[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 22 (Friday, February 3, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9158-9164]
[FR Doc No: 2017-02188]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR PART 52

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0646; FRL-9958-70-OAR]

Findings of Failure To Submit State Implementation Plan
Submittals for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finding that 15
states and the District of Columbia have failed to submit State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions in a timely manner to satisfy
certain requirements for the 2008 ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) that apply to nonattainment areas and/or states in
the Ozone Transport Region (OTR). As explained in this action,
consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA regulations, these
findings of failure to submit establish certain deadlines for the
imposition of sanctions, if a state does not submit a timely SIP
revision addressing the requirements for which the finding is being
made, and for the EPA to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP)
to address any outstanding SIP requirements.

DATE:  The effective date of this action is March 6, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: General questions concerning this
notice should be addressed to Mr. Stephen Senter, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Air Quality Policy Division, Mail Code: C504-2,
109 TW Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709; by telephone
(919) 541-3042; or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)

    Section 553 of the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when
an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedures are
impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest, the
agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for
public comment. The EPA has determined that there is good cause for
making this final agency action without prior proposal and opportunity
for comment because no significant EPA judgment is involved in making a
finding of failure to submit

SIPs, or elements of SIPs, because the finding is required by the CAA
where states have made no submissions to meet the SIP requirements, or
where the EPA has separately determined that they made incomplete
submissions. Thus, notice and public procedures are unnecessary. The
EPA finds that this constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0646. All documents in the docket are listed on
http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information or 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
through http://www.regulations.gov.

C. Where do I go if I have a specific state question?

    For questions related to specific states mentioned in this notice,
please contact the appropriate EPA Regional office:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Regional offices                          States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA Region 1: Anne Arnold, Chief, Air    Connecticut, Maine,
 Quality Planning Unit, EPA Region 1, 1   Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
 Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston,     Rhode Island, Vermont.
 MA 02203.
EPA Region 2: Rick Ruvo, Chief, Air      New Jersey.
 Program Branch, EPA Region 2, 290
 Broadway, New York, NY 10007.
EPA Region 3: Maria Pino, Acting         Delaware, District of Columbia,
 Associate Director, Office of Air        Maryland, Pennsylvania,
 Program Planning, EPA Region 3, 1650     Virginia.
 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103.
EPA Region 5: John Mooney, Chief, Air    Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin.
 Programs Branch, EPA Region 5, 77 West
 Jackson Street, Chicago, IL 60604.
EPA Region 9: Doris Lo, Chief, Air       California.
 Planning Office, EPA Region 9, 75
 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
 94105.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. How is the preamble organized?

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA)
    B. How can I get copies of this document and other related
information?
    C. Where do I go if I have specific state questions?
    D. How is the preamble organized?
II. Background
III. Consequences of a Finding of Failure To Submit
IV. Findings of Failure To Submit for States That Failed To Make a
Nonattainment Area and/or Ozone Transport Region SIP Submittal
V. Environmental Justice Considerations
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority and Low-Income Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
    L. Judicial Review

II. Background

    On March 27, 2008, the EPA issued its final action to revise the
NAAQS for ozone to establish new 8-hour standards.\1\ In that action,
the EPA promulgated identical revised primary and secondary ozone
standards, designed to protect public health and welfare, of 0.075
parts per million (ppm).\2\ Those standards are met when the 3-year
average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration is less than or equal to 0.075 ppm.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 73 FR 16436.
    \2\ Since the 2008 primary and secondary NAAQS for ozone are
identical, for convenience, we refer to both as ``the 2008 ozone
NAAQS'' or ``the 2008 ozone standard.''
    \3\ 40 CFR 50.15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Promulgation of a revised NAAQS triggers a requirement for the EPA
to designate areas of the country as nonattainment, attainment, or
unclassifiable for the standards; for ozone NAAQS, this also involves
classifying any nonattainment areas at the time of designation.\4\
Ozone nonattainment areas are classified based on the severity of their
ozone levels (as determined based on the area's ``design value,'' which
represents air quality in the area for the most recent 3 years). The
possible classifications for ozone nonattainment areas are Marginal,
Moderate, Serious, Severe, and Extreme.\5\ Nonattainment areas with a
``lower'' classification have ozone levels that are closer to the
standard than areas with a ``higher'' classification.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ CAA sections 107(d)(1) and 181(a)(1).
    \5\ CAA section 181(a)(1).
    \6\ See 40 CFR 51.1103 for the design value thresholds for each
classification for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 21, 2012, and June 11, 2012, the EPA issued rules
designating 46 areas throughout the country as nonattainment for the
2008 ozone NAAQS, effective July 20, 2012, and establishing
classifications for the designated nonattainment areas.\7\ Areas
designated nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS are subject to the general
nonattainment area planning requirements of CAA section 172 and also to
the ozone-specific planning requirements of CAA section 182. States in
the OTR are additionally subject to the requirements outlined in CAA
section 184.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012) and 77 FR 34221 (June 11, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ozone nonattainment areas in the lower classification levels have
fewer and/or less stringent mandatory air quality planning and control
requirements than those in higher classifications. For a Marginal area,
a state is required to submit a baseline emissions inventory and adopt
a SIP requiring emissions statements from stationary sources and
implementing a Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) program for the
relevant ozone standard.\8\ For a Moderate area, a state needs to
comply with the Marginal area requirements, plus additional
requirements, including the requirement to submit a demonstration that
the area will attain in 6 years, the requirement to

adopt and implement certain emissions controls, such as Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT), and the requirement for greater
emissions offsets for new or modified major stationary sources under
the state's NNSR program. For each higher ozone nonattainment
classification, a state needs to comply with all lower area
classification requirements, plus additional emissions controls and
more expansive NNSR offset requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ CAA section 182(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CAA sets out specific requirements for states in the OTR.\9\
Upon promulgation of the 2008 ozone NAAQS, states in the OTR were
required to submit a SIP revision for RACT.\10\ This requirement is the
only recurring obligation for an OTR state upon revision of a NAAQS,
unless that state also contains some portion of a nonattainment area
for the revised NAAQS. In that case, the nonattainment requirements
described above also apply to those portions of that state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ CAA section 184 details specific requirements for a group of
states (and the District of Columbia) that make up the OTR. States
in the OTR are required to submit RACT SIP revisions and mandate a
certain level of emissions control for the pollutants that form
ozone, even if the areas in the state meet the ozone standards.
    \10\ 40 CFR 51.1116.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 6, 2015, the EPA established a final implementation rule
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule).\11\ The
purpose of that action was to detail the requirements applicable to
ozone nonattainment areas, as well as requirements that apply in the
OTR, and provide specific deadlines for SIP submittals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 80 FR 12264.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reasonably Available Control Technology

