[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 82 (Wednesday, April 29, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23721-23730]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09889]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2014-0755; FRL-9926-95-Region 10]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Washington:
Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Visibility Protection

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
revisions to the Washington State Implementation Plan (SIP) that were
submitted by the Department of Ecology (Ecology) on January 27, 2014.
These revisions implement the preconstruction permitting regulations
for large industrial (major source) facilities in attainment and
unclassifiable areas, called the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) program. The PSD program in Washington has been
historically operated under a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). This
approval of Ecology's PSD program narrows the FIP to include only those
few facilities, emission sources, geographic areas, and permits for
which Ecology does not have PSD permitting jurisdiction or authority.
The EPA is also approving Ecology's visibility protection permitting
program which overlaps significantly with the PSD program.

DATES: This final rule is effective on May 29, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2014-0755. All documents in the docket are
listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which
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 Planning Unit, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA
Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101. The EPA requests that
if at all possible, you contact the individual listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the
docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday,
8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Hunt at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by using the above EPA, Region 10 address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Definitions

    For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain
words or initials as follows:
    (i) The words or initials ``Act'' or ``CAA'' mean or refer to the
Clean Air Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
    (ii) The words ``EPA'', ``we'', ``us'' or ``our'' mean or refer to
the Environmental Protection Agency.
    (iii) The initials ``SIP'' mean or refer to State Implementation
Plan.
    (iv) The words ``Washington'' and ``State'' mean the State of
Washington.

Table of Contents

I. Background Information
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

I. Background Information

    On January 27, 2014, Ecology submitted revisions to update the
general air quality regulations contained in Chapter 173-400 of the
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) that apply to sources within
Ecology's jurisdiction, including minor new source review, major source
nonattainment new source review (major NNSR), PSD, and the visibility
protection (visibility) program. On October 3, 2014, the EPA finalized
approval of provisions contained in Chapter 173-400 WAC that apply
generally to all sources under Ecology's jurisdiction, but stated that
we would act separately on the major source-specific permitting
programs in a phased approach (79 FR 59653). On November 7, 2014, the
EPA finalized the second phase in the series, approving the major NNSR
regulations contained in WAC 173-400-800 through 173-400-860, as well
as other parts of Chapter 173-400 WAC that support major NNSR (79 FR
66291).
    On January 7, 2015, the EPA proposed approval of the remainder of
Ecology's January 27, 2014 submittal, covering the PSD and visibility
requirements for

