[Federal Register: August 20, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 160)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 46388-46394]
[DOCID:fr20au07-6]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 97

[EPA-R04-OAR-2007-0229-200713(a); FRL 8453-6]

Approval of Implementation Plans of Tennessee: Clean Air
Interstate Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to the Tennessee State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on September 8, 2006. This revision
incorporates provisions related to the implementation of EPA's Clean
Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), promulgated on May 12, 2005, and
subsequently revised on April 28, 2006, and December 13, 2006, and the
CAIR Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) concerning Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2), Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) annual, and NOX
ozone season emissions for the State of Tennessee, promulgated on April
28, 2006, and subsequently revised December 13, 2006. On February 8,
2007, Tennessee requested that EPA only act on a portion of the
September 8, 2006 submittal as an abbreviated SIP. Consequently, EPA is
approving an abbreviated SIP revision that addresses the methodology to
be used to allocate annual and ozone season NOX allowances
under the CAIR FIPs and opt-in provisions for the SO2,
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season trading
programs. EPA is not making any changes to the CAIR FIP, but is
amending, to the extent EPA approves Tennessee's SIP revision, the
appropriate appendices in the CAIR FIP trading rules simply to note
that approval.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective October 19, 2007 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by September 19,
2007. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2007-0229, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2007-0229, Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: James Hou, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The
Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2007-0229. 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 through http://www.regulations.gov
 or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI

or otherwise protected. 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 and any form of encryption and should 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 electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov
 or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Hou, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-8965. Mr. Hou can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What Action Is EPA Taking?
II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
III. What are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
IV. What are the Types of CAIR SIP Submittals?
V. Analysis of Tennessee's CAIR SIP Submittal
    A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations
    B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs
    C. Applicability Provisions for non-EGUs NOX SIP Call
sources
    D. NOX Allowance Allocations
    E. Allocation of NOX Allowances from the Compliance
Supplement Pool
    F. Individual Opt-in Units
VI. Final Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Action Is EPA Taking?

CAIR SIP Approval

    EPA is approving a revision to Tennessee's SIP, submitted on
September 8, 2006, that would modify the application of certain
provisions of the CAIR FIP concerning SO2, NOX
annual, and NOX ozone season emissions. (As discussed below,
this less comprehensive CAIR SIP is termed an abbreviated SIP.)
Tennessee is subject to the CAIR FIPs that implement the CAIR
requirements by requiring certain electric generating units (EGUs) to
participate in the EPA-administered Federal CAIR SO2,
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season cap-and-trade
programs. The SIP revision provides a methodology for allocating
NOX allowances for the NOX annual and NOX
ozone season trading programs. The CAIR FIPs provide that this
methodology, if approved, will be used to allocate NOX
allowances to sources in Tennessee, instead of the federal allocation
methodology otherwise provided in the FIP. The SIP revision also
provides for individual units not otherwise subject to the CAIR trading
programs to opt into such trading programs. EPA is approving (1)
Tennessee's methodology for allocating allowances to units subject to
the CAIR trading programs under the current applicability provisions in
the CAIR FIP NOX annual and ozone season trading rules and
(2) the opt-in unit provisions adopted by Tennessee for the CAIR FIP
NOX annual, SO2, and NOX ozone season
trading programs.
    Consistent with the flexibility provided in the FIPs, these
provisions will also be used to replace or supplement, as appropriate,
the corresponding provisions in the CAIR FIPs for Tennessee. EPA is not
making any changes to the CAIR FIP, but is amending, to the extent EPA
approves Tennessee's SIP revision, the appropriate appendices in the
CAIR FIP trading rules simply to note that approval.

II. What is the Regulatory History of the CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?

    The CAIR was published by EPA on May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). In
this rule, EPA determined that 28 States and the District of Columbia
contribute significantly to nonattainment and interfere with
maintenance of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for
fine particulates (PM2.5) and/or 8-hour ozone in downwind
States in the eastern part of the country. As a result, EPA required
those upwind States to revise their SIPs to include control measures
that reduce emissions of SO2, which is a precursor to
PM2.5 formation, and/or NOX, which is a precursor
to both ozone and PM2.5 formation. For jurisdictions that
contribute significantly to downwind PM2.5 nonattainment,
CAIR sets annual State-wide emission reduction requirements (i.e.,
budgets) for SO2 and annual State-wide emission reduction
requirements for NOX. Similarly, for jurisdictions that
contribute significantly to 8-hour ozone nonattainment, CAIR sets
State-wide emission reduction requirements for NOX for the
ozone season (May 1st to September 30th). Under CAIR, States may
implement these emission budgets by participating in the EPA-
administered cap-and-trade programs or by adopting any other control
measures.
    CAIR explains to subject States what must be included in SIPs to
address the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) with regard to interstate transport with respect to the 8-hour
ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA made national findings, effective
May 25, 2005, that the States had failed to submit SIPs meeting the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D). The SIPs were due in July 2000, 3
years after the promulgation of the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5
NAAQS. These findings started a 2-year clock for EPA to promulgate a
FIP to address the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D). Under CAA
section 110(c)(1), EPA may issue a FIP anytime after such findings are
made and must do so within two years, unless a SIP revision correcting
the deficiency is approved by EPA before the FIP is promulgated.
    On April 28, 2006, EPA promulgated FIPs for all States covered by
CAIR in order to ensure the emissions reductions required by CAIR are
achieved on schedule. Each CAIR State is subject to the FIPs until the
State fully adopts, and EPA approves, a SIP revision meeting the
requirements of CAIR. The CAIR FIPs require certain EGUs to participate
in the EPA-administered CAIR SO2, NOX annual, and
NOX ozone-season model trading programs, as appropriate. The
CAIR FIP SO2, NOX annual, and NOX
ozone season trading programs impose essentially the same requirements
as, and are integrated with, the respective CAIR SIP trading programs.
The integration of the CAIR FIP and SIP trading programs means that
these trading programs will work together to create effectively a
single trading program for each regulated pollutant (SO2,
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season) in all States
covered by CAIR FIP or SIP trading program for that pollutant. The CAIR
FIPs also allow States to submit abbreviated SIP revisions that, if
approved by EPA, will automatically replace or supplement the
corresponding CAIR FIP provisions (e.g., the methodology for allocating
NOX allowances to sources in the state), while the CAIR FIP
remains in place for all other provisions.

    On April 28, 2006, EPA published two more CAIR-related final rules
that added the States of Delaware and New Jersey to the list of States
subject to CAIR for PM2.5 and announced EPA's final
decisions on reconsideration of five issues without making any
substantive changes to the CAIR requirements.