    Subpart 1 of part D of title I of the CAA includes a requirement
that the SIP for a nonattainment area must provide for the
implementation of all reasonably available control measures (otherwise
referred to as Reasonably Available Control Measures) as expeditiously
as practicable to meet a given NAAQS, including such emissions
reductions that may be obtained through implementation of RACT. Under
the provisions of Subpart 2 of part D of title I of the CAA, states
with ozone nonattainment areas classified Moderate and higher must
adopt RACT rules for all volatile organic compounds (VOC) sources
covered by existing or new Control Technique Guidelines (CTGs),\12\ and
for all other major stationary sources of VOC and nitrogen oxide
(NOX).\13\ This same requirement applies to states with
affected sources in the OTR.\14\ The RACT SIP requirements for states
with nonattainment areas and states in the OTR are codified for the
2008 ozone NAAQS in 40 CFR 51.1112 and 51.1116(b), respectively, and
require that RACT SIP revisions be submitted no later than 24 months
after the effective date of area designations for the 2008 standards
(i.e., July 20, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ CTGs provide the EPA's recommendations on how to control
emissions of VOC from a specific type of product or process (source
category) in an ozone nonattainment area. Each CTG includes
emissions limitations based on RACT. RACT emissions limitations are
the lowest emissions limitations that a particular source is capable
of meeting by the application of control technology that is
reasonably available considering technological and economic
feasibility. Air agencies responsible for ozone nonattainment areas
or areas in the OTR must evaluate the recommendations provided in
the CTG and determine if it is necessary to modify their existing
regulations or create new regulations to meet the CAA's RACT
requirements. See Web site: https://www3.epa.gov/airtoxics/ctg_act.html.
    \13\ To clarify, this notice does not make any findings with
respect to SIP revisions that were required upon EPA's issuance of
specific CTGs in 2006, 2007, 2008 or other years. In issuing those
CTGs, the EPA established a separate set of SIP revision deadlines
(as required by CAA section 182(b)(2)), and these deadlines are not
associated with or triggered by the issuance of revised ozone NAAQS
in 1997 or 2008. The findings in this notice pertain only to those
SIP revisions triggered by the promulgation of a revised ozone NAAQS
in 2008.
    \14\ CAA section 184(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nonattainment New Source Review

    NNSR is a preconstruction review permit program that applies to new
major stationary sources or major modifications at existing sources
located in a nonattainment area.\15\ The specific NNSR requirements for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS are located in 40 CFR 51.160-165. The 2008 Ozone
SIP Requirements Rule explained that, for each nonattainment area, a
NNSR plan or plan revision was due no later than 36 months after the
effective date of area designations for the 2008 standards (i.e., July
20, 2015).\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ CAA sections 172(c)(5), 173 and 182.
    \16\ With respect to states with nonattainment areas subject to
a finding of failure to submit NNSR SIP revisions, such revisions
would no longer be required if the area were redesignated to
attainment. The CAA's Prevention of Significant Deterioration
program requirements apply in lieu of NNSR after an area is
redesignated to attainment. For areas outside the OTR, NNSR
requirements do not apply in areas designated as attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Basic Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance

    Consistent with the applicable provisions under CAA section
182(b)(4), ozone nonattainment areas with urbanized populations of
200,000 or more based upon the 1990 United States Census that are
classified as Moderate are subject to requirements to implement a basic
vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program, for which a new
submittal or plan revision is due at the same time as the attainment
demonstration, which was 3 years after the effective date of
designation for a Moderate area (i.e., July 20, 2015).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 40 CFR 51.372(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Transportation Control Measures To Offset Growth in Emissions From
Growth in Vehicle Miles Traveled

    Consistent with CAA section 182(d)(1)(A), Severe and higher ozone
nonattainment areas must submit an analysis to determine if emissions
have increased due to growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) or vehicle
trips. If the VMT analysis shows that a growth in emissions has
occurred, the subject area must develop and submit a new plan or a plan
revision with specific enforceable transportation control measures
(TCMs) to offset that growth in emissions. For such areas, a new
submittal or plan revision was due 2 years after the effective date of
area designation (i.e., July 20, 2014).

Clean Fuels for Boilers

    For ozone nonattainment areas classified as Extreme, section
182(e)(3) of the CAA outlines requirements for new, modified, and
existing electric utility, industrial, and commercial boilers that emit
more than 25 tons per year of NOX. Such facilities must use
a low polluting fuel as its primary fuel source (e.g., natural gas,
methane, ethanol) or use advanced control technology for NOX
emissions reductions. For such areas, a new submittal or plan revision
was due 3 years after the effective date of area designation (i.e.,
July 20, 2015).

III. Consequences of a Finding of Failure To Submit

    For plan requirements under subpart D, title I of the CAA, such as
those for ozone nonattainment areas and areas in the OTR, if the EPA
finds that a state has failed to make the required SIP submittal or
that a submitted SIP is incomplete, then CAA section 179(a) establishes
specific consequences, including the eventual imposition of mandatory
sanctions for the affected area. Additionally, such a finding triggers
an obligation under CAA section 110(c) for the EPA to promulgate a FIP
no later than 2 years from the finding of failure to submit a complete
SIP, if the affected state has not submitted, and the EPA has not
approved, the required SIP submittal.
    If the EPA has not affirmatively determined that a state has
submitted a

complete SIP addressing the deficiency that is the basis for the
finding within 18 months of the effective date of this rulemaking, then
pursuant to CAA section 179(a) and (b) and 40 CFR 52.31 the offset
sanction identified in CAA section 179(b)(2) will apply in the affected
nonattainment area. If the EPA has not affirmatively determined that
the state has submitted a complete SIP addressing the deficiency that
is the basis for the finding within 6 months after the offset sanction
is imposed, then the highway funding sanction will apply in the
affected nonattainment area, in accordance with CAA section 179(b)(1)
and 40 CFR 52.31. If the state does not make the required SIP submittal
and the EPA does not take final action to approve the submittal within
2 years of the effective date of these findings, the EPA is required to
promulgate a FIP, pursuant to CAA section 179(a) and 40 CFR 52.31 for
the affected nonattainment area.

