[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 228 (Tuesday, November 26, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65009-65012]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25597]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2019-0221; FRL-10002-16-Region 1]

Air Plan Approval; Vermont; Reasonably Available Control
Technology for the 2008 and 2015 Ozone Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Vermont.
The SIP revision consists of a demonstration that Vermont meets the
requirements of reasonably available control technology (RACT) for the
two precursors for ground-level ozone, oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), set forth by
the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) with respect to the 2008 and 2015 ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQSs or standards). This
action is being taken under the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This rule is effective on December 26, 2019.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2019-0221. All documents in the docket
are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed
in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
Region 1 Regional Office, Air and Radiation Division, 5 Post Office
Square--Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible,
you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David L. Mackintosh, Air Quality
Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1, 5 Post
Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code 05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, tel.
617-918-1584, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background and Purpose
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Purpose

    On August 2, 2019 (84 FR 37812), EPA issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for the State of Vermont. In the NPRM, EPA proposed
approval of a SIP revision submitted by Vermont on September 6, 2018.
Vermont's SIP revision contains: A certification that Vermont has met
all RACT requirements for the 2008 and 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS with
negative declarations for 29 Control Techniques Guideline (CTG)
categories; the addition of Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulation
(APCR) Sections 5-253.8 Industrial Adhesives, 5-253.9 Offset
Lithographic and Letterpress Printing, and 5-253.17 Industrial Solvent
Cleaning to the Vermont SIP; revisions to Sections 5-253.12 Coating of
Flat Wood Paneling and 5-253.13 Coating of Miscellaneous Metal and
Plastic; revisions to single-source requirements for ``Isovolta Inc.
(Formerly U.S. Samica, Inc.) Operating Permit RACT provisions'',
``Killington/Pico Ski Resort Partners, LLC. Operating Permit RACT
provisions,'' and ``Okemo Limited Liability Company Operating Permit
RACT provisions''; and withdrawal of the single-source requirements for
``Churchill Coatings Corporation Operating Permit RACT conditions'' and
``H.B.H Prestain, Inc.''
    The NPRM provides the rationale for EPA's proposed approval, which
will not be restated here. EPA received one comment on the NPRM.

II. Response to Comments

    Comment: The anonymous comment stated ``EPA should review the
NOX RACT evaluation for the five sources'' to (1) ``review
the most recent stack testing or CEMS reports to evaluate the
particular emission limits applicable;'' (2) ``evaluate minor changes
to a source's operating scenarios such as evaluating if a source can
change fuel sources from natural gas and Number 6 fuel oil to using
only natural gas and limiting fuel oil;'' and (3) ``consider simple
cost effective measures that don't require installation of new and
innovative technologies.''
    Response: As explained in the proposal and in Vermont's SIP, three
of the five major NOX sources in Vermont are subject to New
Source Review (NSR) most stringent emission rate (MSER). Joseph C.
McNeil Generating Station, OMYA, Inc. Vermont Marble Power Division,
and Ryegate Power Station, are each subject to major new source review
permitting under Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulation 5-502,
``Major Stationary Sources and Major Modifications'' and are subject to
emission rates, which are no less stringent than RACT. Specifically,
the nitrous oxide emissions from combustion turbines at OMYA, Inc.
Vermont Marble Power Division are consistent with EPA's ``Alternative
Control Techniques Document--NOX Emissions from Process
Heaters'', established in September 1993 (EPA-453/R-93-034 1993/09),
and the Joseph C. McNeil Generating Station and Ryegate Power Station
wood-fired boilers with selective catalytic