III. What are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?

    CAIR establishes State-wide emission budgets for SO2 and
NOX and is to be implemented in two phases. The first phase
of NOX reductions starts in 2009 and continues through 2014,
while the first phase of SO2 reductions starts in 2010 and
continues through 2014. The second phase of reductions for both
NOX and SO2 starts in 2015 and continues
thereafter. CAIR requires States to implement the budgets by either:
(1) Requiring EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs; or, (2) adopting other control measures of the State's
choosing and demonstrating that such control measures will result in
compliance with the applicable State SO2 and NOX
budgets.
    The May 12, 2005, and April 28, 2006, CAIR rules provide model
rules that States must adopt (with certain limited changes, if desired)
if they want to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs.
    With two exceptions, only States that choose to meet the
requirements of CAIR through methods that exclusively regulate EGUs are
allowed to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs. One
exception is for States that adopt the opt-in provisions of the model
rules to allow non-EGUs individually to opt into the EPA-administered
trading programs. The other exception is for States that include all
non-EGUs from their NOX SIP Call trading programs in their
CAIR NOX ozone season trading programs.

IV. What are the Types of CAIR SIP Submittals?

    States have the flexibility to choose the type of control measures
they will use to meet the requirements of CAIR. EPA anticipates that
most States will choose to meet the CAIR requirements by selecting an
option that requires EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered CAIR
cap-and-trade programs. For such States, EPA has provided two
approaches for submitting and obtaining approval for CAIR SIP
revisions. States may submit full SIP revisions that adopt the model
CAIR cap-and-trade rules. If approved, these SIP revisions will fully
replace the CAIR FIPs. Alternatively, States may submit abbreviated SIP
revisions. These SIP revisions will not replace the CAIR FIPs; however,
the CAIR FIPs provide that, when approved, the provisions in these
abbreviated SIP revisions will be used instead of or in conjunction
with, as appropriate, the corresponding provisions of the CAIR FIPs
(e.g., the NOX allowance allocation methodology).
    A State submitting an abbreviated SIP revision may submit limited
SIP revisions to tailor the CAIR FIP cap-and-trade programs to the
state submitting the revision. Specifically, an abbreviated SIP
revision may establish certain applicability and allowance allocation
provisions that, the CAIR FIPs provide, will be used instead of or in
conjunction with the corresponding provisions in the CAIR FIP rules in
that State. Specifically, the abbreviated SIP revisions may:
    1. Include NOX SIP Call trading sources that are not
EGUs under CAIR in the CAIR FIP NOX ozone season trading
program;
    2. Provide for allocation of NOX annual or ozone season
allowances by the State, rather than the Administrator of the EPA or
the Administrator's duly authorized representative (Administrator), and
using a methodology chosen by the State;
    3. Provide for allocation of NOX annual allowances from
the Compliance Supplement Pool (CSP) by the State, rather than by the
Administrator, and using the State's choice of allowed, alternative
methodologies; or
    4. Allow units that are not otherwise CAIR units to opt
individually into the CAIR FIP cap-and-trade programs under the opt-in
provisions in the CAIR FIP rules.
    With approval of an abbreviated SIP revision, the CAIR FIP remains
in place, as tailored to sources in the State by that approved SIP
revision.
    Abbreviated SIP revisions can be submitted in lieu of, or as part
of, CAIR full SIP revisions. States may want to designate part of their
full SIP as an abbreviated SIP for EPA to act on first when the timing
of the State's submission might not provide EPA with sufficient time to
approve the full SIP prior to the deadline for recording NOX
allocations. This will help ensure that the elements of the trading
programs where flexibility is allowed are implemented according to the
State's decisions. Submission of an abbreviated SIP revision does not
preclude future submission of a CAIR full SIP revision. In this case,
the September 8, 2006 submittal from Tennessee has been submitted as an
abbreviated SIP revision.

V. Analysis of Tennessee's CAIR SIP Submittal

A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations

    The CAIR NOX annual and ozone season budgets were
developed from historical heat input data for EGUs. Using these data,
EPA calculated annual and ozone season regional heat input values,
which were multiplied by 0.15 pounds per million British thermal units
(lb/mmBtu), for phase 1, and 0.125 lb/mmBtu, for phase 2, to obtain
regional NOX budgets for 2009-2014 and for 2015 and
thereafter, respectively. EPA derived the State NOX annual
and ozone season budgets from the regional budgets using State heat
input data adjusted by fuel factors.
    The CAIR State SO2 budgets were derived by discounting
the tonnage of emissions authorized by annual allowance allocations
under the Acid Rain Program under title IV of the CAA. Under CAIR, each
allowance allocated under the Acid Rain Program for the years in phase
1 of CAIR (2010 through 2014) authorizes 0.50 ton of SO2
emissions in the CAIR trading program, and each Acid Rain Program
allowance allocated for the years in phase 2 of CAIR (2015 and
thereafter) authorizes 0.35 ton of SO2 emissions in the CAIR
trading program.
    The CAIR FIPs established the budgets for Tennessee as 50,973
(2009-2014) and 42,478 (2015-thereafter) tons for NOX annual
emissions, 22,842 (2009-2014) and 19,035 (2015-thereafter) tons for
NOX ozone season emissions, and 137,216 (2010-2014) and
96,051 (2015-thereafter) tons for SO2 emissions. Tennessee's
SIP revision, being approved in this action, does not affect these
budgets, which are total amounts of allowances available for allocation
for each year under the EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs under
the CAIR FIPs. In short, the abbreviated SIP revision only affects
allocations of allowances under the established budgets.

