[Federal Register: June 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 125)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 37712-37720]
[DOCID:fr30jn10-5]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 154 and 155

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 112

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0592; EPA-HQ-OPA-2010-0559]
RIN 1625-AB49; 2050-AG63

Temporary Suspension of Certain Oil Spill Response Time
Requirements To Support Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill of National
Significance (SONS) Response

AGENCIES: Coast Guard, DHS, and Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Emergency temporary interim rule.

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

SUMMARY: This joint Coast Guard and Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) temporary interim rule will suspend oil spill response time
requirements, and certain identification and location requirements, for
facilities and vessels

whose response resources are relocated in support of the Deepwater
Horizon SONS response. By providing oil spill removal organizations
(OSROs), and facilities and vessels with their own response resources,
with the temporary opportunity to relocate response resources from
current locations to the Gulf of Mexico, this rule directly assists in
the urgently needed immediate relocation of nationwide oil spill
response resources to the Gulf of Mexico to aid in the response to the
Deepwater Horizon SONS. The rule also provides notice that the Federal
On-Scene Coordinator for the Deepwater Horizon SONS has requested the
Armed Forces to relocate Armed Forces oil spill response resources, in
particular those of the Navy, from their current locations to the Gulf
of Mexico to aid in the response to the Deepwater Horizon SONS.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective from June 30, 2010
through December 31, 2010.
    Comment Period: Comments and related material must reach the Coast
Guard or EPA at the ADDRESSES listed below on or before August 16,
2010.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2010-0592; EPA-HQ-OPA-2010-0559 using any one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
     Fax: Coast Guard,<PHONE_NUMBER>; EPA,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPA-2010-0559.
     Mail: Coast Guard, Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. EPA, EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC), Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPA-2010-0559, Mail Code 2822T,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand delivery: Coast Guard, same as mail address above,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. EPA, EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPA-2010-0559.
Such deliveries are accepted only during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.
    Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the
docket are part of dockets USCG-2010-0592 and EPA-HQ-OPA-2010-0559 and
are available online by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting
USCG-2010-0592 or EPA-HQ-OPA-2010-0559 in the ``Keyword'' box, and then
clicking ``Search.'' They are also available for inspection or copying
at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays; and EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, Public Reading Room, between 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>,
and the telephone number to make an appointment to view the docket is
202-566-0276.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change, and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or e-mail:
    Coast Guard: (Facilities) Mr. David Condino, Ports and Facilities
Division, Coast Guard, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(Vessels) LCDR Ryan Allain, Office of Vessel
Activities, Coast Guard, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the USCG-2010-
0952 docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    EPA: Troy Swackhammer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials on this rule and on the environmental
effects of this rule on the Gulf of Mexico and on the areas from which
response resources could be deployed. All comments received will be
posted, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have provided.

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket numbers for this
rulemaking (USCG-2010-0592; EPA-HQ-OPA-2010-0559), indicate the
specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and
provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit
your comments and material online (via http://www.regulations.gov) or
by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means.
If you submit a comment online via http://www.regulations.gov, it will
be considered received by the Coast Guard and EPA when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered received by the Coast Guard and EPA when it is
received at either the Docket Management Facility or the EPA Docket
Center. We recommend that you include your name and mailing address, e-
mail address, or telephone number in the body of your document so that
we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select
``Proposed Rule'' and insert ``USCG-2010-0592'' or ``EPA-HQ-OPA-2010-
0559'' in the ``Keyword'' box. Click ``Search'' then click on the
balloon shape in the ``Actions'' column. If you submit comments by mail
or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/
2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you
submit comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the
Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period and may change this rule based on your comments.

B. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2010-

0592'' or ``EPA-HQ-OPA-2010-0559'' and click ``Search.'' Click the
``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column. You may also visit:
the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of
the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays (the Coast Guard has an agreement with
the Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management
Facility); or the EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room in Room 3334 of
the EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20460, between 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays.

C. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of the dockets in http://www.regulations.gov by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted
on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may
review a Privacy Act notice regarding Coast Guard public dockets in the
January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

II. Abbreviations

AMPD Average Most Probable Discharge
CEQ Council on Environmental Quality
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FOSC Federal On-Scene Coordinator
FR Federal Register
MMPD Maximum Most Probable Discharge
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OSRO Oil Spill Removal Organizations
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SONS Spill of National Significance
U.S.C. United States Code
WCD Worst Case Discharge

III. Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are
issuing this temporary interim rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision
authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard and EPA find that
good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) with respect to this rule because it is impracticable and
contrary to public interest to do so for the reasons set forth in the
following paragraphs.
    This temporary interim rule is part of the response to the
explosion and sinking of the Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit ``Deepwater
Horizon'' on April 20, 2010, causing an unprecedented crude oil
discharge, which is a Spill of National Significance (SONS). Large
quantities of oil continue to discharge into the waters of the Gulf of
Mexico. Also recently, the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) for the
Deepwater Horizon SONS determined, after working with the appropriate
Federal agencies, that an adequate number of available U.S. oil spill
response vessels capable of skimming oil cannot be employed in a timely
manner to recover the oil released from the Deepwater Horizon SONS.
(Memorandum from Rear Admiral J.A. Watson, FOSC BP Deepwater Horizon
Oil Spill, to National Incident Command (June 16, 2010), available in
the docket).
    This temporary interim rule provides, in light of these exigent
circumstances, oil spill removal organizations (OSROs) and facilities
and vessels with their own response resources that are deploying
response resources in support of the response to the Deepwater Horizon
SONS, with the opportunity to relocate additional response resources
from their current locations to the Gulf of Mexico region to aid in the
response to the Deepwater Horizon SONS.
    This rule also confirms that the FOSC for the Deepwater Horizon
SONS has requested that the Armed Forces relocate response resources,
in particular those of the Navy, from their current locations within
the continental United States to the Gulf of Mexico to aid in the
response to the Deepwater Horizon SONS. This temporary rule is
necessary to immediately relieve facilities and vessels from current
regulatory requirements that would hinder OSROs, and facilities and
vessels with response resources, in their opportunity to participate in
the Deepwater Horizon SONS response.
    This rule is also necessary to facilitate any incorporation of
Armed Forces response resources into cascade plans with private
facilities and OSROs. A cascade plan contains a strategy to maximize
arrival times and the availability of response resources for plan
holders when identified response resources are being used to respond to
another facility's or vessel's incident. OSRO's often contract their
response resources to multiple facilities and vessels given the
unlikelihood of the need to respond to simultaneous incidents among
their clients. To account for the unlikely event of simultaneous
incidents, OSROs utilize cascade plans to ensure each of their clients
will have the necessary response resources and meet Coast Guard and EPA
regulatory response time requirements, and EPA response equipment
identification and location requirements. This strategy may include the
identification of secondary resources, or backfilling resources that
can be accessed through cooperative agreements as needed (cascading
resources), through increased partnerships and the increased pooling of
resources among several OSROs and other stakeholders.
    Publishing an NPRM is impractical because of the ongoing
environmental and public health emergency created by the unprecedented
release of oil from the Deepwater Horizon SONS, and the environmental
damage which would occur during any delay in making this rule
effective, including any time devoted to any comment period. In
addition, publishing an NPRM is contrary to the public interest of
addressing the ongoing environmental and public health emergency and
minimizing environmental damage as quickly as possible in response to
this situation.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard and EPA find that good
cause exists for making this rule effective fewer than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register for the same reasons discussed in
the paragraphs above.
    The Coast Guard and EPA request comments on this temporary interim
rule, and will consider all material received as well as any evidence
obtained from the field in order to determine whether any changes to
this rule are necessary. The Coast Guard and EPA will perform the first
such consideration of all material and evidence at the close of the
comment period, and will then consider any new or additional material
and evidence every 30 days thereafter.
    The Coast Guard and EPA have coordinated on this emergency
temporary interim rule because many oil spill response plans address
both Coast Guard and EPA oil spill response requirements. Similarly,
many regulated entities utilize the same oil spill response assets for
oil spill response plans to comply with Coast Guard and EPA oil spill
response requirements. Additionally, States are authorized by Federal
law to establish oil spill response standards more stringent than the
Coast Guard and EPA. The Coast

Guard and EPA, based on their roles and responsibilities under 40 CFR
300.175, will coordinate and consult with Regional Response Teams and
Area Committees, which include State representatives, regarding the
need to suspend Coast Guard and EPA response time requirements, and EPA
response equipment identification and location requirements, as
discussed below.

A. Basis and Purpose

    A major feature of the National Response System under the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) (codified at 33 U.S.C. 1251 et
seq.) is the requirement that owners and operators of facilities and
vessels have approved response plans that identify and ensure the
availability of personnel and equipment, by contract or other approved
means, to remove to the maximum extent practicable a worst case
discharge or to mitigate or prevent a substantial threat of such a
discharge. Coast Guard implementing regulations establish three levels
of specific response resources and response times for: (1) A worst case
discharge (USCG-regulated facilities and vessels WCD), (2) a maximum
most probable discharge (MMPD), and (3) an average most probable
discharge (AMPD). See 33 CFR parts 154 and 155. EPA implementing
regulations under the FWPCA provide for oil spill responses at similar
levels: (1) A worst case discharge to the maximum extent practicable
(EPA-regulated facilities WCD), (2) discharges greater than 2,100
gallons and less than or equal to 36,000 gallons or 10 percent of the
capacity of the largest tank at the facility, whichever is less,
provided that this amount is less than the worst case discharge (Medium
Discharge), and (3) a discharge of 2,100 gallons or less, provided that
this amount is less than the worst case discharge amount (Small
Discharge). See 40 CFR part 112, subpart D.
    Currently, there is an urgent need to maximize the availability of
oil spill response assets in the U.S. for use in responding to the
unprecedented and ongoing Deepwater Horizon SONS. Those assets are
needed in the Gulf region for the response to the Deepwater Horizon
SONS. Therefore, the Coast Guard is temporarily releasing facilities
and vessels subject to 33 CFR parts 154 and 155, and the EPA is
temporarily releasing facilities subject to 40 CFR part 112, subpart D,
who own or have under contract response resources deployed in support
of the response to the Deepwater Horizon SONS from Coast Guard and EPA
regulatory response time requirements, and EPA equipment identification
and location requirements, that would otherwise preclude them from
relocating owned response resources or releasing contracted response
resources to be moved to the Gulf region.
    Some facilities and vessels subject to 33 CFR parts 154 and 155,
and some facilities subject to 40 CFR part 112, subpart D, contract
with OSROs for the availability of oil spill response resources to
comply with Coast Guard and EPA regulatory requirements. These
contractual obligations keep OSROs from making their response resources
available for the response to the Deepwater Horizon SONS. Other such
facilities and vessels have their own response resources to comply with
these regulatory requirements, and these requirements make the
facilities and vessels unable to make their response resources
available for the response to the SONS. The Coast Guard and EPA are
encouraging an increase in available response resources for the
response to the SONS by temporarily releasing these facilities and
vessels from the Coast Guard and EPA regulatory response time
requirements, and EPA response equipment identification and location
requirements, if and only if they have had their own or contracted
response resources relocated to the Gulf of Mexico in support of the
response to the Deepwater Horizon SONS.
    Section 1321(j)(5)(D)(iii) of 33 U.S.C. requires the identification
and the availability of private personnel and equipment necessary to
remove to the maximum extent practicable a worst case discharge, and to
mitigate or prevent a substantial threat of such a discharge. Existing
facility and vessel response plans must adequately plan for a worst
case discharge to comply with section 1321(j)(5)(D)(iii), as well as
additional regulatory requirements under 33 CFR parts 154 and 155 and/
or 40 CFR part 112, subpart D. Those regulatory requirements include
response times for response resources to respond to incidents of
varying degree. Response plans remain in effect as statutorily required
by section 1321(j)(5)(D)(iii). The Coast Guard is temporarily
suspending only the regulatory response time for those assets to
respond to a USCG-regulated facilities and vessels WCD or a MMPD under
the facility or vessel response plan, and the EPA is temporarily
suspending only the regulatory response time requirements, and response
equipment identification and location requirements, for those assets to
respond to an EPA-regulated facilities WCD or Medium Discharge under
the facility response plan, because of the unique challenges posed by
the Deepwater Horizon spill.
    Section 1321(j)(5)(D)(iii) also requires that these response
resources be ensured ``by contract or other means.'' Because
contractual agreements between facility and vessel owners and OSROs are
not the only way to satisfy the requirements of section
1321(j)(5)(D)(iii), the Coast Guard and EPA are encouraging facilities
and vessels to release OSROs under such contractual obligations to
provide response resources within specified response times above the
AMPD level and/or the Small Discharge level when those OSROs' response
resources are deployed in response to the Deepwater Horizon SONS, and
instead to prepare for USCG-regulated facilities and vessels WCDs and
MMPDs and/or EPA-regulated facilities WCDs and Medium Discharges
through ``other means,'' including cascade planning. The unique
challenges posed by the Deepwater Horizon spill make ``other means''
more appropriate to ensure such capability while providing urgently
needed response resources in the Gulf of Mexico.
    Additionally, the Coast Guard and EPA believe this rule meets the
intent of 33 U.S.C. 1321 (j)(5)(A) both in terms of dealing, to the
maximum extent practicable, with the catastrophic emergency presented
by the Deepwater Horizon SONS, and in terms of meeting, to the maximum
extent practicable, the potential worst case discharge in all other
locations. Response resources located outside the Gulf of Mexico region
are urgently needed in the Gulf region to assist in the Deepwater
Horizon SONS response. The urgent need to use these assets in response
to the Deepwater Horizon SONS affects what is the ``maximum extent
practicable.''
    The phrase ``maximum extent practicable'' is not defined in the
FWPCA. The phrase, however, is defined in Coast Guard regulations for
use in 33 CFR parts 154 and 155 to mean ``the planned capability to
respond to a worst case discharge in adverse weather, as contained in a
response plan that meets the criteria [in Coast Guard regulations
addressing oil spill response plans for facilities and vessels] or in a
specific plan approved by the cognizant COTP.'' See 33 CFR 154.1020.
This rule temporarily suspends the response time requirements for 33
CFR parts 154 and 155, which in effect amends the regulatory definition
of ``maximum extent practicable'' to exclude response time requirements
for MMPD and USCG-regulated facilities and vessels WCD. The phrase is
defined in EPA regulations for use in 40 CFR part 112

