 IAC 10-3 as revised. The remaining provisions of the rule prohibit
the affected non-EGUs' collective emissions from exceeding 8,008 tons,
which is the portion of Indiana's statewide budget under the
NOX SIP Call that was assigned to these types of units under
the NOX Budget Trading Program, and require monitoring of
ozone season NOX mass emissions in accordance with 40 CFR
part 75. The rule also incorporates the provisions of 40 CFR part 72,
subpart B, concerning designated representatives. In its SIP submittal,
Indiana has committed to annually review the non-EGUs' compliance with
the collective cap and, in the event of any cap exceedance, to revise
its SIP within one year to compensate for the exceedance and prevent
additional exceedances.
    The revisions to the existing rule at 326 IAC 10-3 concerning
NOX emission rate limits for specific source categories
revise the rule's applicability provisions to cover the blast furnace
gas-fired units that formerly would have been covered

by the NOX Budget Trading Program.\2\ In addition, the
provisions concerning the establishment of appropriate emissions
factors for use by such units in determining reported emissions under
this rule are modified to allow historical emissions data reported
under 40 CFR part 75 to be used for this purpose, and a provision is
added requiring the newly covered units to submit their plans for
complying with the rule within 60 days of becoming affected under the
rule. The revisions will make these units subject to essentially the
same emission rate limits and monitoring requirements that the units
would have been subject to under the state rules originally adopted by
Indiana to address the NOX SIP Call and approved into the
SIP by EPA in 2001. Other revisions to the rule include removing
references to the repealed NOX Budget Trading Program and
CAIR rules, inserting references to the new rule at 326 IAC 10-2,
updating the names of two sources referenced specifically by the rule,
clarifying and strengthening applicability during certain operating
periods, and making minor improvements to formatting and grammar.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The existing blast furnace gas-fired boilers that will be
affected by this change are ArcelorMittal Indiana Harbor East (plant
code 10474) units 501, 502, 503, and 504 and US Steel Gary Works
(plant code 50733) units 701B1, 701B2, 701B3, 701B5, 701B6, 720B1,
720B2, and 720B3. According to IDEM, the other formerly affected
blast furnace gas-fired boilers at the Indiana Harbor East facility
have been retired.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rules that Indiana requested be removed from the SIP in the
August 27, 2018 SIP submission are the state's NOX Budget
Trading Program rule at 326 IAC 10-4 and the state's CAIR trading
program rules at 326 IAC 24-1, 326 IAC 24-2, and 326 IAC 24-3,
concerning annual NOX, SO2, and ozone season
NOX emissions, respectively. Because EPA's December 17, 2018
SIP action already approved the removal from the SIP of 326 IAC 24-1,
326 IAC 24-2, and portions of 326 IAC 24-3, this action will remove
only 326 IAC 10-4 and the remaining SIP-approved portions of 326 IAC
24-3, which were left in place by the December 17, 2018 SIP action to
address ozone season NOX monitoring requirements for
affected non-EGUs for NOX SIP Call purposes in the absence
of other SIP-approved rules establishing such monitoring requirements.