B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs

    The CAIR NOX annual and ozone-season FIPs both largely
mirror the structure of the NOX SIP Call model trading rule
in 40 CFR part 96, subparts A through I. While the provisions of the
NOX annual and ozone-season FIPs are similar, there are some
differences. For example, the NOX annual FIP (but not the
NOX ozone season FIP) provides for a CSP, which is discussed
below and under which allowances may be

awarded for early reductions of NOX annual emissions. As a
further example, the NOX ozone season FIP reflects the fact
that the CAIR NOX ozone season trading program replaces the
NOX SIP Call trading program after the 2008 ozone season and
is coordinated with the NOX SIP Call program. The
NOX ozone season FIP provides incentives for early emissions
reductions by allowing banked, pre-2009 NOX SIP Call
allowances to be used for compliance in the CAIR NOX ozone-
season trading program. In addition, States have the option of
continuing to meet their NOX SIP Call requirement by
participating in the CAIR NOX ozone season trading program
and including all their NOX SIP Call trading sources in that
program.
    The provisions of the CAIR SO2 FIP are also similar to
the provisions of the NOX annual and ozone season FIPs.
However, the SO2 FIP is coordinated with the ongoing Acid
Rain SO2 cap-and-trade program under CAA title IV. The
SO2 FIP uses the title IV allowances for compliance, with
each allowance allocated for 2010-2014 authorizing only 0.50 ton of
emissions and each allowance allocated for 2015 and thereafter
authorizing only 0.35 ton of emissions. Banked title IV allowances
allocated for years before 2010 can be used at any time in the CAIR
SO2 cap-and-trade program, with each such allowance
authorizing 1 ton of emissions. Title IV allowances are to be freely
transferable among sources covered by the Acid Rain Program and sources
covered by the CAIR SO2 cap-and-trade program.
    EPA used the CAIR model trading rules as the basis for the trading
programs in the CAIR FIPs. The CAIR FIP trading rules are virtually
identical to the CAIR model trading rules, with changes made to account
for federal rather than state implementation. The CAIR model
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
trading rules and the respective CAIR FIP trading rules are designed to
work together as integrated SO2, NOX annual, and
NOX ozone season trading programs.
    Tennessee is subject to the CAIR FIPs for ozone and
PM2.5 and the CAIR FIP trading programs for SO2,
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season apply to sources
in Tennessee. Consistent with the flexibility it gives to States, the
CAIR FIPs provide that States may submit abbreviated SIP revisions that
will replace or supplement, as appropriate, certain provisions of the
CAIR FIP trading programs. The September 8, 2006, submission of
Tennessee is such an abbreviated SIP revision.

C. Applicability Provisions for Non-EGU NOX SIP Call Sources

    In general, the CAIR FIP trading programs apply to any stationary,
fossil-fuel-fired boiler or stationary, fossil-fuel-fired combustion
turbine serving at any time, since the later of November 15, 1990, or
the start-up of the unit's combustion chamber, a generator with
nameplate capacity of more than 25 megawatt electrical (MWe) producing
electricity for sale.
    States have the option of bringing in, for the CAIR NOX
ozone season program only, those units in the State's NOX
SIP Call trading program that are not EGUs as defined under CAIR. EPA
advises States exercising this option to use provisions for
applicability that are substantively identical to the provisions in 40
CFR 96.304 and add the applicability provisions in the State's
NOX SIP Call trading rule for non-EGUs to the applicability
provisions in 40 CFR 96.304 in order to include in the CAIR
NOX ozone season trading program all units required to be in
the State's NOX SIP Call trading program that are not
already included under 40 CFR 96.304. Under this option, the CAIR
NOX ozone season program must cover all large industrial
boilers and combustion turbines, as well as any small EGUs (i.e. units
serving a generator with a nameplate capacity of 25 MWe or less), that
the State currently requires to be in the NOX SIP Call
trading program.
    Consistent with the flexibility given to States in the CAIR FIP,
Tennessee has not chosen to expand the applicability provisions of the
CAIR NOX ozone season trading program to include all non-EGUs in the
State's NOX SIP Call trading program.

D. NOX Allowance Allocations

    Under the NOX allowance allocation methodology in the
CAIR model trading rules and in the CAIR FIP, NOX annual and
ozone season allowances are allocated to units that have operated for
five years, based on heat input data from a three-year period that are
adjusted for fuel type by using fuel factors of 1.0 for coal, 0.6 for
oil, and 0.4 for other fuels. The CAIR model trading rules and the CAIR
FIP also provide a new unit set-aside from which units without five
years of operation are allocated allowances based on the units' prior
year emissions.
    The CAIR FIP provides States the flexibility to establish a
different NOX allowance allocation methodology that will be
used to allocate allowances to sources in the States, if certain
requirements are met concerning the timing of submission of units'
allocations to the Administrator for recordation and the total amount
of allowances allocated for each control period. In adopting
alternative NOX allowance allocation methodologies, States
have flexibility with regard to:
    1. The cost to recipients of the allowances, which may be
distributed for free or auctioned;
    2. The frequency of allocations;
    3. The basis for allocating allowances, which may be distributed,
for example, based on historical heat input or electric and thermal
output; and
    4. The use of allowance set-asides and, if used, their size.
    Consistent with the flexibility given to States in the CAIR FIPs,
Tennessee has chosen to replace the provisions of the CAIR
NOX annual FIP concerning the allocation of NOX
annual allowances, with its own methodology. Tennessee has chosen to
distribute NOX annual allowances, by adopting by reference
the CAIR NOX annual trading program model rule at 40 CFR
96.142. EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee's allocation provisions,
i.e., parts 1200-3-27.10(1) and (2) (section 96.142) of Tennessee's
CAIR NOX annual trading program.
    Consistent with the flexibility given to States in the CAIR FIPs,
Tennessee has chosen to replace the provisions of the CAIR
NOX ozone season FIP concerning allowance allocations with
its own methodology. Tennessee has chosen to distribute NOX
ozone season allowances by adopting, with certain revisions, the CAIR
NOX ozone season trading program model rule at 40 CFR 96.342
for units subject to the CAIR trading program under the CAIR FIP
NOX ozone season applicability provisions. EPA is approving
these Tennessee allocation provisions, i.e., parts 1200-3-
27-.11(2)(c)1.(i) through (iv) of Tennessee's CAIR NOX ozone
season trading program. Tennessee has indicated that it may
subsequently seek approval to exercise the option under CAIR of
expanding the current applicability provisions in the CAIR
NOX ozone season trading program to include units that are
not otherwise subject to the trading program but are subject to
Tennessee's NOX SIP Call trading program. However, under
today's approval, only the allocation methodology for units covered by
the current CAIR FIP NOX ozone season provisions is being
approved, and only CAIR NOX ozone season allowance
allocations submitted by Tennessee for those units will be recorded by
EPA. In addition, EPA notes that Tennessee's allocation provisions in
the abbreviated SIP reference certain applicability provisions in
Tennessee's rule that have

not been submitted as part of the abbreviated SIP. Because Tennessee's
purpose in submitting these allocation provisions is for them to be
used, in lieu of the CAIR FIP allocation provisions, to allocate
allowances to units that are CAIR NOX ozone season units
under the CAIR FIP trading program, EPA interprets the references
(i.e., ``parts [1200-3-27-.11](2)(a)1. and (2)(a)2.'') as referring to
40 CFR 97.304(a) and (b), which are the applicability provisions of the
CAIR FIP NOX ozone season rules.

