[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17758-17761]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08425]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 147

[EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0280; FRL-9976-92-OW]

State of North Dakota Underground Injection Control Program;
Class VI Primacy Approval

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is hereby approving
an application from the state of North Dakota under the Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA) to implement an underground injection control (UIC)
program for Class VI injection wells located within the state, except
within Indian lands.

DATES: This regulation is effective April 24, 2018. The incorporation
by reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by
the Director of the Federal Register as of April 24, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0280. All documents in the docket are
listed on the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available electronically through http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa McWhirter, Drinking Water
Protection Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (4606M),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-3754; email address: [email protected] or Craig
Boomgaard, Underground Injection Control Unit, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, MSC 8WP-SUI, Denver,
Colorado 80202; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: (303)
312-7084; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    The state of North Dakota received primary enforcement
responsibility (primacy) for Class I, III, IV and V injection wells
under SDWA section 1422 on September 21, 1984, and Class II injection
wells under SDWA section 1425 on May 11, 1984. The state of North
Dakota has applied to the EPA under SDWA section 1422, 42 U.S.C. 300h-
1, for primacy for Class VI injection wells, except within Indian
lands. This action is based on a legal and technical review of the
state of North Dakota's application as directed in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR part 145. As a result of

this review, the EPA is approving the state of North Dakota's
application because it meets all applicable requirements for approval
under SDWA section 1422, and the state is capable of administering a
Class VI UIC program in a manner consistent with the terms and purposes
of SDWA and all applicable regulations.

II. Legal Authorities

    These regulations are being promulgated under authority of SDWA
sections 1422 and 1450, 42 U.S.C. 300h-1 and 300j-9.

III. Requirements for State UIC Programs

    SDWA section 1421 requires the Administrator of the EPA to
promulgate minimum requirements for effective state UIC programs to
prevent underground injection activities that endanger underground
sources of drinking water (USDWs). SDWA section 1422 establishes
requirements for states seeking EPA approval of state UIC programs.
    For states that seek approval for UIC programs under SDWA section
1422, the EPA has promulgated a regulation setting forth the applicable
procedures and substantive requirements, codified in 40 CFR part 145.
It includes requirements for state permitting programs (by reference to
certain provisions of 40 CFR parts 124 and 144), compliance evaluation
programs, enforcement authority, and information sharing.

IV. North Dakota's Application

A. Background

    On June 21, 2013, the state of North Dakota submitted a program
revision application to add Class VI injection wells to its SDWA
section 1422 UIC program. The EPA reviewed the application and
published a Federal Register notice of North Dakota's Underground
Injection Control Program Revision Application on August 9, 2013 (78 FR
48639), which sought public comments and provided an opportunity to
request a public hearing. Public notice of North Dakota's application
was also published in the Bismarck Tribune on August 9, 2013.

B. Public Participation Activities Conducted by the State of North
Dakota

    The state of North Dakota held two public hearings with public
comment periods on the state's intent to adopt its Class VI UIC
regulations. The first public hearing was held on April 24, 2012, and
the public comment period closed on June 8, 2012. The second public
hearing was held on October 22, 2012, and the public comment period
closed on November 1, 2012. Both public hearings were held in Bismarck,
North Dakota, and no public comments were received during the two
public comment periods.

C. Public Participation Activities Conducted by the EPA

    On August 9, 2013, a notice announcing North Dakota's Underground
Injection Control Program Revision was published in the Federal
Register (78 FR 48639) and in the Bismarck Tribune. This notice
provided that a public hearing would be held if requested. The agency
did not receive any requests for a public hearing and received five
written comments. Two comments were outside the scope of the state's
application and three comments were focused on the Memorandum of
Agreement between Region 8 and the North Dakota Industrial Commission.
The EPA worked with the Commission to address these comments and revise
the Memorandum of Agreement.

V. Public Comments Received on the Proposed Rule and EPA's Response to
Comments

    On May 19, 2017, EPA issued a proposed rulemaking (82 FR 22949) and
requested public comment. The public comment period was open for 60
days and ended on July 18, 2017. The EPA received comments from 15
individual commenters. Of these 15 commenters, 11 submitted comments in
support of the rule; 1 commenter submitted a comment outside the scope
of the rule; and 3 commenters submitted 13 comments asserting that
certain provisions in North Dakota's regulations do not meet the
federal requirements. After close consideration of these 13 comments,
the EPA resolved 11 in its response and determined 2 to be outside the
scope of the rule. The comments EPA received and EPA's responses are
available in EPA's Docket No. EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0280.

VI. EPA's Approval

    In this action, the EPA is approving the state of North Dakota's
Class VI UIC program; hereby, the state will assume primary enforcement
responsibility (primacy) for regulating Class VI injection wells in the
state, except within Indian lands. Support of this action is part of
the public record in EPA's Docket No. EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0280. This action
amends 40 CFR part 147 and incorporates by reference the EPA-approved
state statutes and regulations. The EPA will continue to administer the
UIC program for all well classes within Indian lands.
    The provisions of the state of North Dakota's Code that contain
standards, requirements, and procedures applicable to owners or
operators of Class VI UIC wells are incorporated by reference into 40
CFR 147.1751. Provisions of the state of North Dakota's Code that
contain standards, requirements, and procedures applicable to owners or
operators of Class I, III, IV and V injection wells have already been
incorporated by reference into 40 CFR 147.1751. Any provisions
incorporated by reference, as well as all permit conditions or permit
denials issued pursuant to such provisions, will be enforceable by the
EPA pursuant to SDWA section 1423 and 40 CFR 147.1(e).
    In order to better serve the public, the EPA is reformatting the
codification of the EPA-approved North Dakota SDWA section 1422
Underground Injection Control Program Statutes and Regulations for Well
Classes I, III, IV, V and VI. Instead of codifying the North Dakota
Statutes and Regulations as separate paragraphs, the EPA is now
incorporating by reference a binder that contains the EPA-approved
North Dakota Statutes and Regulations for Well Classes I, III, IV, V
and VI. This binder is incorporated by reference into Sec.  147.1751
and is available at http://www.regulations.gov in the docket for this
rule. A complete list of the contents of the binder ``EPA-approved
North Dakota SDWA Sec.  1422 Underground Injection Control Program
Statutes and Regulations for Well Classes I, III, IV, V and VI'' is
codified as Table 1 to paragraph (a) in that section.
    The EPA will continue to oversee the state of North Dakota's
administration of the SDWA Class VI program. Part of the EPA's
oversight responsibility will require quarterly reports of non-
compliance and annual UIC performance reports pursuant to 40 CFR 144.8.
The Memorandum of Agreement between the EPA and the state of North
Dakota, signed by the Regional Administrator on October 28, 2013,
provides the EPA with the opportunity to review and comment on all
permits.