IV. Findings of Failure To Submit for States That Failed To Make a
Nonattainment Area and/or Ozone Transport Region SIP submittal

    Based on a review of SIP submittals received and deemed complete as
of the date of this action, the EPA is finding that the states and
areas listed in the tables below have failed to submit specific SIP
element(s) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS required under subpart 2 of part D
of title 1 of the CAA and the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule.

  Table 1--Findings of Failure To Submit Certain Required SIP Elements for 2008 Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Region                   State                     Area name                  Required SIP element
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................  CT             Greater Connecticut...................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
1...............................  CT             New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island....  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
1...............................  MA             Dukes County..........................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
2...............................  NJ             New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island....  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
2...............................  NJ             Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City.  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
3...............................  DC             Washington............................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
3...............................  DE             Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City.  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
3...............................  DE             Seaford...............................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
3...............................  MD             Baltimore.............................  I/M Basic.
3...............................  MD             Baltimore.............................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Moderate.
3...............................  MD             Baltimore.............................  NOX RACT for Major
                                                                                Sources.
3...............................  MD             Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City.  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
3...............................  MD             Washington............................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
3...............................  PA             Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton............  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
3...............................  PA             Lancaster.............................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
3...............................  PA             Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City.  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
3...............................  PA             Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley..............  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
3...............................  PA             Reading...............................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
3...............................  VA             Washington............................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
5...............................  IL             Chicago-Naperville....................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
5...............................  IL             St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington......  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
5...............................  IN             Chicago-Naperville....................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
5...............................  IN             Cincinnati............................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
5...............................  WI             Chicago-Naperville....................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
5...............................  WI             Sheboygan County......................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
9...............................  CA             Calaveras County......................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
9...............................  CA             Kern County (Eastern Kern)............  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
9...............................  CA             Los Angeles-San Bernardino Counties     Nonattainment NSR
                                                  (Antelope Valley & Mojave Desert air    rules--Severe 15.
                                                  districts).
9...............................  CA             Los Angeles-San Bernardino Counties     VMT--TCMs to Offset
                                                  (Antelope Valley & Mojave Desert air    Growth.
                                                  districts).
9...............................  CA             Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin.....  Clean Fuels for
                                                                                Boilers.
9...............................  CA             Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin.....  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Extreme.
9...............................  CA             Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin.....  VMT--TCMs to Offset
                                                                                Growth.
9...............................  CA             Mariposa County.......................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Marginal.
9...............................  CA             Riverside County (Coachella Valley)...  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Severe 15.
9...............................  CA             Riverside County (Coachella Valley)...  VMT--TCMs to Offset
                                                                                Growth.
9...............................  CA             Sacramento Metro (Sacramento).........  Non-CTG VOC RACT for
                                                                                Major Sources.
9...............................  CA             Sacramento Metro (Sacramento).........  NOX RACT for Major
                                                                                Sources.
9...............................  CA             Sacramento Metro (Sacramento).........  CTG VOC RACT (for all
                                                                                44 CTGs *).
9...............................  CA             Sacramento Metro (Yolo Solano)........  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Severe 15.
9...............................  CA             Sacramento Metro (Yolo Solano)........  Non-CTG VOC RACT for
                                                                                Major Sources.
9...............................  CA             Sacramento Metro (Yolo Solano)........  NOX RACT for Major
                                                                                Sources.
9...............................  CA             Sacramento Metro (Yolo Solano)........  CTG VOC RACT (for all
                                                                                44 CTGs *).
9...............................  CA             Sacramento Metro......................  VMT--TCMs to Offset
                                                                                Growth.
9...............................  CA             San Joaquin Valley....................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Extreme.

9...............................  CA             Ventura County........................  Nonattainment NSR
                                                                                rules--Serious.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* A listing in the chart for ``all 44 CTGs'' or particular CTG does not mean that the state or area has failed
  to meet a plan submission requirement triggered by the issuance of any particular CTG. The findings in this
  notice pertain only to those SIP revisions triggered by the promulgation of a revised ozone NAAQS in 2008. In
  other words, consistent with CAA sections 182(b)(2) and 184(b)(1)(B), and 40 CFR 51.1112 and 51.1116,
  inclusion in this table means that the state or area listed has failed to submit to the EPA a RACT submittal
  per the 2008 ozone NAAQS to address the sources covered by a CTG. The 44 VOC RACT CTGs that are relevant for
  purposes of the 2008 ozone NAAQS are for the following source categories: Aerospace; Auto and Light-Duty Truck
  Assembly Coatings (2008); Bulk Gasoline Plants; Equipment Leaks from Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants;
  Factory Surface Coating of Flat Wood Paneling; Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials (2008); Flat Wood
  Paneling Coatings (2006); Flexible Packaging Printing Materials (2006); Fugitive Emissions from Synthetic
  Organic Chemical Polymer and Resin Manufacturing Equipment; Graphic Arts--Rotogravure and Flexography;
  Industrial Cleaning Solvents (2006); Large Appliance Coatings (2007); Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners; Leaks from
  Gasoline Tank Trucks and Vapor Collection Systems; Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment; Lithographic
  Printing Materials and Letterpress Printing Materials (2006); Manufacture of High-Density Polyethylene,
  Polypropylene, and Polystyrene Resins; Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires; Manufacture of Synthesized
  Pharmaceutical Products; Metal Furniture Coatings (2007); Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives (2008);
  Miscellaneous Metal Products Coatings (2008); Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings (2007); Petroleum Liquid Storage
  in External Floating Roof Tanks; Plastic Parts Coatings (2008); Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater
  Separators, and Process Unit Turnarounds; Shipbuilding/repair; SOCMI Air Oxidation Processes; SOCMI
  Distillation and Reactor Processes; Solvent Metal Cleaning; Stage I Vapor Control Systems--Gasoline Service
  Stations; Storage of Petroleum Liquids in Fixed Roof Tanks; Surface Coating for Insulation of Magnet Wire;
  Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks; Surface Coating of Cans; Coating of Coils; Surface
  Coating of Fabrics; Surface Coating of Large Appliances; Surface Coating of Metal Furniture; Surface Coating
  of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products; Coating of Paper; Tank Truck Gasoline Loading Terminals; Use of
  Cutback Asphalt; Wood Furniture.