major stationary sources under Ecology's jurisdiction (80 FR 838). An
explanation of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements, submitted
revisions, and the EPA's reasons for and limitations of the proposed
approval are provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking, which,
together with this document, provides the basis for our final action.
The public comment period for this proposed rule ended on February 6,
2015. The EPA received two sets of similar comments on the proposal.
    Before addressing the public comments, the EPA is clarifying its
discussion in the January 7, 2015 proposal, regarding two important
distinctions between the applicability of Ecology's minor NSR program
and its PSD program. These differences arise from the State's
definitions of the terms ``modification'' in WAC 173-400-030(48) and
``major modification'' in WAC 173-400-710 and -720, which adopt the
Federal definitions in 40 CFR 52.21(b)(2) for Ecology's PSD program.
See 80 FR at 840. The proposal first noted that the applicability test
for ``modifications'' under Ecology's minor NSR program is based on the
definition of modification in CAA section 111(a)(4) and the EPA's
implementing rules at 40 CFR 60.14, and specifically, that a
modification is an increase in the emission rate of an existing
facility in terms of kilograms per hour. See WAC 173-400-030(48). The
proposal then noted that the applicability test under the Federal PSD
program is based on tons per year. The EPA is clarifying here that
under Washington's PSD program, the determination of whether a project
(as that term is defined in 40 CFR 52.21(b)(52) and which is adopted by
reference at WAC 173-400-720(4)(a)(vi)) is a ``major modification'' is,
consistent with the Federal PSD program, based on whether the project
results in both a significant emissions increase and a significant net
emissions increase in terms of tons per year. See WAC 400-173-
720(4)(a)(vi) (which adopts by reference the Federal PSD applicability
test and definitions in 40 CFR 52.21(a)(2) and (b)(2), respectively);
see also WAC 173-400-710(a). Therefore, as stated in the proposal, for
any physical or operational change at an existing stationary source,
regulated sources and permitting authorities will need to calculate
emission changes in terms of both kilograms per hour and tons per year
to determine whether changes are subject to minor NSR, PSD, or both.
    Second, the proposal discussed a difference in minor NSR versus PSD
review in Washington that arises from a limitation on the scope of the
review of a modification under Ecology's minor NSR program. The EPA
first noted that, under Ecology's minor NSR program, new source review
of a modification is limited to the emission unit or units proposed to
be modified and the air contaminants whose emissions would increase as
a result of the modification. See WAC 173-400-110(1)(d) (``New source
review of a modification is limited to the emission unit or units
proposed to be modified and the air contaminants whose emissions would
increase as a result of the modification.''). In contrasting this minor
NSR provision with the requirements of Ecology's PSD program (and the
Federal PSD program), the EPA incorrectly used the phrase ``new and
modified units'' rather than the terms ``new emissions units'' and
``existing emissions units,'' the terminology used in 40 CFR
52.21(a)(2), which is incorporated into Washington's PSD regulations
and the subject of this final SIP approval. The EPA is emphasizing here
that, under Ecology's PSD program (as under the Federal PSD program),
review of a project that is a ``major modification'' must be done in
accordance with the provisions of WAC 173-400-700 through 173-400-750,
and that the limitation in WAC 173-400-110(1)(d) on the review of a
``modification'' does not apply to a ``major modification.'' See WAC