E. Allocation of NOX Allowances From the Compliance
Supplement Pool

    The CSP provides an incentive for early reductions in
NOX annual emissions. The CSP consists of 200,000 CAIR
NOX annual allowances of vintage 2009 for the entire CAIR
region, and a State's share of the CSP is based upon the State's share
of the projected emission reductions under CAIR. States may distribute
CSP allowances, one allowance for each ton of early reduction, to
sources that make NOX reductions during 2007 or 2008 beyond
what is required by any applicable State or Federal emission
limitation. States also may distribute CSP allowances based upon a
demonstration of need for an extension of the 2009 deadline for
implementing emission controls.
    The CAIR NOX annual FIP establishes specific
methodologies for allocations of CSP allowances. States may choose an
allowed, alternative CSP allocation methodology to be used to allocate
CSP allowances to sources in those States.
    Consistent with the flexibility given to States in the FIP,
Tennessee has not chosen to modify the provisions of the CAIR
NOX annual FIP concerning the allocation of allowances from
the CSP.

F. Individual Opt-in Units

    The opt-in provisions allow for certain non-EGUs (i.e., boilers,
combustion turbines, and other stationary fossil-fuel-fired devices)
that do not meet the applicability criteria for a CAIR trading program
to participate voluntarily in (i.e., opt into) the CAIR trading
program. A non-EGU may opt into one or more of the CAIR trading
programs. In order to qualify to opt into a CAIR trading program, a
unit must vent all emissions through a stack and be able to meet
monitoring, recordkeeping, and recording requirements of 40 CFR part
75. The owners and operators seeking to opt a unit into a CAIR trading
program must apply for a CAIR opt-in permit. If the unit is issued a
CAIR opt-in permit, the unit becomes a CAIR unit, is allocated
allowances, and must meet the same allowance-holding and emissions
monitoring and reporting requirements as other units subject to the
CAIR trading program. The opt-in provisions provide for two
methodologies for allocating allowances for opt-in units, one
methodology that applies to opt-in units in general and a second
methodology that allocates allowances only to opt-in units that the
owners and operators intend to repower before January 1, 2015.
    States have several options concerning the opt-in provisions. The
rules for each of the CAIR FIP trading programs include opt-in
provisions that are essentially the same as those in the respective
CAIR SIP model rules, except that the CAIR FIP opt-in provisions become
effective in a State only if the State's abbreviated SIP revision
adopts the opt-in provisions. The State may adopt the opt-in provisions
entirely or may adopt them but exclude one of the allowance allocation
methodologies. The State also has the option of not adopting any opt-in
provisions in the abbreviated SIP revision and thereby providing for
the CAIR FIP trading program to be implemented in the State without the
ability for units to opt into the program.
    Consistent with the flexibility given to States in the FIPs,
Tennessee has chosen to allow non-EGUs meeting certain requirements to
participate in the CAIR NOX annual trading program by
adopting by reference EPA's model rule provisions for opt-in units in
40 CFR part 96, subpart II of the CAIR NOX annual trading
program.
    Consistent with the flexibility given to States in the FIPs,
Tennessee has chosen to permit non-EGUs meeting certain requirements to
participate in the CAIR NOX ozone season trading program by
adopting by reference EPA's model rule provisions for opt-in units in
40 CFR part 96, subpart IIII of the CAIR NOX ozone season
trading program.
    Consistent with the flexibility given to States in the FIPs,
Tennessee has chosen to allow certain non-EGUs to opt into the CAIR
SO2 trading program by adopting by reference EPA's model
rule provisions for opt-in units in 40 CFR part 96, subpart III of the
CAIR SO2 trading program.
    In adopting by reference the CAIR opt-in provisions, Tennessee has
included in its rule a full written version of those provisions, which
contains some technical errors in the language, and does not
specifically reference the CAIR model rule provisions related to opt-in
units in other subparts of the CAIR model trading rules. Because
Tennessee clearly intends to adopt entirely the CAIR model rule opt-in
provisions and because Tennessee has indicated that it will correct the
relatively minor errors in the rule text, EPA interprets the Tennessee
provisions as substantively identical to the CAIR model rule opt-in
provisions and is therefore approving Tennessee's allowing of opt-in
units in the CAIR FIP NOX annual, NOX ozone
season, and SO2 trading programs. Under the approval, the
opt-in provisions in these CAIR FIP trading programs will apply to
units in Tennessee.

VI. Final Action

    EPA is approving Tennessee's abbreviated CAIR SIP revision
submitted on September 8, 2006. Tennessee is covered by the CAIR FIPs,
which requires participation in the EPA-administered CAIR FIP cap-and-
trade programs for SO2, NOX annual, and
NOX ozone season emissions. Under this abbreviated SIP
revision and consistent with the flexibility given to States in the
FIPs, Tennessee adopts provisions for allocating allowances under the
CAIR FIP NOX annual and ozone season trading programs. EPA
is approving Tennessee's CAIR NOX annual and ozone season
allocation provisions (interpreted as discussed above) for units
subject to the CAIR trading programs under the current CAIR FIP
NOX annual and ozone season applicability provisions. In
addition, Tennessee adopts in the abbreviated SIP revision provisions
that allow for individual non-EGUs to opt into the CAIR FIP
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
cap-and-trade programs. EPA is approving Tennessee's allowing for opt-
in units (consistent with the above-discussed interpretation) and
therefore the application of the opt-in provisions in these CAIR FIP
trading programs to units in Tennessee.
    As provided for in the CAIR FIPs, these provisions in the
abbreviated SIP revision will replace or supplement the corresponding
provisions of the CAIR FIPs in Tennessee. The abbreviated SIP revision
meets the applicable requirements in 40 CFR 51.123(p) and (ee), with
regard to NOX annual and NOX ozone season
emissions, and 40 CFR 51.124(r), with regard to SO2
emissions. EPA is not making any changes to the CAIR FIP, but is
amending, to the extent EPA approves Tennessee's SIP revision, the
appropriate appendices in the CAIR FIP trading rules simply to note
that approval.
    EPA is approving the aforementioned changes to the SIP. EPA is
publishing this rule 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 SIP revision
should adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective October
19, 2007 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse
comments by September 19, 2007.
    If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the 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. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on October 19, 2007 and no
further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule 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 rule approves 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).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does 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). This action merely approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA.
This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. 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. 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. section 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).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by October 19, 2007. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule 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

40 CFR Part 52

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

40 CFR Part 97

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

    Dated: July 31, 2007.
J.I. Palmer Jr.,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

0
40 CFR parts 52 and 97 are amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart (RR)--(Tennessee)

0
2. In (52.2220(c) Table 1 is amended as follows:
0
a. Under Chapter 1200-3-14 by adding entry for ``Section 1200-3-14.04''
in numerical order,
0
b. Under Chapter 1200-3-27 by adding entries for ``Section 1200-3-
27.10'' and ``Section 1200-3-27.11'' in numerical order.