Table 2--Findings of Failure To Submit Certain Required SIP Elements for
                  States in the Ozone Transport Region
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           EPA region                 State        Required SIP element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................  MA             Non-CTG VOC RACT for
                                                  Major Sources.
1...............................  MA             NOX RACT for Major
                                                  Sources.
1...............................  MA             CTG VOC RACT (for all
                                                  44 CTGs *).
1...............................  ME             Non-CTG VOC RACT for
                                                  Major Sources.
1...............................  ME             CTG VOC RACT (for all
                                                  44 CTGs *).
1...............................  NH             Non-CTG VOC RACT for
                                                  Major Sources.
1...............................  NH             NOX RACT for Major
                                                  Sources.
1...............................  NH             CTG VOC RACT (for all
                                                  44 CTGs *).
1...............................  RI             Non-CTG VOC RACT for
                                                  Major Sources.
1...............................  RI             NOX RACT for Major
                                                  Sources.
1...............................  RI             CTG VOC RACT (for all
                                                  44 CTGs *).
1...............................  VT             Non-CTG VOC RACT for
                                                  Major Sources.
1...............................  VT             NOX RACT for Major
                                                  Sources.
1...............................  VT             CTG VOC RACT (for all
                                                  44 CTGs *).
2...............................  NJ             CTG VOC RACT Fiberglass
                                                  Boat Manufacturing
                                                  Materials (2008).
2...............................  NJ             CTG VOC RACT
                                                  Miscellaneous Metal
                                                  Products Coatings
                                                  (2008).
2...............................  NJ             CTG VOC RACT Paper,
                                                  Film, and Foil
                                                  Coatings (2007).
2...............................  NJ             CTG VOC RACT Plastic
                                                  Parts Coatings (2008).
2...............................  NJ             CTG VOC RACT Industrial
                                                  Cleaning Solvents
                                                  (2006).
3...............................  DC             NOX RACT for Major
                                                  Sources.
3...............................  DC             CTG VOC RACT (for all
                                                  44 CTGs *).
3...............................  DC             Non-CTG VOC RACT for
                                                  Major Sources.
3...............................  MD             NOX RACT for Major
                                                  Sources.
3...............................  PA             CTG VOC RACT (for all
                                                  44 CTGs *).
3...............................  VA             Non-CTG VOC RACT for
                                                  Major Sources.
3...............................  VA             NOX RACT for Major
                                                  Sources.
3...............................  VA             CTG VOC RACT (for all
                                                  44 CTGs *).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* See the explanation after Table 1.

V. Environmental Justice Considerations

    The EPA believes that the human health or environmental risks
addressed by this action will not have disproportionately high or
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income,
or indigenous populations because it does not directly affect the level
of protection provided to human health or environment under the ozone
NAAQS. The purpose of this rule is to make findings that states named
have failed to provide the identified SIP submissions to the EPA that
are required per the CAA for purposes of implementing the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. As such, this action does not directly affect the level of
protection provided for human health or the environment. Moreover, it
is intended that the actions and deadlines resulting from this notice
will in fact lead to greater protection for U.S. citizens, including
minority, low-income, or indigenous populations, by ensuring that
states meet their statutory obligation to develop and submit SIPs to
ensure that areas make progress toward attaining the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Executive Order
13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was,
therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the PRA. This final rule does not establish any new
information collection requirement apart from what is already required
by law. This rule relates to the requirement in the CAA for states to
submit SIPs under sections 172, 182, and 184 which address the
statutory requirements that apply to areas designated as nonattainment
for the ozone NAAQS and to states within the Ozone Transport Region,
respectively.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities.
    The rule is a finding that the named states have not submitted the
necessary SIP revisions.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local or tribal governments or the private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This rule finds that several states have failed
to submit SIP revisions that satisfy the nonattainment area planning
requirements under sections 172 and 182 of the CAA, and the OTR
requirements under section 184 of the CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. No
tribe is subject to the requirement to submit an implementation plan
under section 172 or under subpart 5 of part D of Title I of the CAA.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks that the EPA has
reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the
definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of the
Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045
because it is a finding that several states have failed to submit SIP
revisions that satisfy the nonattainment area planning requirements
under sections 172 and 182 of the CAA, and the OTR requirements under
Section 184 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and does not directly or
disproportionately affect children.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income,
or indigenous populations. In finding that several states have failed
to submit SIP revisions that satisfy the nonattainment area planning
requirements under sections 172 and 182 of the CAA, and the OTR
requirements under section 184 of the CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
this action does not directly affect the level of protection provided
to human health or the environment. The results of this evaluation are
contained in Section V of this preamble titled ``Environmental Justice
Considerations.''

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

L. Judicial Review

    Section 307(b)(l) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of
Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final agency actions by
the EPA under the CAA. This section provides, in part, that petitions
for review must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit (i) when the agency action consists of
``nationally applicable regulations promulgated, or final actions
taken, by the Administrator,'' or (ii) when such action is locally or
regionally applicable, if ``such action is based on a determination of
nationwide scope or effect and if in taking such action the
Administrator finds and publishes that such action is based on such a
determination.''
    The EPA has determined that this final rule consisting of findings
of failure to submit certain of the required SIP revisions is
``nationally applicable'' within the meaning of section 307(b)(1). This
final agency action affects 15 states with nonattainment areas and/or
in the OTR, located in five of the 10 EPA Regional offices, and in 6
different federal circuits.
    In addition, the EPA has determined that this rule has nationwide
scope or effect because it addresses a common core of knowledge and
analysis involved in formulating the decision and a common
interpretation of the requirements of 40 CFR 51 appendix V applied to
determining the completeness of SIPs in states across the country. This
determination is appropriate because, in the 1977 CAA Amendments that
revised CAA section 307(b)(l), Congress noted that the Administrator's
determination that an action is of ``nationwide scope or effect'' would
be appropriate for any action that has ``scope or effect beyond a
single judicial circuit.'' H.R. Rep. No. 95-294 at 323-324, reprinted
in 1977 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1402-03. Here, the scope and effect of this action
extends to the 6 judicial circuits that include the states across the
country affected by this action. In these circumstances, section
307(b)(1) and its legislative history authorize the Administrator to
find the rule to be of ``nationwide scope or effect'' and, thus, to
indicate that venue for challenges lies in the District of Columbia
Circuit. Accordingly, the EPA

is determining that this rule is of nationwide scope or effect.
    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 District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days from the date this
final action is published in the Federal Register. Filing a petition
for review by the Administrator of this final action does not affect
the finality of the action for the purposes of judicial review, nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review
must be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Approval and promulgation of
implementation plans, Administrative practice and procedures, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: January 13, 2017.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-02188 Filed 2-2-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 225 (Wednesday, November 21, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69923-69924]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28350]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2012-0069]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), this document provides the public notice that by a document
dated July 26,