173-400-110(1)(d) (``Review of a major modification must comply with
WAC 173-400-700 through 173-400-750 or 173-400-800 through 173-400-860,
as applicable.'').

II. Response to Comments

    The EPA received two sets of similar comments from the Northwest
Pulp & Paper Association and the Washington Forest Protection
Association regarding carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from
industrial combustion of biomass.

A. CO2 Emissions From Industrial Combustion of Both Fossil
Fuel and Biomass

    Comment: The EPA must clearly explain in the final approval that,
due to the limitations imposed by Revised Code of Washington (RCW)
70.235.020(3) concerning the industrial combustion of biomass,\1\ the
EPA is retaining the authority to conduct the best available control
technology (BACT) analysis for PSD permits only for biogenic
CO2 emissions from biomass and will coordinate its
processing and issuance of PSD permits with the Department of Ecology.
One of the commenters specifically requests clarity regarding
situations where there are multiple combustion fuels producing
CO2 from a source and whether Ecology would retain PSD
permitting authority for CO2 emissions resulting from the
industrial combustion of non-biomass fuels from such a source.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Note that one commenter refers to the exemption in RCW
70.235.020(3) as applying to ``forest biomass'' and points to the
definition of that term in RCW 79.02.010(7)(a). RCW 70.235.020(3),
however, uses the term ``biomass,'' not ``forest biomass,'' and
nothing in RCW Ch. 70.235 indicates that the definitions in RCW Ch.
79.02 are to be used in interpreting RCW Ch. 70.235. We therefore
continue to use the terminology in RCW Ch. 79.02 in describing the
scope of the remaining Federal Implementation Plan for PSD in
Washington.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response: As discussed in the proposal of this rule, RCW
70.235.020(3) statutorily bars Ecology from regulating CO2
under Ecology's PSD program in some circumstances. That statute
provides that ``[e]xcept for purposes of reporting, emissions of carbon
dioxide from industrial combustion of biomass in the form of fuel wood,
wood waste, wood by-products, and wood residuals shall not be
considered a greenhouse gas as long as the region's silvicultural
sequestration capacity is maintained or increased.'' The EPA has been
actively examining whether under Federal law CO2 emissions
from the industrial combustion of biomass may be exempt from the PSD
permitting requirements in a manner similar to RCW 70.235.020(3). In
2011, the EPA adopted a rule that deferred, for a period of three
years, the application of the PSD and Title V permitting requirements
to CO2 emissions from bioenergy and other biogenic
stationary sources (biogenic CO2). 76 FR 43490 (July 20,
2011) (Biomass Deferral Rule). During the three-year deferral period,
the EPA conducted a detailed examination of the science associated with
biogenic CO2 emissions from stationary sources and developed
a document entitled ``Accounting Framework for Biogenic CO2
Emissions from Stationary Sources,'' which the Agency submitted to the
EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) for peer review.
    On July 12, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit issued a decision overturning the Biomass Deferral
Rule. Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA, 722 F.3d 421 (D.C. Cir.
2013). Although this decision has not yet taken effect because of
matters still pending in the courts, the Biomass Deferral Rule expired
on its own terms on July 21, 2014. The EPA was not able to issue an
additional rule before this date addressing the regulation of biogenic
CO2 emissions from stationary sources in the PSD permitting
program. However, the EPA plans to propose revisions to the PSD