VII. Effective Date

    This final rule is effective immediately upon publication. Section
553(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act (``APA''), 5 U.S.C. 553(d),
provides that final rules shall not become effective until 30 days
after publication in the Federal Register, ``except . . . as otherwise
provided by the agency for good cause,'' among other exceptions. The
purpose of this provision is to ``give affected parties a reasonable
time to adjust their behavior before the final

rule takes effect.'' Omnipoint Corp. v. FCC, 78 F.3d 620, 630 (D.C.
Cir. 1996); see also United States v. Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d 1099, 1104
(8th Cir. 1977) (quoting legislative history). Thus, in determining
whether good cause exists to waive the 30-day delay, an agency should
``balance the necessity for immediate implementation against principles
of fundamental fairness which require that all affected persons be
afforded a reasonable amount of time to prepare for the effective date
of its ruling.'' Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d at 1105. EPA has determined that
there is good cause for making this final rule effective immediately
because this action will simply provide that the state of North Dakota
has primacy under SDWA for the Class VI UIC program, pursuant to which
the state of North Dakota will be implementing and enforcing a state
regulatory program that is as stringent as the existing federal
program. At this time, there are no federally permitted Class VI wells
in North Dakota. As a result, there are no current permittees that need
time to prepare for this rule and any prospective permittees will
benefit from the regulatory certainty that an immediate effective date
will provide. This final rule will not require affected persons to take
action or change behavior to come into compliance within the next 30
days. Furthermore, several prospective applicants are waiting for the
state of North Dakota to receive primacy before submitting their permit
applications. For these reasons, the EPA finds that good cause exists
under section 553(d)(3) to make this rule effective immediately upon
publication.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review 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. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the information collection
activities contained in the existing regulations and has assigned OMB
control number 2040-0042. Reporting or recordkeeping requirements will
be based on the state of North Dakota UIC Regulations, and the state of
North Dakota is not subject to the PRA.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. This rule does not impose any
requirements on small entities as this rule approves a state program.
We have therefore concluded that this action will have no net
regulatory burden for all directly regulated small entities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (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. EPA's approval of
the state of North Dakota's program will not constitute a federal
mandate because there is no requirement that a state establish UIC
regulatory programs and because the program is a state, rather than a
federal program.

F. 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.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This action contains no federal mandates for
tribal governments and does not impose any enforceable duties on tribal
governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

H. 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 environmental 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 approves a state program.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations 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.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act and 1 CFR Part 51

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. The binder,
``EPA-Approved North Dakota SDWA Sec.  1422 Underground Injection
Control Program Statutes and Regulations for Well Classes I, III, IV, V
and VI,'' dated December 2013, is described in greater detail in
Section VI of this preamble. The material is reasonably available
through the rulemaking docket on www.regulations.gov and from the EPA.

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

    The EPA has determined that this action is not subject to Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it does not
establish an environmental health or safety standard. This action will
simply provide that the state of North Dakota has primacy under SDWA
for the Class VI UIC program, pursuant to which the state of North
Dakota will be implementing and enforcing a state regulatory program
that is as stringent as the existing federal program.

L. 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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 147

    Environmental protection, Incorporation by reference, Indian--
lands, Intergovernmental relations,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water supply.

    Dated: April 10, 2018.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency amends 40 CFR part 147 as follows:

PART 147--STATE, TRIBAL, AND EPA-ADMINISTERED UNDERGROUND INJECTION
CONTROL PROGRAMS

0
1. The authority citation for part 147 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300h-4.

0
2. In Sec.  147.1751:
0
a. Revise the section heading, the introductory text, paragraph (a),
and paragraph (b) introductory text.
0
b. Add paragraphs (e) through (h).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  147.1751  State-administered program--Class I, III, IV, V and VI
wells.

    The UIC program for Class I, III, IV and V wells in the state of
North Dakota, except those located on Indian lands, is the program
administered by the North Dakota Department of Health, approved by the
EPA pursuant to SDWA section 1422. Notification of this approval was
published in the Federal Register on September 21, 1984; the effective
date of this program is October 5, 1984. The UIC Program for Class VI
wells in the state of North Dakota, except those located on Indian
lands, is the program administered by the North Dakota Industrial
Commission, approved by the EPA pursuant to SDWA section 1422.
Notification of this approval was published in the Federal Register on
April 24, 2018; the effective date of this program is April 24, 2018.
This program consists of the following elements, as submitted to the
EPA in the state's program revision application.
    (a) The requirements set forth in the state statutes and
regulations cited in the binder entitled ``EPA-Approved North Dakota
SDWA Sec.  1422 Underground Injection Control Program Statutes and
Regulations for Well Classes I, III, IV, V and VI,'' dated December
2013, and listed in Table 1 to paragraph (a) of this section, are
incorporated by reference and made a part of the applicable UIC program
under SDWA for the state of North Dakota. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of the North Dakota regulations
that are incorporated by reference in paragraph (a) of this section may
be inspected at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8,
Library 2nd Floor, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202; Water
Docket, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and the National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA). If you wish to obtain materials from
the EPA Regional Office, please call<PHONE_NUMBER>; for materials from
a docket in the EPA Headquarters Library, please call the Water Docket
at<PHONE_NUMBER>. For information on the availability of this material
at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Table 1 to Paragraph (a) EPA-Approved North Dakota SDWA Sec.   1422 Underground Injection Control Program
                         Statutes and Regulations for Well Classes I, III, IV, V and VI
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         State
           State citation                     Title/subject         effective date      EPA approval date \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Dakota Century Code Sections    Regulation, Development and             1980  September 21, 1984, 49 FR
 38-12-01--38-12-03.                   Production of Subsurface                      37066.
                                       Minerals.
North Dakota Century Code Sections    Control, Prevention and                 1989  March 6, 1991, 56 FR 9418.
 61-28-02 and 61-28-06.                Abatement of Pollution of
                                       Surface Waters.
North Dakota Administrative Code      Underground Injection                   1983  September 21, 1984, 49 FR
 Sections 33-25-01-01--33-25-01-18.    Control Program.                              37066.
North Dakota Administrative Code      Subsurface Mineral                      1986  March 6, 1991, 56 FR 9418.
 Sections 43-02-02-01-43-02-02-50.     Exploration and Development.
North Dakota Administrative Code      Underground Injection                   1984  September 21, 1984, 49 FR
 Sections 43-02-02.1-01--43-02-02.2-   Control Program.                              37066.
 19.
North Dakota Century Code Sections    Carbon Dioxide Underground              2009  April 24, 2018, [Insert
 38-22-01--38-22-23.                   Storage.                                      Federal Register citation].
North Dakota Administrative Code      Control of Oil and Gas                  2013  April 24, 2018, [Insert
 Sections 38-08-16--38-08-17.          Resources.                                    Federal Register citation].
North Dakota Administrative Code      Geologic Storage of Carbon              2013  April 24, 2018, [Insert
 Sections 43-05-01-01--43-05-01-20.    Dioxide.                                      Federal Register citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In order to determine the EPA effective date for a specific provision listed in this table, consult the
  Federal Register notice cited in this column for the particular provision.