2012, Midwest Rail d.b.a. Toledo Lake Erie and Western Railway (TLEW)
has petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for a waiver
of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety
regulations contained at 49 CFR part 223--Safety Glazing Standards--
Locomotives, Passenger Cars and Cabooses. FRA assigned the petition
Docket Number FRA-2012-0083.
    Specifically, TLEW seeks a waiver of compliance from the
requirements of 49 CFR 223.11--Requirements for existing locomotives
and 49 CFR 223.13--Requirements for existing cabooses. TLEW has
petitioned FRA for a waiver for one American Locomotive Company Model
S-4, 1000-horsepower diesel electric locomotive numbered 5109 (TLEW
5109). This locomotive was built for the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad
in 1954. The locomotive is equipped with standard window material that
is shatter resistant. All windows of TLEW 5109 are in excellent shape
with unobstructed visibility. The locomotive will be used for both
excursion passenger and freight service.
    TLEW also seeks a waiver for Caboose TLEW 475, which is a steel
caboose, Association of American Railroads-type M930, built in 1962,
and equipped with shatter-resistant glazing. The existing window
framing on this caboose is not compatible with the required FRA Type I
and II glazing. Other than the glazing, the caboose meets all other FRA
safety requirements. The caboose will be used for both excursion
passenger and freight trains where reverse movements are required. It
will provide a safe platform for crewmembers to ride and protect the
movements through the rural and wooded areas of operation.
    Midwest Rail is committed to operating freight and tourist/
excursion rail service from Waterville, Milepost (MP) 13.2, to Grand
Rapids, OH, MP 25.0, and then return; a one-way distance of 11.8 miles.
The line is located in a rural area, between the communities of
Waterville and Grand Rapids, with a combined population of less than
7,000. There are no overhead bridge structures or areas of elevation
along the railroad that would allow objects to be thrown from above.
Based on historical information provided from the prior operator of
this line, there have been no reports of vandalism, objects thrown, or
other acts of malicious destruction to railroad equipment during
operation in the last 10 years. The maximum authorized speed for
freight and excursion movements will not exceed 15 mph. Locomotive TLEW
5109 is primarily used in yard switching service. TLEW states that the
railroad is private and does not currently operate any trains.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations
Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by January 7, 2013 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets 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 DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78), or online at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 15, 2012.
Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2012-28350 Filed 11-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 145 (Thursday, July 28, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45248-45249]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19086]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER11-2875-001, ER11-2875-002; Docket No. EL11-20-001]

PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., PJM Power Providers Group v. PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.; Supplemental Notice of Staff Technical
Conference

    On June 13, 2011, the Commission issued an order in this proceeding
establishing a staff technical conference.\1\ This notice establishes
the agenda and topics for discussion at the technical conference, which
will be held on July 28, 2011 from 9 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. (EDT) in the
Commission Meeting Room at the Commission's headquarters, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC. Commission staff will lead the technical
conference, and representatives from the following entities will
participate as panelists: American Public Power Association, Dominion
Resources Services, Inc., Maryland Public Service Commission,
Monitoring Analytics, L.L.C., National Rural Electric Cooperative
Association, New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C., PJM Load Group, PJM Power Providers Group, and PSEG Companies.
All interested parties are invited to attend, and registration is not
required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 135 FERC ] 61,228 (2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The issues and questions to be discussed during this conference are
attached. The purpose of the technical conference is to provide
Commission staff and interested parties an opportunity to explore the
applicability of PJM's Minimum Offer Price Rule (MOPR) to resources
designated as ``self supply.''
    A free webcast of this event is available through http://www.ferc.gov. Anyone with Internet access who desires to view this
event can do so by navigating to the Calendar of Events on http://www.ferc.gov and locating this event in the calendar. The event will
contain a link to its webcast. The Capitol Connection provides
technical support for the free webcasts. It also offers access to this
event via television in the DC area and via phone bridge for a fee. If
you have any questions, visit http://www.CapitolConnection.org or call
(703) 993-3100.
    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.
    For more information on this conference, please contact Jonathan
Fernandez at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 22, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.

Discussion Questions for Technical Conference on Self Supply and PJM's
Minimum Offer Price Rule

July 28, 2011

Agenda
9 a.m.-10:30 a.m.
    1. Explain your understanding of how new resources designated as
``self supply'' would commit, clear, and be compensated in PJM's base
residual auction prior to the April 12, 2011 Order.
    2. Explain the conditions under which exempting new self-supply
resources from PJM's MOPR would not

present the opportunity to exercise buyer market power.
    3. Explain how the Commission's April 12 Order may impact long-term
resource planning.
10:30 a.m.-10:45 a.m.--Break
10:45 a.m.-12:30 p.m.
    4. Does the same incentive to exercise buyer market power exist for
buyers who largely or totally self-supply as compared to buyers who
self-supply only a small portion of their load?
    5. Does the same incentive to exercise buyer market power exist for
small load serving entities as compared to large load serving entities?
    6. Would the market power concern about using self-supply be
alleviated if the self-supplied resources are acquired through a
procurement process that does not discriminate between new and existing
resources? If yes, what factors should be analyzed to determine whether
a procurement process is non-discriminatory?
    7. Explain why the Fixed Resource Requirement (FRR) Alternative is
or is not a viable alternative for those wishing to self-supply.
    8. What other alternatives to the FRR option would allow parties to
self-supply while deterring buyer market power?
Panelists
 Patrick McCullar, President & CEO, Delaware Municipal Electric
Corporation, Inc., representing American Public Power Association
 Gregory J. Morgan, Managing Director of Regulated Operations,
Dominion Virginia Power, representing Dominion Resources Services, Inc.
 Douglas R. M. Nazarian, Chairman, Maryland Public Service
Commission
 Dr. Joseph E. Bowring, Market Monitor, Monitoring Analytics,
L.L.C.
 David L. Mohre, Executive Director, Energy & Power Division,
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
 Lee A. Solomon, President, New Jersey Board of Public
Utilities
 Andrew Ott, Senior Vice President-Markets, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
 Mark Scott, Director, Structured Trading, Customized Energy
Solutions, representing PJM Load Group
 Dr. Roy Shanker, Consultant, PJM Power Providers Group
 Dr. William Hogan, Professor, Harvard University, representing
PSEG Companies
[FR Doc. 2011-19086 Filed 7-27-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 111 (Thursday, June 9, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37238-37239]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13665]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0002]

