[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 169 (Tuesday, September 2, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51986-51987]
[FR Doc No: 2014-20764]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC14-14-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-519); Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC.

ACTION: Comment request.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is submitting its information
collection FERC-519 (Application under Federal Power Act Section 203)
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review of the
information collection requirements. Any interested person may file
comments directly with OMB and should address a copy of those comments
to the Commission as explained below. The Commission previously issued
a Notice in the Federal Register (79 FR 30598, 5/28/2014) requesting
public comments. The Commission received no comments on the FERC-519
and is making this notation in its submittal to OMB.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by October 2,
2014.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified by the OMB Control No.
1902-0082, should be sent via email to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission Desk Officer. The Desk Officer may also be
reached via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Commission, in
Docket No. IC14-14-000, by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Ellen Brown may be reached by email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and by fax
at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-519, Application under Federal Power Act Section 203.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0082.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-519 information
collection requirements with no changes to the reporting requirements.
    Abstract: The FERC-519 (Application under Federal Power Act Section
203) is necessary to enable the Commission to

carry out its responsibilities in implementing the statutory provisions
of Section 203 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824b. Section
203 authorizes the Commission to grant approval of transactions in
which a public utility disposes of jurisdictional facilities, merges
such facilities with the facilities owned by another person or acquires
the securities of another public utility. Under this statute, the
Commission must find that the proposed transaction will be consistent
with the public interest.
    Under Section 203 of the FPA, FERC must review proposed mergers,
acquisitions and dispositions of jurisdictional facilities by public
utilities, if the value of the facilities exceeds $10 million, and must
approve these transactions if they are consistent with the public
interest. One of FERC's overarching goals is to promote competition in
wholesale power markets, having determined that effective competition,
as opposed to traditional forms of price regulation, can best protect
the interests of ratepayers. Market power, however, can be exercised to
the detriment of effective competition and customers, making it
necessary for FERC to review and approve or disapprove all
jurisdictional mergers, dispositions and acquisitions. The Commission
implements these filing requirements in the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) under 18 CFR Part 33.
    Type of Respondents: Public utilities subject to the FPA.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \1\ The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden for the information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Commission defines burden as the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain,
retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency. For further explanation of what is included in the
information collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal
Regulations 1320.3.

                                                                        FERC-519
                                                    [Application under Federal Power Act Section 203]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Annual number                                   Total annual
                                                             Number of     of responses    Total number   Average burden  burden hours &     Cost per
                                                            respondents         per        of responses     & cost  per    total annual   respondent ($)
                                                                            respondent                     response \2\        cost
                                                                     (1)             (2)     (1)*(2)=(3)             (4)     (3)*(4)=(5)         (5)/(1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-519................................................             141               1             141             395          55,695       $27,847.5
                                                                                $27,847.5      $3,926,498
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The estimates for cost per response are derived using the
following formula: Average Burden Hours per Response * $70.50 per
Hour = Average Cost per Response. The hourly cost figure of $70.50
is the average FERC employee wage plus benefits. We assume that
respondents earn at a similar rate.

    Dated: August 21, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-20764 Filed 8-29-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 209 (Monday, October 29, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65508-65512]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26105]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 154

[Docket No. RM12-14-000]

Annual Charge Filing Procedures for Natural Gas Pipelines

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC)
is proposing to amend its regulations to revise the filing requirements
for natural gas pipelines that choose to recover Commission-assessed
annual charges through an annual charge adjustment (ACA) clause.
Currently, natural gas pipelines utilizing an ACA clause must make a
tariff filing to reflect a revised ACA unit charge authorized by the
Commission for that fiscal year. In order to reduce the

regulatory burden on these pipelines, the Commission proposes to
eliminate this annual filing requirement. In its place, the Commission
proposes to require natural gas pipelines utilizing an ACA clause to
incorporate the Commission-authorized annual charge unit rate by
reference to that rate, as published on the Commission's Web site
located at http://www.ferc.gov.

DATES: Comments are due November 28, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the
following ways:
     Electronic Filing through: http://www.ferc.gov. Documents
created electronically using word processing software should be filed
in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned
format.
     Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically
may mail or hand-deliver comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adam Bednarczyk (Technical Issues),
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Michelle A. Davis (Legal Issues), 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
[141 FERC ] 61,035]

(Issued October 18, 2012).

    1. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) is
proposing to amend its regulations at 18 CFR 154.402 to revise the
filing requirements for natural gas pipelines that choose to recover
Commission-assessed annual charges through an annual charge adjustment
(ACA) clause. Currently, natural gas pipelines utilizing an ACA clause
must make a tariff filing to reflect a revised ACA unit charge
authorized by the Commission for that fiscal year. In order to reduce
the regulatory burden on these pipelines, the Commission proposes to
eliminate this annual filing requirement. In its place, the Commission
proposes to require natural gas pipelines utilizing an ACA clause to
incorporate the Commission-authorized annual charge unit rate by
reference to that rate, as published on the Commission's Web site
located at http://www.ferc.gov.

I. Background

    2. The Commission is required to ``assess and collect fees and
annual charges in any fiscal year in amounts equal to all of the costs
incurred by the Commission in that fiscal year.'' \1\ To accomplish
this, the Commission created the annual charges program, which is
designed to recover the costs of administering the natural gas, oil,
and electric programs by calculating the costs of each program, net of
filing fees, and properly allocating them among the three programs.\2\
This proceeding applies only to the recovery of annual charges assessed
to entities in the natural gas program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, Public Law 99-509,
Title III, Subtitle E, Sec.  3401, 1986 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News
(100 Stat.) 1874, 1890-91 (codified at 42 U.S.C. 7178 (2012)).
    \2\ Annual Charges Under the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act
of 1986, Order No. 472, FERC Stats & Regs. ] 30,746, clarified by,
Order No. 472-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,750, order on reh'g, Order
No. 472-B, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,767 (1987), order on reh'g,
Order No. 472-C, 42 FERC ] 61,013 (1988).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. The provisions governing the assessment of annual charges are
codified in Part 382 of the Commission's regulations.\3\ In brief,
after the Commission calculates the costs of administering the natural
gas regulatory program,\4\ it assesses those costs to natural gas
pipeline companies (Pipelines).\5\ Each Pipeline is assessed a
proportional share of the Commission's costs of administering the
natural gas program. That proportional share is based on the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 18 CFR part 382 (2012).
    \4\ Id. at 382.102(d) (defining the ``natural gas regulatory
program'' as the Commission's regulation of the natural gas industry
under the Natural Gas Act; Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978; Alaska
Natural Gas Transportation Act; Public Utility Regulatory Policies
Act; Department of Energy Organization Act; Outer Continental Shelf
Lands Act; Energy Security Act; Regulatory Flexibility Act; Crude
Oil Windfall Profit Tax Act; National Environmental Policy Act;
National Historic Preservation Act).
    \5\ For the purposes of this proceeding, we use the term natural
gas pipeline company (Pipeline) as it is defined in 18 CFR
382.101(a) (2012): ``Any person: (1) Engaged in natural gas sales
for resale or natural gas transportation subject to the jurisdiction
of the Commission under the Natural Gas Act whose sales for resale
and transportation exceed 200,000 Mcf at 14.73 psi (60 [deg]F) in
any of the three calendar years immediately preceding the fiscal
year for which the Commission is assessing annual charges; and (2)
Not engaged solely in ``first sales'' of natural gas as that term is
defined in section 2(21) of the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978; and
(3) To whom the Commission has not issued a Natural Gas Act Section
7(f) declaration; and (4) Not holding a limited jurisdiction
certificate.''

The proportion of the total gas subject to Commission regulation
which was sold and transported by each company in the immediately
preceding calendar year to the sum of the gas subject to the
Commission regulation which was sold and transported in the
immediately preceding calendar year by all natural gas pipeline
companies being assessed annual charges.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 18 CFR 382.202 (2012).

