[Federal Register: April 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 79)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 23864-23867]
[DOCID:fr25ap06-5]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[EPA-R04-RCRA-2006-0375; FRL-8161-2]

Georgia: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Immediate final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Georgia has applied to EPA for Final authorization of the
changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA proposes to grant final authorization to
Georgia. In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal
Register, EPA is authorizing the changes by an immediate final rule.
EPA did not make a proposal prior to the immediate final rule because
we believe this action is not controversial and do not expect comments
that oppose it. We have explained the reasons for this authorization in
the preamble of the immediate final rule. Unless we get written
comments which oppose this authorization during the comment period, the
immediate final rule will become effective on the date it establishes,
and we will not take further action on this proposal. If we receive
comments that oppose this action, we will withdraw the immediate final
rule and it will not take effect. We will respond to public comments in
a later final rule based on this proposal. You

may not have another opportunity for comment.

DATES: Final authorization will become effective on June 26, 2006
unless EPA receives adverse written comment on or before May 25, 2006.
If EPA receives such comment, it will publish a timely withdrawal of
this immediate final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public
that this authorization will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
RCRA-2006-0375 by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> (prior to faxing, please notify the
EPA contact listed below)
     Mail: Send written comments to Audrey E. Baker, RCRA
Services Section, RCRA Programs Branch, Waste Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, The Sam Nunn Federal Center, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
     Hand Delivery: Audrey E. Baker, RCRA Services Section,
RCRA Programs Branch, Waste Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, The Sam Nunn Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during
the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should
be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-RCRA-
2006-0375. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov including any personal information provided, unless

the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or
otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which

means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail

address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. (For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm).

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy. You may view and copy Georgia's

application at The EPA, Region 4, Library, The Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal
Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The
Library is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Library telephone number is (404) 562-
8190.
    You may also view and copy Georgia's application from 8 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. at The Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental
Protection Division, 2 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive, Suite 1154 East
Tower, Atlanta, Georgia 30334-4910.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Audrey E. Baker, RCRA Services
Section, RCRA Programs Branch, Waste Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, The Sam Nunn Federal Center, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960;<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Why Are Revisions to State Programs Necessary?

    States which have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA
section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste
program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent
than the Federal program. As the Federal program changes, States must
change their programs and ask EPA to authorize the changes. Changes to
State programs may be necessary when Federal or State statutory or
regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur.
Most commonly, States must change their programs because of changes to
EPA's regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 124,
260 through 266, 268, 270, 273 and 279.

B. What Decisions Have We Made in This Rule?

    We conclude that Georgia's application to revise its authorized
program meets all of the statutory and regulatory requirements
established by RCRA. Therefore, we grant Georgia Final authorization to
operate its hazardous waste program with the changes described in the
authorization application. Georgia has responsibility for permitting
Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDF) within its borders
and for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA program described in its
revised program application, subject to the limitations of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). New Federal
requirements and prohibitions imposed by Federal regulations that EPA
promulgates under the authority of HSWA take effect in authorized
States before they are authorized for the requirements. Thus, EPA will
implement those requirements and prohibitions in Georgia, including
issuing permits, until the State is granted authorization to do so.

C. What Is the Effect of This Authorization Decision?

    The effect of this decision is that a facility in Georgia subject
to RCRA will now have to comply with the authorized State requirements
instead of the equivalent Federal requirements in order to comply with
RCRA. Georgia has enforcement responsibilities under its State
hazardous waste program for violations of such program, but EPA retains
its authority under RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003, which
include, among others, authority to:
     Do inspections, and require monitoring, tests, analyses or
reports
     Enforce RCRA requirements and suspend or revoke permits
     Take enforcement actions regardless of whether the State
has taken its own actions
    This action does not impose additional requirements on the
regulated community because the regulations for which Georgia is being
authorized by today's action are already effective, and are not changed
by today's action.

D. Why Wasn't There a Proposed Rule Before This Rule?

    EPA did not publish a proposal before today's rule because we view
this as a routine program change and do not expect comments that oppose
this approval. We are providing an opportunity for public comment now.
In addition to this rule, in the proposed rules section of today's
Federal Register we are publishing a separate document that proposes to
authorize the State program changes.

E. What Happens If EPA Receives Comments That Oppose This Action?

    If EPA receives comments that oppose this authorization, we will
withdraw this rule by publishing a document in the Federal Register
before the rule becomes effective. EPA will base any further decision
on the authorization of the State program changes on the proposal
mentioned in the previous paragraph. We will then address all public
comments in a later final rule. You may not have another opportunity to
comment. If you want to comment on this authorization, you must do so
at this time.
    If we receive comments that oppose only the authorization of a
particular change to the State hazardous waste program, we will
withdraw that part of this rule but the authorization of the program
changes that the comments do not oppose will become effective on the
date specified above. The Federal Register withdrawal document will
specify which part of the authorization will become effective, and
which part is being withdrawn.

F. What Has Georgia Previously Been Authorized for?

    Georgia initially received Final authorization on August 7, 1984,
effective August 21, 1984 (49 FR 31417), to implement the RCRA
hazardous waste management program. We granted authorization for
changes to their program on July 7, 1986, effective September 18, 1986
(51 FR 24549), July 28, 1988, effective September 26, 1988 (53 FR
28383), July 24, 1990, effective September 24, 1990 (55 FR 30000),
February 12, 1991, effective April 15, 1991 (56 FR 5656), May 11, 1992,
effective July 10, 1992 (57 FR 20055), November 25, 1992, effective
January 25, 1993 (57 FR 55466), February 26, 1993, effective April 27,
1993 (58 FR 11539), November 16, 1993, effective January 18, 1994 (58
FR 60388), April 26, 1994, effective June 27, 1994 (59 FR 21664), May
10, 1995, effective July 10, 1995 (60 FR 24790), August 30, 1995,
effective October 30, 1995 (60 FR 45069), March 7, 1996, effective May
6, 1996 (61 FR 9108), September 18, 1998, effective November 17, 1998
(63 FR 49852), October 14, 1999, effective December 13, 1999 (64 FR
55629), November 28, 2000, effective March 30, 2001 (66 FR 8090), July
16, 2002, effective September 16, 2002 (67 FR 46600), November 19,
2002, effective January 21, 2003 (67 FR 69690), July 18, 2003,
effective September 16, 2003 (68 FR 42605), and January 27, 2005,
effective April 20, 2005 (70 FR 12973).