    (b) The following statutes and regulations, although not
incorporated by reference, also are part of the approved State-
administered program:
* * * * *
    (e) The Memorandum of Agreement between EPA Region VIII and the
North Dakota Industrial Commission, signed by the EPA Regional
Administrator on October 28, 2013.
    (f) The Memorandum of Understanding between the North Dakota
Industrial Commission, Department of Mineral Resources, Oil and Gas
Division and the North Dakota Department of Health, Water Quality
Division, Related to the Underground Injection Control Program signed
on June 19, 2013.
    (g) The statement of legal authority, ``Class VI Underground
Injection Control Program, Attorney General's Statement,'' signed by
the Attorney General of North Dakota on January 22, 2013.
    (h) The Class VI Program Description and any other materials
submitted as part of the program revision or as supplements thereto.

[FR Doc. 2018-08425 Filed 4-23-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 184 (Friday, September 21, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58562-58564]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23361]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2012-0003; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1267]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS
report, once effective, will be used by insurance agents and others to
calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings
and the contents of those buildings.

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before December 20, 2012.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in
the tables below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1267 to
Luis

Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance and
Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
(email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM
and FIS report become effective.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at
www.fema.gov/pdf/media/factsheets/2010/srp_fs.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location and
the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Tuscaloosa County, Alabama, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.adeca.alabama.gov/Divisions/owr/floodplain/Pages/County-Status.aspx
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Northport......................  City Hall, 3500 McFarland
                                          Boulevard, Northport, AL
                                          35476.
City of Tuscaloosa.....................  City Hall, 2201 University
                                          Boulevard, Tuscaloosa, AL
                                          35401.
Town of Brookwood......................  Town Hall, 15689 Highway 216,
                                          Brookwood, AL 35444.
Town of Coaling........................  Town Hall, 11281 Stephens Loop
                                          Road, Coaling, AL 35449.
Town of Coker..........................  Town Hall, 11549 Eisenhower
                                          Drive, Coker, AL 35452.
Town of Lake View......................  Town Hall, 21289 Phyllis Drive,
                                          Lake View, AL 35111.
Town of Moundville.....................  Town Hall, 410 Market Street,
                                          Moundville, AL 35474.
Town of Vance..........................  Town Hall, 18336 Highway 11
                                          North, Vance, AL 35490.
Town of Woodstock......................  Town Hall, 28513 Highway 5,
                                          Woodstock, AL 35188.
Unincorporated Areas of Tuscaloosa       Tuscaloosa County Public Works
 County.                                  Department, 2810 35th Street,
                                          Tuscaloosa, AL 35401.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Franklin County, Florida, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://portal.nwfwmdfloodmaps.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Apalachicola...................  City Hall, 1 Bay Avenue,
                                          Apalachicola, FL 32320.
City of Carrabelle.....................  City Hall, 1001 Gray Avenue,
                                          Carrabelle, FL 32322.
Unincorporated Areas of Franklin County  Franklin County Planning and
                                          Building Department, 34 Forbes
                                          Street, Suite 1, Apalachicola,
                                          FL 32320.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Hillsborough County, Florida, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.bakeraecom.com/index.php/florida/hillsborough
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unincorporated Areas of Hillsborough     Hillsborough County Department
 County.                                  of Planning and Growth
                                          Management, 5701 East
                                          Hillsborough Avenue, Suite
                                          1140, Tampa, FL 33610.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Jefferson County, Florida, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://portal.nwfwmdfloodmaps.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Monticello.....................  City Hall, 245 South Mulberry
                                          Street, Monticello, FL 32344.
Unincorporated Areas of Jefferson        Jefferson County Courthouse, 1
 County.                                  Courthouse Circle, Monticello,
                                          FL 32344.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