For example, if a Pipeline sold and transported 10 percent of the total
gas subject to the Commission's regulations, that Pipeline would be
assessed 10 percent of the costs of the natural gas regulatory program
in the form of an annual charge.
    4. Pipelines are entitled to recover these annual charges from
their customers, and they have two options for doing so. First, upon
Commission approval, a Pipeline may adjust its rates annually to
recover the annual charges through an ACA clause.\7\ Second, a Pipeline
may seek to recover its annual charges through its general
transportation rates.\8\ This proceeding proposes to modify only the
first method, i.e., recovery of annual charges through an ACA clause,
as it is widely used among Pipelines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Id. at 154.402.
    \8\ Order No. 472, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,746 at 30,629.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Order No. 472 recognized that although the Commission generally
disfavors the use of tracking mechanisms, it is appropriate that
Pipelines be permitted to pass through these annual charges directly to
customers.\9\ Accordingly, the Commission provided Pipelines an option
of passing along the annual charges to customers through a surcharge to
their transportation rates reflected in the ACA clause.\10\ The
Commission's requirements for Pipelines that choose to utilize an ACA
clause are codified in section 154.402 of the Commission's
regulations.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Id.
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ 18 CFR 154.402 (2012).

    The ACA clause must be filed with the Commission and indicate
the amount of annual charges to be flowed through per unit of energy
sold or transported (ACA unit charge). The ACA unit charge will be
specified by the Commission at the time the Commission calculates
the annual charge bills. A company must reflect the ACA unit charge
in each of its rate schedules applicable to sales or transportation
deliveries. The company must apply the ACA unit charge to the usage
component of rate schedules with two-part rates. A company may
recover annual charges through an ACA unit charge only if its rates
do not otherwise reflect the costs of annual charges assessed by the
Commission under Sec.  382.106(a) of this chapter. The applicable
annual charge, required by Sec.  382.103 of this chapter, must be
paid before the company applies the ACA unit charge.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id. at 154.402(a).

    6. Pipelines that seek to recover annual charges through an ACA
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
clause must file a tariff record containing the following:

    (1) A statement that the company is collecting an ACA per unit
charge, as approved by the Commission, applicable to

all the pipeline's sales and transportation rate schedules, (2) The
per unit charge of the ACA, (3) The proposed effective date of the
tariff change (30 days after the filing of the tariff sheet or
section, unless a shorter period is specifically requested in a
waiver petition and approved), and (4) A statement that the pipeline
will not recover any annual charges recorded in FERC Account 928 in
a proceeding under subpart D of [part 154 of the Commission's
regulations].\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id. at 154.402(b).

Additionally, the Commission requires these Pipelines to file revised
tariff records to reflect changes to the ACA unit charge authorized by
the Commission each fiscal year.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id. at 154.402(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Each year the Commission sets the ACA unit charge for the
natural gas program in July.\15\ Pipelines that wish to begin
collecting the ACA unit charge on the first day of the fiscal year are
required to file revised tariff records reflecting changes in the ACA
unit charge by September 1 of each year, to be effective October 1 of
that year.\16\ So long as the Pipeline has paid its annual charge to
the Commission, the Commission will accept the tariff records, and they
will go into effect on October 1. To the extent that the ACA unit
charge remains the same from one year to the next, existing Pipelines
that already reflect that ACA unit charge in their tariffs need not
make a filing for that year. This annual process is designed to ensure
that Pipelines collect charges for the entire fiscal year, as defined
in Part 382 of the Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The Commission publishes this change via a notice entitled,
``FY [Year] Gas Annual Charges Correction for Annual Charges Unit
Charge,'' which is available on the Commission's Web site, located
at http://www.ferc.gov.
    \16\ See id. at 382.102(i) (defining ``fiscal year'' as the
twelve-month period that begins on the first day of October and ends
on the last day of September); see also id. at 154.402(b)(3)
(requiring the proposed effective date of the tariff change revising
the ACA unit charge to be 30 days after the date the change is
filed, unless a shorter period is specifically requested in a waiver
petition and approved).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. In 2011, the Commission received 134 filings to reflect the
annual change in the ACA unit charge. In years in which the ACA unit
charge does not change, there are fewer filings. However, some
Pipelines, such as those that have recently gone into service and have
been billed an annual charge, are still permitted to submit a filing to
the Commission in order to pass along the annual charge to their
customers.

II. Discussion

    9. In an effort to reduce the regulatory burden associated with
annual tariff filings to reflect the current year's ACA unit charge,
the Commission proposes to eliminate the annual filing requirement for
Pipelines utilizing an ACA clause. In its place, the Commission
proposes to require Pipelines utilizing an ACA clause to incorporate
the Commission-authorized ACA unit rate by reference to that rate, as
published on the Commission's Web site. Accordingly, Pipelines that
wish to continue utilizing an ACA clause would be required to make a
one-time tariff revision that incorporates the ACA unit charge
published on the Commission's Web site into the Pipeline's tariff as
the ACA unit charge for the relevant fiscal year.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See id. at 382.102(i) (defining ``fiscal year'' as the
twelve-month period that begins on the first day of October and ends
on the last day of September).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. In proposing this change, the Commission is aware that in
addition to the basic statutory requirement that all rates and charges
be on file with the Commission,\18\ the filing requirements associated
with the annual revisions to the ACA unit charge serve important
practical functions. First, the annual tariff filing (and the
Commission's acceptance of that filing) establishes an effective date
upon which the Pipeline is entitled to begin collecting that fiscal
year's ACA unit charge. Second, the annual filing provides the
Commission with an opportunity to ensure that the Pipeline has actually
paid the annual charge that it seeks to recover from customers.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 717c (2006).
    \19\ Order No. 472, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,746 at 30,629-30
(explaining that Pipelines may only collect those annual charges
that they have already paid to the Commission).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11. Because the annual filing requirement would be eliminated under
the proposed reform and no longer serve these functions, the
Commission's proposal is designed to replicate them. Accordingly, the
Commission proposes to require Pipelines utilizing an ACA clause to
incorporate by reference into their tariffs the ACA unit charge
specified in the annual notice issued by the Commission entitled ``FY
[Year] Gas Annual Charges Correction for Annual Charges Unit Charge.''
This ACA unit charge shall be effective on the first day of October
following issuance of this notice and shall extend to the last day of
September the following year (i.e., the duration of the fiscal year).
However, the ACA unit charge shall only be incorporated by reference
into the Pipeline's tariff, and thereby assessed to shippers, if the
Pipeline has paid its annual assessment, as reflected on a new notice,
entitled ``Payment Status of Pipeline Billings--FY [Year],'' that the
Commission will issue each year. This notice will identify the
Pipelines that have been assessed annual charges for a fiscal year and
indicate whether they have paid their bills and are, therefore,
authorized to recover the ACA unit charge from shippers. The Commission
will issue the ``Payment Status of Pipeline Billings--FY [Year]''
notice on the last business day of the fiscal year, and provide updates
as necessary. All of the documents can be found on the Annual Charges
page of the Natural Gas section of the Commission's Web site, located
at http://www.ferc.gov.
    12. We emphasize that the only thing changed by this Proposed Rule
is the filing requirement for those Pipelines that utilize an ACA
clause. This Proposed Rule does not prevent Pipelines from continuing
to recover annual charges assessed by the Commission through their
transportation rates, as established in a general rate case. Nor does
this Proposed Rule modify how the Commission calculates the costs of
the natural gas regulatory program or how the ACA unit charge is
calculated or assessed.
    13. We are taking this action as part of our commitment to
continually review our regulations and eliminate those requirements
that impose an unnecessary burden on regulated entities. We find that
our proposal to have Pipelines incorporate the ACA unit charge by
reference to the notices published on the Commission's Web site will
retain all of the transparency and consumer safeguards embodied in the
Commission's existing regulations. However, it will eliminate
approximately 145 filings each year, thereby reducing the regulatory
burden on the Pipelines and the Commission.

III. Compliance

    14. The Commission proposes that Pipelines be required to implement
the proposed changes in time for the 2014 fiscal year. Accordingly, the
Commission proposes to require Pipelines utilizing an ACA clause to
make a one-time compliance filing revising their tariffs to incorporate
by reference the ACA unit charge published on the Commission's Web
site, as discussed above. In order to give Pipelines subject to these
proposed modifications adequate time to implement these changes, this
compliance filing will be due 30 days after the Final Rule is published
in the Federal Register. Pipelines will be required to seek an
effective date of October 1, 2013, for these compliance filings.