G. What Changes Are We Authorizing With This Action?

    On October 13, 2005, Georgia submitted a final complete program
revision application, seeking authorization of their changes in
accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. Georgia's revision consists of
provisions promulgated July 1, 2003, through June 30, 2004, otherwise
known as RCRA Cluster XIV. The Georgia Board of Natural Resources
adopted the rules for RCRA Cluster XIV on December 7, 2004, which
became effective January 9, 2005. We now make an immediate final
decision, subject to receipt of written comments that oppose this
action, that Georgia's hazardous waste program revision satisfies all
of the requirements necessary to qualify for Final authorization.
Therefore, we grant Georgia Final authorization for the following
program changes:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Description of Federal                            Analogous state
          requirement            Federal Register        authority
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Checklist 203, Recycled Used    July 30, 2003, 68  391-3-11-.07(1) and
 Oil Management Standards;       FR 44659-44665.    391-3-11-.17 Georgia
 Clarification.                                     Rule for Hazardous
                                                    Waste Management.
Checklist 204, National         April 22, 2004,    391-3-11-.08(1)
 Environmental Performance       69 FR 21737-       Georgia Rules for
 Track Program.                  21754.             Hazardous Waste
                                                    Management.
Checklist 205, NESHAP: Surface  April 26, 2004,    391-3-11-.10(1) and
 Coating of Automobiles and      69 FR 22601-       391-3-11-.10(2)
 Light-Duty Trucks.              22661.             Georgia Rules for
                                                    Hazardous Waste
                                                    Management.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. Where Are the Revised State Rules Different From the Federal Rules?

    There are no State requirements in this program revision considered
to be more stringent or broader in scope than the Federal requirements.

I. Who Handles Permits After the Authorization Takes Effect?

    Georgia will issue permits for all the provisions for which it is
authorized and will administer the permits it issues. EPA will continue
to administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits or portions of permits
which we issued prior to the effective date of this authorization until
they expire or are terminated. We will not issue any more new permits
or new portions of permits for the provisions listed in the Table above
after the effective date of this authorization. EPA will continue to
implement and issue permits for HSWA requirements for which Georgia is
not yet authorized.

J. What Is Codification and Is EPA Codifying Georgia's Hazardous Waste
Program as Authorized in This Rule?

    Codification is the process of placing the State's statutes and
regulations that comprise the State's authorized hazardous waste
program into the Code of Federal Regulations. We do this by referencing
the authorized State rules in 40 CFR part 272. We reserve the amendment
of 40 CFR part 272, subpart L for this authorization of Georgia's
program changes until a later date.

K. Administrative Requirements

    The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from
the requirements of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4,
1993), and therefore this action is not subject to review by OMB. This
action authorizes State requirements for the purpose of RCRA 3006 and
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law.
Accordingly, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this action
authorizes pre-existing requirements under State law and does not
impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by State
law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). For the same reason, this
action also does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities
of Tribal governments, as

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
This action will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999), because it merely authorizes State requirements as
part of the State RCRA hazardous waste program without altering the
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities
established by RCRA. This action also is not subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically
significant and it does not make decisions based on environmental
health or safety risks. This rule is not subject to Executive Order
13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001))
because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
    Under RCRA 3006(b), EPA grants a State's application for
authorization as long as the State meets the criteria required by RCRA.
It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it
reviews a State authorization application, to require the use of any
particular voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard
that otherwise satisfies the requirements of RCRA. Thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996),
in issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied
with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining
the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this document and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This
action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This
action will be effective June 26, 2006.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Authority: This action is issued under the authority of Sections
2002(a), 3006, and 7004(b), of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, and 6974(b).

    Dated: April 3, 2006.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 06-3851 Filed 4-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 211 (Friday, October 31, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64759-64760]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25900]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 6957-002]

City of Portland Water Bureau; Notice of Application Accepted for
Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Types of Application: Surrender of Exemption.
    b. Project No.: 6957-002.
    c. Date Filed: October 3, 2014.
    d. Applicant: City of Portland Water Bureau.
    e. Name of Project: Mt. Tabor Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: Mt. Tabor Reservoir, in the City of Portland and
Multnomah County, Oregon.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Frank Galida, Portland Hydroelectric
Project Manager, Portland Water Bureau, 1120 SW. Fifth Avenue, Room
530, Portland, OR 97204,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Ms. Rebecca Martin,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests, is November 23, 2014. All documents may be filed
electronically via the Internet. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. If unable to be filed electronically,
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and seven
copies should be mailed to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments.
    Please include the project number (P-6957-002) on any comments,
motions, or recommendations filed.
    k. Description of Request: The applicant proposes to surrender the
exemption for the Mt. Tabor Project. The licensee proposes to remove
the turbine, generator, and governor. The underground electrical
connection to the local power utility would be disconnected. No ground
disturbing activities are proposed.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in
the docket number field to access the document. You may also register
online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be
notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or

email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy
is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in
item (h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, 211,
214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will
consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file
a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may
become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to
intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for
the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading
the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene or protests should relate
to project works which are the subject of the license amendment.
Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the
applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served
upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.

    Dated: October 23, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-25900 Filed 10-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 13, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 132)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 33397-33399]
[DOCID:fr13jy09-19]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2009-0371, FRL-8929-7]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Northern
Sierra Air Quality Management District and San Joaquin Valley Unified
Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Northern Sierra
Air Quality Management District (NSAQMD) and San Joaquin Valley Unified
Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portions of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority of the Clean Air Act
as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we are proposing to approve local
rules that address volatile organic compound emissions from asphalt
paving, gasoline bulk storage tanks, and gasoline dispensing stations.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by August 12, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2009-0371, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov is an
``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mae Wang, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4124<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What Rules Did the State Submit?
    B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?
    C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rules and Rule
Amendments?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?
    B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
    C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What Rules Did the State Submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules we are proposing to approve with the dates
that they were adopted, amended, or revised by the local air agencies
and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Adopted or
             District                  Rule No.              Rule title               amended        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSAQMD............................             227  Cutback and Emulsified              11/27/06        03/07/08
                                                     Asphalt Paving Materials.
SJVUAPCD..........................            4621  Gasoline Transfer into              12/20/07        03/07/08
                                                     Stationary Storage
                                                     Containers, Delivery
                                                     Vessels, and Bulk Plants.
SJVUAPCD..........................            4622  Gasoline Transfer into Motor        12/20/07        03/07/08
                                                     Vehicle Fuel Tanks.
SJVUAPCD..........................            4651  Soil Decontamination                09/20/07        03/07/08
                                                     Operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 17, 2008, CARB's submittal of March 7, 2008, was found to
meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which
must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?