rules to include an exemption from the BACT requirement for GHGs from
waste-derived feedstocks and from non-waste biogenic feedstocks derived
from sustainable forest or agricultural practices. For all other
biogenic feedstocks, the EPA intends to propose that biogenic
CO2 emissions would remain subject to the GHG BACT
requirement at this time. See Memorandum from Janet McCabe, Acting
Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation, to EPA Air
Division Directors, Regions 1-10, ``Addressing Biogenic Carbon Dioxide
Emissions from Stationary Sources,'' (Nov. 19, 2014). In addition, to
continue advancing our understanding of the role biomass can play in
reducing overall GHG emissions, the EPA has developed a second draft of
the Framework for Assessing Biogenic CO2 Emissions from
Stationary Sources, and is initiating a second round of targeted peer
review through its SAB.
    Although the EPA is planning to initiate the rulemaking described
above that would enable states to avoid applying BACT to GHG emissions
from combustion of biogenic feedstocks derived from sustainable forest
or agricultural practices, the CAA and EPA regulations presently
require that PSD permitting programs address CO2 emissions
from the industrial combustion of biomass. CO2 is a gas
included in the definition of ``greenhouse gas'' used in the Federal
PSD program.\2\ Because GHGs are a pollutant subject to regulation
under the CAA, section 165 of the Act requires GHG emissions from a
major source obtaining a PSD permit to be subject to PSD requirements,
particularly the requirement to meet emission limitations based on
application of BACT. After the expiration of the three-year period in
the EPA's Biomass Deferral Rule, there is presently no EPA rule in
place that exempts the CO2 emissions from the industrial
combustion of biomass from the requirements of the PSD permitting
program. As discussed in our January 7, 2015 proposal (80 FR 838),
because of the Supreme Court decision in Utility Air Regulatory Group
v. Environmental Protection Agency, 134 S.Ct. 2427, the EPA is not
applying the requirement that a state's SIP-approved PSD program
require that sources obtain PSD permits when GHGs are the only
pollutant (i) that the source emits or has the potential to emit above
the major source thresholds, or (ii) for which there is a significant
emissions increase and a significant net emissions increase from a
physical change or change in the method of operation of a major
stationary source.\3\ However, the BACT requirement remains applicable
to GHGs from a source that is subject to PSD because it is major for
another regulated NSR pollutant (what is known as an ``anyway source'')
and which would emit a significant amount of GHGs (i.e., more than
75,000 tons per year CO2 equivalent emissions,
CO2e, as defined in 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)). Absent an EPA rule
establishing an exemption for CO2 emissions from biomass
combustion, the determination of BACT for a regulated NSR pollutant
must consider all of the emissions of each pollutant subject to
regulation under the Act. Because RCW 70.235.020(3) prohibits Ecology
from establishing BACT limits for such sources that include
CO2 emissions resulting from the industrial combustion of
biomass, Washington law is inconsistent with the EPA's current
regulations implementing the PSD provisions in the CAA in that regard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(definition of ``subject to
regulation'').
    \3\ Under this decision, the Supreme Court held that the EPA may
not treat GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of determining
whether a source is a major source (or major modification thereof)
required to obtain a PSD permit, but that the EPA could continue to
require that PSD permits, otherwise required based on emissions of
pollutants other than GHGs, contain limitations on GHG emissions
based on the application of BACT. See 80 FR at 842.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result, the EPA must retain a FIP under 40 CFR 52.21 and issue
partial PSD permits to ensure that major sources in Washington have a
means to satisfy the CAA construction permit requirements for GHGs when
CO2 emissions from the industrial combustion of biomass in
Washington cannot be considered or regulated by Ecology under its PSD
rules.\4\ Because Ecology does have authority to carry out all PSD
requirements for GHGs except for sources permitted to engage in the
industrial combustion of biomass, the EPA is approving Ecology's
regulations as part of the Washington PSD SIP for such purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ PSD permitting of CO2 emissions from such sources
was also excluded from the 2013 Delegation Agreement between the EPA
and Washington.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For sources subject to the FIP, the EPA is retaining the authority
to conduct the BACT analysis for all GHGs when necessary, not just the
biogenic CO2 emissions not covered by the Washington
permitting program under RCW 70.235.020(3). Because the regulated NSR
pollutant is GHGs and not CO2, the Federal PSD permit issued
by the EPA under the FIP will contain a BACT limit covering all GHG
emissions from a subject emission unit when that unit is permitted to
emit biogenic CO2 not covered by the Washington permitting
program. The EPA believes it should retain authority over all GHG
emissions at such sources to avoid difficulties that could arise if
Ecology and the EPA each separately evaluated BACT for only a portion
of the GHG emissions from an emission unit. For example, each agency
could end up calculating cost values that would not reflect the true
cost of the control options for GHG emissions because not all GHGs, as
defined under the Federal PSD program, would be considered by either
agency.
    Thus, the EPA FIP addresses the impact of the Washington statutory
provision in two ways. First, the Ecology and the EPA definitions of
GHGs are effectively different, with the EPA's definition being more
inclusive (i.e., it does not exclude CO2 emissions from the
industrial combustion of biomass) so an ``anyway source'' could be
subject to PSD for GHGs under the FIP when it would not be subject to
PSD under the SIP. In this situation, the EPA will issue a Federal PSD
permit under 40 CFR 52.21 for the new major stationary source or major
modification that would require BACT for GHGs for all subject emission
units at the source, regardless of whether CO2 emissions
were from the industrial combustion of biomass or from other sources of
GHG emissions at the facility. Second, if an ``anyway source'' is
subject to PSD for GHG emissions under both the SIP and the FIP, but
there are CO2 emissions from the industrial combustion of
biomass that cannot be addressed in the Ecology PSD permit, the EPA
will issue a Federal PSD permit under 40 CFR 52.21 requiring BACT for
GHGs for each subject emissions unit with CO2 emissions from
the industrial combustion of biomass. Note that the Ecology PSD permit
issued under the SIP will address all other subject emission units that
do not have CO2 emissions from the industrial combustion of
biomass. We have revised the language of 40 CFR 52.2497 to reflect this
clarification.
    Given this dual CAA PSD permitting authority in situations where
there are multiple combustion fuels producing CO2 from a
source engaged in the industrial combustion of biomass in Washington,
the EPA will coordinate closely with Ecology during the PSD permit
issuance process.