IV. Information Collection Statement

    15. The following collections of information contained in this
proposed rule are being submitted to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review under section 507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(d). The Commission solicits comments on the
Commission's need for this information, whether the information will
have practical utility, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates,
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondents'
burden, including the use of automated information techniques. The
following burden estimates reflect the time necessary for respondents
to update their tariffs according to this proposed rule, as well as the
avoided burden as respondents will no longer have to file ACA charge
tariff adjustments. The Commission estimates it will require eight
hours per company to make the one time tariff changes proposed in this
rule. In each year, including the first, the Commission estimates that
filers will see a two hour per year reduction in burden from no longer
filing ACA charge tariff adjustments. The following shows the burden
hour impact of the proposed rule.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of                        Average        Estimated
                                     Number of     responses per   Total number    burden hours    total annual
                                    respondents     respondent     of responses    per response       burden
                                             (A)             (B)     (A)*(B)=(C)             (D)         (C)*(D)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1 One-time tariff changes    ..............  ..............  ..............               6             870
 and burden reduction...........
Year 2 burden reduction.........  ..............  ..............  ..............               2             290
Year 3 burden reduction.........             145               1             145               2             290
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The average annual burden associated with this rule over three
years is 97 hours (870 hours - 290 hours - 290 hours = 290 hours; 290
hours/3 years = 96.67 hours/year). Accordingly, the Commission
estimates that each respondent, on average, should experience a net
reduction in burden (2 hours per year) starting with the fifth year and
in each year thereafter.
    Information Collection Costs: The Commission seeks comments on the
costs to comply with these requirements. It has projected the average
cost for all respondents to be the following: \20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The cost figures are derived by multiplying the total hours
to prepare a response (hours) by an hourly wage estimate of $59 (a
composite estimate that includes legal, technical and support staff
wages and benefits obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistic data
at http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_221000.htm and http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm rates).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     One-time total cost of $51,330 (870 hours * $59/hour)
     Avoided cost per year of $17,110 (290 hours * $59/hour)
    Title: FERC-542, Gas Pipeline Rates: Rate Tracking.
    Action: One-time filing and reduced future filings.
    OMB Control Number: 1902-0070.
    Respondents: Natural Gas Pipelines.
    Frequency of Responses: One-time implementation and future
reduction in number of responses. Responses are mandatory.
    Necessity of Information: The proposals in this Proposed Rule
would, if implemented, reduce the burden of interstate natural gas
pipelines resulting from compliance with the Commission's regulations.
    Internal Review: The Commission has reviewed the requirements
pertaining to proposed modification of the Commission's regulations and
made a preliminary determination that the proposed revisions are
necessary to reduce the burden imposed by the Commission on the natural
gas industry. The Commission has assured itself, by means of its
internal review, that there is specific, objective support for the
burden estimates associated with the information requirements.
    16. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the following: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426 [Attention:
Ellen Brown, Office of the Executive Director, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>].
    17. Comments concerning the collection of information and the
associated burden estimate, should be sent to the Commission in this
docket and to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503 [Attention:
Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, telephone:
(202) 395-4638, fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>].

V. Environmental Analysis

    18. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental
Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may
have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.\21\ The
Commission has categorically excluded certain actions from these
requirements as not having a significant effect on the human
environment.\22\ The actions proposed here fall within categorical
exclusions in the Commission's regulations for rules that are
clarifying, corrective, or procedural, for information gathering,
analysis, and dissemination, and for sales, exchange, and
transportation of natural gas that requires no construction of
facilities.\23\ Therefore, an environmental assessment is unnecessary
and has not been prepared as part of this NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, Order No. 486, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,783 (1987).
    \22\ 18 CFR 380.4.
    \23\ See 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii), 380.4(a)(5), 380.4(a)(27).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    19. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \24\ generally
requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The RFA mandates consideration of regulatory alternatives that
accomplish the stated objectives of a proposed rule and that minimize
any significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The Small Business Administration's (SBA) Office of Size
Standards develops the numerical definition of a small business.\25\
The SBA has established a size standard for pipelines transporting
natural gas, stating that a firm is small if its annual receipts are
less than $25.5 million.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
    \25\ 13 CFR 121.101.
    \26\ 13 CFR 121.201, subsection 486.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    20. The regulations proposed here impose requirements only on
interstate pipelines, the majority of which are not small businesses.
Most companies regulated by the Commission do not fall within the RFA's
definition of a small

entity. Approximately 145 entities would be potential respondents
subject to data collection FERC-545 reporting requirements. Nearly all
of these entities are large entities. For the year 2011 (the most
recent year for which information is available), only 15 companies not
affiliated with larger companies had annual revenues of less than $25.5
million. Moreover, these requirements are designed to benefit all
customers, including small businesses. The Commission estimates that
the one-time cost per small entity is $354.\27\ In the future, small
entities should see a cost savings related to avoiding an annual ACA
charge adjustment filing. The Commission does not consider the
estimated $354 impact per entity to be significant. Accordingly,
pursuant to Sec.  605(b) of the RFA, the Commission certifies that this
proposed rule should not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ This number is derived by multiplying the hourly figure (6)
by the cost per hour ($59). 6 hrs * $59/hr = $354.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Comment Procedures

    21. The Commission invites interested persons to submit written
comments on the proposed regulation modifications promulgated in this
NOPR, as well as any related matters or alternative proposals that
commenters may wish to discuss. Comments are due November 28, 2012.
Comments must refer to Docket No. RM12-14-000, and must include the
commenter's name, the organization they represent, if applicable, and
their address. Comments may be filed either in electronic or paper
format.
    22. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically
via the eFiling link on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts most standard word processing
formats. Documents created electronically using word processing
software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format
and not in a scanned format. Commenters filing electronically do not
need to make a paper filing.
    23. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically
must send an original of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    24. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files
and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the
Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal are
not required to serve copies of their comments on other commenters.

VIII. Document Availability

    25. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
Internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and
in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours
(8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A,
Washington DC 20426.
    26. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this
information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is
available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type
the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in
the docket number field.
    27. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
Web site during normal business hours from the Commission's Online
Support at<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email the Public Reference Room at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 154

    Natural gas, Pipelines, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    By direction of the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission proposes to amend
Part 154.402, Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as
follows:

PART 154--RATE SCHEDULES AND TARIFFS

    1. The authority citation for part 154 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 717-717w; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 7102-
7352.
    2. Revise section 154.402 to read as follows:

Sec.  154.402  ACA expenditures.

    (a) Requirements. Upon approval by the Commission, a natural gas
pipeline company may adjust its rates, annually, to recover from its
customers annual charges assessed by the Commission under part 382 of
this chapter pursuant to an annual charge adjustment clause (ACA
clause). Prior to the start of each fiscal year, the Commission will
post on its Web site the amount of annual charges to be flowed through
per unit of energy sold or transported (ACA unit charge) for that
fiscal year. A company's ACA clause must be filed with the Commission
and must incorporate by reference the ACA unit charge for the upcoming
fiscal year as posted on the Commission's Web site. A company must
incorporate by reference the ACA unit charge posted on the Commission's
Web site in each of its rate schedules applicable to sales or
transportation deliveries. The company must apply the ACA unit charge
posted on the Commission's Web site to the usage component of rate
schedules with two-part rates. A company may recover annual charges
through an ACA unit charge only if its rates do not otherwise reflect
the costs of annual charges assessed by the Commission under Sec.
382.106(a) of this chapter. The applicable annual charge, required by
Sec.  382.103 of this chapter, must be paid before the company applies
the ACA unit charge. Upon payment to the Commission of its annual
charges, the ACA unit charge for that fiscal year will be incorporated
by reference into the company's tariff, effective throughout that
fiscal year.
    (b) Application for Rate Treatment Authorization. A company seeking
authorization to use an ACA unit charge must file with the Commission a
separate ACA tariff record containing:
    (1) A statement that the company is collecting an ACA unit charge,
as calculated by the Commission, applicable to all the pipeline's sales
and transportation rate schedules,
    (2) A statement that the ACA unit charge, as revised annually and
posted on the Commission's Web site, is incorporated by reference into
the company's tariff,
    (3) For companies with existing ACA clauses, a proposed effective
date of the tariff change of October 1, 2013; for companies seeking to
utilize an ACA clause after October 1, 2013, a proposed effective date
30 days after the filing of the tariff record, unless a shorter period
is specifically requested in a waiver petition and approved), and
    (4) A statement that the pipeline will not recover any annual
charges recorded in FERC Account 928 in a proceeding under subpart D of
this part
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-26105 Filed 10-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


                          Technical Support Document
       NOx and VOC RACT Source Specific SIP Revision State of New Jersey
                                      for
                             CMC Steel New Jersey
                          (Commercial Metals Company)
                             Sayreville, New Jersey

                         Docket: EPA-R02-OAR-2019-0720

 INTRODUCTION

   This technical support document (TSD) outlines the state of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection's (the State) State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to the ozone SIP. Specifically, the State seeking EPA's approval on facility-specific volatile organic compounds (VOC) control plan and facility-specific Nitrogen oxides (NOx) control plan for the electric arc furnace (Sayreville EAF) at the CMC Steel New Jersey located at 1 N. Crossmen Road, Sayreville, New Jersey, Middlesex county. The facility operates a mini-mill that consist of melting reclaimed scrap metal using an electric arc furnace and is then cast into billets and reinforcing bars. This SIP revision would establish facility-specific VOC emission rate of 57 pounds per hour (lb/hr) and facility-specific maximum allowable NOx emission rate of 31 lb/hr for the electric arc furnace and does not change allowable emissions. The electric arc furnace will not increase hourly VOC and NOx emissions, therefore, the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ground level ozone is protected.
      On December 5, 2018, the State approved an administrative amendment reflecting new ownership and name change from Gerdau Ameristeel to CMC Steel New Jersey. All control options for the Sayreville EAF and associated Clean Air Act (CAA) permit limits remain the same under the new ownership as were under the former owner Gerdau Ameristeel.