             Wakulla County, Florida, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://portal.nwfwmdfloodmaps.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Sopchoppy......................  City Hall, 105 Municipal
                                          Avenue, Sopchoppy, FL 32358.
City of St. Marks......................  City Hall, 788 Port Leon Drive,
                                          Saint Marks, FL 32355.
Unincorporated Areas of Wakulla County.  Wakulla County Planning and
                                          Zoning Department, 3095
                                          Crawfordville Highway,
                                          Crawfordville, FL 32327.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Champaign County, Illinois, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.starr-team.com/starr/RegionalWorkspaces/RegionV/ChampaignIL RegionalWorkspaces/RegionV/ChampaignIL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Champaign......................  City Hall, 102 North Neil
                                          Street, Champaign, IL 61820.
City of Urbana.........................  City Hall, 400 South Vine
                                          Street, Urbana, IL 61801.
Unincorporated Areas of Champaign        Champaign County Administrative
 County.                                  Building, 1776 East Washington
                                          Street, Urbana, IL 61802.
Village of Bondville...................  Village Hall, 102 South Walnut
                                          Street, Bondville, IL 61815.
Village of Broadlands..................  Village Hall, 107 Lincoln
                                          Street, Broadlands, IL 61816.
Village of Fisher......................  Village Office, 100 East School
                                          Street, Fisher, IL 61843.
Village of Ivesdale....................  Village Hall, 406 Third Street,
                                          Ivesdale, IL.
Village of Mahomet.....................  Administrative Offices, 503
                                          East Main Street, Mahomet, IL
                                          61853.
Village of Rantoul.....................  Village Hall, 333 South Tanner
                                          Street, Rantoul, IL 61866.
Village of Royal.......................  Village Hall, 101 West Main
                                          Street, Royal, IL 61871.
Village of Sadorus.....................  Village Hall, 115 West Market
                                          Street, Sadorus, IL 61872.
Village of Sidney......................  Village Hall, 221 South David
                                          Street, Sidney, IL 61877.
Village of St. Joseph..................  Village Hall, 207 East Lincoln
                                          Street, St. Joseph, IL 61873.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Macomb County, Michigan (All Jurisdictions)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.starr-team.com/starr/RegionalWorkspaces/RegionV/ShelbyPMR/SitePages/Home.aspx
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charter Township of Shelby.............  Building Department, 52700 Van
                                          Dyke Avenue, Shelby Township,
                                          MI 48316.
Township of Macomb.....................  Town Hall, 54111 Broughton
                                          Road, Macomb, MI 48042.
Township of Washington.................  Township Office, 57900 Van Dyke
                                          Avenue, Washington, MI 48094.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Jefferson County, New York (All Jurisdictions)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: www.rampp-team.com/ny.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Town of LeRay..........................  LeRay Municipal Offices, 8650
                                          LeRay Street, Evans Mills, NY
                                          13637.
Village of Black River.................  Village Office, 107 Jefferson
                                          Place, Black River, NY 13612.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Weber County, Utah, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.bakeraecom.com/index.php/utah/weber-county/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Ogden..........................  City Hall, 2549 Washington
                                          Boulevard, Ogden, UT 84401.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Dated: September 3, 2012.
Sandra K. Knight,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2012-23361 Filed 9-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 66 (Monday, April 6, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19093-19096]
[FR Doc No: 2020-06582]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0305; FRL-10007-15-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; Tennessee; Chattanooga Miscellaneous Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a
revision to the Chattanooga portion of the Tennessee State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Tennessee through
the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) on
behalf of the Chattanooga/Hamilton County Air Pollution Control Bureau
(Bureau) on September 12, 2018. The SIP submittal removes and replaces
the Chattanooga City Code, Air Pollution Control Ordinances pertaining
to the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Air Pollution Control Board (Board),
powers and duties of the Board, penalties, enforcement and permit fees.
The SIP revision that EPA is approving is consistent with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: This rule will be effective May 6, 2020.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0305. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is
(404) 562-9043. Mr. Lakeman can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Through a letter dated September 12, 2018, TDEC submitted a SIP
revision on behalf of the Bureau requesting removal and replacement of
certain air quality rules in the Chattanooga portion of the Tennessee
SIP.1 2 This rulemaking approves the Chattanooga City Code
Part II, Chapter 4, Section 4-4, ``Penalties for violation of chapter,
permit or order,'' \3\ Section 4-6, ``Air pollution control board;
bureau of air pollution control; persons required to comply with
chapter,'' \4\ Section 4-7, ``Powers and duties of the board;
delegation,'' \5\ Paragraphs 4-8(a)(14), 4-8(c)(12), 4-8(d)(4) and 4-
8(d)(6) in Section 4-8, ``Installation permit and certificate of
operation,'' \6\ Paragraph 4-