B. EPA Guidance

    Comment: The EPA should also clarify that it will follow the EPA's
existing guidance on BACT for biogenic emissions, ``Guidance for
Determining

Best Available Control Technology for Reducing Carbon Dioxide Emissions
from Bioenergy Production'' (March 2011 guidance).
    Response: The March 2011 guidance is the EPA's most recent guidance
on the topic of BACT determinations for bioenergy production and the
EPA will consider it, as appropriate, in issuing PSD permits under the
FIP. The EPA will also consider prior BACT determinations for GHGs at
biomass facilities, such as the one reflected in the permit EPA Region
9 issued to Sierra Pacific Industries. In the November 19, 2014
Memorandum cited above, the EPA has also stated that the Agency
anticipates providing additional guidance to sources undergoing BACT
analyses involving biogenic feedstocks. To the extent that guidance is
available at the time the EPA issues permits under the FIP discussed in
this rule, the EPA will consider that guidance as well.

C. The EPA's Next Steps on Biogenic CO2 Emissions From Stationary
Sources

    Comment: One commenter referenced the EPA's memorandum,
``Addressing Biogenic Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Stationary
Sources,'' from Janet McCabe, Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of
Air and Radiation, to EPA Air Division Directors, Regions 1--10,
November 19, 2014, regarding biogenic CO2 emissions and
urged the EPA to complete rulemaking regarding this issue in an
expeditious manner.
    Response: The EPA will endeavor to complete this rulemaking in a
timely manner. After considering public comments on the proposal for
that rule, if the final rule contains an exemption that aligns with the
scope of RCW 70.235.020(3), the EPA will reevaluate the extent to which
the FIP established in this rule should remain applicable to Washington
facilities with CO2 emissions from the industrial combustion
of biomass. To enable the EPA to remove such sources from the FIP,
Washington may need to consider whether an amendment to RCW
70.235.020(3) is appropriate to match the scope of any final rule
adopted by the EPA.

III. Final Action

    For the reasons set forth in our proposed rulemaking at 80 FR 838,
January 7, 2015, as further discussed above, the EPA is approving and
incorporating by reference the PSD and visibility permitting
regulations submitted by Ecology on January 27, 2014. This action is
the third and final in a series approving the remaining elements
contained in Ecology's January 27, 2014 submittal. The previous two
actions consisted of the EPA's October 3, 2014 (79 FR 59653) approval
of general provisions that apply to all air pollution sources and the
EPA's November 7, 2014 (79 FR 66291) approval of requirements that
implement major source NNSR.

A. Rules Approved and Incorporated by Reference Into the SIP

    The EPA is approving and incorporating by reference into
Washington's SIP at 40 CFR part 52, subpart WW, the PSD and visibility
permitting regulations listed in the table below. A full copy of the
regulations is included in the docket for this action. The EPA has also
determined that the general air quality regulations at WAC 173-400-036,
WAC 173-400-110, WAC 173-400-111, WAC 173-400-112, WAC 173-400-113, WAC
173-400-171, and WAC 173-400-560, to the extent they relate to
implementation of Ecology's PSD and visibility programs, also meet the
EPA's requirements for subject sources.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The EPA previously approved these regulations as part of our
October 3, 2014 approval of Ecology's minor new source review (NSR)
program. Approval of these regulations for purposes of implementing
the PSD and visibility programs is subject to the exceptions and
explanations described in the EPA's July 10, 2014 proposed (79 FR
39351) and October 3, 2014 final action (79 FR 59653), and the
January 7, 2015 proposed action (80 FR 838) on the general air
quality regulations contained in WAC 173-400-036, WAC 173-400-110,
WAC 173-400-111, WAC 173-400-112, WAC 173-400-113, WAC 173-400-171,
and WAC 173-400-560.

                               Regulations Approved and Incorporated by Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
       State citation              Title/Subject           effective                   Explanation
                                                             date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Chapter 173-400 WAC, General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
173-400-036................  Relocation of Portable           12/29/12  ........................................
                              Sources.
173-400-110................  New Source Review (NSR)          12/29/12  Except:
                              for Sources and Portable                  173-400-110(1)(c)(ii)(C); 173-400-
                              Sources.                                   110(1)(e); 173-400-110(2)(d);
                                                                        The part of WAC 173-400-110(4)(b)(vi)
                                                                         that says,
                                                                         ``not for use with materials
                                                                         containing toxic air pollutants, as
                                                                         listed in chapter 173-460 WAC,'';
                                                                        The part of 400-110 (4)(e)(iii) that
                                                                         says,
                                                                         ``where toxic air pollutants as
                                                                         defined in chapter 173-460 WAC are not
                                                                         emitted'';
                                                                        The part of 400-110(4)(e)(f)(i) that
                                                                         says,
                                                                         ``that are not toxic air
                                                                         pollutants listed in chapter 173-460
                                                                         WAC'';
                                                                        The part of 400-110 (4)(h)(xviii) that
                                                                         says,
                                                                         ``, to the extent that toxic
                                                                         air pollutant gases as defined in
                                                                         chapter 173-460 WAC are not emitted'';
                                                                        The part of 400-110 (4)(h)(xxxiii) that
                                                                         says,
                                                                         ``where no toxic air pollutants
                                                                         as listed under chapter 173-460 WAC are
                                                                         emitted'';
                                                                        The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxiv) that
                                                                         says,
                                                                         ``, or <= 1% (by weight) toxic
                                                                         air pollutants as listed in chapter 173-
                                                                         460 WAC'';
                                                                        The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxv) that
                                                                         says,
                                                                         ``or <= 1% (by weight) toxic
                                                                         air pollutants'';
                                                                        The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxvi) that
                                                                         says,
                                                                         ``or <= 1% (by weight) toxic
                                                                         air pollutants as listed in chapter 173-
                                                                         460 WAC'';
                                                                        400-110(4)(h)(xl) , second sentence; and