to mean ``within the limitations used to determine oil spill planning
resources and response times for on-water recovery, shoreline
protection, and cleanup for worst case discharges from onshore non-
transportation-related facilities in adverse weather. It includes the
planned capability to respond to a worst case discharge in adverse
weather, as contained in a response plan that meets the requirements in
Sec.  112.20 or in a specific plan approved by the Regional
Administrator.'' See 40 CFR 112.2. This rule temporarily suspends the
response time requirements, and response equipment identification and
location requirements, for 40 CFR part 112, which in effect amends the
regulatory definition of ``maximum extent practicable'' to exclude
response time requirements for Medium Discharges and EPA-regulated
facilities WCD.
    Therefore, from June 30, 2010 through December 31, 2010 (or such
other date as may be established by publication in the Federal Register
after the effective date of this rule):
     Oil spill and facility response plan holders need not
require response times for MMPD and USCG-regulated facilities and
vessels WCD levels, and need not require response time requirements and
response equipment identification and location requirements for Medium
Discharge and EPA-regulated facilities WCD levels when their existing
plans and contracts for response resources will be impacted due to
providing response resources in support of the Deepwater Horizon SONS
so that meeting those response requirements is impossible. The Coast
Guard and EPA will allow greater use of cascade plans which, in
combination, will protect ports and coastlines to the MMPD and USCG-
regulated facilities and vessels WCD levels and to Medium Discharge and
EPA-regulated facilities WCD levels; and
     Owners of facilities and vessels with contracts with OSROs
are encouraged to relieve those OSROs of their responsibility to
respond to MMPD and USCG-regulated facilities and vessels WCD levels
and to Medium Discharge and EPA-regulated facilities WCD levels within
the required response times under such contracts when those OSROs'
response resources are deployed in response to the Deepwater Horizon
SONS.
    The Coast Guard and EPA response time requirements, and EPA
identification and location requirements, for response resources for an
AMPD and/or Small Discharge, as applicable, remain in effect, except
for installations of the Armed Forces that relocate spill response
assets to the Gulf of Mexico in response to the FOSC's request for
assets. Those installations are authorized to drop below the Coast
Guard and EPA response time requirements, and EPA response equipment
identification and location requirements, for response resources for an
AMPD and/or a Small Discharge, as applicable.
    The intent of this rule is to make available more response
resources for use in responding to the Deepwater Horizon SONS. When the
FOSC makes a request for response resources, the FOSC will coordinate
with the cognizant Captains of the Port (COTPs), Regional Response
Teams, Area Committees, EPA and the National Incident Commander in
order to consider the relative environmental and other risks and
impacts of requesting and accepting offers for specific response
resources from locations outside the Gulf of Mexico.
    This action is supported by 33 U.S.C. 1321(c) and (j), and is
promulgated under 33 U.S.C. 1321(j)(5)(A).