10(a), ``Records,'' \7\ and Section 4-17, ``Enforcement of chapter;
procedure for adjudicatory hearings for violations'' into the
Chattanooga portion of the Tennessee SIP.8 9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Bureau is comprised of Hamilton County and the
municipalities of Chattanooga, Collegedale, East Ridge, Lakesite,
Lookout Mountain, Red Bank, Ridgeside, Signal Mountain, Soddy Daisy,
and Walden. The Bureau recommends regulatory revisions, which are
subsequently adopted by the eleven jurisdictions. The Bureau then
implements and enforces the regulations, as necessary, in each
jurisdiction. Because the air pollution control regulations/
ordinances adopted by the jurisdictions within the Bureau are
substantively identical (except as noted later in this document),
EPA refers solely to Chattanooga and the Chattanooga rules
throughout the document as representative of the other ten
jurisdictions for brevity and simplicity. See footnotes 3 through 8,
later in this document.
    \2\ EPA received the SIP revision on September 18, 2018.
    \3\ In this final action, EPA is also approving substantively
similar changes in the following sections of the Air Pollution
Control Regulations/Ordinances for the remaining jurisdictions
within the Bureau, which were locally effective as of the relevant
dates below: Hamilton County--Section 4 (9/6/17); City of
Collegedale--Section 14-304 (10/16/17); City of East Ridge--Section
8-4 (10/26/17); City of Lakesite--Section 14-4 (11/2/17); Town of
Lookout Mountain--Section 4 (11/14/17); City of Red Bank--Section
20-4 (11/21/17); City of Ridgeside--Section 4 (1/16/18); City of
Signal Mountain--Section 4 (10/20/17); City of Soddy-Daisy--Section
8-4 (10/5/17); and Town of Walden--Section 4 (10/16/17). The only
substantive difference between the various jurisdictions'
regulations is that Chattanooga Ordinance Part II, Chapter 4,
Section 4-4 contains an additional sentence regarding fines and
fees, which is discussed later in this document.
    \4\ In this final action, EPA is also approving substantively
similar changes in the following sections of the Air Pollution
Control Regulations/Ordinances for the remaining jurisdictions
within the Bureau, which were locally effective as of the relevant
dates below: Hamilton County--Section 6 (9/6/17); City of
Collegedale--Section 14-306 (10/16/17); City of East Ridge--Section
8-6 (10/26/17); City of Lakesite--Section 14-6 (11/2/17); Town of
Lookout Mountain--Section 6 (11/14/17); City of Red Bank--Section
20-6 (11/21/17); City of Ridgeside--Section 6 (1/16/18); City of
Signal Mountain--Section 6 (10/20/17); City of Soddy-Daisy--Section
8-6 (10/5/17); and Town of Walden--Section 6 (10/16/17).
    \5\ In this final action, EPA is also approving substantively
similar changes in the following sections of the Air Pollution
Control Regulations/Ordinances for the remaining jurisdictions
within the Bureau, which were locally effective as of the relevant
dates below: Hamilton County--Section 7 (9/6/17); City of
Collegedale--Section 14-307 (10/16/17); City of East Ridge--Section
8-7 (10/26/17); City of Lakesite--Section 14-7 (11/2/17); Town of
Lookout Mountain--Section 7 (11/14/17); City of Red Bank--Section
20-7 (11/21/17); City of Ridgeside--Section 7 (1/16/18); City of
Signal Mountain--Section 7 (10/20/17); City of Soddy-Daisy--Section
8-7 (10/5/17); and Town of Walden--Section 7 (10/16/17).
    \6\ In this final action, EPA is also approving substantively
similar changes in the following sections of the Air Pollution
Control Regulations/Ordinances for the remaining jurisdictions
within the Bureau, which were locally effective as of the relevant
dates below: Hamilton County--Section 8 (9/6/17); City of
Collegedale--Section 14-308 (10/16/17); City of East Ridge--Section
8-8 (10/26/17); City of Lakesite--Section 14-8 (11/2/17); Town of
Lookout Mountain--Section 8 (11/14/17); City of Red Bank--Section
20-8 (11/21/17); City of Ridgeside--Section 8 (1/16/18); City of
Signal Mountain--Section 8 (10/20/17); City of Soddy-Daisy--Section
8-8 (10/5/17); and Town of Walden--Section 8 (10/16/17).
    \7\ In this final action, EPA is also approving substantively
similar changes in the following sections of the Air Pollution
Control Regulations/Ordinances for the remaining jurisdictions
within the Bureau, which were locally effective as of the relevant
dates below: Hamilton County--Section 10 (9/6/17); City of
Collegedale--Section 14-310 (10/16/17); City of East Ridge--Section
8-10 (10/26/17); City of Lakesite--Section 14-10 (11/2/17); Town of
Lookout Mountain--Section 10 (11/14/17); City of Red Bank--Section
20-10 (11/21/17); City of Ridgeside--Section 10 (1/16/18); City of
Signal Mountain--Section 10 (10/20/17); City of Soddy-Daisy--Section
8-10 (10/5/17); and Town of Walden--Section 10 (10/16/17).
    \8\ In this final action, EPA is also approving substantively
similar changes in the following sections of the Air Pollution
Control Regulations/Ordinances for the remaining jurisdictions
within the Bureau, which were locally effective as of the relevant
dates below: Hamilton County--Section 17 (9/6/17); City of
Collegedale--Section 14-17 (10/16/17); City of East Ridge--Section
8-17 (10/26/17); City of Lakesite--Section 14-17 (11/2/17); Town of
Lookout Mountain--Section 17 (11/14/17); City of Red Bank--Section
20-17 (11/21/17); City of Ridgeside--Section 17 (1/16/18); City of
Signal Mountain--Section 17 (10/20/17); City of Soddy-Daisy--Section
8-17 (10/5/17); and Town of Walden--Section 17 (10/16/17). The only
substantive difference between the various jurisdictions'
regulations is that Chattanooga City Code Part II, Chapter 4,
Section 4-17 contains an additional paragraph concerning citation of
violators to municipal court, which is discussed below.
    \9\ EPA received other revisions to the Chattanooga portion of
the Tennessee SIP transmitted with the same September 12, 2018,
cover letter. EPA will be considering action for those other SIP
revisions in a separate rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on February 10,
2020 (85 FR 7491), EPA proposed to approve the revision to the
Chattanooga portion of the Tennessee SIP provided on September 18,
2018. The NPRM provides additional detail regarding the background and
rationale for EPA's action. Comments on the NPRM were due on or before
March 2, 2020. EPA received no adverse comments on the NPRM.

II. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the following
provisions of Chattanooga City Code, Part II, Chapter 4, locally
effective on October 3, 2017: Section 4-4, ``Penalties for violation of
chapter, permit or order;'' Section 4-6, ``Air pollution control board;
bureau of air pollution control; persons required to comply with
chapter;'' Section 4-7, ``Powers and duties of the board; delegation;''
Paragraphs 4-8(a)(14), 4-8(c)(12), 4-8(d)(4) and 4-8(d)(6) in Section
4-8, ``Installation permit and certificate of operation;'' Paragraph 4-
10(a) in Section 4-10, ``Records;'' and Section 4-17, ``Enforcement of
chapter; procedure for adjudicatory hearings for violations.'' \10\ EPA
has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally
available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 Office
(please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble for more information). Therefore,
these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the State
implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into
that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113
of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's
approval, and will be incorporated by reference in the next update to
the SIP compilation.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ EPA's approval also includes regulations/ordinances
submitted for the other ten jurisdictions within the Bureau. See
footnotes 3 through 8, above.
    \11\ See 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving the removal and replacement in the entirety of the
following rules in the Chattanooga-Hamilton County portion of the
Tennessee SIP with the version of the rules submitted on September 12,
2018: Chapter 4, Section 4-4, ``Penalties for violation of chapter,
permit or order,'' Section 4-6, ``Air pollution control board; bureau
of air pollution control; persons required to comply with chapter,''
Section 4-7, ``Powers and duties of the board; delegation,'' Paragraphs
4-8(a)(14), 4-8(c)(12), 4-8(d)(4) and 4-8(d)(6) in Section 4-8,
``Installation permit and certificate of operation,'' Paragraph 4-
10(a), ``Records,'' and Section 4-17, ``Enforcement of chapter;
procedure for adjudicatory hearings for violations.''

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. This action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a

copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this
action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S.
House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A
major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in
the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 5, 2020. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations.