                                                                        The last row of the table in 173-400-
                                                                         110(5)(b) regarding exemption levels
                                                                         for Toxic Air Pollutants.
173-400-111................  Processing Notice of             12/29/12  Except:
                              Construction                              173-400-111(3)(h);
                              Applications for                          173-400-111(3)(i);
                              Sources, Stationary                       The part of 173-400-111(8)(a)(v) that
                              Sources and Portable                       says,
                              Sources.                                   ``and 173-460-040,''; and 173-
                                                                         400-111(9).
173-400-112................  Processing Notice of             12/29/12  Except:
                              Construction                              173-400-112(8).
                              Applications for
                              Sources, Stationary
                              Sources and Portable
                              Sources.
173-400-113................  New Sources in Attainment        12/29/12  Except:
                              or Unclassifiable Areas--                 173-400-113(3), second sentence.
                              Review for Compliance
                              with Regulations.
173-400-116................  Increment Protection.....         9/10/11  ........................................
173-400-117................  Special Protection               12/29/12  ........................................
                              Requirements for Federal
                              Class I Areas.
173-400-171................  Public Notice and                12/29/12  Except:
                              Opportunity for Public                    The part of 173-400-171(3)(b) that says,
                              Comment.
                                                                         ``or any increase in emissions
                                                                         of a toxic air pollutant above the
                                                                         acceptable source impact level for that
                                                                         toxic air pollutant as regulated under
                                                                         chapter 173-460 WAC''; and
                                                                        173-400-171(12).
173-400-560................  General Order of Approval        12/29/12  Except:
                                                                        The part of 173-400-560(1)(f) that says,
                                                                        ``173-460 WAC''.
173-400-700................  Review of Major                    4/1/11  ........................................
                              Stationary Sources of
                              Air Pollution.
173-400-710................  Definitions..............        12/29/12  ........................................
173-400-720................  Prevention of Significant        12/29/12  Except:
                              Deterioration (PSD).                      173-400-720(4)(a)(i through iv); 173-400-
                                                                         720(4)(b)(iii)(C); and 173-400-
                                                                         720(4)(a)(vi) with respect to the
                                                                         incorporation by reference of the text
                                                                         in 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(v),
                                                                         52.21(i)(5)(i), and 52.21(k)(2).
173-400-730................  Prevention of Significant        12/29/12  ........................................
                              Deterioration
                              Application Processing
                              Procedures.
173-400-740................  PSD Permitting Public            12/29/12  ........................................
                              Involvement Requirements.
173-400-750................  Revisions to PSD Permits.        12/29/12  Except:
                                                                        173-400-750(2) second sentence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Transfer of Existing EPA-Issued PSD Permits

    As discussed in the proposal, Ecology requested approval to
exercise its authority to fully administer the PSD program with respect
to those sources under Ecology's permitting jurisdiction that have
existing PSD permits issued by the EPA since August 7, 1977. 80 FR 843,
January 7, 2015. Upon the effective date of this approval of Ecology's
PSD program into the SIP, we transfer the EPA-issued PSD permits issued
on and after August 7, 1977 to Ecology. The EPA retains authority to
administer PSD permits issued by the EPA in Washington prior to August
7, 1977. Id.