B. Discussion of Coast Guard Rule

    This rule adds to Coast Guard regulations a temporary, new Sec.
154.T150 to 33 CFR part 154, and a temporary, new Sec.  155.T150 to 33
CFR part 155. Paragraph (a) of the temporary sections sets forth
applicability of each section. These sections only apply to facilities
and vessels that have contracted response resources, or their own
response resources, that are deployed to participate in the Deepwater
Horizon SONS response.
    Paragraph (b) of the temporary sections suspend the regulatory
response time requirements for (1) MMPD and (2) USCG-regulated
facilities and vessels WCD. Paragraph (b) suspends these requirements
only from June 30, 2010 through December 31, 2010. Except as described
in paragraph (d), paragraph (c) of the temporary sections makes clear
that the response time requirements for AMPD remain in effect for all
facilities and vessels regulated by 33 CFR Parts 154 and 155.
    In addition to OSROs and facilities and vessels regulated by 33 CFR
parts 154 and 155, Armed Forces installations have response resources
that are needed to respond to the Deepwater Horizon SONS. Paragraph (d)
of Sec.  154.T150 confirms that the FOSC has requested that the Armed
Forces relocate response assets to support the SONS response, and
authorizes Armed Forces installations responding to such a FOSC request
to revise their response times below what is necessary for an AMPD in
order to make the urgently needed response resources of Armed Forces
installations available for deployment in support of the SONS response.
    Armed Forces installations are more able than private facilities
and vessels to mitigate their own risk of delayed response times and
take advantage of any cascade planning, if they relocate response
resources to assist in the response to the Deepwater Horizon SONS. The
National Contingency Plan at 40 CFR 300.175(b)(4) specifically
authorizes the Department of Defense ``consistent with its operational
requirements and upon request of the [F]OSC, provide locally deployed
U.S. Navy oil spill equipment and provide assistance to other federal
agencies on request.'' Because of the inherent mobility of the Armed
Forces, an Armed Forces installation could more quickly return response
resources to the original installation, if necessary, than an
individual, private facility or vessel. Additionally, an Armed Forces
installation provides its own response resources, which are dedicated
to that installation, compared to a facility or vessel that relies on
one or more OSROs to provide response resources which are also
contracted to other facilities or vessels. Therefore, the FOSC has
requested that Armed Forces installations relocate response resources
to the urgent situation in the Gulf of Mexico as set forth in this
temporary interim rule.

C. Discussion of EPA Rule

    This rule adds to EPA regulations a temporary, new Sec.  112.22 to
40 CFR part 112. Paragraph (a) of the temporary section sets forth the
applicability of this section. This section only applies to facilities
that have contracted response resources, or their own response
resources, that are deployed to participate in the SONS response.
    Paragraph (b) of the temporary section suspends the regulatory
requirements for response times and the identification of response
equipment and its location for (1) Medium Discharges and (2) EPA-
regulated facilities WCDs. Paragraph (b) suspends these requirements
only from June 30, 2010 through December 31, 2010. Paragraph (b) also
states that changes to facility response plans due to relocation of
response equipment in support of the response to the Deepwater Horizon
SONS are not required. Except as described in paragraph (d), paragraph
(c) makes clear that the response times for Small Discharges remain in
effect for facilities regulated by 40 CFR Part 112.
    In addition to facilities regulated by 40 CFR Part 112, Armed
Forces installations have response resources that are needed to respond
to the

Deepwater Horizon SONS. Paragraph (d) of Sec.  112.22 authorizes Armed
Forces installations responding to a FOSC request to support SONS
response to revise their response times below what is necessary for a
Small Discharge in order to make the urgently needed response resources
of Armed Forces installations available for deployment in support of
the SONS response. The National Contingency Plan at 40 CFR
300.175(b)(4) supports this provision for the Armed Forces.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 14 of these statutes or executive orders.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This temporary interim rule is in response to an emergency
situation and the Coast Guard and EPA must act more quickly than normal
review procedures under Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review. In accordance with section 6(a)(3)(D) of that Order, the Coast
Guard and EPA have communicated with the Office of Management and
Budget. The rule is not a significant regulatory action under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order.
    This rule will temporarily suspend Coast Guard and EPA response
time requirements, and EPA response equipment identification and
location requirements, for facilities and vessels subject to 33 CFR
parts 154 and 155 and/or 40 CFR 112, subpart D, as applicable. The
suspension of these regulatory requirements provides industry and
government the opportunity to relocate oil spill response resources to
the Gulf of Mexico to aid in the response to the Deepwater Horizon
SONS. There may be additional costs for relocating these resources.
    If OSROs, or facilities or vessels with their own response
resources, temporarily relocate infrastructure and assets to the Gulf
of Mexico, other regions may not have the same level of response times
for response resources available in the event an oil spill occurred in
those other regions. This may marginally increase the risk of delayed
response times in those areas because there would be fewer assets
immediately available for spill response. However, we expect these
risks to be temporary and small, because the suspension of certain
response time requirements is only until the end of this calendar year,
and the Coast Guard and affected industry stakeholders will coordinate
the positioning and deployment of additional response assets in the
Gulf of Mexico.
    Additionally, if planned-for response resources have relocated to
the Gulf of Mexico, cascade plans can be used to help minimize the risk
of delayed response times. A cascade plan contains an OSRO's strategy
to maximize arrival times and the availability of response resources
for plan holders given the deployment of response resources. This
strategy may include the identification of secondary or cascading
resources through increased partnerships and the increased pooling of
resources among several OSROs and other stakeholders. Coast Guard COTPs
will assist in facilitating the incorporation of Armed Forces
installations into cascade plans when revising their respective Area
Response Plans. The inclusion of Armed Forces installations in cascade
planning may be necessary to provide Armed Forces installations that
have temporarily revised their response times below that necessary for
an average most probable discharge and/or a Small Discharge with access
to additional response resources. The inclusion of Armed Forces
installations in cascade planning will also allow Coast Guard regulated
facilities and vessels to access remaining Armed Forces installation
response resources in the event they are needed.
    Additional assets are urgently needed in the Gulf region for the
response to the unprecedented and ongoing Deepwater Horizon SONS.
Current assets in the Gulf region have been fully utilized in response
to the SONS. Based on the urgent need to maximize the availability of
oil spill response assets from around the country, the Coast Guard is
temporarily releasing facilities and vessels subject to 33 CFR parts
154 and 155, and the EPA is temporarily releasing facilities subject to
40 CFR part 112, subpart D, whose response plans are impacted by
relocation of response resources in support of the response to the
Deepwater Horizon SONS, from Coast Guard and EPA regulatory response
time requirements, and EPA response equipment identification and
location requirements, that would keep OSROs, and facilities with their
own response resources, from relocating their response resources to the
Gulf region. Some facilities and vessels subject to 33 CFR parts 154
and 155, and some facilities subject to 40 CFR part 112, subpart D,
contract with OSROs for the availability of response resources to
comply with these required regulatory response times. These contractual
obligations keep OSROs from making their response resources available
for the response to the SONS. Other such facilities and vessels have
their own response resources to comply with these regulatory
requirements, and these requirements preclude the facilities and
vessels from making their response resources available for the response
to the SONS. By releasing these facilities and vessels from the
required Coast Guard and EPA regulatory response times, and EPA
response equipment identification and location requirements, the Coast
Guard and EPA are encouraging owners and contracting facilities and
vessels to make more response resources available for the response to
the SONS. This will allow these additional response resources from
these areas to begin being brought into the Gulf of Mexico to respond
to the SONS.

B. Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612) requires
agencies to consider whether regulatory actions would have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The term ``small entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000. An RFA analysis is not required when a
rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C.
553(b). The Coast Guard and EPA determined that this rule is exempt
from notice and comment rulemaking pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
Therefore, an RFA analysis is not required for this rule.

C. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard or EPA,

call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). Neither the Coast Guard nor EPA
will retaliate against small entities that question or complain about
this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard or EPA.

D. Congressional Review Act

    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. Section 808 allows the issuing agency to make a rule
effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes
a good cause finding that notice and public procedure is impracticable,
unnecessary or contrary to the public interest. This determination must
be supported by a brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As stated
previously, Coast Guard and EPA have made such a good cause finding,
including the reasons therefor, and established an effective date of
June 30, 2010. Coast Guard and EPA will submit a report, as described
in Sec.  801(a)(1)(A), 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. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

E. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

F. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

H. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

I. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

J. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

K. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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.

L. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action.
Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under
Executive Order 13211.

M. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

N. Environment

    This is an emergency rulemaking, and in accordance with the Council
on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations Implementing the Procedural
Requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR parts
1500-1508) and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (43
U.S.C. 4321-4370f), the Coast Guard, with the assistance of EPA, is
consulting with CEQ for this action. The Coast Guard, with the
assistance of EPA, will continue to consult CEQ as well as the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and other key authorities in
order to determine appropriate environmental impact analysis. The Coast
Guard and EPA especially invite public comment on environmental impacts
and management of relative risks of this regulatory action to address
an immediate environmental need in the context of preparedness to meet
potential environmental needs.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 154

    Alaska, Fire prevention, Hazardous substances, Oil pollution,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

33 CFR Part 155

    Alaska, Hazardous substances, Oil pollution, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 112

    Environmental protection, Facility response plan, Oil pollution,
Oil spill response, Oil spill removal organization, OSRO, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR parts 154 and 155 and the EPA amends 40 CFR part 112 as follows:

TITLE 33--NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS

PART 154--FACILITIES TRANSFERRING OIL OR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL IN BULK

0
1. The authority citation for part 154 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j)(1)(C), (j)(5), (j)(6), and
(m)(2); sec. 2, E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Subpart F is also issued under 33
U.S.C. 2735.

0
2. Add Sec.  154.T150 to read as follows:

Sec.  154.T150  Temporary Suspension of Requirements to Permit Support
of Deepwater Horizon Spill Response.

    (a) Applicability. This section applies to--
    (1) Any facility described in Sec.  154.100 of this part, that has
contracted with any oil spill removal organization (OSRO), as defined
in Sec.  154.1020 of this part, if the OSRO's response resources, as
defined in Sec.  154.1020 of this part, are deployed in coordination
with the On-Scene Coordinator (OSC), as defined in 40 CFR 300.5, in
support of the response to the Deepwater Horizon Spill of National
Significance; and
    (2) Any facility described in Sec.  154.100 of this part, that
owns, operates, or has under its direct control, response resources, as
defined in Sec.  154.1020 of this part, deployed in coordination with
the OSC, as described in 40 CFR 300.5, in support of the response to
the Deepwater Horizon Spill of National Significance.
    (b) Suspension of certain response time requirements. From June 30,
2010 through December 31, 2010, the stipulated response times,
including the response times contained in any written contractual
agreement with any OSRO, for the availability of response resources, as
defined in Sec.  154.1020 of this part, for a maximum most probable
discharge and a worst case discharge are not necessary to meet the
requirements of this part.
    (c) Other response time requirements still effective. Any response
time requirements for the availability of response resources, as
defined in Sec.  154.1020 of this part, for an average most probable
discharge, as required by this part, remain in effect.
    (d) Armed Forces installation planning factors. The Coast Guard
authorizes the Armed Forces to revise Armed Forces installation
response times to below that which is necessary to respond to an
average most probable discharge at those installations that have
deployed assets in support of the response to the Deepwater Horizon
Spill of National Significance in response to a request from the OSC,
as described in 40 CFR 300.5, for such assets.

PART 155--OIL OR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL POLLUTION PREVENTION
REGULATIONS FOR VESSELS

0
3. The authority citation for part 155 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 3703; E.O. 12777,
56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Sections 155.100 through 155.130,
150.350 through 155.400, 155.430, 155.440, 155.470, 155.1030(j) and
(k), and 155.1065(g) are also issued under 33 U.S.C. 1903(b).
Section 155.490 also issued under section 4110(b) of Pub. L. 101-
380. Sections 155.1110 through 155.1150 also issued under 33 U.S.C.
2735.

0
4. Add Sec.  155.T150 to read as follows:

Sec.  155.T150  Temporary Suspension of Requirements to Permit Support
of Deepwater Horizon Spill Response.