    There is no previous version of NSAQMD Rule 227 in the SIP. We
approved previous versions of SJVUAPCD Rules 4621 and 4622 into the SIP
on April 19, 2000 (65 FR 20912) and March 24, 2003 (68 FR 14156),
respectively. We approved a previous version of SJVUAPCD Rule 4651 into
the SIP on July 24, 1996 (61 FR 38571).

C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rules and Rule Amendments?

    Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) help produce ground-level ozone
and smog, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a)
of the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control VOC
emissions. NSAQMD Rule 227 provides standards to control VOC emissions
during the use or manufacture of cutback asphalt and emulsified asphalt
paving materials. SJVUAPCD Rule 4621 limits VOC emissions from gasoline
storage containers and delivery vessels, and gasoline transfer
operations at bulk plants. SJVUAPCD Rule 4622 limits VOC emissions from
the transfer of gasoline into motor vehicle fuel tanks. SJVUAPCD Rule
4651 regulates VOC emissions from excavation, transportation, handling,
decontamination, and disposal of soil that has been contaminated with a
VOC-containing liquid. EPA's technical support documents (TSDs) have
more information about these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
CAA) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193 of the CAA).
    CAA subpart 1 VOC rules must require Reasonably Available Control
Measures (RACM), including Reasonably Available Control Technology
(RACT), for each major VOC source in ozone nonattainment areas (see
section 172(c)(1) of the CAA). The NSAQMD regulates a subpart 1 8-hr
ozone nonattainment area in Western Nevada County (see 40 CFR part 81)
and must fulfill the requirements of RACM/RACT in that area.
    CAA subpart 2 VOC rules must require RACT for each significant
source category covered by a Control Technique Guideline (CTG) document
and for each major source in ozone nonattainment areas (see sections
182(a)(2) and (b)(2) of the CAA). The SJVUAPCD regulates a subpart 2 8-
hr ozone nonattainment area which was classified under the 1-hr
standard as an extreme nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81).
Additionally, gasoline storage, transfer, and dispensing rules must
fulfill the special requirements for gasoline vapor recovery in ozone
nonattainment areas (see section 182(b)(3)(A) of the CAA) and special
requirements for vehicle fleets (see section 202(a)(6) of the CAA).
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to help evaluate specific
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the
following:
    1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987).
    2. Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations, EPA (May 25, 1988) [The Bluebook].
    3. Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies, EPA Region 9 (August 21, 2001) [The Little Bluebook].
    4. Control of VOC from the Use of Cutback Asphalt, EPA-450/2-77-037
(December 1977).
    5. SJVUAPCD 2004 Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan.
    6. SJVUAPCD 2007 Ozone Plan, http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/
2007sip/sjv8hr/sjvozone.htm.
    7. SJVUAPCD Final Staff Report, Proposed Amendments to Rule 4651
(September 20, 2007).

B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe that NSAQMD Rule 227 and SJVUAPCD Rules 4621, 4622, and
4651 are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding
enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSDs have more
information on our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Final Action

    Because EPA believes the submitted rules fulfill all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve them as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate these rules into the Federally
enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have Tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: June 22, 2009.
Jane Diamond,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
 [FR Doc. E9-16496 Filed 7-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


February 2, 2010

MEMORANDUM

TO:			Air Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0161

SUBJECT:	Details on the Adjustment of Sugarcane Data Based on Marketing
Year Data in the FAPRI-CARD Models

The FAPRI-CARD models report data in terms of marketing years for a
variety of commodities.  Marketing years for different commodities do
not necessarily equal the same timeframe of other commodities.  For
instance, the crop sugarcane marketing year for “2011/2012” (October
1, 2010 through September 30, 2011) is more closely aligned in terms of
time (months) with the “2010/2011” marketing year for corn
(September 1, 2010 through August 31, 2011), rather than the
“2011/2012” marketing year for corn.  Therefore, for the purposes of
the final rulemaking analysis, data for sugarcane that are presented in
terms of marketing years are shifted by one marketing year to more
closely align with corn and other commodities in order to capture a more
accurate representation of changes in acres and other variables in a
given year.

It should also be noted that the FAPRI-CARD models present various data
in terms of marketing years, as well as calendar year.  Any data
presented in calendar year form (e.g., “2022”) represents data
covering January through December of that year.

Raw data provided from the FAPRI-CARD models for each of the cases do
not reflect this adjustment.

This analytical decision to adjust this data based on marketing year in
this manner was made in consultation with the staff at the Center for
Agriculture and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University who
operate the FAPRI-CARD models.


NMP_readme_zip_files
-Paul Schlosser, NCEA, U.S. EPA
-September 23, 2013

The .zip files, NMP_human_9-23-13.zip and NMP_rat_9-23-2013.zip, contain sets of files that constitute workspaces for the computation software, acslX (v. <IP_ADDRESS>, The AEgis Technologies Group, Inc., Huntsville, AL).  Most of the files contained in each workspace are specific to acslX and a basic knowledge of this software is necessary to make use of them.

The workspaces can be used by unzipping the corresponding .zip files.  Once this is done the resulting folder will contain a workspace (.aws) file of the corresponding name (e.g., NMP_human_2013_2.aws) and a "Project 1" subfolder.  The .aws can be opened from within acslX, which will then display the primary acslX program (.csl) file and scripts (.m files) for reproducing the simulations and model fits shown in the QA report, n-Methylpyrrolidone PBPK QA Report 091613 V3.docx, or used and shown in the dose-response analysis.  A detailed list of scripts and their functions follow.

While various files within the acslX "Project 1" folders can be viewed outside of acslX, changing them can damage their functionality.  In particular .aps files set formatting for various plots and are created/edited by acslX when a user is manipulating a plot through the graphical user interface.  Please do not edit them directly.

** The file Residential.xlsx in the human "Project 1" folder should not be altered, as it contains inputs for the residential exposure scenario.