3D Surrogate Vehicle Scanning Event

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Announcement of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA is announcing a public meeting to seek stakeholder
feedback on a full-size 3-dimensional surrogate vehicle being developed
to better support the evaluation of advanced crash avoidance
technologies. NHTSA, Euro NCAP, Thatcham, and the Insurance Institute
for Highway Safety (IIHS) have been collaboratively working to develop
this surrogate; however, confirmation that it appears as realistic to
the sensors used in automotive safety systems requires feedback from
industry experts.

DATES: NHTSA will hold the public meeting July 13-14, 2016, in East
Liberty, OH. Each day the meeting will start at 9:00 a.m. and continue
until 5:00 p.m., local time. Check-in will begin at 8:00 a.m. All
attendees for the meeting are required to register by following the
instructions under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT no later than June
24, 2016. Admission onto the facility will not be permitted without
advanced registration.
    Following the event, participants are requested to submit all
written feedback and supporting information pertaining to their 3D
surrogate vehicle measurements no later than August 5, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held on the test track at the
Transportation Research Center, Inc., 10820 SR 347, East Liberty, OH
43319.
    Written Comments: Written feedback and supporting information
should be submitted not later than August 5, 2016, by any of the
following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number. Note that all comments received will be posted without
change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. Please see the Privacy Act discussion below.
    Docket: For access to the docket go to http://www.regulations.gov
at any time or to 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays. Telephone: 202-
366-9826.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets 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 DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78), or you may visit
http://www.regulations.gov/privacy.html.
    Confidential Business Information: If you wish to submit any
information under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit three
copies of your complete submission, including the information you claim
to be confidential business information to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA,
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590. In addition, you should
submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential
business information, to Docket Management at the address given above.
When you send a comment containing information claimed to be
confidential business information, you should submit a cover letter
setting forth the information specified in our confidential business
information regulation (49 CFR part 512).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Attendees should register at http://goo.gl/forms/C6tj0oRj1QlS4qNy2 not later than June 24, 2016. Admission
onto the facility will not be permitted without advanced registration.
Should it be necessary to cancel the meeting due to inclement weather
or other emergency, NHTSA will take available measures to notify
registered participants. If you have questions about the public
meeting, please contact<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To date, multiple iterative efforts have
been made to produce a 3D surrogate vehicle that not only emulates a
passenger car from any approach angle, but one that can be safely and
repeatedly struck by an actual light or heavy vehicle without harm. In
Europe, vehicle manufacturers and suppliers were presented with two
opportunities to measure the appearance of multiple surrogate designs
during similar test events hosted by Thatcham in the UK. The feedback
received from these companies has been invaluable, and has helped
refine the surrogate to its current characteristics.
    On July 13-14, 2016, NHTSA will be hosting a U.S.-based test event
featuring the most recent iteration of the collaboratively-developed 3D
surrogate vehicle and up to two robotic platforms (the surrogate
vehicle is secured to a shallow self-propelled robotic platform to
facilitate accurate longitudinal and lateral movement during testing).
During this two-day meeting, vehicle manufacturers and suppliers will
have an opportunity to measure the appearance of the 3D surrogate
vehicle from multiple approach angles using vehicle-based sensors
(e.g., radar, lidar, cameras, etc.). Feedback from the first day of
testing will be used to make adjustments to the surrogate ahead of the
second day's tests. Results from the second testing day will be used to
help finalize the surrogate's design. The stated goal is to identify a
final design by December 2016.
    Feedback from the participants will be beneficial in finalizing the
design of the surrogate. Meeting participants will have the opportunity
to provide results from the measurements collected with their
respective test equipment, and to provide specific recommendations
about how the surrogate vehicle's appearance, to any sensor, could be
improved. When providing these recommendations, participants are asked
to consider the balance between realism and practicality. While it is
very important the surrogate look as realistic as possible, it must
also remain strikeable from any approach angle, over a broad range of
impact speeds, without affecting the safety of those using it or
harming the vehicle being evaluated.

Draft Agenda (in local time)

Wednesday, July 13, 2016

08:00-09:00 Arrival/Check-In
09:00-09:30 Brief presentations describing the need for 3D surrogate

vehicles, and development efforts to date.
09:30-09:45 Descriptions of the event test layout and choreography
09:45-12:00 Morning testing
12:00-13:00 Lunch break
13:00-16:00 Afternoon testing
16:00-17:00 Discuss the day's testing. Agree on what changes are to be
made ahead of the next day's evaluations.
17:00 Adjourn

Thursday, July 14, 2016

08:00-08:30 Arrival/Check-In
08:30-12:00 Morning testing
12:00-13:00 Lunch break
13:00-15:30 Afternoon testing
15:30-17:00 Discuss preliminary results from the event's testing and
how the results will be collected, consolidated, and disseminated.
17:00 Adjourn

Public Meeting Topics

    Discussions pertaining to the 3D surrogate vehicle will be focused
on what features, if any, will need to be adjusted to allow it to
appear realistic to automotive sensing systems. NHTSA does not intend
to discuss how it may use 3D surrogate vehicles beyond inclusion is its
research programs.
    Surrogate vehicle feedback forms will be available on-site, and
will request information about, but not be limited to, the following
topics:
    1. Are the radar return characteristics of the surrogate, including
radar cross section (RCS), adequately realistic from each approach
angle, depth, and height relative to the ground?
    2. Are the visual characteristics, including the overall shape,
reflectivity, contrasting features, of the surrogate adequately
realistic?
    3. Is the surrogate able to adequately support lidar-based safety
systems?
    4. Is the presence of the robotic platform beneath the surrogate
apparent to the automotive sensing system (radar, visual, etc.)? If so,
what effect will the platform's presence expected to have on safety
system performance?
    5. How consistent is the classification of the surrogate (e.g.,
distance to the surrogate at which the safety system classifies the
surrogate as being an actual vehicle, and does the classification
remain stable during the test vehicle's approach to the surrogate). How
does this consistency compare to that expected by the overall light
vehicle population? What effect does the panel misalignment have on
surrogate classification?
    6. From an industry perspective, what is the preferred rank order
of the following: absolute surrogate vehicle realism, strikeablity/
durability, or ease of reassembly?