B. EPA's Evaluation of the SIP Submission

    Under the ongoing requirements of the NOX SIP Call, the
Indiana SIP must, among other things: (1) Include enforceable control
measures for ozone season NOX mass emissions from existing
and new large EGUs and large non-EGUs that the state relied on to
achieve emission reductions to meet its statewide NOX budget
and (2) require those sources to monitor and report their ozone season
NOX emissions, which may be in accordance with part 75. See
40 CFR 51.121(f)(2) and (i). For the reasons discussed below, EPA is
finding that Indiana's new rule at 326 IAC 10-2, in combination with
the continued participation of the state's EGUs in the CSAPR ozone
season NOX trading program, is sufficient to address the
state's ongoing NOX SIP Call obligations with respect to
these EGUs and large non-EGUs, while the revisions to 326 IAC 10-3
establish reasonable requirements for the blast furnace gas-fired units
formerly subject to the NOX Budget Trading Program.
Accordingly, EPA is approving these changes into the SIP.
    With respect to the NOX SIP Call requirement that the
state have enforceable control measures to limit ozone season
NOX mass emissions, Indiana's EGUs are currently subject to
a state CSAPR Update trading program for ozone season NOX
emissions that addresses these requirements for existing and new EGUs,
but because Indiana's non-EGUs are not subject to that CSAPR trading
program, the state must meet this requirement for existing and new non-
EGUs through other SIP provisions. Indiana's new rule at 326 IAC 10-2
will prohibit ozone season NOX mass emissions from existing
and new large non-EGUs other than blast furnace gas-fired units from
exceeding 8,008 tons, the portion of the state's NOX SIP
Call budget assigned to such large non-EGUs. Under 326 IAC 10-2,
Indiana will conduct an annual review to ensure that the most recent
ozone season emissions from large non-EGUs remain below the statewide
budget, and in the SIP submission IDEM has committed to take action
within one year as needed to address any exceedances. The new cap will
replace the former enforcement mechanism of the NOX Budget
Trading Program and the CAIR ozone season NOX trading
program under which these sources were required to hold allowances
equal to their emissions. The allowance holding requirements under the
trading programs have been unenforceable since EPA stopped
administering the trading programs in 2009 and 2015, respectively. The
addition of 326 IAC 10-2 thus will remedy an existing gap in the SIP by
reestablishing enforceable limits on ozone season NOX mass
emissions from these units.
    Indiana has chosen a different regulatory approach for blast
furnace gas-fired units that formerly would have been covered by the
NOX Budget Trading Program. Unlike the state's other large
non-EGUs, the blast furnace gas-fired units have never been relied upon
by Indiana to achieve emissions reductions to meet the statewide
NOX budget under the NOX SIP Call. In the state's
original rules approved into the SIP in 2001, under which all blast
furnace gas-fired units were subject to source-by-source emission rate
limits under 326 IAC 10-3, as well as in the rule revisions approved
into the SIP in 2003, under which the blast furnace gas-fired units at
two sources were instead made subject to the NOX Budget
Trading Program under 326 IAC 10-4, Indiana consistently projected no
emission reductions from its blast furnace gas-fired units for purposes
of meeting the state's overall NOX budget. See 66 FR at
56469 (Table 4) and 56473; June 26, 2003 SIP submission (Attachment K),
available in the docket for this rulemaking. Consequently, there is no
ongoing NOX SIP Call requirement under 40 CFR 51.121(f)(2)
for the Indiana SIP to include enforceable limits on ozone season
NOX mass emissions from these units, and to meet its other
NOX SIP Call requirements, Indiana has now chosen to return
to the regulatory approach in its original SIP submission (as approved
into the SIP in 2001) by making all the state's blast furnace gas-fired
units subject to source-by-source emission rate limits under 326 IAC
10-3. Importantly, this change of requirements will be implemented in a
manner designed to maintain the overall stringency of the SIP for
NOX SIP Call purposes. First, with respect to the blast
furnace gas-fired units, the source-by-source emission rate limit of
0.17 lb/MMBtu that will apply to the units under 326 IAC 10-3 is the
same limit that was used to project the units' uncontrolled emissions
for purposes of both of the state's previous SIP submissions concerning
the NOX SIP Call-related requirements for these units.
Second, with respect to the remaining non-EGUs that will be subject to
the new collective mass emissions cap under 326 IAC 10-2, Indiana has
set the cap at 8,008 tons, which is the portion of the statewide
NOX budget assigned to Indiana's non-EGUs under the
NOX Budget Trading Program before the blast furnace gas-
fired units at the two sources were added to the trading program. The
SIP with the combined revisions included in this action therefore will
remain in compliance with Indiana's statewide NOX budget
under the NOX SIP Call.