In the primary model (.csl) files, all changes made by the U.S. EPA are noted in comments at the end of or just above or below the altered code.  Significant changes in script (.m) files are also noted with comments.  In order to avoid the possibility of having some parameters assigned different values for different simulations, all parameters other than those defining exposures/scenarios have been consolidated into one or two 'param.m' scripts.  Where values had been set in other scripts, these have been commented out, but there may not be explanatory commments on each instance.

The document, n-Methylpyrrolidone PBPK QA Report 091613 V3.docx, is referred to as "the QA report" below.

NMP_rat_9-23-2013 / NMP_rat_2013_2.aws

 > NMPpreg_rat.csl: model definition file

 > raparam.m: sets rat model parameters except pregnancy-specific values

 > preg_rat_params.m: calls ratparam.m and then sets pregnancy-specific values

 > Poet2010_Fig5_oral.m: plots in preface of QA report, reproducing Fig. 5 of Poet
	et al. (2010)

 > Fig 1 IV plasma.m: plots shown in Figure 1 (p. 8) of the QA report.

 > Fig 2 Payan 2002 IV 5HNMP.m: plots shown in Fig. 2 (p. 9) of the QA report.
	The last plot is an expanded view of results for the lowest 3 doses.

 > Fig 3 Payan 2003 Dermal plasma.m: Updated version of Fig. 3 (p. 10) in the QA
	report. Results differ slightly from those in Fig. 3 of the QA report due
	to changes noted in the preface of the report.

 > Poet2013_Fig1_gestation growth.m: recreates plot of BW and tissue changes for
	rat pregnancy; these differ from Fig. 1A of Poet et al. (2010) but match
	Poet (2013) (liver not shown). Not in QA report.

 > Poet2013_Fig3_Ghantous_1995.m: reproduces Fig. 3 of Poet (2013) report.
	Not in QA report.

 > Saillenfait_2002_gavage.m: calculates internal doses for Saillenfait et al.
	(2002) oral bioassay

 > Saillenfait_2003_inhalation.m: internal doses for Saillenfait et al. (2003)
	inhalation bioassay

 > Becci_1982_dermal.m: internal doses for Becci et al. (11982) dermal bioassay.

NMP_human_9-23-13 / NMP_human_2013_2.aws

 > HumPregRetreive Restored 1.csl: model definition file

 > human_params.m: physiological and biochemical parameter values for human model

 > Figs_4-5_Poet 2013 Fig 4.m: Figs. 4 & 5 in the QA report; Fig. 4 in Poet (2013)

 > Fig_6_Poet 2013 Fig 5 plasma.m: Fig. 6 in QA report; Fig. 5 in Poet (2013)

 > Fig_7_Poet 2013 Fig 8 plasma & urine.m: Fig. 7 in QA report; Fig. 8 in Poet (2013)

 > Fig_8_Poet 2013 Fig 9 plasma .m: Fig. 8 in QA report; Fig. 9 in Poet (2013)

 > Poet 2013 Fig 6 plasma.m: Fig. 6 in Poet (2013); not in QA report

 > spraywork.m: workplace exposure simulations; results written to spraywork.csv

 > residential.m: residential exposure simulations, written to Residential.csv


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 240 (Monday, December 14, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 80596-80598]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27301]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0825; Airspace Docket No. 20-ANM-27]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Kalispell, MT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies the Class D airspace at Glacier Park
International Airport. This action also modifies the Class E airspace,
designated as a surface area. Additionally, this action modifies the
Class E airspace, extending upward from 700 feet above the surface.
Further, this action modifies the Class E airspace, extending upward
from 1,200 feet above the surface. This action also removes the Smith
Lake NDB from the Class E airspace legal descriptions. Lastly, this
action implements several administrative corrections to the airspaces'
legal descriptions.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, February 25, 2021. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1 Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov//air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you
can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington,

DC 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Order is also available for
inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Van Der Wal, Federal Aviation
Administration, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 2200
S 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it modifies Class D and Class E airspace at Glacier Park
International Airport, Kalispell, MT, to ensure the safety and
management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (85 FR 62630, October 5, 2020) for Docket No. FAA-2020-0825 to
modify Class D and Class E airspace at Glacier Park International
Airport, Kalispell, MT. Interested parties were invited to participate
in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the
proposal to the FAA. Two comments were received. The comments were not
germane to the proposed airspace action.
    Class D, E2, and E5 airspace designations are published in
paragraphs 5000, 6002, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11E,
dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15, 2020, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations part 71
modifies Class D airspace at Glacier Park International Airport,
Kalispell, MT. To properly contain IFR aircraft, this action adds an
extension to the airspace, northeast of the airport. This airspace area
is described as follows: That airspace extending upward from the
surface to and including 5,500 feet MSL within a 4.3-mile radius of the
airport, and within 1.2 miles each side of the 032[deg] bearing from
the airport, extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 5.6 miles northeast
of Glacier Park International Airport. This Class D airspace area is
effective during the specific dates and times established, in advance,
by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be
continuously published in the Chart Supplement.
    This action also modifies the Class E airspace, designated as a
surface area, to be coincident with the new Class D dimensions. This
airspace area is part-time and this action adds the appropriate
verbiage to the airspace legal description. This airspace area is
described as follows: That airspace extending upward from the surface
within a 4.3-mile radius of the airport, and within 1.2 miles each side
of the 032[deg] bearing from the airport, extending from the 4.3-mile
radius to 5.6 miles northeast of Glacier Park International Airport.
This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and
times established, in advance, by a Notice to Airmen. The effective
date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart
Supplement.
    Additionally, this action modifies the Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface. The action properly sizes the
airspace to contain IFR departures to 1,200 feet above the surface and
IFR arrivals descending below 1,500 feet above the surface. This
airspace area is described as follows: That airspace extending upward
from 700 feet above the surface within a 7.5-mile radius of the
airport, and within 2.3 miles each side of the 138[deg] bearing from
the airport, extending from the 7.5-mile radius to 13.4 miles southeast
of the airport, and within 2 miles each side of the 215[deg] bearing
from the airport, extending from the 7.5-mile radius to 19.5 miles
southwest of Glacier Park International Airport.
    This action also modifies the Class E airspace extending upward
from 1,200 feet above the surface. This area is designed to contain IFR
aircraft transitioning to/from the terminal and en route environments.
This airspace area is described as follows: That airspace extending
upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within a 25-mile radius of the
airport beginning at the 270[deg] bearing from the airport, clockwise
to the 090[deg] bearing from the airport, thence along the 090[deg]
bearing to 45 miles east of the airport, thence within a 45-mile radius
of the airport clockwise to the 270[deg] bearing from the airport,
thence along the 270[deg] bearing to the point of beginning, 25 miles
west of Glacier Park International Airport.
    This action removes the Smith Lake NDB and all references to the
NDB from the Class E2 and Class E5 text headers and the airspace legal
descriptions. The navigational aid is not needed to define the
airspace. Removal of the navigational aid allows the airspace to be
defined from a single reference point which simplifies how the airspace
is described.
    Lastly, this action implements several administrative corrections
to the airspaces' legal descriptions. In the Class D legal description,
the last sentence contains the term ``Airport/Facilities Directory''
this action updates the term to ``Chart Supplement''. This action
removes the city name from the second line of the Class D, Class E2,
and Class E5 text headers. The airport's geographic coordinates do not
match the FAA database; this action updates the geographic coordinates
in all of the airspace areas to ``lat. 48[deg]18'38'' N, long.
114[deg]15'22'' W''.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since
this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated,
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and
effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ANM MT D Kalispell, MT [Amended]