II.	CLEAN AIR ACT REQUIREMENTS FOR NOx OZONE AND RACT

A.	Federal Ozone Requirements

Ground level ozone is created by chemical reactions between NOx and VOCs when pollutants emitted by sources chemically react in the presence of sunlight. Nonattainment for ground level ozone is defined as an area that is not meeting (or that contributes to ambient air quality in a nearby area that does not meet) the primary or secondary NAAQS for ozone. Nonattainment areas are classified as either marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme based on the degree to which the ozone level in the area exceeds the NAAQS.
      On March 6, 2015, the EPA established a final rule for implementing the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This final rule repeals the 1997 ozone NAAQS and adds anti-backsliding requirements to help smooth the transition between the 1997 and the 2008 ozone standards for nonattainment areas. The March 6, 2015 rule addresses a range of nonattainment area SIP requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015).
      To summarize the federal ozone rules, in 1997 the EPA revised the health-based NAAQS for 8-hour ozone, setting it at 0.084 parts per million (ppm) averaged over an 8-hour time frame. See 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997). The EPA revised the 8-hour ozone standard twice since 1997; in March 2008, the EPA revised the standard to 0.075 ppm, and in October 2015 the EPA revised it to 0.070 ppm while retaining the 2008 ozone indicators. See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008); 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015). After the EPA establishes a new or revised NAAQS, the CAA directs the EPA and the states to take steps to ensure that the new or revised NAAQS are met. One of the first steps, known as the initial area designations, involves identifying areas of the country that are not meeting the new or revised NAAQS, as well as the nearby areas that contain emissions sources that contribute emissions to the areas not meeting the NAAQS. The EPA finalized its attainment/nonattainment designations on June 4, 2018 for most areas across the country with respect to the 2015 ozone standard. See 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018). This action became effective on August 3, 2018.

B.	Federal Ozone Design Values and Standards

A design value is a statistic that describes the air quality status of a given location relative to the level of the NAAQS. In 1997, the EPA revised the health-based NAAQS for 8-hour ozone, setting it at 0.084 parts per million (ppm) averaged over an 8-hour time frame. This rule became effective on September 16, 1997.  See 62 FR 38856. This rulemaking was based on scientific evidence demonstrating that ozone causes adverse health effects at lower ozone concentrations and over longer periods of time than was understood when the 1-hour ozone standard was set in 1979.

      On April 30, 2004, the EPA finalized attainment/nonattainment designations for areas across the country with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone standard and set design values based on fourth-highest daily maximum, averaged across three consecutive years. This rule became effective on June 15, 2004. See 69 FR 23951.

      On November 29, 2005, the EPA finalized rules regarding emissions control and planning obligations applicable to areas designated nonattainment for 1997 8-hour ozone, including RACT measures and attainment demonstrations among other elements. This rule became effective on January 30, 2006. See 70 FR 71612.

      The EPA has revised the 8-hour ozone standard twice since 1997. First, on March 27, 2008, the standard was revised to 0.075 ppm. This rule became effective on May 27, 2008. See 73 FR 16436. On May 21, 2012, the EPA finalized the air quality thresholds that define the classifications assigned to all nonattainment areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This rule became effective on July 20, 2012. See 77 FR 30088.

      Then, the EPA revised the 8-hour ozone standard again on October 26, 2015, down to 0.070 ppm, but retained the 2008 ozone indicators, design value (i.e., fourth-highest daily maximum, averaged across three consecutive years) and averaging times (eight hours). This rule became effective December 28, 2015. See 80 FR 65292. On March 9, 2018, the EPA finalized the air quality thresholds that define the classifications assigned to all nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. This rule became effective on May 8, 2018.  See 83 FR 10376.

C. 	New Jersey Ozone Designations

      As explained above, nonattainment areas are classified as either marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme based on the degree to which the ozone level in the area exceeds the NAAQS. The State of New Jersey has two ozone nonattainment areas, which are the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City (PA-NJ-MD-DE), classified as marginal, and the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island (NY-NJ-CT), reclassified as serious, also referred to as the New York Metropolitan Area (NYMA). The New Jersey portion of the NYMA is made up of  -  -  - 12 counties (Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Hunterdon, Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris, Passaic, Somerset, Sussex, Union and Warren counties).

      On May 4, 2016 the EPA ruled that the NYMA did not attain their marginal 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable marginal attainment date July 20, 2015 and therefore the area was reclassified from marginal to moderate nonattainment. See 81 FR 26697 (May 4, 2016). As an area that is reclassified to a higher classification, the NYMA must demonstrate attainment by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2018, however, the NYMA again failed to meet the attainment date. Consequently, on August 23, 2019 the EPA reclassified the area to serious for 2008 ozone NAAQS. CAA sections 172(c)(1), 182(b)(2) and 182(f) require nonattainment areas that are designated as "moderate" or above to adopt reasonably available control technology.

D.	Federal RACT Requirements, OTR, and the NOx Supplement
Reasonably available control technology (RACT) is defined as the lowest emission limit that a particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility. Under EPA guidance, States should consider in their RACT determinations technologies that achieve 30 - 50 percent reduction within a cost range of $160 - 1300 per ton of NOx removed. See 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005).
      The CAA section 182, Plan Submissions and Requirements, requires states with nonattainment areas to include in their SIPs, among other things, provisions to require the implementation of RACT. Section 182(f) does not fully define NOx requirements for marginal and moderate nonattainment, but it does address NOx requirements for serious, severe and extreme nonattainment (i.e., 182(c), (d), and (e) respectively). In addition, section 182(f) outlines requirements that do not apply to sources located in Ozone Transport Region (OTR),but does not address situations that not that apply to OTR. To clarify, the CAA NOx Supplement was developed that clarifies requirements for NOx.  The NOx Supplement explains that the CAA section 182(f), read in conjunction with section 182(a)(2)(C) and other New Source Review (NSR) related provisions in section 182, require state new source review (NSR) plans to apply to major stationary sources of NOx, the same requirements that govern major stationary sources of VOC emissions in ozone nonattainment areas and in other areas located in OTR. Section182(a)(2)(C) requires states to adopt and submit revised NSR regulations for all ozone nonattainment areas classified as marginal or above.
      In addition, the CAA section 184(a), Control of Interstate Ozone Air Pollution, Ozone Transport Regions, addresses requirements for nonattainment areas located in the OTR, and the CAA section 176A, Interstate Transport Commissions, set forth the formation and responsibilities for the Ozone Transport Commission, that among other things, the Commission establishes control measures for RACT NOx for major sources located in the OTR.

E. 	New Jersey RACT Requirements
All the State of New Jersey is subject to RACT due to nonattainment area designations for the 8-hour ozone standard at 40 CFR 81.331. In addition, the entire state of New Jersey is located within the OTR, which triggers the RACT NOx requirements. The State developed an ozone SIP to attain the NAAQS standards and considers source-specific SIP revisions as necessary. A source-specific SIP revision is submitted by a facility to request approval for source-specific emission limitations, through a RACT analysis, and if approved by the State and the EPA, are incorporated into the State's ozone SIP. Furthermore, the state of New Jersey is located in the OTR.
      On August 1, 2007, the State finalized RACT revisions to its SIP to address the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (2007 NJ RACT plan) and focuses on control measures that reduce NOx and VOC emissions. On May 15, 2009 the EPA approved the 2007 NJ RACT plan. See 74 FR22837.