combustion (SCR) and selective non-catalytic combustion (SNCR) controls
exceed the EPA RACT requirements for wood-fired boilers described in
the ``Alternative Control Techniques Document--NOX Emissions
from Industrial, Commercial & Institutional Boilers'', of March 1994
(EPA-453/R-94-022 1994/03).
    The remaining two NOX sources, Killington/Pico Ski
Resort Partners, LLC and Okemo Limited Liability Company, are now
restricted by permit, approved into the Vermont SIP by EPA on July 19,
2011 (76 FR 42560), to emit significantly less than the Vermont
NOX major source threshold. Since their emissions are
restricted to below the major source threshold, there are no applicable
RACT requirements for the 2008 and 2015 ozone standards. These two
facilities remain subject to RACT levels of control per EPA's previous
VT RACT approval published July 19, 2011 (76 FR 42560). Therefore, EPA
disagrees with the commenter that the NOX RACT analysis for
these sources is insufficient.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving Vermont's SIP revision as meeting the State's RACT
obligations for the 2008 and 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQSs as set forth by
sections 182(b) and 184(b)(2) of the CAA, and adding ``State
Implementation Plan Revision Supporting Compliance with Requirements
for Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Under the 2008 and
2015 8-Hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, Final
Submittal, September 6, 2018'' to the Vermont SIP. EPA is approving the
addition of Vermont APCR Sections 5-253.8 Industrial Adhesives, 5-253.9
Offset Lithographic and Letterpress Printing, and 5-253.17 Industrial
Solvent Cleaning in to the Vermont SIP. EPA is approving the revision
of APCR Sections 5-253.12 Coating of Flat Wood Paneling and 5-253.13
Coating of Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts currently in the
Vermont SIP. EPA is also approving the revision of single-source
requirements for ``Isovolta Inc. (Formerly U.S. Samica, Inc.) Operating
Permit RACT provisions'', ``Killington/Pico Ski Resort Partners, LLC.
Operating Permit RACT provisions,'' and ``Okemo Limited Liability
Company Operating Permit RACT provisions'' currently in the Vermont
SIP. EPA is withdrawing single-source requirements for ``Churchill
Coatings Corporation Operating Permit RACT conditions'' and ``H.B.H
Prestain, Inc. Operating Permit RACT provisions'' from the Vermont SIP.
Lastly, EPA is converting our previous conditional approval of RACT
with respect to the 1997 ozone standard to a full approval because the
proposed addition of APCR Section 5-253.12 Coating of Flat Wood
Paneling will constitute RACT in lieu of the previous source-specific
RACT conditions for Churchill Coatings Corporation and H.B.H Prestain,
Inc.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the
Vermont APCR described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. EPA is also revising and removing provisions of the EPA-approved
Vermont source specific requirements at 40 CFR 52.2370(d), ``EPA-
approved State Source specific requirements'' in the Vermont State
Implementation Plan, which is incorporated by reference in accordance
with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these documents generally available through https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 1 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.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     [Igr]s not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because this action is not significant 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 Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, 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 Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 27, 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. 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,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: November 19, 2019.
Dennis Deziel,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.

    Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart UU--Vermont

0
2. Section 52.2370 is amended by:
0
a. In the table in paragraph (c):
0
i. Adding entries for ``Section 5-253.8 Industrial Adhesives'' and
``Section 5-253.9 Offset Lithographic and Letterpress Printing'' in
numerical order;
0
ii. Revising entries for ``Section 5-253.12 Coating of Flat Wood
Paneling'' and ``Section 5-253.13 Coating of Miscellaneous Metal and
Plastic Parts''; and
0
ii. Adding an entry for ``Section 5-253.17 Industrial Solvent
Cleaning'' in numerical order;
0
b. In the table in paragraph (d):
0
i. Revising the entries for ``Isovolta Inc. (Formerly U.S. Samica,
Inc.) Operating Permit RACT provisions'';
0
ii. Removing the entry for ``Churchill Coatings Corporation Operating
Permit RACT conditions'';
0
iii. Revising the entries for ``Killington/Pico Ski Resort Partners,
LLC. Operating Permit RACT provisions'' and ``Okemo Limited Liability
Company Operating Permit RACT provisions''; and
0
iv. Removing the entry for ``H.B.H Prestain, Inc. Operating Permit RACT
provisions''; and
0
c. In the table in paragraph (e):
0
i. Revising the entry for ``Reasonably Available Control Technology
State Implementation Plan (SIP)/certification for the 1997 8-hour Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard''; and
0
ii. Adding an entry at the end of the table for ``Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT) Under the 2008 and 2015 8-Hour Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards.''
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  52.2370  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                        EPA-Approved Vermont Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        State        EPA approval
        State citation            Title/subject    effective date        date                Explanations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 5-253.8...............  Industrial              9/15/2018  11/26/2019        ...........................
                                 Adhesives.                         [Insert Federal
                                                                    Register
                                                                    citation].
Section 5-253.9...............  Offset                  9/15/2018  11/26/2019        ...........................
                                 Lithographic and                   [Insert Federal
                                 Letterpress                        Register
                                 Printing.                          citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 5-253.12..............  Coating of Flat         9/15/2018  11/26/2019        ...........................
                                 Wood Paneling.                     [Insert Federal
                                                                    Register
                                                                    citation].
Section 5-253.13..............  Coating of              9/15/2018  11/26/2019        ...........................
                                 Miscellaneous                      [Insert Federal
                                 Metal and                          Register
                                 Plastic Parts.                     citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 5-253.17..............  Industrial              9/15/2018  11/26/2019        ...........................
                                 Solvent Cleaning.                  [Insert Federal
                                                                    Register
                                                                    citation].

