[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 43 (Monday, March 5, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9215-9219]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04277]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-R01-OAR-2017-0343; A-1-FRL-9972-97-Region 1]

Approval of Section 112(l) Authority for Hazardous Air
Pollutants; Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for Dry Cleaning
Facilities; State of Vermont

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to grant the Vermont Department of Environmental
Conservation (VT DEC) the authority to implement and enforce, with
respect to area sources only, the Vermont Perchloroethylene Dry
Cleaning Rule in place of the National Emissions Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities
(Dry Cleaning NESHAP). Pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA), the VT DEC
submitted a request for approval to implement and enforce the
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Rule of the Vermont Air Pollution
Control Regulations as a partial substitution for the National
Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Perchloroethylene
Dry Cleaning Facilities (Dry Cleaning NESHAP), as it applies to area
sources. EPA has reviewed this request and has determined that the
Vermont Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Rule satisfies the requirements
necessary for partial rule substitution. Thus, EPA is hereby granting
VT DEC's request. This action does not affect the authority of any
party to implement and enforce the Dry Cleaning NESHAP with respect to
major source dry cleaners. This approval makes the Vermont
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Rule federally enforceable in Vermont.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective June 4, 2018, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by April 4, 2018. If EPA receives adverse
comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect. The incorporation by reference of certain publications
listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register
as of June 4, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2017-0343 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lancey, Air Permits, Toxics, and
Indoor Programs Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New
England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code
OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?
    B. Does this direct final rule apply to me?
    C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?
II. Background
III. What requirements must a State rule meet to substitute for a
Section 112 rule?
IV. What if any material differences exist between the Vermont Dry
Cleaning Rule and the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and what is EPA's
evaluation?
    A. What are the differences in applicability?
    B. How does the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule address the control
requirements?
    C. How do the monitoring requirements differ?
    D. What are the differences in reporting and recordkeeping?
    E. Is the State's submittal separable?
    F. What is EPA's action regarding the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule?
V. Final Action
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
VIII. Judicial Reviews

I. General Information

A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?

    The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates
no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the state rule should
adverse comments be filed.
    If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a notice
withdrawing the direct final rule and informing the public that the
rule will not take effect. All public comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The
EPA will not institute a second comment period on the proposed rule.
All parties interested in commenting on the proposed rule

should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on June 4, 2018 and no
further action will be taken on the proposed rule. For further
information about commenting on this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of
this document.

B. Does this direct final rule apply to me?

    Categories and entities potentially regulated by this direct final
rule include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               NAICS \1\
                           Category                               code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coin Operated Laundries and Dry Cleaners.....................     812310
Dry Cleaning and Laundry Services (except coin operated).....     812320
Industrial Laundries.........................................     812332
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.

    This Table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
direct final rule. To determine whether your facility is affected you
should examine the applicability criteria in the Vermont Air Pollution
Control Regulations, Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, section 5-253.11
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning. If you have questions regarding the
applicability of any aspect of this action to a particular entity,
please contact the person identified in the ``For Further Information
Contact'' section.

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

    Do not submit information containing CBI to EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comments that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comments that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver information
identified as CBI only to the following address: ``EPA-R01-OAR-2017-
0343'', Susan Lancey, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New
England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square (mail code OEP05-2),
Boston, MA 02109-3912.

II. Background

    Under CAA section 112(l), EPA may approve state or local rules or
programs to be implemented and enforced in place of certain otherwise
applicable Federal rules, emissions standards, or requirements. The
Federal regulations governing EPA's approval of state and local rules
or programs under section 112(l) are located at 40 CFR part 63, subpart
E. See 58 FR 62262 (November 26, 1993), as amended by 65 FR 55810
(September 14, 2000). Under these regulations, a state air pollution
control agency has the option to request EPA's approval to substitute a
state rule for the applicable Federal rule (e.g., the National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants). Upon approval by EPA, the
state agency is authorized to implement and enforce its rule in place
of the Federal rule, and the state rule becomes federally enforceable
in that state.
    EPA originally promulgated the Dry Cleaning NESHAP on September 22,
1993. See 58 FR 49354. The Dry Cleaning NESHAP has been amended several
times and is codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart M, ``National
Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities.''
On May 26, 2017, EPA received VT DEC's request to implement and enforce
Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulations (VT APCR) section 5-253.11
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning (Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule) in lieu of
the Dry Cleaning NESHAP as applied to area sources.