    Dated: March 17, 2020.
Mary S. Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 52 is amended
as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart RR--Tennessee

0
2. In Sec.  52.2220(c), amend Table 4 by revising the entries for
``Section 4-4'', ``Section 4-6'', ``Section 4-7'', ``Section 4-8'',
``Section 4-10'', ``Section 4-17'' under the heading ``Article I. In
General,'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2220   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                  Table 4--EPA-Approved Chattanooga Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      State section            Title/subject      Adoption date    EPA approval date          Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Article I. In General
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 4-4..............  Penalties for              10/3/2017  4/6/2020, [Insert     EPA's approval includes
                            violation of                          citation of           the corresponding
                            chapter, permit or                    publication].         sections of the Air
                            order.                                                      Pollution Control
                                                                                Regulations/Ordinances
                                                                                for the remaining
                                                                                jurisdictions within the
                                                                                Chattanooga-Hamilton
                                                                                County Air Pollution
                                                                                Control Bureau, which
                                                                                were locally effective
                                                                                as of the relevant dates
                                                                                below: Hamilton County--
                                                                                Section 4 (9/6/17); City
                                                                                of Collegedale--Section
                                                                                14-304 (10/16/17); City
                                                                                of East Ridge--Section 8-
                                                                                4 (10/26/17); City of
                                                                                Lakesite--Section 14-4
                                                                                (11/2/17); Town of
                                                                                Lookout Mountain--
                                                                                Section 4 (11/14/17);
                                                                                City of Red Bank--
                                                                                Section 20-4 (11/21/17);
                                                                                City of Ridgeside--
                                                                                Section 4 (1/16/18);
                                                                                City of Signal Mountain--
                                                                                Section 4 (10/20/17);
                                                                                City of Soddy-Daisy--
                                                                                Section 8-4 (10/5/17);
                                                                                and Town of Walden--
                                                                                Section 4 (10/16/17).

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 4-6..............  Air pollution              10/3/2017  4/6/2020, [Insert     EPA's approval includes
                            control board;                        citation of           the corresponding
                            bureau of air                         publication].         sections of the Air
                            pollution control;                                          Pollution Control
                            persons required to                                         Regulations/Ordinances
                            comply with chapter.                                        for the remaining
                                                                                jurisdictions within the
                                                                                Chattanooga-Hamilton
                                                                                County Air Pollution
                                                                                Control Bureau, which
                                                                                were locally effective
                                                                                as of the relevant dates
                                                                                below: Hamilton County--
                                                                                Section 6 (9/6/17); City
                                                                                of Collegedale--Section
                                                                                14-306 (10/16/17); City
                                                                                of East Ridge--Section 8-
                                                                                6 (10/26/17); City of
                                                                                Lakesite--Section 14-6
                                                                                (11/2/17); Town of
                                                                                Lookout Mountain--
                                                                                Section 6 (11/14/17);
                                                                                City of Red Bank--
                                                                                Section 20-6 (11/21/17);
                                                                                City of Ridgeside--
                                                                                Section 6 (1/16/18);
                                                                                City of Signal Mountain--
                                                                                Section 6 (10/20/17);
                                                                                City of Soddy-Daisy--
                                                                                Section 8-6 (10/5/17);
                                                                                and Town of Walden--
                                                                                Section 6 (10/16/17).
Section 4-7..............  Power and duties of        10/3/2017  4/6/2020, [Insert     EPA's approval includes
                            the board;                            citation of           the corresponding
                            delegation.                           publication].         sections of the Air
                                                                                Pollution Control
                                                                                Regulations/Ordinances
                                                                                for the remaining
                                                                                jurisdictions within the
                                                                                Chattanooga-Hamilton
                                                                                County Air Pollution
                                                                                Control Bureau, which
                                                                                were locally effective
                                                                                as of the relevant dates
                                                                                below: Hamilton County--
                                                                                Section 7 (9/6/17); City
                                                                                of Collegedale--Section
                                                                                14-307 (10/16/17); City
                                                                                of East Ridge--Section 8-
                                                                                7 (10/26/17); City of
                                                                                Lakesite--Section 14-7
                                                                                (11/2/17); Town of
                                                                                Lookout Mountain--
                                                                                Section 7 (11/14/17);
                                                                                City of Red Bank--
                                                                                Section 20-7 (11/21/17);
                                                                                City of Ridgeside--
                                                                                Section 7 (1/16/18);
                                                                                City of Signal Mountain--
                                                                                Section 7 (10/20/17);
                                                                                City of Soddy-Daisy--
                                                                                Section 8-7 (10/5/17);
                                                                                and Town of Walden--
                                                                                Section 7 (10/16/17).
Section 4-8..............  Installation permit,       10/3/2017  4/6/2020, [Insert     Except paragraphs 4-
                            temporary operating                   citation of           8(a)(1)-(13), (a)(15),
                            permit,                               publication].         (b)(1)-(5), (c)(1)-(4),
                            certification of                                            (d)(1)-(3), (d)(7),
                            operation and solid                                         (d)(9), and (e)(1)-(2),
                            fuel permit.                                                approved 2/18/97, with
                                                                                an 8/16/95 local
                                                                                adoption date; and
                                                                                paragraphs 4-8(a)(16),
                                                                                (c)(5)-(11), (d)(5),
                                                                                (d)(8), (f), and (g),
                                                                                which are not approved
                                                                                into the SIP.
                                                                                Due to intervening
                                                                                numbering changes, the
                                                                                versions of paragraphs 4-
                                                                                8(a)(14), (d)(4), and
                                                                                (d)(6) with local
                                                                                adoption dates of both 8/
                                                                                16/95 and 10/3/17 are
                                                                                approved into the SIP.

                                                                                EPA's approval includes
                                                                                the corresponding
                                                                                sections of the Air
                                                                                Pollution Control
                                                                                Regulations/Ordinances
                                                                                for the remaining
                                                                                jurisdictions within the
                                                                                Chattanooga-Hamilton
                                                                                County Air Pollution
                                                                                Control Bureau, which
                                                                                were locally effective
                                                                                as of the relevant dates
                                                                                below: Hamilton County--
                                                                                Section 8 (9/6/17); City
                                                                                of Collegedale--Section
                                                                                14-308 (10/16/17); City
                                                                                of East Ridge--Section 8-
                                                                                8 (10/26/17); City of
                                                                                Lakesite--Section 14-8
                                                                                (11/2/17); Town of
                                                                                Lookout Mountain--
                                                                                Section 8 (11/14/17);
                                                                                City of Red Bank--
                                                                                Section 20-8 (11/21/17);
                                                                                City of Ridgeside--
                                                                                Section 8 (1/16/18);
                                                                                City of Signal Mountain--
                                                                                Section 8 (10/20/17);
                                                                                City of Soddy-Daisy--
                                                                                Section 8-8 (10/5/17);
                                                                                and Town of Walden--
                                                                                Section 8 (10/16/17).