Sec.  52.2220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                                      Table 1.--EPA Approved Tennessee Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      State
           State citation                    Title/subject          effective            EPA approval date                       Explanation
                                                                       date
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
                                                  Chapter 1200-3-14 Control of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions

                                                                      * * * * * * *
Section 1200-3-14.04................  CAIR SO2 Annual Trading         11/06/06  8/20/07 [Insert citation of          ...................................
                                       Program.                                  publication]

                                                                      * * * * * * *
                                                            Chapter 1200-3-27 Nitrogen Oxides

                                                                      * * * * * * *
Section 1200-3-27.10................  CAIR NOX Annual Trading         11/06/06  8/20/07 [Insert citation of          ...................................
                                       Program.                                  publication]
Section 1200-3-27.11................  CAIR NOX Ozone Season           11/06/06  8/20/07 [Insert citation of          ...................................
                                       Trading Program.                          publication]

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

PART 97--[AMENDED]

0
3. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7403, 7410, 7426, 7601, and 7651, et
seq.

0
4. Appendix A to Subpart EE is amended by adding in alphabetical order
the entry ``Tennessee'' under paragraph 1. to read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart EE of Part 97--States With Approved State
Implementation Plan Revisions Concerning Allocations:

    1. * * *

Tennessee

* * * * *

0
5. Appendix A to Subpart II of Part 97 is amended by adding in
alphabetical order the entry ``Tennessee'' under paragraphs 1. and 2.
to read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart II of Part 97--States With Approved State
Implementation Plan Revisions Concerning CAIR NOXOpt-In
Units

    1. * * *

Tennessee

    2. * * *

Tennessee

0
6. Appendix A to Subpart III of Part 97 is amended by adding in
alphabetical order the entry ``Tennessee'' under paragraphs 1. and 2.
to read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart III of Part 97--States With Approved State
Implementation Plan Revisions Concerning CAIR SO2Opt-In
Units

    1. * * *

Tennessee

    2. * * *

Tennessee

0
7. Appendix A to Subpart EEEE of Part 97 is amended by adding in
alphabetical order the entry ``Tennessee'' under the introductory text
to read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart EEEE of Part 97--States With Approved State
Implementation Plan Revisions Concerning Allocations

* * * * *

Tennessee

0
8. Appendix A to Subpart IIII of Part 97 is amended by adding in
alphabetical order the entry ``Tennessee'' under paragraphs 1. and 2.
to read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart IIII of Part 97-States With Approved State
Implementation Plan Revisions Concerning CAIR NOXOzone
Season Opt-in Units

    1. * * *

Tennessee

    2. * * *

Tennessee

 [FR Doc. E7-15782 Filed 8-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 18 (Thursday, January 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4890-4891]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1714]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP11-59-000]

Northwest Pipeline GP; Notice of Application

January 20, 2011.
    Take notice that on January 11, 2011, Northwest Pipeline GP
(Northwest), 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108, filed in
Docket No. CP11-59-000, an application pursuant to sections 7(b) and
7(c) of the Natural Gas Act and pursuant to 18 CFR part 157, requesting
abandonment approval and a certificate of public convenience and
necessity authorizing Northwest to construct and operate its Molalla
Capacity Replacement Project (Molalla Project) located in Clackamas and
Marion Counties, Oregon. Specifically, the Molalla Project consists of:
Abandonment in place of approximately 15 miles of 16-inch diameter
pipeline and related facilities on Northwest's Camas to Eugene Line
between milepost 21.1 and 36.06; and construction and operation of
approximately 7.75 miles of 20-inch diameter pipeline adjacent to
Northwest's existing 16-inch diameter Camas to Eugene Line beginning at
milepost 41.02, all as more fully set forth in the application, which
is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The
filing may also be viewed on the 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 TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Pam
Barnes, Manager, Certificates and Tariffs, Northwest Pipeline GP, 295
Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84101, telephone no.<PHONE_NUMBER>,
facsimile no.<PHONE_NUMBER>, and e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    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 7 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. 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, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of 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 (except for the mailing of environmental documents
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 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: February 10, 2011.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-1714 Filed 1-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 71 (Monday, April 13, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20562-20564]
[FR Doc No: 2020-07730]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2019-0239]

Hours of Service of Drivers: Application for Exemption; Small
Business in Transportation Coalition

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Application for exemption; final determination.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to deny the Small Business in
Transportation Coalition's (SBTC) request for reconsideration of its
application for exemption from the electronic logging device (ELD) rule
that was denied by the Agency on July 17, 2019. SBTC has resubmitted
its application for exemption from the ELD requirements for all motor
carriers with fewer than 50 employees, including, but not limited to,
one-person private and for-hire owner-operators of commercial motor
vehicles used in interstate commerce. SBTC believes that the exemption
would not have any adverse impacts on operational safety as motor
carriers and drivers would remain subject to the hours-of-service (HOS)
regulations, as well as the requirements to maintain paper records of
duty status (RODs). FMCSA has analyzed SBTC's petition for
reconsideration and the public comments received and has determined
that neither the applicant nor the commenters provided information that
would change the Agency's previous decision to deny the exemption.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. La Tonya Mimms, Chief, FMCSA
Driver and Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and
Vehicle Safety Standards; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or submitting material
to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs). FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption
request in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must
provide the public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant
to the application, including any safety analyses that have been
conducted. The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public
comment on the request.
    The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted,
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying or granting the application
and, if granted, the name of the person or class of persons receiving
the exemption, and the regulatory provision from which the exemption is
granted. The notice must also specify the effective period and explain
the terms and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be renewed
(49 CFR 381.300(b)).
    When the Agency denied a request for an exemption, the applicant
may be allowed to resubmit the application, if the applicant can
reasonably address the basis for denial. 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(3).