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated by 49 CFR
1.95.
Nathaniel Beuse,
Associate Administrator for Vehicle Safety Research.
[FR Doc. 2016-13665 Filed 6-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 153 (Monday, August 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 47914]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19557]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13629-002]

 Coleman Hydro, LLC; Notice of Availability of Draft
Environmental Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office
of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for an original license
to construct the Coleman Hydroelectric Project, located on Little
Timber Creek near the Town of Leadore, in Lemhi County, Idaho, and has
prepared a Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project. The
project would not occupy any federal lands.
    The draft EA includes staff's analysis of the potential
environmental impacts of the project and concludes that licensing the
project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not
constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the
quality of the human environment.
    A copy of the draft EA is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
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 Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the date of this
notice. Comments 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. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing,
documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and
five copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    For further information, contact Jim Hastreiter at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 4, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-19557 Filed 8-7-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 127 (Friday, July 1, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 43194]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15597]

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

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: EG16-118-000.
    Applicants: Western Antelope Blue Sky Ranch B LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Western Antelope Blue Sky Ranch B.
    Filed Date: 6/21/16.
    Accession Number: 20160621-5144.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: EG16-119-000.
    Applicants: Antelope DSR 2, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Antelope DSR 2, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/22/16.
    Accession Number: 20160622-5185.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: EG16-120-000.
    Applicants: Western Antelope Dry Ranch LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Western Antelope Dry Ranch LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/22/16.
    Accession Number: 20160622-5186.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/13/16.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER16-425-005.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: NYISO filing re: establish 6/22/16
as effective date for CSP to be effective 6/22/2016.
    Filed Date: 6/22/16.
    Accession Number: 20160622-5173.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/28/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-890-002.
    Applicants: Summer Solar LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Summer Solar LLC MBR Tariff to be
effective 3/4/2016.
    Filed Date: 6/22/16.
    Accession Number: 20160622-5096.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1969-001.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: 2016-06-20_Compliance filing to
address NIPSCO Complaint Order to be effective 8/22/2016.
    Filed Date: 6/20/16.
    Accession Number: 20160620-5137.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1987-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Service Agreement No. 4479,
Queue Position No. AB1-055 to be effective 5/23/2016.
    Filed Date: 6/22/16.
    Accession Number: 20160622-5035.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1988-000.
    Applicants: AEP Texas Central Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: TCC-La Paloma Energy Center
IA Fourth Amend & Restated to be effective 6/6/2016.
    Filed Date: 6/22/16.
    Accession Number: 20160622-5044.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1989-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 3200 WAPA & City of Lakota,
ND Interconnection Agreement to be effective 5/31/2016.
    Filed Date: 6/22/16.
    Accession Number: 20160622-5110.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/13/16.

    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 22, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-15597 Filed 6-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 168)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 50730-50731]
[DOCID:fr28au08-17]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 564 and 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2007-28322; Notice 2]

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Lamps, Reflective
Devices, and Associated Equipment

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule delays the effective date of an amendment that
reorganizes and improves the structure and clarity of the Federal motor
vehicle safety standard on lamps, reflective devices, and associated
equipment, from September 1, 2008 to December 1, 2009. The final rule
reorganizing the lighting standard was published on December 4,
2007.\1\ The agency received fifteen petitions for reconsideration of
the final rule, including two that requested a delay in the effective
date of the rule, and others which raised concerns that the
reorganization of FMVSS No. 108 imposed new requirements. To allow for
more time for the agency to analyze the petitions prior to the rule
taking effect, the agency is delaying the effective date until December
1, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 72 FR 68234.

DATES: The effective date of the final rule amending 49 CFR parts 564
and 571 published at 72 FR 68234 is delayed until December 1, 2009. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the rules
is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of December 1,
2009. Optional early compliance continues to be permitted. Any
petitions for reconsideration of today's final rule must be received by
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA not later than October 14, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Any petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket
number of this document and be submitted to: Administrator, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
West Building, Ground Floor, Docket Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may call Mr.
David Hines, Office of Crash Avoidance Standards (Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>). For legal issues, you may call Mr. Ari Scott,
Office of the Chief Counsel (Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>).
You may send mail to these officials at: National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps
Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, specifies requirements
for original and replacement lamps, reflective devices, and associated
equipment. The purpose of FMVSS No. 108 is to reduce traffic accidents
and deaths and injuries resulting from traffic accidents, by providing
adequate illumination of the roadway, and by enhancing the conspicuity
of motor vehicles on the public roads so that their presence is
perceived and their signals understood, both in daylight and in
darkness or other conditions of reduced visibility.
    On December 4, 2007, NHTSA published a final rule amending FMVSS
No. 108 to reorganize the standard and provide a more straightforward
and logical presentation of the applicable regulatory requirements (see
72 FR 68234). Related amendments were made to 49 CFR part 564,
Replacement Light Source Information. While the final rule greatly
reduced the number of third-party standards incorporated by reference,
it did not impose any new substantive requirements on manufacturers.
Along with the changes made, the final rule specified an effective date
of September 1, 2008 for these amendments and permitted voluntary early
compliance immediately upon publication.

II. Petitions for Reconsideration

    In response to the December 4 final rule, the agency received
fifteen petitions for reconsideration. Petitions for reconsideration
were submitted by Grote Industries, LLC, Alliance of Automobile
Manufacturers (Alliance), Motor and Equipment Manufacturers Association
(MEMA) \2\, Nissan North America, Inc., Valeo Sylvania, Calcoast
Industrial Testing Laboratory, Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Koito
Manufacturing Co, Ltd., Ford Motor Company, Toyota Motor North America,
Inc., GE Consumer & Industrial Automotive Lighting, SABIC Innovative
Plastics, Valeo Lighting Systems, Vehicle Services Consulting, Inc.,
and American Association for Justice. The petitions addressed a wide
range of FMVSS No. 108 subjects, including technical amendments to the
rule, concern that the reorganization imposed new requirements, and
requests to change the effective date of the final rule. Among the
latter, specifically, the Alliance requested that the final rule take
effect on September 1, 2009 and Harley-Davidson requested, unless the
agency granted all of the items contained in its petition, that the
effective date be delayed until September 1, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ MEMA submitted a petition for reconsideration collectively
with the Transportation Safety Equipment Institute and the Motor
Vehicle Lighting Council.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Agency Response to Petitions