III. What requirements must a State rule meet to substitute for a
Section 112 rule?

    A state must demonstrate that it has satisfied the general
delegation/approval criteria contained in 40 CFR 63.91(d). The process
of providing ``up-front approval'' assures that a state has met the
delegation criteria in Section 112(l)(5) of the CAA as implemented by
EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 63.91(d). These criteria require, among
other things, that the state has demonstrated that its NESHAP program
contains adequate authorities to assure compliance with each applicable
Federal requirement, adequate resources for implementation, and an
expeditious compliance schedule. Under 40 CFR 63.91(d)(3), interim or
final Title V program approval under 40 CFR part 70 satisfies the
criteria set forth in 40 CFR 63.91(d) for ``up-front approval.'' On
November 29, 2001, EPA promulgated full approval of VT DEC's operating
permits program with an effective date of November 30, 2001. See 66 FR
59535. Accordingly, VT DEC has satisfied the up-front approval criteria
of 40 CFR 63.91(d).
    Additionally, the regulations governing approval of state
requirements that substitute for a section 112 rule require EPA to
evaluate the state's submittal to ensure that it meets the stringency
and other requirements of 40 CFR 63.93. A rule will be approved if the
state requirements contain or demonstrate: (1) Applicability criteria
that are no less stringent than the corresponding Federal rule; (2)
levels of control and compliance and enforcement measures that result
in emission reductions from each affected source that are no less
stringent than would result from the otherwise applicable Federal rule;
(3) a compliance schedule that requires each affected source to be in
compliance within a time frame consistent with the deadlines
established in the otherwise applicable Federal rule; and (4) the
additional compliance and enforcement measures as specified in 40 CFR
63.93(b)(4). See 40 CFR 63.93(b).
    A state may also seek, and EPA may approve, a partial delegation of
the EPA's authorities. See CAA 112(l)(1). To obtain a partial rule
substitution, the state's submittal must meet the otherwise applicable
requirements in 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93, and be separable from the
portions of the program that the state is not seeking rule substitution
for. See 64 FR 1889.
    Before we can approve alternative requirements in place of a part
63 emissions standard, the state must submit to us detailed information
that demonstrates how the alternative requirements compare with the
otherwise applicable Federal standard. A detailed discussion of how EPA
will determine equivalency for state alternative NESHAP requirements is
provided in the preamble to EPA's proposed Subpart E amendments on
January 12, 1999. See 64 FR 1908.
    After reviewing VT DEC's partial rule substitution request and
equivalency demonstration for the Dry Cleaning NESHAP as it applies to
area sources, EPA has determined this request meets all the
requirements necessary for approval under CAA section 112(l) and 40 CFR
63.91 and 63.93.

IV. What if any material differences exist between the Vermont Dry
Cleaning Rule and the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and what is EPA's evaluation?

    The following discussion explains the major differences between the
area source requirements in the Vermont Dry

Cleaning Rule and the area source requirements in the Dry Cleaning
NESHAP and how EPA evaluated the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule. A detailed
side-by-side comparison of these requirements, as well as an
equivalency narrative, are included in the public docket.

A. What are the differences in applicability?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP applies to each dry cleaning facility that
uses perchloroethylene (PCE), except for coin-operated dry cleaning
machines. The Dry Cleaning NESHAP exempts existing dry cleaning
machines from certain requirements if the total PCE consumption of the
dry cleaning facility is less than 140 gallons per year. See 40 CFR
63.320(d). The Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule applies to all dry cleaning
facilities that use PCE at area sources of HAP. The Vermont Dry
Cleaning Rule has no exemption for coin-operated machines and no
exemption based on PCE consumption. Under Vermont's rule, major sources
of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP) must continue to comply with the
Federal Dry Cleaning NESHAP. See VT APCR section 5-253.11(a).
Consequently, EPA finds that the applicability of the Vermont Dry
Cleaning Rule is no less stringent than that of the Dry Cleaning
NESHAP.