      The State of New Jersey choose to use more stringent RACT requirements. Most counties in New Jersey were previously classified under the 1979 1-hour ozone standard as severe nonattainment (i.e., major source defined as 25 TPY NOx), and the remaining counties were subject to RACT as part of the OTR. In comparison, under the 1997 8-hour standard most of New Jersey was classified as moderate (i.e., major source defined as 100 TPY NOx). Leading up to 2007, the State worked collaboratively with stakeholders to conduct a RACT analysis of statewide NOx source operations and pieces of equipment that have the potential to emit 25 TPY because the State was interested in finding methods to go beyond the 1997 federal requirements. The result was that the State choose to implement more stringent RACT requirements based on the 1979 1-hour severe nonattainment. The use of 25 TPY for RACT is also consistent with the anti-backsliding provisions of the CAA.

      The more stringent RACT requirements are outlined in the 2007 NJ RACT plan, at pages 18-21, as the following:
 past New Jersey costs for retrofitting a given control;
 average RACT cost (dollars per tons reduced) for a control technology and maximum RACT cost. The idea is that once a reasonable number of sources in a source category achieve a lower emission level, other sources should do the same;
 the seriousness of the Region's ozone air quality exceedance. For nonattainment areas with higher ozone levels higher cost for controls are reasonable;
 the seriousness of the need to reduce transported air pollution. As an OTR state, higher costs for RACT are justified; and
 the State plan for addressing economic feasibility in RACT rules. The State intends to specify RACT at the lowest emission limit that a reasonable number of similar industries had already successfully implemented for each source category

      The State of New Jersey was to codify in a rule by defining what is considered a major source of NOx, thus requiring use of RACT. On September 2, 2010 the EPA approved the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection revised SIP to incorporate several amendments to the New Jersey Administrative Code Title 7, Chapter 27, one of which is Subchapter 19, "Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution from Oxides of Nitrogen" (N.J.A.C. 7:27-19). See FR 45483. As such, Subchapter 19.2 defines 14 sources as being major. Essentially 13 of the major sources derive from the stakeholder RACT study for sources with potential to emit 25 TPY NOx and thus have strictly defined maximum allowable emission rates. The fourteenth category is reserved for all other source operations or pieces of equipment that exceed 10 TPY NOx, such as the electric arc furnace subject to this current SIP revision.

III.	EPA'S ANALYSIS OF STATE SUBMITTAL

CMC Steel New Jersey, 1 N Crossman Road, Sayreville, Middlesex County, NJ 08872, Program Interest Number 18052, Activity Number BOP 150002

CMC Steel New Jersey submitted this source-specific SIP revision requesting that they continue to operate under their current approved emission limits for the Sayreville EAF. Specifically, the VOC emission rate of 57 lb/hr and the NOx emission rate of 31 lb/hr. The facility met the statutory deadline to qualify for continuing to operate under existing limits, as outlined below:
 On April 20, 2009, the State revised regulations at 7:27-16.17(c) stating that if a VOC RACT plan was originally approved prior to May 19, 2009 and if a facility wishes to continue to operate under the original plan, the facility must submit a revised proposed plan by August 17, 2009. The original VOC RACT plan addressing the Sayreville EAF was approved October 1994. Therefore, on August 17, 2009, in accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:27-16.17(c)(3), Gerdau Ameristeel submitted a revised VOC RACT plan with VOC emission rate of 57 lb/hr. CMC Steel New Jersey assumes VOC RACT plan as new owner as of December 5, 2018.
 On April 20, 2009, the State revised regulations at N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.13(b) stating that if a NOx RACT plan was originally approved prior to May 1, 2005 and if a facility wishes to continue to operate under the original plan, the facility must submit a revised proposed plan by August 17, 2009. The original facility-specific NOx RACT plan for the Sayreville EAF dates to May 31, 1995 and the facility wishes to continue to operate facility-specific maximum allowable NOx emission rate of 31 lb/hr. CMC Steel New Jersey assumes NOx RACT plan as new owner as of December 5, 2018.
 In an email correspondence to Gerdau Ameristeel on September 7, 2018, the State requested an updated VOC RACT plan and NOx RACT plan to determine if other electric arc furnace control strategies have emerged since 2009.
 Gerdau Ameristeel sold the facility to CMC Steel New Jersey on December 5, 2018. The EPA verified that all control options for the Sayreville EAF and associated CAA permit limits remain the same under the new ownership as were under the former owner Gerdau Ameristeel.
 The State reviewed CMC Steel New Jersey's submitted VOC RACT plan and NOx RACT plan and in a letter dated April 30, 2019 from Catherine R. McCabe, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) Commissioner, to Peter D. Lopez, Regional Administrator U.S. EPA Region 2, the State requests EPA's approval of a revision to the New Jersey SIP for ozone. The SIP revision was submitted to EPA to evaluate the request to continue to use the control options as outlined in N.J.A.C.7:27-16.17 Proposed Facility-Specific VOC Control Plan for Electric Arc Furnace updated October 31, 2018 and N.J.A.C.7:27-19.13 Proposed Facility-Specific NOx Control Plan for Electric Arc Furnace updated October 31, 2018.

      This is SIP revision establishes facility-specific VOC emission rate of 57 lb/hr and facility-specific maximum allowable NOx emission rate of 31 lb/hr and, therefore, does not change allowable emissions from the affected source. The permit levels of the Sayreville EAF are maximum potential to emit 78.7 TPY of VOC and maximum potential to emit of 78.8 TPY of NOx emissions. Based on the most recent emissions inventory, the other VOC and NOx emissions for the Melt Shop include scrap pre-heater, three ladle preheaters, a tundish preheater, and billet cutting torches, however, each of these sources contributes substantially less than 3 pounds per hour of VOC emissions and less than one ton per year of NOx to the overall NOx emissions from the Melt Shop. Therefore, only the Sayreville EAF source operation is subject to the VOC RACT rule and the NOx RACT rule as per N.J.A.C. 7:27-16.17(a) and N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.2(b)12 respectively.

EPA's Evaluation

The EPA reviewed CMC Steel New Jersey application and the source specific SIP revision for completeness and approvability. The following was considered in evaluating comparable electric arc furnace control technologies: reviewed control options on other electric arc furnaces from similar facilities that operate EAF as CMC Steel New Jersey is the only facility in New Jersey to operate an EAF; consulted with NJDEP and the EPA experienced air inspectors; and reviewed the EPA technical guidance.

Similar operation:
      The Delaware Division of Air Quality confirms that a typical fuel fired combustion equipment applied to NOx emitting sources are not technically feasible for an electric arc furnace. Specifically, in 2001 the state certified that no additional requirements on the Citisteel's electric arc furnace operations are required under RACT. (CitiSteel: 66 FR 32231 (6/14/2001)  -  "Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Delaware; Conversion of the Conditional Approval of the NOX": Direct final rule approving 3 source specific NOx RACT determinations https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2001/06/14/01-14898/approval-and-promulgation-of-air-quality-implementation-plans-delaware-conversion-of-the-conditional). Delaware submitted the case-by-case RACT Determinations for CitiSteel that can be found in the June 2000 edition of the Delaware Register of Regulations at http://leghall.delaware.gov/LIS/Register.nsf/vwRegisters/312/$file/June2000.pdf?openelement (pg 1755 of the document). This document includes information about the process description, NOx emissions, and the RACT Analysis for CitiSteel.
      The EPA's Technology Transfer Network identifies two facilities in Ohio with similar operations to the Sayreville EAF, Dearborn Industrial Generation and Norths Star Blue Scope Steel, that use natural gas fuel, have melt shops and similar emission rates and do not have thermal incineration as a control device for VOC. They have other emission control technologies suitable for their operations, such as, DES, bag house, post combustion chamber, among others.

New Jersey experienced air inspector:
      The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection air inspector has been conducting inspections at the Sayreville EAF since 2001 and confirms that Sayreville EAF is the only electric arc furnace in New Jersey. Inspection records for the last 5 years demonstrate no violations for VOC or NOx in the Sayreville EAF stack testing. The most recent full compliance evaluation and stack tests for VOC and NOx was conducted by the State in August 2019 and there were no issues with VOC or NOx. The Sayreville EAF has a continuous emission monitor for VOC, NOx, Oxygen, and Carbon Monoxide and the 3-hour rolling average sometimes creates a blip for VOC and NOx, but the inspector is not concerned. The noncompliance at the Sayreville facility over the years (i.e. over 2 million in penalties) is due to the electric arc furnace opacity and mercury and not for VOC or NOx. The State is working with the facility to improve mercury and opacity issues and they recently implemented a dust management plan. The State rule has a very low standard for opacity and the continuous opacity monitor has a 2% tolerance and this results in quarterly noncompliance for opacity. The facility is considering replacing the continuous opacity monitor with broken bag detectors, however, switching control equipment will require State approval. The State rule for electric arc furnace addresses mercury in pounds/year and milligrams/ton/steel produced and it is the latter that the Sayreville EAF does not meet.