II. Background

    On December 16, 2015, FMCSA published the Electronic Logging
Devices and Hours of Service Supporting Documents final rule (80 FR
78292). The ELD rule applies to most motor carriers and drivers who are
required to keep RODS. The compliance date for the ELD requirement was
December 18, 2017.
    On June 5, 2018, FMCSA published SBTC's application for exemption
and requested public comment (83 FR 26140). SBTC reports it is a non-
profit trade organization with more than 8,000 members. SBTC states
that it ``represents, promotes, and protects the interest of small
businesses in the transportation industry. Through the exemption
application, SBTC sought relief from the ELD requirements for small
private, common and contract motor carriers with fewer than 50
employees. SBTC argued:

    ``[T]he ELD rule is not a ``safety regulation'' per se as the
FMCSA has concluded. Rather it is a mechanism intended to enforce a
safety regulation by regulating the manner in which a driver records
and communicates his compliance. That is, it is merely a tool to
determine compliance with an existing rule that regulates over-the-
road drivers' driving and on duty time, namely the actual safety
regulation: the [hours-of- service] regulations codified at 49 CFR
395.3 and 395.5. However, the ELD rule is not a safety regulation
itself. Therefore, it is our position that this rule does not itself
impact safety, and that the level of safety will not change based on
whether or not our exemption application is approved. That would
require a change to the [hours-of-service rules].''

    On July 9, 2018, FMCSA extended the public comment period at the
request of the SBTC (83 FR 31836). The Agency received more than 1,900
comments to the docket [Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0180]. Most of the
comments favored granting the exemption. On July 17, 2019, the Agency
published notice of its decision to deny SBTC's application for
exemption (84 FR 34250) and listed the following reasons for the
denial:
     Failing to provide the name of the individual or motor
carrier that would be responsible for the use or operation of
commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) under the exemption [49 CFR
381.310(b)(2)];
     Failing to provide an estimate of the total number of
drivers and CMVs that would be operated under the terms and conditions
of the exemption [Sec.  381.310(c)(3)]; and
     Failing to explain how an equivalent level of safety would
be achieved [Sec.  381.310(c)(5)].

III. Request for Reconsideration of Agency Decision

    SBTC requested FMCSA to reconsider its denial of the ELD exemption.
According to SBTC, the reason for not providing an estimate of the
number of drivers and CMVs that would be operating under the exemption
is that SBTC is a trade group, not a single carrier. SBTC argues that a
trade group would not know the number of employees eligible for the
exemption. Regarding that question, SBTC deferred to the Agency because
FMCSA is the custodian of MCS-150 industry data. SBTC believes that it
has identified the percentage of carriers that would be affected by the
exemption but does not know a way to extrapolate the number of drivers
from the estimated 3.5 million truck drivers in the U.S. without
deferring to FMCSA for that information.

IV. Equivalent Level of Safety

    To ensure an equivalent level of safety, SBTC suggests a return to
paper logs. According to SBTC, ``Paper logs were deemed sufficient to
ensure adequate levels of safety for generations, more than 80 years.
And the FMCSA has already issued numerous exemptions that require
carriers to revert to tracking their hours of service using paper logs
in lieu of ELDs . . .'' SBTC argues that ELDs have caused reckless
speeding and pose a national security threat. SBTC urges FMCSA to look
carefully at the unintended consequences of the ELD rule when deciding
whether or not to grant the exemption. SBTC also suggests that FMCSA
temporarily grant the exemption ``if for no other reason than to press
the pause button while [FMCSA] studies these unintended consequences
and their adverse effects on safety. We contend this would indeed
achieve a greater level of overall safety than the current status
quo.''

V. Public Comments

    On October 29, 2019, FMCSA published SBTC's petition for
reconsideration and requested public comment (84 FR 57932). The Agency
received approximately 355 comments, more than 300 of which favored the
exemption. For example, Mr. Michael Garrison said, ``I support the ELD
exemption application. Please grant the exemption. The 14-hour rule is
forcing drivers to drive when they are tired and is a major safety
concern.'' Mr. Dahl Warren wrote, ``I support the ELD exemption
especially for small carriers. There is no need for these carriers to
have the expense burden that the ELDs create.''
    Only a few commenters opposed the exemption: the Commercial Vehicle
Safety Alliance (CVSA), Truckload Carriers Association (TCA) and Mr.
Michael Millard. CVSA wrote, ``In their request for reconsideration,
SBTC reiterates the same claims about paper logs and does not provide
any additional method of ensuring an equivalent level of safety.'' TCA
stated, ``In comments submitted to the Agency in July 2018, TCA opposed
the Small Business in Transportation Coalition's (SBTC) initial request
for an exemption from the ELD requirements and we now oppose the
group's petition for reconsideration.'' Mr. Millard said, ``The FMCSA
should again deny the SBTC's request to assure a level platform among
all carriers large and small in following the HOS. Removing the ELD
from the HOS equation allows those using paper RODS an upper hand and
questionable HOS compliance.''

VI. FMCSA Decision

    The FMCSA carefully reviewed SBTC's petition for reconsideration,
as well as the public comments. The

Agency has concluded that SBTC provided no additional information that
would alter its decision to deny SBTC's 2018 exemption application. For
example, instead of providing the information required by subpart C of
49 CFR part 381 for reconsideration, SBTC presented arguments for not
providing the information. SBTC's application still does not provide
the number of drivers and CMVs that would be covered by the exemption,
nor does SBTC explain how an equivalent level of safety would be
achieved by continuing to use paper logs. Therefore, the Agency denies
this application for exemption from the ELD rule and reaffirms its
previous denial.

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-07730 Filed 4-10-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 48 (Wednesday, March 11, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14147-14150]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04855]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0503; FRL-10006-32-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; GA and NC: Infrastructure Requirements for the
2015 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
portions of the Georgia and North Carolina State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submissions provided on September 24, 2018, and September 27,
2018, respectively. The submissions pertain to the infrastructure
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2015 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). Whenever EPA
promulgates a new or revised NAAQS, the CAA requires that each state
adopt and submit a SIP submission to establish that state's
implementation plan meets infrastructure requirements for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each such NAAQS.
Georgia and North Carolina each made the required SIP submissions to
assure that their SIPs contain provisions that ensure the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in their State.
EPA has in this action determined that the Georgia and North Carolina
infrastructure SIP submissions satisfy certain required infrastructure
elements for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

DATES: This rule is effective April 10, 2020.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0503. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Lakeman can be
reached via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Overview