B. How does the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule address the control
requirements?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires the owner or operator of each dry
cleaning system at area sources to equip each dry cleaning machine with
a refrigerated condenser, except that certain existing dry cleaning
systems installed between December 9, 1991, and September 22, 1993, may
alternatively comply by routing the air-perchloroethylene gas-vapor
stream of each dry cleaning machine through a carbon adsorber. See 40
CFR 63.322(a). The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires new area source dry
cleaning systems installed after December 21, 2005, to equip each dry
cleaning machine with a refrigerated condenser and a non-vented carbon
adsorber and to desorb the carbon adsorber in accordance with the
manufacturer's instruction. See 40 CFR 63.322(o)(2). The Vermont Dry
Cleaning rule requires all dry cleaning machines to be equipped with a
refrigerated condenser without exception, and requires dry cleaning
systems installed after December 21, 2005 to equip each dry cleaning
machine with a refrigerated condenser and a non-vented carbon adsorber.
The carbon adsorber must be desorbed in accordance with the
manufacturer's instruction. The Vermont Dry Cleaning rule does not
allow a primary carbon adsorber as a method of control. See VT APCR
section 5-253.11(c)(2) and (4). Both the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule and
the Dry Cleaning NESHAP effectively prohibit transfer machines,
prohibit dry cleaning systems installed after December 21, 2005 in a
building with a residence, and prohibit any dry cleaning system in a
building with a residence after December 21, 2020. See VT APCR section
5-253.11(c)(3), (5)-(6) and 40 CFR 63.322(o)(3)-(5). The Vermont Dry
Cleaning Rule only allows equivalent control devices approved by the
Vermont Air Pollution Control Officer and the EPA pursuant to 40 CFR
63.325. See VT APCR section 5-253.11(c)(2)(ii) and (3). Consequently,
EPA finds that the Vermont Dry Cleaning control requirements are no
less stringent than those of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP.

C. How do the monitoring requirements differ?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires dry cleaning systems at area
sources to be inspected weekly for perceptible leaks and requires a
monthly inspection using a halogenated hydrocarbon detector or PCE gas
analyzer. See 40 CFR 63.322(k) and (o)(1)(i). Instead, the Vermont Dry
Cleaning Rule requires a weekly inspection for perceptible leaks and a
weekly inspection using a halogenated hydrocarbon detector or PCE gas
analyzer. See VT APCR section 5-253.11(e)(1). The Dry Cleaning NESHAP
requires weekly temperature monitoring to determine if the temperature
is equal to or less than 45 degrees Fahrenheit, or alternatively
monitoring of refrigeration system high pressure and low pressure
during the drying phase. See 40 CFR 63.323(a)(1). The Vermont Dry
Cleaning Rule requires weekly temperature monitoring of the
refrigerated condenser and requires the temperature to be maintained at
less than or equal to 40 degrees Fahrenheit. The Vermont Dry Cleaning
Rule does not allow refrigeration system high and low pressure
monitoring as an alternative to temperature monitoring of the
refrigerated condenser. See VT APCR section 5-253.11(c)(2)(i)(B) and
(e)(2). Therefore, EPA finds that the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule
monitoring requirements are no less stringent than those of the Dry
Cleaning NESHAP.

D. What are the differences in reporting and recordkeeping?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires the owner or operator of any new
dry cleaning facility to submit a notification of compliance status
within 30 days after startup. See 40 CFR 63.324(b). The Vermont Dry
Cleaning Rule also requires the owner or operator of any new dry
cleaning facility to submit a notification of compliance status within
30 days of commencing operations. See VT APCR section 5-253.11(g)(2).
Thus, the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule reporting requirements are no less
stringent than those of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP.

E. Is the State's submittal separable?

    A state may also seek, and EPA may approve, a partial delegation of
the EPA's authorities. See CAA 112(l)(1). To obtain a partial rule
substitution, the state's submittal must meet the otherwise applicable
requirements in 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93, and be separable from the
portions of the program that the state is not seeking rule substitution
for. See 64 FR 1889. A separable portion of a state rule or program is
a section(s) of a rule or a portion(s) of a program which can be acted
upon independently without affecting the overall integrity of the rule
or program as a whole.
    Here, the state's rule applies to area source dry cleaners, while
the NESHAP continues to apply to major source dry cleaners. EPA finds
that there exists a logical and compelling distinction between area and
major dry cleaning sources. That is, the state rule may independently
regulate area source dry cleaners separate from major source dry
cleaners, without affecting the overall integrity of the rule or
program as a whole. EPA further finds that granting partial delegation
would not create an overly cumbersome or unworkable scheme. For these
reasons, EPA concludes that the portion of the NESHAP delegated under
this partial rule substitution is separable from the remainder of the
NESHAP. Therefore, partial delegation is appropriate.