The EPA experienced air inspector:
      The EPA Region 2 Air Compliance Branch confirms with the State air inspector findings that the facility has been having issues complying with their opacity limit of 3% for the electric arc furnace, however, the complying issues do not apply to VOC or NOx.

Reviewed the EPA technical guidance:
 RACT/BACT/LEAR Clearinghouse, https://cfpub.epa.gov/rblc/index.cfm?action=Home.Home&lang=en, demonstrates that no electric arc furnace in the U.S. has a thermal incinerator for a VOC control device
 The EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual, Chapter 2 Incinerators and Oxidizers, Section <IP_ADDRESS>. Equipment Cost (updates as of August 2018), https://www.epa.gov/economic-and-cost-analysis-air-pollution-regulations/cost-reports-and-guidance-air-pollution
 Alternative Control Techniques Document  -  NOx Emissions from Iron and Steel Mills (EPA-453/R-94-065), https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/control-techniques-guidelines-and-alternative-control-techniques
 AP-42 Iron and Steel Mills, https://www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/ch12/final/c12s0501.pdf
 Handbook Control Techniques for Hazardous Air Pollutants (EPA 625/6-91/014), https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_report.cfm?Lab=NRMRL&dirEntryId=124752
 Air Pollution Control Technology Factsheet - Thermal incinerator (EPA-452/F-03-022), https://www3.epa.gov/ttncatc1/cica/files/fthermal.pdf
 Air Pollution Control Technology Factsheet  -  Catalytic incineration (EPA-452/F-03-018), https://www3.epa.gov/ttncatc1/cica/files/fcataly.pdf
 Air Pollution Control Technology Factsheet  -  Flares (EPA-452/F-03-019), https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/catc/dir1/fflare.pdf
 Technology Transfer Network - Choosing Adsorption System for VOC (EPA-456/F-99-004), https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/catc/cica/other6_e.html
 EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual, sixth edition (EPA-452/B-02-001),  https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/910118CI.PDF?Dockey=910118CI.PDF
 EPA Technical Bulletin Refrigerated Condensers for Control of Organic Air Emissions (Clean Air Technology Center (EPA-456/R-01-004), https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/catc/dir1/refrigeratedcondensers.pdf

EPA's Evaluation of Facility RACT analysis
In considering RACT for a source it is important to understand how the source fits into the overall facility process. The Sayreville EAF receives scrap metal and is positioned in the Melt Shop. The incoming scrap metal is subject to a Scrap Management Plan that minimizes oil, grease, and plastic and other elements that would result in VOC emissions if burned. The remaining particulates, metals, and emissions are controlled with a Direct Evacuation System (DES) and evacuated through two main branches of ductwork: through direct evacuation by a preheater chamber which feeds scrap to the furnace and through a canopy hood positioned high above the electric arc furnace in the Melt Shop roof. This process generates no more than 57 lb/hr of VOC. Several modifications were made to the DES system after its initial design in 1997 for the primary purpose of reducing VOC emissions. Specifically, two methods of post-combustion control are integrated into the Consteel(TM)/DES system evacuation design to rapidly melt the scrap as it is introduced into a hot heel of metal.  These included oxygen injection in the freeboard space in the Sayreville EAF above the foamy slag and oxygen injection into the preheater at ports along the length of the scrap conveyor.  The antechamber and DES water spray chambers were replaced with larger vessels to increase residence time. Lastly, modifications to the DES were made to increase temperature in the antechamber by reducing infiltration of cold air.
      The proposed CMC Steel New Jersey facility-specific VOC and NOx RACT control plans identify seven possible VOC control technologies and eight possible NOx control technologies for a typical electric arc furnace, summarized in the table below. The facility demonstrates that the Sayreville EAF is capable of meeting 57 lb/hr VOC through their current practices with the DES and scrap management plan; and is capable of meeting 31 lb/hr NOx by avoiding temperature spikes and minimizing electrical use as control technologies.

      The two RACT control plans also consider the cost of all the technologically feasible control devices not currently in use in the Melt Shop so that they can determine if the not-in-use control devices should be added or not. In the source-specific SIP revision before us, the control that could be added is the thermal incinerator for VOC emission reductions, as such, the facility conducted a RACT analysis on the thermal incinerator. The RACT analysis must demonstrate that VOC reductions from the thermal incinerator are cost effective to be considered RACT.  If the cost to the facility to install and operate a thermal incinerator on the Sayreville EAF is higher than what is expected by the federal or state regulation, the thermal incinerator is not cost effective and is not RACT, which is the case under this source-specific SIP revision.

      Cost effectiveness is a figure in dollars per ton of emissions reductions per year (i.e., the cost per ton of pollutant controlled). Factors of cost effectiveness include, for example, consideration of process capital equipment, total plant cost and investment, fixed and variable operating cost, total capital requirement and consumable costs. Because sources (e.g., electric arc furnace) will vary in age, condition, and size, among other considerations, the actual cost, emission reduction, and cost effectiveness levels that an individual source will experience in meeting the RACT requirements will vary from unit to unit and from area to area. The EPA believes that it is appropriate to focus on a range of cost effectiveness due to the variability of the actual cost effectiveness that is expected from unit to unit. See, March 16, 1994 D. Kent Berry Memorandum "Cost effective Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)".

      Based on the November 2017 updates to the EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual, the maximum costs considered are for a 50,000 standard cubic feet per minute (SCFM) thermal incinerator. Although larger thermal incinerator units can be built, applications are rare at flow rates above 50,000 SCFM. Therefore, CMC Steel New Jersey calculated the cost needed to handle a flow rate of 100,000 SCFM based on the cost of two 50,000 SCFM units. The cost effectiveness of operating two thermal incinerators was calculated using the total annual cost of two thermal incinerators ($3,647,283) and the VOC emissions that would be removed (74.8 TPY). Therefore, the annual cost effectiveness to install two thermal incinerators on the Sayreville EAF is $48,760 per ton VOC reduced ($3,647,283 / 74.8 = $48,760). The VOC reduction was based on a baseline of 78.7 TPY from the facility's Title V permit and an assumed thermal incinerator control efficiency of 95%, resulting in a reduction of 74.8 TPY of VOC.  A control efficiency of 95% was selected based on EPA guidance (i.e., Handbook Control Technologies for Hazardous Air Pollutants, EPA/625/6-91/014, June 1991).

      Although capital costs are not conserved in the RACT cost effectiveness, consideration of process capital equipment was estimated to demonstrate RACT. To purchase two thermal incinerators at 2018 dollars the cost is $2,645,690. And because of the presence of sulfuric acid that can be in the gas stream, a 100,000 SCFM packed-bed/packed-tower wet scrubber to control the halogenated/sulfur compounds can cost $4,703,832 to install. Since $48,760 per VOC tons removed is above the federal RACT and no other electric arc furnace in the U.S. has thermal incinerator control technology to compare, the thermal incinerator is not cost effective.

      The two tables below summarize the VOC and NOx control technologies identified by CMC Steel New Jersey for the electric arc furnace and which are technologically feasible, which have RACT analysis, and which are currently being implemented:

                           VOC control technologies

Scrap management plan

Technically feasible; Currently implementing  -  purchased scrap material is of consistent and verifiable quality to minimize the amount of nonmetallic/organic material, including oil, grease, and plastic that would result in VOC emissions.
Direct evacuation system (DES)

Technically feasible; Currently implementing  -  VOC emissions are both generated in and destroyed (controlled) in the preheater by the DES. Utilizes a "Fourth-hole evacuation" to capture gas from the electric arc furnace through the preheater to send to the baghouse through ducts. To destroy VOCs the temperature in the preheater is maintained between 1,400 and 2,100º F with an oxygen content varying from 0 to 14% as measured at the preheater exit.
Thermal incineration

Technically feasible; RACT analysis provided  -  This technology has not been implemented for an electric arc furnace. Not well suited for streams with large fluctuations in flow rate because the reduced residence time and mixing during increased flow would result in lower destruction efficiency. Thermal incineration can handle minor fluctuations in flow, however, excess fluctuations require the use of a flair. Thermal incinerator fuel consumption is high so thermal units are best suited for small process operations with moderate to high VOC loadings. Also, see the "disadvantage" section of the factsheet (EPA-452/F-03-022), speaks of formation of highly corrosive acid gases.
Catalytic incineration

Not technically feasible  -  Strong likelihood of catalyst poisoning and deactivation and the high level SO3 and sulfuric acid (H2SO4) would cause catalyst fouling.
Flares

Not technically feasible  -  Require constant fuel combustion to maintain the pilot flame which would result in higher emissions including CO and NOx. Flares cannot be used to treat waste with halogenated compounds (CMC Steel New Jersey has halogenated/sulfur compounds in the gas stream, such as dioxin). Flares are primarily a safety device which deal with flow in short duration (an upset or accidental release condition) rather than a control device that treats a continuous stream.
Mixed bed carbon adsorption

Not technically feasible  -  Not feasible based on the VOC concentration in the exhaust gas.
Condensers/recapture

Not technically feasible  -  Not feasible based on requirement of large amounts of energy to meet the high cooling requirements.