    (a) Applicability. This section applies to--
    (1) Any ship and any tank vessel described in Sec.  155.100 of this
part, that has contracted with any oil spill removal organization
(OSRO), as defined in Sec.  155.1020 of this part, if the OSRO's
response resources, as defined in Sec.  154.1020 of this part, are
deployed in coordination with the On-Scene Coordinator (OSC), as
defined in 40 CFR 300.5, in support of the response to the Deepwater
Horizon Spill of National Significance; and
    (2) Any ship and any tank vessel described in Sec.  155.100 of this
part, that owns, operates, or has under its direct control, response
resources, as defined in Sec.  155.1020 of this part, deployed in
coordination with the OSC, as defined in 40 CFR 300.5, in support of
the response to the Deepwater Horizon Spill of National Significance.
    (b) Suspension of certain response time requirements. From June 30,
2010 through December 31, 2010, the stipulated response times,
including the response times contained in any written contractual
agreement with any OSRO, for the availability of response resources, as
defined in Sec.  155.1020 of this part, for a maximum most probable
discharge and a worst case discharge are not necessary to meet the
requirements of this part.
    (c) Other response time requirements still effective. Any response
time requirements for the availability of response resources, as
defined in Sec.  154.1020 of this part, for an average most probable
discharge, as required by this part, remain in effect.

TITLE 40--PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT

PART 112--OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION

0
5. The authority citation for part 112 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 33 U.S.C. 2720; E.O. 12777
(October 18, 1991), 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351.

0
6. Add Sec.  112.22 to read as follows:

Sec.  112.22  Temporary Suspension of Response Planning Level
Requirements to Support Deepwater Horizon Spill Response.

    (a) Applicability. This section applies to any person who owns or
operates--
    (1) Any facility described in Sec.  112.20 of this part, who has
contracted with any oil spill removal organization (OSRO), as defined
in Sec.  112.2 of this part, where the OSRO's response resources, as
required under 112.20(h)(3) and Appendix E, Sections 4.0 and 5.0, are
deployed in support of the response to the Deepwater Horizon Spill of
National Significance; and
    (2) Any facility described in Sec.  112.20 of this part, who owns,
operates, or has under direct control, response resources, as required
under 112.20(h)(3) and Appendix E, Sections 4.0 and 5.0, deployed in
support of the response to the Deepwater Horizon Spill of National
Significance.
    (b) Suspension of certain response planning level requirements.
From June 30, 2010 through December 31, 2010, facility response plan
requirements relating to the identification of response equipment and
its location and the stipulated response times, including the response
times contained in any written contractual agreement with any OSRO, for
the availability of response resources, as required under Sec.
112.20(h)(3) and Appendix E, Sections 4.0 and 5.0, for a medium
discharge as described in Sec.  112.20(h)(5)(iii) of this part, and for
a worst case discharge over 2,100 gallons as described under Sec.
112.20(h)(5)(i), are suspended. Changes to facility response plans due
to relocation of response equipment in support of the response to the
Deepwater Horizon Spill of National Significance, do not require a
revision under Sec.  112.20(d).
    (c) Other response time and response equipment identification and
location requirements still effective. Response times and response
equipment identification and location requirements required under Sec.
112.20(h)(3) and Appendix E, Section 3.0 for a small discharge, as
described in 112.20(h)(5)(ii), remain in effect.

    (d) Armed Forces installation planning factors. Armed Forces may
revise Armed Forces installation response times and response equipment
identification and location requirements below that which is necessary
to respond to a small discharge, as described in 112.20(h)(5)(ii), at
those installations that have deployed assets in support of the
response to the Deepwater Horizon Spill of National Significance in
response to a request from the On-Scene Coordinator, as defined in 40
CFR 300.5, for such assets.

    Dated: June 28, 2010.
Robert Papp,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-16005 Filed 6-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P; 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 245 (Monday, December 22, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76326-76327]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29791]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0548; FRL--9920-74-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Reformulated Gasoline and Conventional
Gasoline: Requirements for Refiners, Oxygenate Blenders, and Importers
of Gasoline; Requirements for Parties in the Gasoline Distribution
Network (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), Reformulated Gasoline and
Conventional Gasoline: Requirements for Refiners, Oxygenate Blenders,
and Importers of Gasoline; Requirements for Parties in the Gasoline
Distribution Network (Renewal) (EPA ICR No. 1591.26, OMB Control No.
2060-0277) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a proposed revision of the ICR, which is
currently approved through 12/31/2014. Public comments were previously
requested via the Federal Register (79 FR 52317) on September 3, 2014
during a 60 day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30
days for public comment. A fuller description of the ICR is given
below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency
may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.

DATES: Additional comments must be submitted on or before January 21,
2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2014-0548, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jose Solar, Compliance Division,
Office of Transportation and Air Quality, (Mail Code 6405A),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: 202-
343-2801; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: Gasoline combustion is the major source of air pollution
in most urban areas. In the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act (Act),
section 211(k), Congress required that gasoline dispensed in nine areas
with severe air quality problems, and areas that opt-in, be
reformulated to reduce toxic and ozone-forming emissions. Congress also
required that, in the process of producing reformulated gasoline (RFG),
dirty components removed in the reformulation process not be ``dumped''
into the remainder of the country's gasoline, known as conventional
gasoline (CG). The Environmental Protection Agency promulgated
regulations at 40 CFR part 80, subpart D--Reformulated Gasoline,
subpart E--Anti-Dumping, and subpart F--Attest Engagements,
implementing the statutory requirements, which include standards for
RFG (80.41) and CG (80.101). The regulations also contain reporting and
recordkeeping requirements for the production, importation, transport
and storage of gasoline, in order to demonstrate compliance and
facilitate compliance and enforcement. This program excludes
California, which has separate requirements for gasoline.
    The United States has an annual gasoline consumption of about 133
billion gallons, of which about 30% is RFG. In 2013 EPA received
reports from 255 refineries, 60 importer facilities/facility groups, 51
oxygenate blending facilities, 25 independent laboratory facilities,
and the RFG Survey Association, Inc. under this program.
    Section 211(k) of the Act requires the Administrator to promulgate
regulations establishing requirements for RFG to be used in gasoline-
fueled vehicles in the nine specified nonattainment areas, and opt-in
areas. The Act specifically provides that recordkeeping, reporting, and
sampling and testing requirements are among the tools EPA may use in
enforcement of the provisions, and also provides that EPA must develop
an enforceable scheme. Sections 114 and 208 of the Clean Air Act, 42
U.S.C. 7414 and 7542, authorize EPA to require recordkeeping and
reporting regarding enforcement of the provisions of Title II of the
Clean Air Act.
    Information claimed as confidential is handled in accordance with
EPA Freedom of Information Act regulations at 40 CFR 2. Most of the
information submitted is claimed as such. Data submitted electronically
are encrypted and housed in a secure area.
    Form: Reformulated Gasoline and Conventional Gasoline reporting is
now required to be completed electronically. The reporting is to be
made through The EPA Fuels Programs Reporting Forms: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/reporting/index.htm.
    Respondents/affected entities: Gasoline marketing-related
industries, SIC codes: refiners (2911), importers (5172), terminals
(5171), pipelines (4613), truckers and other distributors (4212), and
retailers/wholesale purchaser-consumers (5541). NAICS codes: refiners
(324110), pipelines (486910) and terminals (424710). Not all NAICS
codes for the responsible reporting parties were found. These are,
however, parties which are obligated to report: importers, truckers and
other distributors and retailers/wholesale