    With respect to the ongoing NOX SIP Call requirement for
emissions monitoring, Indiana's new rule at 326 IAC 10-2 will continue
to require that non-EGUs subject to that rule monitor and report their
ozone season NOX emissions under part 75, and the state's
EGUs are subject to equivalent monitoring requirements under the
state's CSAPR trading program for ozone season NOX
emissions. The blast furnace gas-fired units being made subject to
source-by-source emission rate limits under 326 IAC 10-3 will become
subject to the non-part 75 monitoring requirements under that rule,
which will be slightly modified to allow the use of historical part 75
emissions data as a basis for setting the emissions factors used to
determine reported emissions. If, as anticipated, IDEM submits to EPA a
SIP revision that would make non-part 75 monitoring approaches
available to large non-EGUs subject to 326 IAC 10-2, the monitoring
requirements for these units under the NOX SIP Call will be
the subject of a future rulemaking.
    EPA is finding that the new rule at 326 IAC 10-2 meets Indiana's
ongoing obligations under the NOX SIP Call with respect to
existing and new large non-EGUs that the state relied on to achieve
emission reductions to meet its statewide NOX budget.
Specifically, the revised rules meet the requirement under 40 CFR
51.121(f)(2) for enforceable limits on the units' collective emissions
of ozone season NOX mass emissions and the requirement under
40 CFR 51.121(i)(1) for monitoring sufficient to ensure compliance with
those limits. The state's EGUs are currently complying with their
analogous NOX SIP Call requirements through participation in
the state's CSAPR Update trading program for ozone season
NOX. EPA is also finding that the change in regulatory
approach chosen by Indiana for the blast furnace gas-fired units is
permissible under the NOX SIP Call regulations and is
reasonable because it provides for continued emissions monitoring by
the units and ensures that the overall stringency of the SIP is
maintained for NOX SIP Call purposes.
    Finally, EPA is also approving the removal from the SIP of
Indiana's NOX Budget Trading Program rule and the remaining
portions of the state's CAIR trading program rule for ozone season
NOX emissions. With respect to the NOX Budget
Trading Program rule, because EPA already approved sunsetting of this
rule in a previous action, the rule has no force and its removal from
the SIP in this action will have no substantive effect. With respect to
the remaining CAIR rule, which establishes emission monitoring
requirements for the types of large non-EGUs formerly subject to the
NOX Budget Trading Program, the rule will generally be made
redundant by the other rule changes approved in this action.
Specifically, the large non-EGUs other than blast furnace gas-fired
units will remain subject to equivalent part 75 monitoring requirements
under 326 IAC 10-2, and the blast furnace gas-fired units will become
subject to the non-part 75 monitoring requirements that EPA originally
approved into the SIP for the units in 2001 as part of the state's
original SIP submission addressing NOX SIP Call
requirements.
    In summary, EPA is finding that IDEM's addition of the new rule at
326 IAC 10-2, revision of the existing rule at 326 IAC 10-3, and repeal
of the rules at 326 IAC 10-4 and 326 IAC 24-3 are consistent with
applicable requirements under the CAA and the NOX SIP Call,
and EPA is therefore approving these changes into the Indiana SIP.