                           NOx control technologies

Good operating practices

Technically feasible; Currently implementing  -  CMC Steel New Jersey maintains constant temperature in the pre-chamber and in the Sayreville EAF which avoids temperature spikes that would create more NOx emissions. They also use the least amount of electricity as possible to reduce indirect NOx emissions.
Direct evacuation system (DES)

Not technically feasible  -  Even though the DES vents NOx emissions to the baghouse, it does not prevent the formation of NOx nor does it destroy already created NOx.
Low NOx/oxy-fuel burner

Not technically feasible  -  This technology is used on burners and the Sayreville EAF does not utilize burners to melt scrap.
Low excess air

Not technically feasible  -  This technology is used on burners and the Sayreville EAF does not utilize burners to melt scrap.
Flue gas recirculation / temperature reduction

Not technically feasible  -  The Sayreville EAF requires a temperature of over 2,000°F for the incoming air, well above the temperature required to control NOx using gas recirculation. Carbon Monoxide (CO) is combusted in the preheater to maintain the correct temperature and to control CO. Reducing the temperature at the preheater could jeopardize the CO combustion and control.
Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)
Not technically feasible  -  Catalyst poisoning by acid gases and particulate matter can occur. The scrap metal contains large amounts of sulfur, which leads to the formation of sulfuric acid and sulfite (SO3) in the EAF. SO3 can combine with the ammonia to form Ammonium Bisulfate, which sticks to the catalyst causing fouling of the catalyst. The sulfuric acid created can also cause poisoning of the catalyst directly. The exhaust gas from the EAF contains high concentrations of particulate matter including metals. The high concentration of particulate matter will cause unacceptable fouling of the catalyst, which can deactivate the catalyst rendering it impractical for the EAF. Also, the presence of metals, such as arsenic, mercury, vanadium, zinc, etc, can deactivate the catalyst as well.
Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SCNR)
Not technically feasible  -  The Sayreville EAF has a wide variability of temperature, flow rate, and pollutant concentrations in the gas exhaust. The SNCR reaction needs a certain temperature range to take place. If the temperature is too low the ammonia (NH3) and NOx do not react, resulting in ammonia slip emissions (in addition to the NOx that wasn't destroyed being released). At too high of a temperature NH3 decomposes into nitric oxide (NO) and water, resulting in higher NOx emissions.
Non-Selective Catalytic Reduction (NSCR)
Not technically feasible  -  NSCR is generally applicable to rich burn reciprocating engines running near stoichiometric conditions to destroy NOx, CO, and VOC/HAP. The Sayreville EAF does not operate as a reciprocating engine, rather, it operates with excess oxygen (lean-burn) and the oxygen content in the exhaust gas would be too high for NSCR to be technically feasible.

EPA's Determination

Based on a thorough review of similar sources, and analysis of this source-specific SIP revision, the EPA is proposing to allow CMC Steel New Jersey to continue to operate under their current approved emission limits for the Sayreville EAF. Specifically, the VOC emission rate of 57 lb/hr and the NOx emission rate of 31 lb/hr. And that there are no VOC nor NOx control technologies that are RACT besides what the facility already has in place. The control technologies currently in place are DES and scrap management plan capable of meeting 57 lb/hr VOC and best management practices to avoid temperature spikes and minimize electrical use that results in meeting the 31 lb/hr NOx limit. The facility met the statutory deadline to qualify for continuing to operate under existing limits.

Note this technical support document summarizes the State submission and the EPA/State consultations.  The related correspondence and State Implementation Plan revision are available for inspection and review at the EPA regional office located at 290 Broadway, floor 25, NY, N Y and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection office. Or by contacting Linda Longo, Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 113 (Thursday, June 12, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 33750]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13740]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[9912-13-ORD; Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2013-0357]

Workshop To Obtain Input on Draft Materials for the Integrated
Science Assessment (ISA) for Sulfur Oxides (SOX): Health Criteria

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Workshop.

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

SUMMARY: As part of the review of the air quality criteria for sulfur
oxides (SOX) and primary (health-based) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide (SO2), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing a teleconference
workshop to evaluate preliminary draft materials that will inform the
development of the SOX Integrated Science Assessment (ISA)
for health effects. The workshop is being organized by EPA's National
Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) within the Office of
Research and Development and will be held on June 23-24, 2014.
Participation in the workshop will be by webinar or teleconference
only.

DATES: The workshop will be held on June 23-24, 2014, beginning at 1:00
p.m. and ending at 4:00 p.m. each day.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions regarding information,
registration, and logistics for the workshop should be directed to Ms.
Whitney Kihlstrom, ICF International; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Questions regarding the scientific and technical aspects of the
workshop should be directed to Dr. Tom Long; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Dr. Lisa
Vinikoor-Imler; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Summary of Information About the Workshop

    Section 109(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the U.S. EPA to
conduct periodic reviews of the air quality criteria for each air
pollutant listed under section 108 of the Act. Based on such reviews,
EPA is to retain or revise the NAAQS for a given pollutant as
appropriate. As part of these reviews, NCEA assesses newly available
scientific information and develops ISA documents (formerly known as
Air Quality Criteria Documents) that provide the scientific basis for
the reviews of the NAAQS.
    NCEA is holding this teleconference workshop to inform the Agency's
evaluation of the scientific evidence for the review of the primary
NAAQS for SO2. Section 109(b)(1) of the CAA defines primary
NAAQS as standards, ``the attainment and maintenance of which in the
judgment of the Administrator, based on such criteria and allowing an
adequate margin of safety, are requisite to protect the public
health.'' EPA intends to develop a separate ISA, and NAAQS review, for
the secondary (welfare-based) NAAQS for SOX, in conjunction
with a review of the secondary NAAQS for oxides of nitrogen. The
purpose of the workshop is to obtain peer input on the scientific
content of preliminary draft materials that will inform the development
of the draft health effects ISA. Workshop participants will review and
discuss preliminary draft materials on the atmospheric chemistry of and
human exposure to SOX as well as health effects evidence
from in vivo and in vitro animal toxicology, controlled human exposure,
and epidemiology studies. In addition, panel discussions will help
identify key studies or concepts within each discipline to assist EPA
in integrating relevant literature within and across disciplines. These
preliminary materials are not being released to the general public
before the workshop but will be used during the teleconference to guide
workshop discussions and inform the development of the draft health
effects ISA. This workshop is planned to help ensure that the ISA, once
developed, is up-to-date and focuses on the key evidence to inform the
scientific understanding for the review of the primary NAAQS for
SO2. EPA is planning to release the first external review
draft health effects ISA for SOX for review by the Clean Air
Scientific Advisory Committee and the public in December 2014.

II. Workshop Information

    Members of the public may attend the teleconference as observers.
Space in the teleconference or webinar may be limited, and reservations
will be accepted on a first-come, first-served basis. Registration for
the workshop is available online at https://sites.google.com/site/soxpeerinputwebinar/. The workshop agenda and additional information
will be available through the NCEA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ncea
or by contacting one of the individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.