Glacier Park International Airport, MT
    (Lat. 48[deg]18'38'' N, long. 114[deg]15'22'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
5,500 feet MSL within a 4.3-mile radius of the airport, and within
1.2 miles each side of the 032[deg] bearing from the airport,
extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 5.6 miles northeast of Glacier
Park International Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective
during the specific dates and times established, in advance, by a
Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be
continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as a Surface Area.

* * * * *

ANM MT E2 Kalispell, MT [Amended]

Glacier Park International Airport, MT
    (Lat. 48[deg]18'38'' N, long. 114[deg]15'22'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 4.3-
mile radius of the airport, and within 1.2 miles each side of the
032[deg] bearing from the airport, extending from the 4.3-mile
radius to 5.6 miles northeast of Glacier Park International Airport.
This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates
and times established, in advance, by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ANM MT E5 Kalispell, MT [Amended]

Glacier Park International Airport, MT
    (Lat. 48[deg]18'38'' N, long. 114[deg]15'22'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7.5-mile radius of the airport, and within 2.3 miles each
side of the 138[deg] bearing from the airport, extending from the
7.5-mile radius to 13.4 miles southeast of the airport, and within 2
miles each side of the 215[deg] bearing from the airport, extending
from the 7.5-mile radius to 19.5 miles southwest of the airport; and
that airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface
within a 25-mile radius of the airport beginning at the 270[deg]
bearing from the airport, clockwise to the 090[deg] bearing from the
airport, thence along the 090[deg] bearing to 45 miles east of the
airport, thence within a 45-mile radius of the airport clockwise to
the 270[deg] bearing from the airport, thence along the 270[deg]
bearing to the point of beginning, 25 miles west of Glacier Park
International Airport.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on December 7, 2020.
B.G. Chew,
Acting Group Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2020-27301 Filed 12-11-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 187 (Thursday, September 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59423-59424]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23459]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Special Permit Applications

AGENCY: Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of actions on Special Permit Applications.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations (49 CFR Part 107,
Subpart B), notice is hereby given of the actions on special permits
applications in (August to August 2013). The mode of transportation
involved are identified by a number in the ``Nature of Application''
portion of the table below as follows: 1--Motor vehicle, 2--Rail
freight, 3--Cargo vessel, 4--Cargo aircraft only, 5--Passenger-carrying
aircraft. Application numbers prefixed by the letters EE represent
applications for Emergency Special Permits. It should be noted that
some of the sections cited were those in effect at the time certain
special permits were issued.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 19, 2013.
Donald Burger,
Chief, Special Permits and Approvals.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Nature of special permit
           S.P No.                     Applicant               Regulation(s)                  thereof
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       MODIFICATION SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13544-M......................  Carlson Logistics Inc.,   49 CFR 172.301(a),        To modify the special permit
                                Sacramento, CA.           172.301(c), and 172.401.  to authorize the cylinders
                                                                                be transported on a flat
                                                                                bed, not enclosed and
                                                                                platform type trailers that
                                                                                are placarded.
15558-M......................  3M Company, St. Paul, MN  49 CFR 173.212,           To modify the special permit
                                                          172.302(a)(c).            to authorize alternative
                                                                                packaging with a maximum
                                                                                capacity of 400 gallons.
13424-M......................  Taminco, Inc.,            49 CFR 177.834(i)(3),     To modify the special permit
                                Allentown, PA.            172.203(a), and           to remove the requirement
                                                          172.302(c).               that the video camera must
                                                                                be capable of panning.
14912-M......................  ITW Sexton, Decatur, AL.  49 CFR 173.304a and       To authorize the addition of
                                                          173.306(a)(3)(ii).        a Division 2.1 material and
                                                                                require burst pressure of
                                                                                containers to not be below
                                                                                480 psig.
15110-M......................  Kidde Technologies,       49 CFR 178.65...........  To modify the special permit
                                Inc., dba Kidde                                     to authorize minor
                                Aerospace & Defense,                                dimensional changes for the
                                Wilson, NC.                                         existing developmental
                                                                                drawing 348711 which is part
                                                                                of weldment design 447235,
                                                                                the addition of two new
                                                                                weldment designs, two
                                                                                additional Division 2.2
                                                                                materials, and the use of
                                                                                these cylinders as
                                                                                components on US Naval
                                                                                Aircraft.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           NEW SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15839-N......................  Sensors, Inc., Saline,    49 CFR 172.202, 172.301,  To authorize the discharge of
                                MI.                       172.400 and 177.834(h).   a Division 2.1 material from
                                                                                an authorized DOT
                                                                                specification cylinder
                                                                                without removing the
                                                                                cylinder from the vehicle on
                                                                                which it is transported.
                                                                                (mode 1)