    On October 1, 2015, EPA promulgated revised primary and secondary
NAAQS

for ozone, revising the 8-hour ozone standards from 0.075 parts per
million (ppm) to a new more protective level of 0.070 ppm. See 80 FR
65292 (October 26, 2015). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA,
states are required to make a SIP submission meeting the applicable
requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation
of a new or revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as EPA may
prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP
elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program
requirements, and legal authority that are designed to assure
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. This particular type of SIP
submission is commonly referred to as an ``infrastructure SIP.'' EPA
required states to make these infrastructure SIP submissions for the
2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS no later than October 1, 2018.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In these infrastructure SIP submissions, states generally
certify evidence of compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of
the CAA through a combination of state regulations and statutes,
some of which have been incorporated into the SIP. In addition,
certain federally-approved, non-SIP regulations may also be
appropriate for demonstrating compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and
(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This action is approving Georgia's September 24, 2018, SIP
submission provided to EPA through the Georgia Environmental Protection
Division (GA EPD), and North Carolina's September 27, 2018,\2\ SIP
submission provided to EPA through the North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality (NC DEQ) with respect to most of the applicable
requirements of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In this action, EPA is not
acting upon the submissions with respect to the interstate transport
provisions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) pertaining to contribution to
nonattainment or interference with maintenance in other states, and the
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) provisions related to
major sources under sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and
110(a)(2)(J). With respect to the interstate transport provisions of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and PSD provisions related to major sources
under sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and 110(a)(2)(J), EPA
is addressing these provisions in separate rulemaking actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The September 27, 2018, SIP submission provided by NC DEQ's
Division of Air Quality (DAQ) was received by EPA on October 10,
2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on December 30,
2019 (84 FR 71866), EPA proposed to approve Georgia and North Carolina
SIP submissions provided on September 24, 2018, and September 27, 2018,
respectively, for the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements of the
2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The NPRM provides additional detail regarding
the background and rationale for EPA's action. Comments on the NPRM
were due on or before January 29, 2020.

II. Response to Comment

    EPA received two comments on the NPRM, one in support of the action
and one opposed to the action. Both comments are included in the docket
for this final rule, and the adverse comment is addressed below.
    Comment: The Commenter states that ``EPA fails to explain whether
either state has submitted an approved Emergency Episode plan pursuant
to Subpart H under section 110(a)(2)(G). Both states have at least one
area that is classified as Priority 1 for Hydrocarbons under Part
52.571 or 52.1771, as they apply to each state. EPA must explain where
these emergency episode plans are in each states' SIPs or disapprove
the States' section 110(a)(2)(G) submission.''
    Response: EPA disagrees with the commenter. Section 110(a)(2)(G)
requires SIPs to ``provide for authority comparable to that in section
7603 [303] of this title and adequate contingency plans to implement
such authority.'' Section 303 of the CAA authorizes the EPA
Administrator to seek a court order to restrain any source from causing
or contributing to emissions that present an ``imminent and substantial
endangerment to public health or welfare, or the environment.'' EPA's
September 13, 2013 ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2),'' explains that EPA interprets section 110(a)(2)(G) to
impose two requirements for purposes of an infrastructure SIP
submission.\3\ First, a state's submission should identify the relevant
statutes or regulations that provide the air agency or official with
authority comparable to that of the EPA Administrator under section
303.4 5 Second, the state's implementation plan is required
to include an adequate contingency plan to meet the requirements of 40
CFR part 51, subpart H.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan
(SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2),'' September 13, 2013, p. 47.
    \4\ EPA explains that the best practice is for the statutory or
regulatory provisions that provide authority comparable to section
303 to be included in the SIP, but provides that an air agency may
choose not to include such provision in the SIP, in which case the
submission should provide a reference or citation to the authority
provisions, along with a narrative explanation of how they meet the
requirements of this element.
    \5\ A discussion of how Georgia and North Carolina have
authority comparable to CAA section 303 is found in the NPRM at 84
FR 71872.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commenter expresses concern about the states' compliance with
the second 110(a)(2)(G) requirement--an adequate contingency plan to
meet the requirements of 40 CFR part 51, subpart H. Specifically, the
Commenter questions whether the Georgia and North Carolina SIPs contain
the required subpart H emergency episode plan and contends that EPA
failed to explain whether either state has such a plan. In the NPRM at
84 FR 71872, EPA cited to the emergency episodes and contingency plan
in Georgia's existing SIP, which is Air Quality Control Rule 391-3-
1-.04, ``Air Quality Control Episodes.'' This rule authorizes the GA
EPD Director to proclaim an air pollution alert, warning, or emergency;
and authorizes the Director to require the owner, operator or lessee of
any source to prepare, submit, and implement a plan to reduce air
contaminants when notified of an air pollution alert, warning, or
emergency. Similarly, EPA explained in the NPRM at 84 FR 71872, that
North Carolina's existing SIP contains an emergency episode and
contingency plan in 15A NCAC 2D .0300, ``Air Pollution Emergencies.''
This rule authorizes the NC DEQ Director to proclaim an air pollution
alert, warning, or emergency; requires larger source to develop actions
plans; lists other abatement measures; and provides that such plans and
measures must be implemented when an alert, warning or emergency has
been declared.
    EPA notes that Georgia Air Quality Control Rule 391-3-1-.04, ``Air
Quality Control Episodes,'' and North Carolina 15A NCAC 2D .0300, ``Air
Pollution Emergencies'' are already approved into each state's
respective SIP.\6\ Thus, contrary to Commenter's assertion, EPA
identified each state's SIP-approved emergency episode plan in the
NPRM. The Commenter did not provide any information to suggest that
either Georgia's or North Carolina's existing SIP-approved rules were
inadequate or otherwise suggest that these states lacked authority
comparable to that in CAA section 303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In footnote 3 of the NPRM (84 FR 71867), EPA explained that
regulations cited to in the NPRM as Georgia's Air Quality Control
Rule and North Carolina's NCAC have been approved into the SIP,
unless otherwise indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

    With the exception of interstate transport provisions of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1 and 2) pertaining to contribution
to nonattainment or interference with

maintenance in other states, and PSD provisions related to major
sources under sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3), and
110(a)(2)(J), EPA is approving Georgia's and North Carolina's September
24, 2018, and September 27, 2018, SIP submissions for the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. EPA is approving Georgia's and North Carolina's
infrastructure SIP submissions for certain requirements related to the
2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS because the submissions are consistent with
section 110 of the CAA.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. These actions merely
approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and do not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, these actions:
     Are not significant regulatory actions 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);
     Are not Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory actions because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are 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.);
     Do 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);
     Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are not an economically significant regulatory actions
based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Are 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
     Do 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).
    The SIPs subject to these actions are not approved to apply on any
Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it
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 action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by May 11, 2020. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: February 27, 2020.
Mary S. Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart L--Georgia