purchaser-consumers. Some refiners are importers but that is not always
the case. Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory per 40 CFR part
80.
    Estimated number of respondents: 4,283.
    Frequency of response: Quarterly, Annually, on Occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 127,246 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b)
    Total estimated cost: $39,223,076 (per year), includes $24,713,032
in non-labor costs.
    Changes in Estimates: Compared with the ICR currently approved by
OMB, there is an increase in the total estimated burden. The increase
from 127,041 hours to 127,246 hours is because additional regulations
that were introduced through rule making.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2014-29791 Filed 12-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 147 (Friday, July 31, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45655-45656]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18717]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0085; FRL-9931-71-OEI]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; NESHAP
for Radionuclides (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR), ``NESHAP for Radionuclides
(Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 1100.15, OMB Control No. 2060-0249) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects
of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a
proposed extension of the ICR. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and
a person is not required to respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before September 29, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing the above referenced
Docket ID Number online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection
Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip Egidi, Radiation Protection
Division, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, Mail Code 6608J,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania

Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of
the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA
will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate.
The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and
approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice
to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to
submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: In the context of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 1857),
Section 114 authorizes the Administrator of EPA to require any person
who owns or operates any emission source or who is subject to any
requirements of the Act to: (1) Establish and maintain records, (2)
make reports, install, use, and maintain monitoring equipment or
method, (3) sample emissions in accordance with EPA prescribed
locations, intervals and methods, and (4) provide information as may be
requested. EPA's regional offices use the information collected to
ensure that public health continues to be protected from the hazards of
radionuclides by compliance with health based standards. This
information is required for those facilities meeting the definition of
each Subpart. EPA's compliance monitoring activities vary widely. EPA
could issue a letter requesting information about compliance or could
conduct a full-scale investigation, including on site inspections. The
information required to be submitted is not confidential in nature.
    Respondents/affected entities: The NAICS Codes of facilities
associated with the activity of the respondents are: (1) Elemental
Phosphorous 325188, (2) Phosphogypsum Stacks 212392, (3) Underground
Uranium Mines 212291, and (4) Uranium Mill Tailings 212291
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory.
    Estimated number of respondents: 20 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially (Once), Annually, Random
(Occasionally).
    Total estimated burden: 2,872 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $500,572, which includes $283,460 in
annualized capital and O&M costs.
    Changes in Estimates: The final ICR submitted to OMB will contain
revised burden estimates that reflect any changes to the collection
over the past three years and any public comments received.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collections Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-18717 Filed 7-30-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 47)]
[Notices]
[Page 11015-11016]
[DOCID:fr12mr07-84]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-34-000]

Southwest Gas Storage Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

March 6, 2007.
    Take notice that on February 20, 2007, Southwest Gas Storage
Company filed a cost and revenue study to comply with the Commission's
Order Setting Complaint for Hearing, issued on December 21, 2006, in
Docket No. RP07-34-000 (117 FERC ] 61,318 (2006)).
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a
protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the
proceeding.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests 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 to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 14, 2007.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-4402 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 24 (Monday, February 5, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 5090]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02240]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Commissioner and Staff Attendance at North American
Electric Reliability Corporation Meetings

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) hereby gives
notice that members of the Commission and/or Commission staff may
attend the following meetings:

North American Electric Reliability Corporation, Member Representatives
Committee and Board of Trustees Meetings, Board of Trustees Corporate
Governance and Human Resources Committee, Finance and Audit Committee,
Compliance Committee, and Standards Oversight and Technology Committee
Meetings
Hilton Fort Lauderdale Marina, 1881 SE 17th Street, Fort Lauderdale, FL
33316
February 7 (8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. eastern time) and February 8 (8:30
a.m.-12:00 p.m. eastern time), 2018

    Further information regarding these meetings may be found at:
http://www.nerc.com/Pages/Calendar.aspx.
    The discussions at the meetings, which are open to the public, may
address matters at issue in the following Commission proceedings:

Docket No. RR17-6, North American Electric Reliability Corporation

    For further information, please contact Jonathan First, 202-502-
8529, or [email protected].

    Dated: January 30, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-02240 Filed 2-2-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


METHODOLOGY FOR WASTEWISE MULTI STAGE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The method used to estimate the WasteWise impact accounts for two data facts: ( 1) not all WasteWise partners report waste prevention and recycling data and ( 2) we have no information on waste prevention and recycling among nonpartners. To account for these data problems, EPA developed a method that relies on statistical modeling to account for the missing data. One important fact, however, is that although we do not have waste prevention and recycling data for non reporting partners and non partners, we do have access to other information on these companies ( e. g., financial information, size). Use of this other information helps us to control for the fact that we are missing outcome ( i. e., waste prevention and recycling) data. In statistical terms, we have censored data. Thus, although we are missing outcome data for some companies, we know which companies are missing data and we have other information on these companies.