15852-N......................  Nuance Medical, LLC,      49 CFR 173.304a(a)(1);    To authorize the
                                Carlsbad, CA.             173.306(a).               transportation in commerce
                                                                                of small units of certain
                                                                                compressed gas, intended for
                                                                                medical use as limited
                                                                                quantities and/or ORM-D.
                                                                                (modes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        EMERGENCY SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15885-N......................  PHI, Inc., Lafayette, LA  49 CFR 172.101 Table      To authorize the
                                                          Column (9A).              transportation in commerce
                                                                                of certain hazardous
                                                                                materials which exceed the
                                                                                authorized quantity
                                                                                limitations for passenger-
                                                                                carrying aircraft. (mode 5)
15951-N......................  Antonov Company, t/a      49 CFR 49 CFR Sec.        To authorize the one-time
                                Antonov Airlines, Kiev,   172.101 Column (9B).      transportation in commerce
                                NH.                                                 of certain explosives that
                                                                                are forbidden for
                                                                                transportation by cargo only
                                                                                aircraft. (mode 4)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          NEW SPECIAL PERMIT WITHDRAWN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15850-N......................  Chart Industries, New     49 CFR 173.315..........  To authorize the manufacture,
                                Prague, MN.                                         mark and sale of non-DOT
                                                                                specification tanks cars
                                                                                similar to DOT113C120W for
                                                                                the transportation in
                                                                                commerce of certain
                                                                                refrigerated liquids. (mode
                                                                                2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       EMERGENCY SPECIAL PERMIT WITHDRAWN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15841-N......................  Franklin Composite        49 CFR 173.304a(a)(1)...  To authorize the manufacture,
                                Cylinder, LLC dba The                               marking, sale and use of a
                                Lite Cylinder Company,                              non-DOT specification, liner-
                                Franklin, TN.                                       less, fully-wrapped
                                                                                fiberglass composite
                                                                                cylinder for the
                                                                                transportation in commerce
                                                                                of certain Division 2.1 and
                                                                                2.2 materials. (modes 1, 2,
                                                                                3, 4)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 Denied
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
15862-N................................  Request by Veolia ES Technical
                                          Solutions, L.L.C. Flanders, NJ
                                          August 30, 2013. To authorize
                                          the transportation in commerce
                                          of Division 6.1, PG I
                                          materials in lab packs by
                                          motor vehicle, rail freight
                                          and cargo vessel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2013-23459 Filed 9-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


Superfund: Past and Future Briefing for NACEPT Superfund Subcommittee September 2002 2 Agenda   Superfund's Past   Report to Congress   Findings   Conclusions   Thinking About the Future Agenda Resources for the Future 3 Superfund's Past Resources for the Future 4 NPL Final Listings FY 1983  2002 Superfund's Past Resources for the Future 404 130 3 170 67 0 93 218 60 261924131515 37362818 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Fiscal Year Number of Sites 5 Superfund's Past NPL Mega Listings FY 1983  2002 Resources for the Future 52 13 2 16 10 5 9 20 423 000 32 6 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Fiscal Year Number of Sites 6 Superfund's Past NPL Sites by Site Type ( as of the end of FY 1999) Resources for the Future 050100150200250300350 Miscellaneous Contaminated areas Transportation Non captive waste handling and disposal Captive waste handling and disposal Recycling Coal gasification and other industrial Wood preserving Mining Oil refining Chemical manufacturing Number of Sites Total Mega 7 Superfund's Past Type of Site Chemical manufacturing1051311.6% 12.4%

Oil refining1421.8% 14.3%

Mining421715.2% 40.5%

Wood preserving6987.1% 11.6%

Coal gasification and other industrial2671412.5% 5.2%

Recycling9487.1% 8.5%

Captive waste handling and disposal7876.3% 9.0%

Non captive waste handling and disposal3321614.3% 4.8%

Transportation2810.9% 3.6%

Contaminated areas1142118.8% 18.4%

Miscellaneous10254.5% 4.9%

Total1245112100.0% 9.0%

Number of Sites Number of Mega Sites Percent of All Megas Percent of Site Type NPL Sites by Site Type ( as of the end of FY 1999) Resources for the Future 8 Superfund Appropriations Superfund's Past Resources for the Future Fiscal Year 1990$ 1,551$ 0$ 1,551100%

1991$ 1,616$ 861$ 75547%

1992$ 1,616$ 234$ 1,38286%

1993$ 1,574$ 250$ 1,32484%

1994$ 1,481$ 250$ 1,23183%

1995$ 1,431$ 250$ 1,18183%

1996$ 1,311$ 250$ 1,06181%

1997$ 1,394$ 250$ 1,14482%

1998$ 1,500$ 250$ 1,25083%

1999$ 1,500$ 325$ 1,17578%

2000$ 1,400$ 700$ 70050%

2001$ 1,267$ 635$ 63250%

2002$ 1,292$ 635$ 65751%

2003$ 1,239$ 700$ 53944%

Total Appropriation General RevenuesTrust Fund Percent Trust Fund 9 Report to Congress Resources for the Future 10 Report to Congress   Requested in conference report to FY 2000 VA HUD appropriations bill   Estimate the costs of Superfund from FY 2000 through FY 2009   Costs to EPA only   Federal facilities, brownfields excluded   Under current law and policies   Final report requested by December 2000   Study released July, 2001 Resources for the Future 11 Six Elements   Remaining cost of cleaning up current NPL   Cost of sites added to the NPL FY 2000   FY 2009   Removal program   Operation and maintenance (" LTRA")

  Five year reviews   " Nonsite" costs ( the rest of the Superfund dollars) Resources for the Future Report to Congress 12 RFF Baseline: Status and Type of NPL Sites, End of FY 1999 Report to Congress Resources for the Future Construction Complete623 NonmegaSites1,133 Not Construction Complete510 Teenager250 Not Teenager260 Not Teenager19 Not Construction Complete87 Teenager68 Construction Complete25 Mega Sites112 Final and Deleted NPL Sites1,245 Note: Does not include federal facilities. Source: RFF site level dataset. 13 Findings Resources for the Future 14 Where Does The Money Go?

( FY 1999 Expenditures)

Findings Resources for the Future 20.7% 3.8% 40.5%

21.2%

6.5% 7.4% Removal Program ($ 317.8 million) Remedial Program ($ 622.3 million)

Site Assessment ($ 57.8 million)

Program Administration ($ 114.1 million)

Other Programs and Agencies ($ 100.5 million)

Program Staff,

Management,

and Support ($ 325.6 million) Total = $ 1.54 billion Note: Does not include expenditures for federal facilities or brownfields. 15 Remedial Program Breakdown ( FY 1999 Expenditures)

Findings Resources for the Future 12% 5%

21% 60%

2% RD ($ 30.2 million)

RA ($ 370.1 million)

RI/ FS ($ 77.4 million)

Other Site Costs ($ 131.8 million)

LTRA ($ 1.3 million) Total = $ 622.3 million 16 Findings All sites$ 1,300,000$ 1,300,000$ 11,000,000 Mega sites2,500,0003,900,00030,000,000 Nonmega sites990,000880,0005,800,000 Mega sites$ 139.6million Nonmega sites$ 12.2million RA Number of Operable Units 3.8 1.6 Total Extramural Site Costs RI/ FSRD Extramural Unit Costs at Operable Unit Level Extramural Costs of Remedial Pipeline Actions ( 1999$) Resources for the Future 17 What Work Remains?