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

    (d) * * *

                                EPA-Approved Vermont Source Specific Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        State        EPA approval
        Name of source              Permit No.     effective date        date                Explanations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isovolta Inc. (Formerly U.S.    AOP-14-037              9/30/2017  11/26/2019        ...........................
 Samica, Inc.) Operating                                            [Insert Federal
 Permit RACT provisions.                                            Register
                                                                    citation].
Killington/Pico Ski Resort      AOP-14-003              2/15/2018  11/26/2019        ...........................
 Partners, LLC. Operating                                           [Insert Federal
 Permit RACT provisions.                                            Register
                                                                    citation].
Okemo Limited Liability         AOP-14-034              2/15/2018  11/26/2019        ...........................
 Company Operating Permit RACT                                      [Insert Federal
 provisions.                                                        Register
                                                                    citation].

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

    (e) * * *

                                             Vermont Non-Regulatory
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Applicable        State submittal
   Name of non regulatory SIP        geographic or      date/effective     EPA approved date      Explanation
            provision             nonattainment area         date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Reasonably Available Control      Statewide.........  Submitted 11/14/    11/26/2019 [Insert  Certain aspects
 Technology State Implementation                       2008.               Federal Register    relating to
 Plan (SIP)/certification for                                              citation].          Coating of Flat
 the 1997 8-hour Ozone National                                                                Wood Paneling
 Ambient Air Quality Standard.                                                                 which were
                                                                                conditionally
                                                                                approved on July
                                                                                19, 2011 are now
                                                                                fully approved.

                                                  * * * * * * *
Reasonably Available Control      Statewide.........  Submitted 9/6/2018  11/26/2019 [Insert  ..................
 Technology (RACT) Under the                                               Federal Register
 2008 and 2015 8-Hour Ozone                                                citation].
 National Ambient Air Quality
 Standards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2019-25597 Filed 11-25-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


P-19-0118 Sanitized Support Documents Index:
 P-19-0118 Sanitized Determination Document (linked)
 P-19-0118 Sanitized CHEM Report (attached)
 P-19-0118 Sanitized ECO Report (attached)
 P-19-0118 Sanitized ENG Report (attached)
 P-19-0118 Sanitized EXP Report (attached)
 P-19-0118 Sanitized Fate Report (attached)
 P-19-0118 Sanitized HLTH Report_POST-FOCUS FINAL (attached)


U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Plan for Developing Interim
Preliminary Remediation Goals for Dioxin in Soil

In May 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA)
Administrator, Lisa P. Jackson decided that EPA needs to accelerate work
underway to reassess the human health risks from exposures to dioxin.
EPA’s Science Plan for Activities Related to Dioxins in the
Environment (2009) details a plan, with interim milestones, for
completion of the Agency’s dioxin reassessment.  By the end of 2010,
EPA expects to complete the dioxin reassessment and release it to the
public, subject to further consideration of the science and the scope
and complexity of the revisions that will need to be made.