The method can best be described as a multi stage statistical analysis that uses statistical modeling to develop control variables to overcome the lack of outcome data. In the first part of the analysis, we look at what influences firms= decisions to join WasteWise. From this analysis we create a variable that reflects the probability that a firm is a WasteWise partner. 1 In the second part of the analysis, we measure how a number of factors, including the probability of being a WasteWise partner, affect waste prevention and recycling. The relationship between the probability of being a WasteWise partner and the outcome variables ( waste prevention and recycling) will determine the program effect of WasteWise.

Using the probability of being a WasteWise partner adjusts for the lack of outcome data for nonpartners. To understand this, consider the situation where outcome data is are available for both partners and nonpartners. We will refer to this as the full data scenario. In this situation, we can construct a binary variable equal to one if the firm was a partner and zero if not. The statistical analysis would then compare outcomes among partners ( binary variable equal to one) to nonpartners ( binary variable equal to zero) while controlling for other relevant factors ( size, financial status). The difference between outcomes for partners and nonpartners after controlling for other relevant factors is the program effect of WasteWise. This type of analysis is not possible because we do not have outcome data for nonpartners.

1 In some sense, this variable is an artificial construction since we know which firms are and which are not partners. We need to construct this variable, however, to deal with the missing outcome data. To develop an estimate of the program effect in the absence of outcome data for nonpartners, we have developed a statistical approach method that combines some well accepted methods. In terms of the discussion above, we transform the binary variable into one that is continuous between zero and one: i ( i. e., the probability of being a partner). In the full data scenario, outcome data areis available for both partners and nonpartners. In our situation, however, outcome data are is only available for cases where the binary variable equals one, making direct comparison impossible because there is no variation in the program participation measure. To get around this, we use the probability of being a partner to measure the degree to which a firm is part of the program. The probability of being a WasteWise partner will exhibit variation among partners. Firms that have a higher probability of being a partner should also perform more waste prevention and recycling. A detailed technical justification of this method can be found in the full project report ( currently under peer review).

The second part of the analysis also adjusts for two other problems: ( 1) some partners will have A zero@ for the outcome variable, but in actuality, probably are conducting waste reduction initiatives but do not report and ( 2) there will be some the presence offirm specific effects. The occurrence of A zero@ values for waste prevention and recycling amounts reflects censoring of the outcome variable. That is, we expect that actual waste prevention and recycling amounts are positive for those companies, but since the companies did not report a value, we record their value as A zero.@ This type of problem is not uncommon in statistical research, and a variety of methods have been developed to account for the missing data in a regression model framework. We use a A Tobit@ model specification to handle this issue, which . This is discussed in more detail in the full report.

The presence of A firm specific effects2@ reflects the nature of the data. Specifically, we have a number of partners measured over time. This scenario is commonly referred to as panel or longitudinal data. In such a framework, unmeasured differences ( i. e., the firm specific effects) between firms can lead to biased estimates for the variables included in the analysis. A number of methods have been developed to account for the presence of these firm specific effects. We use the random effects procedure to account for these firm specific effects, which . This is discussed in more detail in the full report.

Our method also allows us to estimate a waste prevention and recycling amount for nonreporting partners. Thus, once the analysis has defined the relationship between outcomes and the control factors, we can use the estimated statistical model to fill in the missing values for nonreporting partners. We discuss this in more detail in the full report.

Finally, to meet EPA= s goal of identifying the impact of WasteWise on our global climate, the method must also provide material specific estimates of the amount of waste prevention and recycling that are attributable to the WasteWise program. While Tthe statistical analysis, however, provides a program effect for categories of materials, it does not provide a material specific estimate needed for use in EPA= s WARM model3. There are two separate questions issues that need resolution in this area: ( 1) wWhat will be the program effect for specific materials if we only have category level estimates of the program effect? and ( 2) hHow do we estimate the amount of waste prevention and recycling of specific materials for non reporting partners if we only have category level estimates of these amounts for non reporting partners?. The first can be resolved with a reasonable assumption.: T that is, we assume that the category level estimates of the program effect can be applied to the materials within each category.

2 By A firm specific effects,@ we mean factors that we cannot measure that might affect the data. Examples of such factors include corporate culture and how firms measure waste prevention.

3 For more information on EPA= s WARM model, see < http:// yosemite. epa. gov/ oar/ globalwarming. nsf/ content/ ActionsWasteWARM. html> The second issue requires some elaboration before describing a solution. The statistical models that we estimate provide a category level estimate of waste prevention and recycling for non reporting partners. For example, the statistical model for plastics waste prevention will provide an estimate of the amount of plastics waste prevention doneachieved by non reporting partners. The statistical model will not, however, provide material specific estimates of waste prevention and recycling. This is not an issue for reporting partners since they have reported material specific amounts. To determine the material specific amounts for non reporting partners, we use the distribution of materials in each category from the reported partners, stratified by industry sector. We describe this approach in more detail in the full report.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 23 (Monday, February 4, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 7779]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02378]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9776-1]

Office of Environmental Information; Announcement of Availability
and Comment Period for the Draft Quality Standard for Environmental
Data Collection, Production, and Use by Non-EPA (External)
Organizations and Two Associated QA Handbooks; Extension of Comment
Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency published a document in
the Federal Register of December 26, 2012, concerning request for
comments for the Draft Quality Standard for Environmental Data
Collection, Production, and Use by Non-EPA (External) Organizations and
two associated QA Handbooks. The notice of availability is being
extended to a 62 day review and comment period to provide more time for
external reviewers to provide comments. This document extends the
comment period for 17 days, from February 11, 2013, to February 28,
2013.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before February 11, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Warren, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, MC 2811R, Washington, DC 20460;
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: January 29, 2013.
Monica D. Jones,
Director, Quality Staff.
[FR Doc. 2013-02378 Filed 2-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P