( Final NPL Sites as of the end of FY 1999)

Note: Underway includes actions at mega sites with starts in FY 2000.

RI/ FS RD RA Findings Resources for the Future 78%

5%

17% Underway Completed Not Yet Started 41%

24%

35% Underway Completed Not Yet Started 61%

13% 26% UnderwayCompleted Not Yet Started 18 RAs Through 2009 ( Final NPL Sites as of the end of FY 1999)

Findings Resources for the Future Source: RFF Model Underway 24.3% Completed 40.2%

Not Yet Started 35.5% Und 22 FY 1999 erway .8% Completed 69.9%

Not Yet Started 7.4%

FY 2004 Underway 6.5% Completed 93.0%

Not Yet Started 0.4%

FY 2009 19 Findings 50638366 137 199 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 RI/ FSRDRA Number of Actions FundPRP Action Leads at Mega Sites ( Underway and Future Actions at Final NPL Sites, as of end of FY1999)

Resources for the Future 20 Findings 144 200 273 144 362 664 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 RI/ FSRDRA Number of Actions FundPRP Action Leads at Nonmega Sites ( Underway and Future Actions at Final NPL Sites, as of end of FY1999)

Resources for the Future 21 Conclusions Resources for the Future 22 Ramp down not imminent Estimated Total Annual Cost to EPA of Superfund Program:

Three Scenarios, FY 2000 FY 2009 ( billions of 1999$) Resources for the Future Conclusions 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2000200120022003200420052006200720082009 Fiscal year Billions of dollars Base Case High Case Low Case 23 Total 10 year cost: $ 14 B $ 16.4 B Resources for the Future Conclusions Estimated Total Cost to EPA of Superfund Program: Three Scenarios,

FY 2000 FY 2009 ( billions of 1999$)

Base case Low case High case Removal program $ 3.18 $ 3.18 $ 3.18 Remedial program $ 6.55 $ 5.71 $ 7.55 Site assessment $ 0.58 $ 0.58 $ 0.58 Program staff, management, and support $ 2.69 $ 2.51 $ 2.89 Program administration $ 1.10 $ 1.02 $ 1.20 Other programs and agencies $ 1.01 $ 1.01 $ 1.01 Total ( 1999$)* $ 15.10 $ 13.99 $ 16.40 Total ( Inflation Adjusted Dollars) $ 16.85 $ 15.58 $ 18.33 * Note: Totals may not add due to rounding 24 Current NPL major driver of costs Resources for the Future Conclusions 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 2000200120022003200420052006200720082009 Fiscal year Millions of dollars (

1999$ Current NPL Future NPL Estimated Total Cost of Fund Lead Actions at Current and Future NPL Sites:

Base Case, FY 2000 FY 2009 25 Predicting future NPL sites is difficult   Little information about sites " coming down the pike"   and what information there is,

closely held.

  Sites generally listed on the NPL when:

  States want Trust Fund money   PRPs are recalcitrant or not financially viable   Relocation is involved.

  Governor's concurrence complicates listing.

Resources for the Future Conclusions 26   States with strong programs ( N. J, NY,

CA, PA) are big listers.

  Weak states list few if any NPL sites.

  State cost share of Fund lead remedial actions ( 10% of cleanup and 100% of operation and maintenance) a big issue.

Resources for the Future Conclusions Predicting future NPL sites is difficult 27 Other Conclusions   More work is needed to assess staff and program management needs.

  Post construction activities are crucial.

Conclusions Resources for the Future 28 Thinking About the Future Resources for the Future 29 Recent NPL listings   FY 2000     36 final nonfederal NPL sites, 2 mega sites:

° Leviathan Mine, California, Region 9 ° MidniteMine, Washington, Region 10   FY 2001   28 final nonfederal NPL sites, including 6 mega sites:

° Indian Refinery Texaco Lawrenceville, Illinois, Region 5 ° Malone Service Company, Inc., Texas, Region 6 ° Gilt Edge Mine, South Dakota, Region 8 ° CasmaliaResources, California, Region 9 ° Portland Harbor, Oregon, Region 10 ° Lower Duwamish Waterway, Washington, Region 10 Thinking About the Future Resources for the Future 30 Recent NPL Listings ( cont'd)

  FY 2002   18 final nonfederal NPL sites, including 1 mega site:

° Del Amo. California, Region 9 Thinking About the Future Resources for the Future 31 Lead by Site Type Thinking About the Future Resources for the Future Type of Site Fund

lead PRP

lead Fund

lead PRP

lead Fund

lead PRP

lead Chemical manufacturing45% 55% 32% 68% 35% 65%

Oil refining67% 33% 25% 75% 21% 79%

Mining40% 60% 83% 17% 67% 33%

Wood preserving78% 22% 57% 43% 44% 56%

Coal gasification and other industrial55% 45% 31% 69% 29% 71%

Recycling58% 42% 18% 82% 19% 81%

Captive waste handling and disposal38% 62% 14% 86% 11% 89%

Non captive waste handling and disposal25% 75% 12% 88% 11% 89%

Transportation88% 13% 11% 89% 29% 71%

Contaminated areas73% 27% 36% 64% 37% 63%

Miscellaneous86% 14% 49% 51% 41% 59%

Note: Percentages may not add to 100% because of rounding.