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 4-10.............  Records.............       10/3/2017  4/6/2020, [Insert     Except paragraph 4-10(b)
                                                                  citation of           approved 5/10/90, with a
                                                                  publication].         7/20/89 local adoption
                                                                                date.
                                                                                EPA's approval includes
                                                                                the corresponding
                                                                                sections of the Air
                                                                                Pollution Control
                                                                                Regulations/Ordinances
                                                                                for the remaining
                                                                                jurisdictions within the
                                                                                Bureau, which were
                                                                                locally effective as of
                                                                                the relevant dates
                                                                                below: Hamilton County--
                                                                                Section 10 (9/6/17);
                                                                                City of Collegedale--
                                                                                Section 14-310 (10/16/
                                                                                17); City of East Ridge--
                                                                                Section 8-10 (10/26/17);
                                                                                City of Lakesite--
                                                                                Section 14-10 (11/2/17);
                                                                                Town of Lookout
                                                                                Mountain--Section 10 (11/
                                                                                14/17); City of Red
                                                                                Bank--Section 20-10 (11/
                                                                                21/17); City of
                                                                                Ridgeside--Section 10 (1/
                                                                                16/18); City of Signal
                                                                                Mountain--Section 10 (10/
                                                                                20/17); City of Soddy-
                                                                                Daisy--Section 8-10 (10/
                                                                                5/17); and Town of
                                                                                Walden--Section 10 (10/
                                                                                16/17).

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 4-17.............  Enforcement of             10/3/2017  4/6/2020, [Insert     EPA's approval includes
                            chapter; procedure                    citation of           the corresponding
                            for adjudicatory                      publication].         sections of the Air
                            hearings.                                                   Pollution Control
                                                                                Regulations/Ordinances
                                                                                for the remaining
                                                                                jurisdictions within the
                                                                                Bureau, which were
                                                                                locally effective as of
                                                                                the relevant dates
                                                                                below: Hamilton County--
                                                                                Section 17 (9/6/17);
                                                                                City of Collegedale--
                                                                                Section 14-17 (10/16/
                                                                                17); City of East Ridge--
                                                                                Section 8-17 (10/26/17);
                                                                                City of Lakesite--
                                                                                Section 14-17 (11/2/17);
                                                                                Town of Lookout
                                                                                Mountain--Section 17 (11/
                                                                                14/17); City of Red
                                                                                Bank--Section 20-17 (11/
                                                                                21/17); City of
                                                                                Ridgeside--Section 17 (1/
                                                                                16/18); City of Signal
                                                                                Mountain--Section 17 (10/
                                                                                20/17); City of Soddy-
                                                                                Daisy--Section 8-17 (10/
                                                                                5/17); and Town of
                                                                                Walden--Section 17 (10/
                                                                                16/17).

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-06582 Filed 4-3-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 143 (Monday, July 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 44354]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18243]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0101; FRL-9930-21-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
Production (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``NESHAP for Polyvinyl Chloride
and Copolymers Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHHH) (Renewal)''
(EPA ICR No. 2432.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0666), 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.). This is a
proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through July
31, 2015. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal
Register (79 FR 30117) on May 27, 2014, during a 60-day comment period.
This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. 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 may be submitted on or before August 26,
2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2014-0101, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or 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: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, 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.
    Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General
Provisions of the NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), and any changes,
or additions to the General Provisions, which are specified at 40 CFR
part 63, subpart HHHHHHH. Owners or operators of the affected
facilities must submit an initial notification report, performance
tests, and periodic reports and results. Owners or operators are also
required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any
startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected
facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is
inoperative. Reports, at a minimum, are required semiannually.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Polyvinyl chloride and copolymer
production facilities that are major sources of HAP.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
Subpart HHHHHHH).
    Estimated number of respondents: 17 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, and semiannually.
    Total estimated burden: 378,000 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $43,150,000 (per year), includes $5,150,000
in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the
estimated burden as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of
Approved Burdens. In consulting with the Vinyl Institute during the
renewal of this ICR, EPA received comprehensive comments on the burden
associated with specific reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
including, but not limited to, performance test, monitor installation,
resin and wastewater sampling, equipment leak and process vent
monitoring. We have updated the burden items to more accurately reflect
the costs incurred by the industry. The update results in a substantial
increase in the respondent labor hours, labor costs, and capital/O&M
costs. There is also an increase in the number of responses as we have
updated the number of subject major sources from 15 to 17 based on data
provided by the Vinyl Institute.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-18243 Filed 7-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
March 2013
Economic Impact and Small Business Analysis  -  Proposed Wool Fiberglass Area Source NESHAP
	This report is the economic impact analysis for the proposed Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing area source standard.   This standard is scheduled to be proposed under a settlement agreement on March 15, 2013. The report presents impacts to firms affected by the requirements in the proposed rule and also their consumers.  Impacts to small firms are accounted for in adherence to the Regulatory Flexibility Act as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA).
The rule includes emissions limits for furnaces, test methods, startup/shutdown provisions, and other requirements.  For more information on this regulatory action, please refer to the preamble for this action.
Wool fiberglass manufacturing facilities are included in NAICS 327993.     The industry's revenue for 2011 was $5.1 billion, and the estimated gross profit was 40.15%.  We use economic data for 2011 in this analysis in order to be consistent with the year dollars for the costs (2011).

      This economic impact analysis identified the businesses that will be affected by this rule using information from the cost memo for this proposal, and provides an analysis at a screening level to help estimate the rule's economic impact on affected businesses and their consumers.  The analysis employed here is a "sales test" that computes the annualized compliance costs as a share of sales for each company. The annualized cost per sales for a company represents the maximum price increase in affected product needed for the company to completely recover the annualized costs imposed by the regulation.
      The "sales test" is the impact methodology EPA employs in economic impact analysis such as this one as opposed to a "profits test", in which annualized compliance costs are calculated as a share of profits.  This is because revenues or sales data are commonly available data for entities normally impacted by EPA regulations and profits data normally made available are often not the true profits earned by firms due to accounting and tax considerations.  Firms and entities often have ways legally available in the tax code to minimize their reported profits; thus, using reported profits may lead to a less than accurate estimate of the economic impact of a regulation to an affected firm or entity and their consumers.   While screening level analyses are often employed to estimate impacts to small business or entities as part an analysis in compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), a screening level analysis can also be employed in an economic impact analysis such as this one whose focus is on the regulated companies.
      In the next section is background information on the wool fiberglass industry, and impact results then follow.
Background on the Wool Fiberglass Industry
      Wool fiberglass is a thick, fluffy material made from discontinuous fibers, is used for thermal insulation and sound absorption. It is commonly found in ship and submarine bulkheads and hulls; automobile engine compartments and body panel liners; in furnaces and air conditioning units; acoustical wall and ceiling panels; and architectural partitions. Fiberglass can be tailored for specific applications such as Type E (electrical), used as electrical insulation tape, textiles and reinforcement; Type C (chemical), which has superior acid resistance, and Type T, for thermal insulation.