    In the December 2007 final rule, the agency set a September 1, 2008
effective date. The fifteen petitions for reconsideration have asked
the agency to reconsider many aspects of that rulemaking. However,
NHTSA's consideration of the petitions has not yet concluded, and given
the imminence of the September 1, 2008 effective date, the agency has
determined that it is appropriate to first partially respond to
petitions concerning the effective date of the December 2007 final
rule. Accordingly, the agency is delaying the effective date of the
December 2007 final rule until December 1, 2009, when manufacturers
will be required to meet the new requirements of FMVSS No. 108. Other
issues raised in the petitions for reconsideration will be addressed by
the agency in a separate document.
    NHTSA believes that a partial response to the petitions for
reconsideration is necessary based upon the number of issues raised in
the petitions for reconsideration, and the impact of the revised
requirements on compliance documentation. As such, the agency has
determined that delaying the effective date is appropriate. The agency
notes that the Alliance originally requested an effective date of
September 1, 2009, one full year after the final rule in its comments
to our Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 70 FR 77454 (December 30, 2005) (Docket No. NHTSA-2006-
23634-3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA expects that all other issues raised in the petitions will be
fully addressed prior to the new December 1, 2009 effective date. In
the event, however, that these issues have not been resolved, all
affected manufacturers will be required to meet the new requirements.
Effective dates of agency final rules are not stayed due to outstanding
petitions for reconsideration of those rules.

IV. Effective Date of This Document

    Because September 1, 2008 (the original effective date for the
FMVSS

No. 108 final rule) is fast approaching, NHTSA finds for good cause
that this action delaying the effective date should take effect
immediately. Today's final rule makes no substantive changes to FMVSS
No. 108, but delays the effective date of the December 4, 2007 final
rule until December 1, 2009 while the agency responds to the petitions
for reconsideration of the rule.

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This action delays the effective date of an administrative rewrite
of FMVSS No. 108. It was not reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget under E.O. 12866. The agency has considered the impact of this
action under the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and
procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979), and has determined that it
is not ``significant'' under them.
    This final rule delays the effective date of a December 4, 2007
final rule, from September 1, 2008, to December 1, 2009. Neither that
rule nor today's action will have any measurable effect on costs or
benefits since the rule merely reorganizes and clarifies existing
requirements.

B. Privacy Act

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets 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 DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit
http://docketsinfo.dot.gov/.

C. Other Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

    In the December 2007 final rule, the agency discussed relevant
requirements related to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the National
Environmental Policy Act, Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, Civil Justice Reform, the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act, the Paperwork Reduction Act,
and Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks). Since that final rule was an administrative
rewrite of existing requirements and since today's action simply delays
the effective date of that final rule, today's rule does not affect the
agency's analyses in those areas.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued: August 21, 2008.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E8-19837 Filed 8-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


MEMORANDUM

DATE:		July 30, 2015

TO:		Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR - 2013-0602

FROM:	EPA Region 1

SUBJECT:	July 16, 2015 Presentation to New Hampshire Environmental Business Council including Proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY

      On July 16, 2015, Regional Administrator Curt Spalding presented on EPA priorities to the New Hampshire Environmental Business Council.  The presentation included the proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants.          ATTENDEES Curt Spalding, EPA

Approximately 25 people attended this conference.  Attendance was not taken by EPA

Slides attached.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 159 (Wednesday, August 17, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54797-54798]
[FR Doc No: 2016-19572]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of FERC Staff Attendance at the Entergy Regional State
Committee Meeting

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) hereby gives
notice that members of its staff may attend the meeting noted below.
Their attendance is part of the Commission's ongoing outreach efforts.

Entergy Regional State Committee

August 19, 2016 (9:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Central)

    This meeting will be held at the Capital Hotel, 111 West Markham
St., Little Rock, AR 72201.
    The discussions may address matters at issue in the following
proceedings:

    Docket No. EL95-33--Louisiana Public Service Commission et al. v.
Entergy Corp. et al.
    Docket No. EL00-66--Louisiana Public Service Commission, et al. v.
Entergy Corp., et al.
    Docket No. EL01-88--Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Entergy
Services, Inc.
    Docket No. EL09-61--Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Entergy
Services, Inc.
    Docket No. EL10-65--Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Entergy
Services, Inc.
    Docket No. EL14-19--Midcontinent Independent System Operator and
Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. EL16-7--City of Osceola, Arkansas v. Entergy Arkansas,
Inc.
    Docket No. ER10-1350--Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Docket No. ER13-432--Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Docket No. ER13-948--Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Docket No. ER13-1195--Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Docket No. ER13-1508--Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Docket No. ER13-1509--Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-1510--Entergy Louisiana, LLC.
    Docket No. ER13-1511--Entergy Mississippi, Inc.
    Docket No. ER13-1512--Entergy New Orleans, Inc.
    Docket No. ER13-1513--Entergy Texas, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-649--Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-693--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-694--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-695--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-696--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-697--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-699--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-700--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-701--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-702--Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-703--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-704--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-1640--Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, L.L.C
    Docket No. ER14-1641--Entergy Louisiana, LLC.
    Docket No. ER14-1642--Entergy Mississippi, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-1643--Entergy New Orleans, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-1644--Entergy Texas, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-2850--Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Docket No. ER14-2851--Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Docket No. ER15-1436--Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER15-1453--Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Docket No. ER15-1826--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER16-227--Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Docket No. ER16-1087--Entergy New Orleans, Inc.
    Docket No. ER16-1251--Entergy Louisiana, LLC.
    Docket No. ER16-1316--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER16-1528--Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Docket No. ER16-1806--Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER16-1965--Entergy Louisiana, LLC.
    Docket No. ER16-2034--Entergy Louisiana, LLC.
    Docket No. ER16-2124--Entergy New Orleans, Inc.
    Docket No. ER16-2125--Entergy Louisiana, LLC.
    Docket No. ER16-2199--Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Docket No. ER16-2200--Midcontinent Independent System Operator,
Inc.
    These meetings are open to the public.
    For more information, contact Patrick Clarey, Office of Energy
Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at (317) 249-
5937 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: August 11, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-19572 Filed 8-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P