Source: Data provided to RFF by EPA in October 2000. RI/ FSRDRA 32 Extramural Unit Costs of Remedial Pipeline Actions by Site Type ( Nonmegasites only; at operable unit level; 1999$) Resources for the Future Thinking About the Future Type of Site Chemical manufacturing$ 710,000 $ 830,000 $ 5,200,000 Oil refining550,000 910,000 4,500,000 Mining2,200,000 1,200,000 10,000,000 Wood preserving750,000 1,000,000 11,000,000 Coal gasification and other industrial1,100,000 810,000 5,700,000 Recycling1,200,000 1,100,000 4,400,000 Captive waste handling and disposal440,000 780,000 3,700,000 Noncaptive waste handling and disposal1,000,000 1,200,000 5,900,000 Transportation560,000 450,000 10,000,000 Contaminated areas970,000 650,000 4,100,000 Miscellaneous1,200,000 610,000 3,200,000 RI/ FSRDRA 33 Available Funding for State Lead Cleanup Thinking About the Future Florida Subject to annual appropriations Massachusetts $ 3 million  5 million Missouri Capable of funding only small emergency response cleanups New Jersey $ 20 million  30 million ( should stay in this range for next six years)

New York $ 193 million Pennsylvania $ 45 million Ohio Capable of funding only small emergency response cleanups Texas $ 24 million Source: RFF State Interviews, July 2000. Resources for the Future StateFY 2000 resources California$ 8 million 34 Background Slides Resources for the Future Thinking About the Future 35 Future NPL Scenarios Background Resources for the Future Base caseLow caseHigh case Number of sites listed each year Total352349 Mega213 Nonmega332246 RI/ FS80% 80% 80%

Remedial Design35% 35% 35%

Remedial Action25% 25% 35%

RI/ FS75% 75% 75%

Remedial Design40% 30% 40%

Remedial Action40% 30% 40%

Percent of Fund lead actions at non mega sites Percent of Fund lead actions at mega sites 36 General Approach   Worked closely with EPA and large group of external experts   Hill, states, industry, enviros   Relied mostly on CERCLIS and IFMS data   Modeled workload of Fund and PRP lead actions at NPL sites   Baseline is end of FY 1999   Developed three future scenarios   Estimates are projected annual expenditures in constant 1999 dollars Report to Congress Resources for the Future 37 Estimating Cost of Fund Lead Actions   Separated out " mega" sites   Used historical data of actual EPA expenditures to develop average costs   Addressed differences in site types   Calculated average durations for categories of sites ( mega and nonmega, teenager and nonteenager) Resources for the Future Report to Congress 38 Durations Findings Resources for the Future 0246810121416 Years NPL proposal date to RI/ FS startRI/ FS RI/ FS completion to RD startRemedial design Remedial action 8.1 years RFF ( excluding long RAs)

RFF ( including long RAs) EPA 11.2 years 11.8 years


[Federal Register: November 27, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 227)]
[Notices]
[Page 66168-66169]
[DOCID:fr27no07-80]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0093; FRL-8499-4]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; Clean Air Act Tribal Authority
(Renewal); EPA ICR No. 1676.05, OMB Control No. 2060-0306

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq.), this document announces that an Information
Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an
existing approved collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below,
describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated
burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 27,
2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2007-0093, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket

Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Air and Radiation Docket
and Information Center (Mailcode 2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB by mail to: Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention:
Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Darrel Harmon, Office of Air and
Radiation, Immediate Office, (6101A), Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:
202-564-7416; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On July 6, 2007 (72 FR 37002), EPA sought comments on this ICR
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional
comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days
of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0093, which is

available for online viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person

viewing at the Air Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading
Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is
202-566-1742.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at
http://www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the

index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA receives

them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted
material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information
whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further
information about the electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

    Title: Clean Air Act Tribal Authority (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR No. 1676.05, OMB Control No. 2060-0306.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on 12/31/2007. Under
OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the
collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. An
Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: This Information Collection Request (ICR) seeks
authorization for tribes to demonstrate their eligibility to be treated
in the same manner as states under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and to
submit applications to implement a CAA program. This ICR extends the
collection period of information for determining eligibility, which
expires December 31, 2007.
    The program regulation provides for Indian tribes, if they so
choose, to assume responsibility for the development and implementation
of CAA programs. The regulation, Indian Tribes: Air Quality Planning
and Management (Tribal Authority Rule [TAR] 40 CFR parts 9, 35, 49, 50
and 81), sets forth how tribes may seek authority to implement their
own air quality planning and management programs. The rule establishes:
(1) Which CAA provisions Indian tribes may seek authority to implement,
(2) what requirements the tribes must meet when seeking such
authorization, and (3) what Federal financial assistance may be
available to help tribes establish and manage their air quality
programs. The TAR provides tribes the authority to administer air
quality programs over all air resources, including non-Indian owned fee
lands, within the exterior boundaries of a reservation and other areas
over which the tribe can demonstrate jurisdiction. An Indian tribe that
takes responsibility for a CAA program would essentially be treated in
the same way as a state would be treated for that program.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 40
hours per response. Burden means 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. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Indian tribes.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 27.
    Frequency of Response: One-time application.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 360.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $18,838.20, includes $0 annualized
capital or O&M costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in hours in the total
estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved
ICR Burdens.

    Dated: November 20, 2007.
Sara Hisel-McCoy,
 Director, Collections Strategies Division.
 [FR Doc. E7-23073 Filed 11-26-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 18 (Tuesday, January 28, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4977-4978]
[FR Doc No: 2020-01404]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP20-35-000]

Notice of Application: WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.

    Take notice that on January 8, 2020, WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.
(WBI

Energy), 1250 West Century Avenue, Bismarck, North Dakota 58503, filed
in the above referenced docket an application pursuant to section 7(b)
of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and Part 157 of the Commission's
regulations requesting authorization for the abandonment by sale of all
WBI Energy's gathering facilities and related service located in the
state if Montana and North Dakota as a result of the sale of its
gathering assets to Scout Energy Group, II, LP. All as more fully set
forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open
to public inspection. The filing is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's website web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Lori
Myerchin, Director, Regulatory Affairs and Transportation Services, WBI
Energy Transmission, Inc., 1250 West Century Avenue, Bismarck, North
Dakota 58503, by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    WBI Energy filed an application for authorization to abandon by
sale, to Scout Energy Group II, LP, its remaining gathering facilities,
which includes approximately 400 miles of natural gas gathering
pipeline and appurtenant facilities, and related land rights associated
with WBI Energy's existing gathering operations in the Baker Field,
located in Fallon County, Montana and Bowman County, North Dakota.
Following the proposed abandonment WBI Energy will no longer provide
any gathering services.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules (18 CFR 157.9),
within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit seven copies of filings made in the proceeding with the
Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other
party. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of
Commission orders in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, and will be
notified of any meetings associated with the Commission's environmental
review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve
copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party
commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other
parties or issued by the Commission and will not have the right to seek
court review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on February 11, 2020.

    Dated: January 21, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-01404 Filed 1-27-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P