F. What is EPA's action regarding the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule?

    After reviewing VT DEC's request for approval of the Vermont Dry
Cleaning Rule, EPA has determined that the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule
meets all of the requirements necessary for partial rule substitution
under section 112(l) of the CAA and 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93. Therefore,
EPA hereby approves VT DEC's request to implement and enforce VT APCR
section 5-253.11 (as effective under state law on December 15, 2016),
in place of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP for area sources in Vermont. As of
the effective date of this action, the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule is
enforceable by EPA and by citizens under the CAA. Although VT DEC has
primary

responsibility to implement and enforce the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule,
EPA retains the authority to enforce any requirement of the rule upon
its approval under CAA 112. See CAA section 112(l)(7).

V. Final Action

    EPA is approving the Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulations,
Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, section 5-253.11, Perchloroethylene
Dry Cleaning (as effective under state law on December 15, 2016) as a
partial rule substitution for the Dry Cleaning NESHAP for area sources
in Vermont. The Federal Dry Cleaning NESHAP continues to apply to major
source dry cleaners in Vermont. The applicability of the Federal NESHAP
to major source dry cleaners is in no way affected by this action.
    This rule will be effective June 4, 2018 without further notice
unless the Agency receives relevant adverse comments by April 4, 2018.

VI. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of Vermont
Air Pollution Control Regulations, Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control,
section 5-253.11, Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning, effective December
15, 2016. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available electronically through http://www.regulations.gov.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator has the authority to approve
section 112(l) submissions that comply with the provisions of the Act
and applicable Federal regulations. In reviewing section 112(l)
submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they
meet the criteria and objectives of the CAA and of EPA's implementing
regulations. Accordingly, this action merely approves the State's
request as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the submitted rule 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.
    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 rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will be effective June 4, 2018.

VIII. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by May 4, 2018. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and record keeping
requirements.

    Dated: February 26, 2018.
Alexandra Dapolito Dunn,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
    40 CFR part 63 is amended as follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--General Provisions

0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by adding paragraph (l)(13) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.14   Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *
    (l) * * *
    (13) Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulations, Chapter 5, Air
Pollution Control, section 5-253.11, Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning,
effective as of December 15, 2016. Incorporation by reference approved
for Sec.  63.99(a).
* * * * *

Subpart E--Approval of State Programs and Delegation of Federal
Authorities

0
3. Section 63.99 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(46) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.99   Delegated Federal authorities.

    (a) * * *
    (46) Vermont. (i) Affected area sources within Vermont must comply
with Vermont Regulations applicable to Hazardous Air Pollutants
(incorporated

by reference as specified in Sec.  63.14) as described in paragraph
(a)(46)(i)(A) of this section:
    (A) The material incorporated into the Vermont Air Pollution
Regulations at Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, section 5-253.11,
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning (effective as of December 15, 2016)
pertaining to area source dry cleaning facilities in the State of
Vermont jurisdiction, and approved under the procedures in Sec.  63.93
to be implemented and enforced in place of the requirements for area
source dry cleaning facilities in the Federal NESHAP for
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities (subpart M of this part),
effective as of July 11, 2008. For purposes of this paragraph (a)(46)
the term ``area source dry cleaning facilities'' means any source that
qualifies as an area source under Sec.  63.320(h).
    (1) Authorities not delegated. (i) Vermont is not delegated the
Administrator's authority to implement and enforce Vermont Air
Pollution Control Regulations, Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control,
section 5-253.11, in lieu of those provisions of subpart M of this part
which apply to major sources, as defined in Sec.  63.320(g).
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (2) [Reserved]
    (B) [Reserved]
    (ii) [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-04277 Filed 3-2-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 238)]
[Notices]
[Page 70579]
[DOCID:fr12de07-30]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL08-14-000]

Black Oak Energy, LLC, EPIC Merchant Energy, LP, SESCO
Enterprises, LLC, Complainants v. PJM Interconnection, Inc.,
Respondent; Notice of Complaint

December 4, 2007.
    Take notice that on December 3, 2007, Black Oak Energy, LLC (Black
Oak), EPIC Merchant Energy, LP and SESCO Enterprises, LLC
(collectively, Financial Marketers), filed a formal complaint against
PJM Interconnection, Inc. (PJM) pursuant to section 206 and 306 of the
Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e and 825e (2000), and Rule 206 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206 (2007),
alleging that the PJM Tariff is improperly allocating physical
transmission line losses to virtual transactions and also distributing
over-collected transmission line losses in a manner that discriminates
against virtual Market Participants.
    Financial Marketers certify that copies of the complaint were
served on the contacts for PJM as listed on the Commission's list of
Corporate Officials.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of 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 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on December 26, 2007.

 Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-24028 Filed 12-11-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P