Several key site-specific decisions involving dioxin may need to be made
before the dioxin reassessment is finalized.  EPA’s Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) will be reviewing current dioxin
cleanup guidance set by the Agency and other entities, with the goal of
recommending interim preliminary remediation goals (PRGs) informed by
the latest science. These interim recommended PRGs would be used until
EPA issues its dioxin reassessment and OSWER issues final recommended
PRGs based on the reassessment.  After publication of the dioxin
reassessment and final PRG guidance, EPA will re-evaluate cleanup
decisions at Superfund, Federal Facilities, Brownfields, and Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) sites that were based on the
interim PRGs to ensure that cleanups are protective.

In developing these interim recommended PRGs, OSWER and EPA’s Office
of Research and Development (ORD) are reviewing current soil cleanup
levels and dioxin toxicity values used by the states, the Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, and other countries.  Based on
this evaluation, OSWER may reconsider EPA’s currently recommended PRGs
for Superfund, Federal Facilities, Brownfields and RCRA sites, which are
1 ppb (parts per billion) (or 1,000 ppt (parts per trillion)) for dioxin
toxicity equivalents (TEQs) in residential soil, and a level within the
range of 5 ppb (or 5,000 ppt) and 20 ppb (or 20,000 ppt) in
commercial/industrial soil, where exposure is due to direct contact.
Three key components of EPA’s current recommended PRGs will be
re-evaluated: the EPA dioxin toxicity value adopted in 1985, generic
exposure assumptions, and the cancer risk level. OSWER intends to
recommend interim PRGs informed by the latest science and the work of
state and other agencies.

The proposed plan for the development of the OSWER interim recommended
PRGs for dioxin in soil is as follows:

Open public comment period on this OSWER plan

for developing interim recommended PRGs
   October  2009

Interim recommended PRGs available for public comment

in the Federal Register                          				  December 31, 2009

End of public comment period					          February 2010

Issuance of guidance that addresses interim recommended

PRGs								   	     June 2010*

*Schedule subject to change based on the extent of public comments
received.

EPA will make this information available to the public through the
following: 1) the EPA Superfund program web site; 2) Clu-in, a web site
maintained by EPA that has technical information related to cleanups; 3)
postings on regional web sites and used at public meetings; and 4)
distribution generally to the regions.

To comment on the proposed plan for developing interim recommended PRGs
for dioxin in soil, please send comments to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

Frequently Asked Questions

How are PRGs Used?

Consistent with the National Contingency Plan, PRGs generally are
initial chemical-specific concentration goals for specific media (e.g.
soil, sediment, water and air) and land uses at Superfund, Federal
Facilities, Brownfields and RCRA sites.  These goals normally should
both be protective of human health and the environment and comply with
all applicable, relevant and appropriate regulations (ARARs) for all
exposure pathways being addressed.

Risk-based PRGs generally are developed using estimates for the toxicity
of a chemical, as well as generic exposure assumptions.  An example of
an exposure assumption is exposure frequency, or the number of days in a
year that a person is exposed to contamination.  A generic exposure
frequency of 350 days per year is typically used for Superfund, Federal
Facilities, Brownfields, and RCRA sites for residential settings.

A PRG is usually calculated for cancer and for non-cancer effects.  The
more conservative value typically is then selected as the recommended
PRG.  PRGs for carcinogens commonly are set at levels that correspond to
one in a million (1 x 10-6) individual excess cancer risk5 as a point of
departure.  However, they may be revised to a different risk level
within the acceptable risk range of 10-6 to 10-4 based on consideration
of exposure factors, uncertainty, or technical issues. PRGs for
non-carcinogens are typically set at a level corresponding to a hazard
quotient6 equal to 1.0.