	The basic raw materials for fiberglass products are a variety of natural minerals and manufactured chemicals. The major ingredients are silica sand, limestone, borides and soda ash. Other ingredients may include calcined alumina, borides, feldspar, nepheline syenite, magnesite, and kaolin clay, among others. Silica sand is used as the glass former, and soda ash and limestone help primarily to lower the melting temperature. Other ingredients are used to improve certain properties, such as borides for chemical resistance and ductability. Waste glass, also called cullet, is also used as a raw material and may be `internal' from the production of fiberglass or may be `external' from glass recycling. The raw materials must be carefully weighed in exact quantities, their chemical compositions evaluated, and thoroughly mixed together (called batching) before being melted into glass for the manufacture of fiberglass.
      There are three parent firms owning these facilities with major HAP sources that will incur costs as a result of this proposal, and these firms are shown in Table 1.  The costs used as input to the economic impact analysis include the cost of emissions control and the costs of monitoring, recordkeeping, reporting and testing.  These are the full cost of compliance estimated by EPA for this proposed rule.  Based on emissions test data received, we estimate that there are currently eight gas-fired furnaces located at five facilities. Three of these eight furnaces do not meet the proposed chromium compounds emission limit; the remaining five furnaces currently meet the limit but would incur compliance testing costs because they meet the applicability requirements of the proposed rule (i.e., they are gas-fired glass-melting furnaces). We have estimated the add-on control cost impact for those affected facilities (three furnaces) based on the installation of a sodium hydroxide (NaOH) scrubber to remove chromium compounds from the furnace exhaust stream(s). The capital equipment cost was estimated to be $250,000 for each unit (scrubber) with an annual operation cost of $100,000 per unit. Guardian and Johns-Manville (owned by Berkshire-Hathaway) are wool fiberglass producers who are expected to incur no compliance costs as a result of this proposal as shown in the cost memo for this proposal.  None of these firms affected by the proposal is a small business as defined by the SBA (750 employees or less for an ultimate parent company, as mentioned earlier for the relevant NAICS code), for all of these firms have in excess of 10,000 employees as of 2011.     Each of these firms has revenues in excess of $3 billion in 2011, as shown in Table 1.   All of the firms are owned by parent companies based in the U.S. except for CertainTeed, which is owned by Saint-Gobain, a French conglomerate.  Table 1 provides the annualized compliance costs and economic impacts to the affected firms from this proposed rule.  EPA used no CBI in generating economic impacts for this industry.
Table 1:  Wool Fiberglass Firms that Are Affected by the Proposed Area Source Rule, their Revenues and Costs Incurred from the Proposed Area Source Rule, and Economic Impacts from this Area Source Rule
Wool Fiberglass Firm
Annual Revenues in 2011 (billions)
Total Annualized Costs (2011 dollars)[e]
Annualized Costs as a Percentage of Annual Revenues in 2011
Owens Corning
                                                                      $5.30[c]

                                                                       $140,000

                                                                          0.003
 Certain Teed (owned by Saint-Gobain)
                                                                  $56.31[a,][b]

                                                                         20,000

                                                                       0.000004
Knauf Group (owned by Gebr. Knauf Verwaltungsgesellschaft KG)
                                                                       $3.02[d]

                                                                        220,000

                                                                          0.007
[a] Taken from   http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/International-Taxpayers/Yearly-Average-Currency-Exchange-Rates.  Conversion from euros uses euro to U.S. dollar value as an average for all of 2011.  The conversion from euro to U.S. dollar value for 2011 is 0.748.  That is, 0.748 euro = $1.
 [b] Taken from 2011 annual report for Saint-Gobain, Inc., found at    http://www.saint-gobain.com/files/Saint-Gobain-annual-report-2011.pdf,  p. 4.
[c] Taken from http://investor.owenscorning.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=71581&p=irol-IRHome.
[d]http://www.investorpoint.com/stock/USG-Usg+Corp./income-statement/.

 [e]Costs are taken from RTI International to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/NRG, "Estimated Cost Impact for Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing Industry to Comply with Proposed Area Source Rule," March 12, 2013.

	The economic impact on these firms, measured in annual compliance costs as a percent of sales or revenues, is less than 0.01 percent for each of the affected parent firms based on using the most current year for available revenue data.    The total annualized costs of the proposed rule to the wool fiberglass industry are $380,000 (2011 dollars).
      To examine impacts on price and output from this proposal in an illustrative way, we use estimates of the price elasticity of demand and supply for this industry.  The price elasticity of demand for the wool fiberglass industry is estimated at -0.8, and the price elasticity of supply for the wool fiberglass industry is estimated at -0.7.  With the responsiveness of wool fiberglass demand and supply at less than 1:1 compared to a price change of 1 percent, and with the change in product price as approximated by the cost to revenue ratio at less than 0.01 percent, for this ratio is the maximum price change that producers may face, it is expected that wool fiberglass price and output changes will be less than 0.01 percent. Hence, the overall economic impact of this proposed rule should be relatively low on the affected industry and its consumers.  It should be noted that the wool fiberglass firms mentioned above that are expected to not incur any costs as a result of this proposal will experience some increase in revenues to the extent that wool fiberglass prices increase as a response to this proposal.  For more information on the compliance costs, please refer to the cost memo for this proposed rule.
	For the proposed rule, we find that we can certify that there is not a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities (or SISNOSE).  This is based on no small firm being impacted by this rule as shown in the impact results presented in this economic impact and small business impact analysis, and that no wool fiberglass manufacturer is a small business.