C. Section 110(l) Demonstration

    IDEM's submission includes a demonstration showing that CAA section
110(l) does not prohibit approval of this SIP revision; such a
demonstration is sometimes called an anti-backsliding demonstration.
Section 110(l) provides that EPA cannot approve a SIP revision if the
revision would interfere with attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS,
reasonable further progress, or any other applicable requirement of the
CAA.
    The majority of the rule changes approved in this action either add
new requirements, remove provisions that have no impact on emissions or
air quality, or replace existing requirements under one rule with
identical requirements under another rule. As such, they will not
interfere with any applicable CAA requirement. First, the emission
limits established by revised 326 IAC 10-3 for blast furnace gas-fired
units and by 326 IAC 10-2 for other non-EGUs are new requirements that
will remedy a gap in the SIP that was created when EPA discontinued the
administration of the CAIR trading program for ozone season
NOX emissions. Second, removal from the SIP of the state's
NOX Budget Trading Program rule will have no impact on
emissions or air quality because EPA's earlier November 29, 2010 action
approved sunsetting of the rule, and EPA ceased administering the
program when the CAIR trading program was implemented. The state's
NOX Budget Trading Program rule can, therefore, no longer be
implemented. Finally, with respect to the removal of the remaining CAIR
rule for ozone season NOX emissions, which established
monitoring requirements for non-EGUs (other than blast furnace gas-
fired units) for NOX SIP Call purposes, the new rule at 326
IAC 10-2 will reestablish substantively identical part 75 monitoring
requirements for these units.
    The only SIP revision that we are approving in this action that
will remove currently effective rule provisions without replacing them
with substantively identical provisions relates to the emissions
monitoring requirements for blast furnace gas-fired units at the two
sources formerly subject to the NOX Budget Trading Program.
These units are currently subject to part 75 monitoring requirements
under 326 IAC 24-3, which the State has requested be removed from the
SIP, and will become subject to non-part 75 monitoring requirements
under the revised rule at 326 IAC 10-3. EPA concludes this change in
monitoring requirements will not lead to an increase in emissions for
two reasons. First, the change will relate only to monitoring
requirements, not to emission limits; in fact, other rule changes
approved in this action will make the units subject to additional
enforceable emission limits. Second, even during the period after 2014
in which the sources were not subject to enforceable emission limits
under the NOX Budget Trading Program or the CAIR trading
program, the units' reported collective emissions in every year from
2015 through 2019 were well below the units' share of the previous
collective emissions budget for the state's non-EGUs under 326 IAC 24-
3. Specifically, the units' collective ozone season NOX mass
emissions have not exceeded 1,193 tons, compared to their budget share
of 1,526 tons. See emissions data at https://ampd.epa.gov; June 26,
2003 SIP submission (Attachment K), available in the docket for this
rulemaking. These data indicate that the units' emissions limits and
monitoring requirements for NOX SIP Call purposes have not
been driving their historical emissions levels, with the logical
consequence that the change in their monitoring requirements approved
in this action will not cause a change in their emissions levels.
    For these reasons, we conclude that the revisions will not
interfere with attainment of the NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or
any other applicable requirement of the CAA. EPA is therefore finding
that CAA section 110(l) does not prohibit approval of this SIP
revision.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving IDEM's request to modify its SIP to include the
new rule at 326 IAC 10-2 and the revised rule at 326 IAC 10-3 and to
remove 326 IAC 10-4 and 326 IAC 24-3.
    We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective April 21, 2020
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by March 23, 2020. If we receive such comments, we will
withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective April
21, 2020.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Indiana
Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 5
Office (please contact the person identified in the For Further
Information Contact section of this preamble for more information).
Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in
the State implementation plan, 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
EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference in the next
update to the SIP compilation.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also in this document, as described in the amendments to 40 CFR
part 52 set forth below, EPA is removing provisions of the EPA-Approved
Indiana Regulations from the Indiana SIP, which is incorporated by
reference in accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely 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);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where 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).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 21, 2020. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: January 30, 2020.
Kurt A. Thiede,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    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.

0
2. In Sec.  52.770, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by:
0
a. Revising the section entitled ``Article 10. Nitrogen Oxides Rules'';
and
0
b. Removing the heading ``Rule 3. Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) NO X
Ozone Season Trading Program'' and the entries for 24-3-1, 24-3-2, 24-
3-4, and 24-3-11.
    The revision reads as follows:

Sec.  52.770  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                        EPA-Approved Indiana Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Indiana
      Indiana citation               Subject          effective      EPA approval date           Comments
                                                         date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Article 10. Nitrogen Oxides Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10-1.......................  Nitrogen Oxides           6/12/1996  6/3/1997, 62 FR 30253.
                              Control in Clark and
                              Floyd Counties.
10-2.......................  NOX Emissions from        8/26/2018  2/21/2020, [Insert
                              Large Affected Units.                Federal Register
                                                                   citation].
10-3.......................  Nitrogen Oxide            8/26/2018  2/21/2020, [Insert
                              Reduction Program for                Federal Register
                              Specific Source                      citation].
                              Categories.
10-5.......................  Nitrogen Oxide            2/26/2006  10/1/2007, 72 FR 55664
                              Reduction Program for
                              Internal Combustion
                              Engines (ICE).
10-6.......................  Nitrogen Oxides           8/30/2008  11/10/2009, 74 FR
                              Emission Limitations                 57904.
                              for Southern Indiana
                              Gas and Electric
                              Company.

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-02817 Filed 2-20-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P