It is important to note that PRGs are not intended to act as
site-specific cleanup levels; rather they are intended to serve as
initial guidelines for use in scoping characterization and remediation
alternatives at Superfund, Federal Facilities, Brownfields, and RCRA
sites.  Final cleanup levels for a site typically would be developed by
modifying the PRGs based on consideration of site specific factors
(e.g., exposure frequency or acceptable cancer risk level).7

For specific information on how PRGs are calculated, see EPA’s Risk
Assessment Guidance for Superfund (RAGS) Part B, Chapter 1 and Chapter
3.  Available online at:   HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment/ragsb/index.htm%20"
http://www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment/ragsb/index.htm

What are the current PRGs for dioxin in soil?

For Superfund, Federal Facilities, Brownfields, and RCRA sites,
OSWER’s 1998 soil dioxin guidance  NOTEREF _Ref237845794 \h  \*
MERGEFORMAT  2  recommends a PRG of 1 ppb (or 1,000 ppt) for dioxin
toxicity equivalents (TEQs)  NOTEREF _Ref237845810 \h  \* MERGEFORMAT  3
 in residential soil, and a level within the range of 5 ppb (or 5,000
ppt) and 20 ppb (or 20,000 ppt) in commercial/industrial soil, where
exposure is due to direct contact. A range in levels has been
recommended for commercial/industrial soil due to the greater
variability in human exposures associated with these land uses.

The currently recommended PRGs are based on an EPA dioxin toxicity value
adopted by the Agency in 1985. This toxicity value is considered a Tier
3 toxicity value under the 2003 OSWER memorandum on the hierarchy of
sources of toxicological information8 that should be considered for
site-specific risk assessments (the interim recommended PRGs will also
be based on a Tier 3 toxicity value.)  The categories for toxicity
values are as follows:

Tier 1- EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)9

Tier 2- EPA’s Provisional Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTVs) –
The Office of Research and Development/National Center for Environmental
Assessment/Superfund Health Risk Technical Support Center develops
PPRTVs, at the request of EPA’s Superfund program, for chemicals not
found in IRIS.

Tier 3- Other Toxicity Values – Tier 3 includes additional EPA and
non-EPA sources of toxicity information. Priority should be given to
those sources of information that are the most current, the basis for
which is transparent and publicly available, and which have been
peer-reviewed.

The currently recommended PRGs are also based on generic exposure
assumptions and cancer risk levels used at Superfund, Federal
Facilities, Brownfields, and RCRA sites.  The 1 ppb (or 1,000 ppt)
represents a lifetime excess cancer risk of 2.5 x 10-4 for residential
soil, and 5 ppb (or 5,000 ppt) represents a lifetime excess cancer risk
of 1.4 x 10-4 for commercial/industrial soil.

Why is EPA considering modifying the existing PRGs for dioxin in soil?

While EPA finalizes its ongoing dioxin reassessment, EPA Administrator
Jackson has asked that Agency staff consider the newest science to help
evaluate the protectiveness of current PRGs for dioxin in soil.

How will the interim PRGs for dioxin in soil be used?

The interim PRGs will be used to evaluate pending cleanup decisions.
These decisions will be re-evaluated when the final PRGs for dioxin in
soil are developed. As noted above, the interim PRGs being developed for
dioxin are not site-specific cleanup levels. They are intended to serve
as recommended PRG levels that can generally be used as a starting point
in the process used for determining cleanup levels at Superfund, Federal
Facilities, Brownfields, and RCRA sites.  Final cleanup levels for a
site would typically be developed by modifying the PRGs based on
consideration of site-specific information (such as exposure frequency
or acceptable cancer risk level) obtained as part of the site-specific
baseline risk assessment.

October 15, 2009

  PAGE  1

 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  May 26, 2009.  EPA’s Science
Plan for Activities Related to Dioxins in the Environment.  Press
Release.  Available online:    HYPERLINK
"http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=209690"
http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=209690 .

 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  April 13, 1998.  Approach for
Addressing Dioxin in Soil at CERCLA and RCRA Sites.  OSWER Directive
9200.4-26.  Available at:    HYPERLINK
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/remedy/pdf/92-00426-s.pdf
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/remedy/pdf/92-00426-s.pdf .