0
2. Section 52.570, is amended in paragraph (e) by adding an entry for
``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2015 8-Hour
Ozone NAAQS'' at the end of the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.570  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                 EPA-Approved Georgia Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              State
  Name of nonregulatory SIP    Applicable geographic or  submittal date/   EPA approval         Explanation
          provision               nonattainment area     effective date        date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
110(a)(1) and (2)              Georgia.................       9/24/2018  3/11/2020,        With the exception of
 Infrastructure Requirements                                              [Insert           110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
 for the 2015 8-Hour Ozone                                                citation of       (prongs 1 and 2) and
 NAAQS.                                                                   publication].     PSD provisions
                                                                                related to major
                                                                                sources under
                                                                                sections
                                                                                110(a)(2)(C),
                                                                                110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)
                                                                                (prong 3), and
                                                                                110(a)(2)(J).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subpart II--North Carolina

0
3. Section 52.1770, is amended in paragraph (e) by adding an entry for
``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2015 8-Hour
Ozone NAAQS'' at the end of the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1770  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                              EPA-Approved North Carolina Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        State       EPA approval     Federal Register
            Provision              effective date       date             citation              Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure        9/27/2018       3/11/2020  [Insert citation of  With the exception of
 Requirements for the 2015 8-Hour                                   publication].        110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
 Ozone NAAQS.                                                                            (prongs 1 and 2) and
                                                                                PSD provisions related
                                                                                to major sources under
                                                                                sections 110(a)(2)(C),
                                                                                110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)
                                                                                (prong 3), and
                                                                                110(a)(2)(J).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2020-04855 Filed 3-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 121 (Friday, June 22, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37668-37669]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15253]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14388-000]

Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and
Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing Applications;
Coralville Energy, LLC

    On April 18, 2012, the Coralville Energy, LLC filed an application
for a preliminary permit under section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act
proposing to study the feasibility of the proposed Coralville Dam
Hydroelectric Project No. 14388, to be located at the existing
Coralville Dam on the Iowa River, near Iowa City in Johnson County,
Iowa. The Coralville Dam is owned by the United States government and
operated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
    The proposed project would consist of: (1) One new 50-foot-long by
50-foot-wide by 30-foot-high powerhouse, containing two 2.3-megawatt
(MW) propeller type turbine/generator units for a total capacity of 4.6
MW; (2) an existing 65-foot-long by 65-foot-wide by 100-foot-high
intake structure; (3) an

existing 350-foot-long by 23-foot-diameter concrete conduit; (4) a new
30-foot-long by 60-foot-wide by 30-foot-high bifurcation structure; (5)
a new 150-foot-long by 15-foot-diameter steel penstock; (6) a new 450-
foot-long, 12.7-kilovolt transmission line; and (7) appurtenant
facilities. The project would have an estimated annual generation of
26.252 gigawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Mark Boumansour, 1035 Pearl Street, 4th
Floor, Boulder, CO 80302;<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Tyrone A. Williams,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. 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. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14388) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: June 15, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-15253 Filed 6-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 119 (Friday, June 19, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37090-37091]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13245]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG20-186-000.
    Applicants: Ellwood Power, LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of EWG of Ellwood Power, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/12/20.
    Accession Number: 20200612-5226.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: EG20-187-000.
    Applicants: Ormond Beach Power, LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of EWG of Ormond Beach Power, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/12/20.
    Accession Number: 20200612-5227.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: EG20-188-000.
    Applicants: Fern Solar LLC.

    Description: Fern Solar LLC Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt
Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 6/12/20.
    Accession Number: 20200612-5229.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1107-002.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., ITC
Midwest LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2020-06-15_SA 2945 ITC-IPL Sub 1st
Rev FSA (J233 J514) Unpopulated Template to be effective 2/28/2020.
    Filed Date: 6/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200615-5142.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2050-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to Service
Agreement No. 207 to be effective 2/25/2020.
    Filed Date: 6/12/20.
    Accession Number: 20200612-5192.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2051-000.
    Applicants: Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, New York Independent
System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Niagara Mohawk--Order No. 864
compliance re: transmission service charge to be effective 1/27/2020.
    Filed Date: 6/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200615-5017.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2052-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to ICSA, SA No.
5247; Queue Position Z2-107 to be effective 6/21/2019.
    Filed Date: 6/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200615-5106.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2053-000.
    Applicants: Republic Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Republic Transmission LLC
Cancellation of Formula Rates Tariff to be effective 6/15/2020.
    Filed Date: 6/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200615-5130.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2055-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amended GIA & DSA Kaweah
River Power Authority SA Nos. 1100-1101 Terminus Dam to be effective 8/
15/2020.
    Filed Date: 6/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200615-5165.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2056-000.
    Applicants: Northern Indiana Public Service Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Filing of a CIAC Agreement
to be effective 6/10/2020.
    Filed Date: 6/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200615-5198.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2057-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Service Agreement No. 335,
Nonconforming EPE and EDFR Solar LGIA to be effective 5/29/2020.
    Filed Date: 6/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200615-5220.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2058-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Service Agreement No. 336,
Nonconforming EPE and NextEra LGIA to be effective 5/20/2020.
    Filed Date: 6/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200615-5240.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES20-43-000.
    Applicants: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
    Description: Application Under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act
for Authorization to Issue Securities of Consolidated Edison Company of
New York, Inc.
    Filed Date: 6/12/20.
    Accession Number: 20200612-5242.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/20.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 15, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-13245 Filed 6-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 144)]
[Notices]
[Page 44293-44294]
[DOCID:fr28jy10-127]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 17a-7; SEC File No. 270-147; OMB Control No. 3235-0131.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Rule 17a-7 (17 CFR 240.17a-7) under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) (``Exchange Act'') requires non-resident
broker-dealers registered or applying for registration pursuant to
Section 15 of the Exchange Act to maintain--in the United States--
complete and current copies of books and records required to be
maintained under any rule adopted under the Exchange Act.
Alternatively, Rule 17a-7 provides non-resident broker-dealers may sign
written undertakings to furnish the requisite books and records to the
Commission upon demand.
    There are approximately 63 non-resident brokers and dealers. Based
on the Commission's experience in this area, it is estimated that the
average amount of time necessary to preserve the books and records
required by Rule 17a-7 is one hour per year. Accordingly, the total
burden is 63 hours per year. With an average cost per hour of
approximately $294, the total cost of compliance for the respondents is
approximately $18,522 per year.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate
of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    Comments should be directed to: Charles Boucher, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Shirley
Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312, or send
an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: July 21, 2010.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-18444 Filed 7-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">

<META name="generator" content="PDFCreactiveX HTML Export">
<META name="creation-date" content="23/06/2008 06:40:23 ">
<TITLE></TITLE>