    Dated: June 5, 2014.
James Gallahan,
Acting Deputy Director, National Center for, Environmental Assessment.
[FR Doc. 2014-13740 Filed 6-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: January 13, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 8)]
[Notices]
[Page 1754-1755]
[DOCID:fr13ja09-114]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2009-02]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of this notice is to
improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of
FAA's regulatory activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the
inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to
affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number involved and must be received on or before January 23, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2008-
1137 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking web site: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://

www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can find and
read the comments received into any of our dockets, including the name
of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for 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).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maria G. Delgado, ANM-113, (425) 227-
2775, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Ave., SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; or Ralen Gao, ARM-200,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAA,
Office of Rulemaking, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 7, 2009.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2008-1137.
    Petitioner: L-3 Communications Integrated Systems.
    Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 26.47.
    Description of Relief Sought: The petitioner requests an exemption
from the requirements of Sec.  26.47 for two Boeing Model 747-47C
airplanes, modified in accordance with certain supplemental type
certificates (STCs). Section 26.47 requires holders of, and applicants
for, an STC to develop damage tolerance data for airplane alterations
and repairs. Section 26.47 is intended to apply to airplanes operating
under parts 121 or 129. The airplanes, which the petitioner is seeking
exemption for, are not currently operating in the United States under
parts 121 or 129, nor is there any plan to do so in the future.
[FR Doc. E9-382 Filed 1-12-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 119 (Friday, June 20, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35280-35282]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14417]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 232

[Release Nos. 33-9600; 34-72394; 39-2497; IC-31081]

Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (the Commission) is
adopting revisions to the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and
Retrieval System (EDGAR) Filer Manual and related rules to reflect
updates to the EDGAR system. The revisions are being made primarily to
support the US GAAP 2014 Taxonomy, validate the filings containing EX-
101 XBRL documents, update the Public Validation Criteria validation in
EX-101.INS documents, change the ABS Asset Class value ``Corporate
Debt'' for ABS-15G and ABS-15G/A to ``Debt Securities,'' disseminate
unofficial PDF copies of COVER and CORRESP attachments to EDGARLink
Online submissions at the discretion of the SEC, update the Frequently
Asked Questions (FAQ) screens, and revise the N-SAR system
requirements. The EDGAR system is scheduled to be upgraded to support
this functionality on June 16, 2014.

DATES: Effective Date: June 20, 2014. The incorporation by reference of
the EDGAR Filer Manual is approved by the Director of the Federal
Register as of June 20, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In the Division of Corporation
Finance, for questions concerning dissemination of unofficial PDF
copies of COVER and CORRESP attachments to EDGARLink Online submissions
contact Heather Mackintosh at<PHONE_NUMBER>; in the Division of
Economic and Risk Analysis, for questions concerning taxonomies update
and XBRL contact Walter Hamscher at<PHONE_NUMBER>; and in the Office
of Information Technology, contact Vanessa Anderson at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are adopting an updated EDGAR Filer
Manual, Volume I, Volume II, and Volume III. The Filer Manual describes
the technical formatting requirements for the preparation and
submission of electronic filings through the EDGAR system.\1\ It also
describes the

requirements for filing using EDGARLink Online and the Online Forms/XML
Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ We originally adopted the Filer Manual on April 1, 1993,
with an effective date of April 26, 1993. Release No. 33-6986 (April
1, 1993) [58 FR 18638]. We implemented the most recent update to the
Filer Manual on March 3, 2014. See Release No. 33-9554 (March 10,
2014) [79 FR 13216].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The revisions to the Filer Manual reflect changes within Volume I
entitled EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: ``General Information,'' Version
17 (June 2014), Volume II entitled EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II:
``EDGAR Filing,'' Version 27 (June 2014), and Volume III entitled EDGAR
Filer Manual, Volume III: ``N-SAR Supplement,'' Version 3 (June 2014).
The updated manual will be incorporated by reference into the Code of
Federal Regulations.
    The Filer Manual contains all the technical specifications for
filers to submit filings using the EDGAR system. 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.\2\ Filers may consult the Filer Manual in conjunction with our
rules governing mandated electronic filing when preparing documents for
electronic submission.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Rule 301 of Regulation S-T (17 CFR 232.301).
    \3\ See Release No. 33-9554 in which we implemented EDGAR
Release 14.0. For additional history of Filer Manual rules, please
see the cites therein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EDGAR system will be upgraded to Release 14.1 on June 16, 2014
and will introduce the following changes: EDGAR will be updated to
support the US GAAP 2014 Taxonomy. In addition, EDGAR will no longer
provide support for the US GAAP 2012 Taxonomy and the US 2011 DEI
Taxonomy. Please see http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edgartaxonomies.shtml for a complete listing of supported standard
taxonomies.
    Filings containing the EX-101 XBRL documents will be validated to
ensure that:
     EX-101 exhibits do not contain custom elements with a
fractionItemType declaration.
     EX-101 exhibits with numerical elements do not have a
value and decimal attribute combination that would cause non-zero
digits to be truncated to zero.
     EX-101 exhibits with non-numeric elements do not have
label roles, such as ``negated,'' ``zero,'' and ``positive'' that imply
they are numeric.
     EX-101 exhibits do not contain an element declaration for
which xbrli:periodType is instant and its base type is non-numeric.
     EX-101.INS XBRL documents do not contain contexts that
include the xbrli:forever context element.
    The Public Validation Criteria validation [fs-0509-Start-And-End-
Dates-Not-Distinct-Inconsistent-With-Document-Type] has been updated to
allow individual context durations in EX-101.INS documents that are
equal to or greater than 24 hours.
    The ABS Asset Class value ``Corporate Debt'' for ABS-15G and ABS-
15G/A submission form types will be changed to ``Debt Securities.''
This change will not impact previous ABS-15G and ABS-15G/A submissions
where filers selected ``Corporate Debt'' as the ABS Asset Class value.
    Unofficial PDF copies of COVER and CORRESP attachments to EDGARLink
Online submissions will now be disseminated at the discretion of the
SEC.
    The Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) screens of the EDGAR Filing
Web site and the EDGAR Filer Management Web site have been updated to
include a new ``EDGAR Quick Reference Guides'' hyperlink. On clicking
this hyperlink, filers are presented with a list of hyperlinks to the
Quick Reference Guides in the lower pane of the window.
    Section 2.1 of the ``EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume III: N-SAR
Supplement'' has been revised to update the following N-SAR system
requirements. (Note: The procedure for filing Form N-SAR, the Semi-
Annual Report for Registered Investment Companies has not changed.)
     The N-SAR PC application (Version 6.1.a) is supported by
16-bit and 32-bit Windows-based Operating Systems.
     The references to modem and the Netscape browser have been
deleted. The Internet browsers recommended for transmitting N-SAR
submissions include Internet Explorer 7.0 through 8.0, and Firefox 17.0
or later.
    Along with the adoption of the 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 today's 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.
    You may obtain paper copies of the updated Filer Manual at the
following address: Public Reference Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE., Room 1543, Washington, DC 20549, on
official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. We
will post electronic format copies on the Commission's Web site; the
address for the Filer Manual is http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml.
    Since the Filer Manual and the corresponding rule changes relate
solely to agency procedures or practice, publication for notice and
comment is not required under the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA).\4\ It follows that the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act \5\ do not apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
    \5\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The effective date for the updated Filer Manual and the rule
amendments is June 20, 2014. In accordance with the APA,\6\ we find
that there is good cause to establish an effective date less than 30
days after publication of these rules. The EDGAR system upgrade to
Release 14.1 is scheduled to become available on June 16, 2014. 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 system upgrade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statutory Basis

    We are adopting the amendments to Regulation S-T under Sections 6,
7, 8, 10, and 19(a) of the Securities Act of 1933,\7\ Sections 3, 12,
13, 14, 15, 23, and 35A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,\8\
Section 319 of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939,\9\ and Sections 8, 30,
31, and 38 of the Investment Company Act of 1940.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, and 77s(a).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78c, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o, 78w, and 78ll.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 77sss.
    \10\ 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 Amendment

    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 authority citation for Part 232 continues to read in part as
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 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, and 7201 et seq.; and 18 U.S.C. 1350.
* * * * *

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 out
the technical formatting requirements for electronic submissions. The
requirements for becoming an EDGAR Filer and updating company data are
set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: ``General
Information,'' Version 17 (June 2014). The requirements for filing on
EDGAR are set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II:
``EDGAR Filing,'' Version 27 (June 2014). Additional provisions
applicable to Form N-SAR filers are set forth in the EDGAR Filer
Manual, Volume III: ``N-SAR Supplement,'' Version 3 (June 2014). 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. You can obtain paper copies of the EDGAR
Filer Manual from the following address: Public Reference Room, U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Room 1543,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Electronic copies are available on the
Commission's Web site. The address for the Filer Manual is http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml. You can also inspect the document at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to:
http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    By the Commission.

    Dated: June 16, 2014.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-14417 Filed 6-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P