 Toxicity equivalents consider the toxicity of the less toxic
dioxin-like compounds as fractions of the toxicity of the most toxic
compound (2,3,7,8-TCDD). Each compound is attributed a specific “Toxic
Equivalency Factor” (TEF). This factor indicates the degree of
toxicity compared to 2,3,7,8-TCDD, which is given a reference value of
1.

 40 CFR 300 Section 430(e)(2)(i)(A)(2)

5  Cancer risks normally are estimated as the incremental probability of
an individual developing cancer over a lifetime as a result of exposure
to a contaminant.  This incremental or excess individual lifetime cancer
risk is generally expressed as the probability (e.g., 1 x 10-6 or one in
a million) of an individual developing cancer.

6  A hazard quotient generally is the ratio of an exposure level for a
single substance to a reference dose, which is an estimate of the daily
exposure that is likely to be without an appreciable risk of deleterious
effects during a lifetime.

7  EPA's Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Part B, Development of
Preliminary Remediation Goals 1991, EPA/540/R-92/003

8  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response.  December 5, 2003.  Human Health Toxicity Values in
Superfund Risk Assessments.  OSWER Directive 9285.7-53.  Available at:
 HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment/pdf/hhmemo.pdf"
http://www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment/pdf/hhmemo.pdf .

9  IRIS develops human health risk information for an EPA database that
addresses potential human health effects that may result from long-term
exposure to environmental contaminants.   Dioxin toxicity values
established based on the final dioxin reassessment will be incorporated
into IRIS.

What is a PRG?

Preliminary remediation goals (PRGs) are chemical-specific concentration
goals for specific media (e.g. soil, sediment, water and air) and land
use combinations at Superfund, Federal Facilities, Brownfields and RCRA
sites.  They serve as a target to use during the initial development,
analysis, and selection of cleanup alternatives.  These goals should
both be protective of human health and the environment and comply with
all applicable, relevant and appropriate regulations (ARARs) for all
exposure pathways being addressed.


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 105 (Monday, June 2, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 31320]
[FR Doc No: 2014-12640]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP14-488-000]

Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket
Authorization

    Take notice that on May 14, 2014, Northern Natural Gas Company
(Northern), pursuant to the blanket certificate authorization granted
to Northern on September 1, 1982, in Docket No. CP82-401-000,\1\ filed
an application in accordance to sections 157.205, 157.208, and 157.216
of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA) as
amended, requesting authority to replace and operate approximately 5.6
miles of its existing 12-inch-diameter Marquette branch line (MIM10101)
located in Marquette County, Michigan, all as more fully set forth in
the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 20 FERC ] 62,410 (1982).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to remediate anomalies discovered during a caliper pig
run, Northern proposes to replace approximately 5.6 miles of the
existing MIM10101 with a 12-inch-diameter pipeline that begins at
approximately MP 236.10 and ends at approximately MP 241.70 located in
Marquette County, Michigan. The new replacement pipeline will primarily
be installed parallel and adjacent to the existing pipeline, with the
exception of approximately 4,435 feet of the pipeline which will be
installed in new right-of-way. No auxiliary installations are included
with the proposed project. The existing line will be cut, purged of
gas, capped, and abandoned in-place. Northern will retain all easements
related to the abandoned segment of pipe as well as responsibility for
the abandoned pipeline. The total estimated cost of the proposed
project is $17,120,470.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to
Michael T Loeffler, Senior Director, Certificates and External Affairs
for Northern, 1111 South 103rd Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68124, at (402)
398-7103 or Bret Fritch, Senior Regulatory Analyst, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be
viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number filed to access the document. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at FERC
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or, for
TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. Comments, protests and interventions may
be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
intervenors to file electronically.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 days after
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 regulations under the NGA (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 filing a protest. If a protest is filed and
not withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed time for filing a
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.

    Dated: May 23, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-12640 Filed 5-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P