C. Scope of Final Action

1. WAC 173-400-700 Through 173-400-750
    Under WAC 173-400-700, Ecology's PSD regulations contained in WAC
173-400-700 through 173-400-750 apply statewide, except where a local
clean air agency has received delegation of the Federal PSD program
from the EPA or has a SIP-approved PSD program. At this time, no local
clean air agencies in Washington have a delegated or SIP-approved PSD
program. For the reasons provided in the preambles to the proposed and
final notices of rulemaking, the EPA is therefore approving WAC 173-
400-700 through 173-400-750 to apply statewide, with the three
exceptions described below. For the following exceptions, the PSD FIP
codified at 40 CFR 52.2497 and 40 CFR 52.21 will continue to apply, and
the EPA will retain responsibility for issuing PSD permits to and
implementing the Federal PSD program for such sources:
a. Sources Under the Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC)
Jurisdiction
    By statute, Ecology does not have authority to issue PSD permits to
sources under the jurisdiction of EFSEC. See Chapter 80.50 of the
Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Therefore, the EPA's approval of
Ecology's PSD program, under WAC 173-400-700 through 173-400-750,
excludes projects under the jurisdiction of EFSEC. Such sources will
continue to be subject to the PSD FIP codified at 40 CFR 52.2497 and 40
CFR 52.21, until such time that EFSEC's PSD rules are approved into the
SIP.
b. CO2 Emissions From Industrial Combustion of Biomass
    As discussed above, under a provision contained in RCW 70.235.020,
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions--Reporting Requirements, Ecology is
statutorily barred from

regulating certain GHG emissions. As a result, the EPA is retaining a
FIP under 40 CFR 52.21 and will issue partial PSD permits to ensure
that major sources in Washington have a means to satisfy the CAA
construction permit requirements for GHGs when CO2 emissions
from the industrial combustion of biomass in Washington are not being
considered or regulated by Ecology under its PSD rules. Because Ecology
does have authority to carry out all PSD requirements for GHGs except
for sources permitted to engage in the industrial combustion of
biomass, the EPA is approving Ecology's regulations as part of the
Washington PSD SIP for such purposes.
c. Sources in Certain Areas of Indian Country
    Excluded from the scope of this final approval of Ecology's PSD
program are all Indian reservations in the State, except as
specifically noted below, and any other area where the EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. Sources on such
lands will continue to be subject to the PSD FIP codified at 40 CFR
52.2497 and 40 CFR 52.21.
    Under the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement Act of 1989, 25
U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided state and local agencies in
Washington authority over activities on non-trust lands within the
exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation (also known as
the 1873 Survey Area) and the EPA is therefore proposing to approve
Ecology's PSD regulations into the SIP with respect to such lands.
d. Scope of PSD FIP in Washington
    Consistent with the limitations on the scope of the EPA's final
approval of WAC 173-400-700 through 173-400-750 in the Washington SIP,
the EPA retains, but significantly narrows, the scope of the current
PSD FIP codified at 40 CFR 52.2497. The EPA will continue to implement
the current PSD FIP as provided in III.C.1.a., b., and c. of this
document.
2. WAC 173-400-116 and 173-400-117
    With respect to the EPA's approval of WAC 173-400-116 and WAC 173-
400-117, the SIP-approved provisions of WAC 173-400-020 govern
jurisdictional applicability for those sections. WAC 173-400-020
states, ``[t]he provisions of this chapter shall apply statewide,
except for specific subsections where a local authority has adopted and
implemented corresponding local rules that apply only to sources
subject to local jurisdiction as provided under RCW 70.94.141 and
70.94.331.'' Because Ecology will be the only authority in Washington
with a SIP-approved PSD program that would implement WAC 173-400-116,
Increment Protection, the EPA's approval of WAC 173-400-116 applies
statewide, with the two exceptions discussed below. Similarly, the
scope of our approval of WAC 173-400-117, Special Protection
Requirements for Federal Class I Areas, applies statewide for PSD
permits issued by Ecology under WAC 173-400-700 through 173-400-750,
noting the two exceptions discussed below. However, for visibility-
related elements associated with permits issued under the major NNSR
program, the applicability of WAC 173-400-117 is more complicated
because local clean air agencies have the authority under state law to
have alternative, but no less stringent, permitting requirements.
Therefore, consistent with the EPA's November 7, 2014 approval of
Ecology's major NNSR program, our approval of WAC 173-400-117, as it
relates to NNSR permits issues under WAC 173-400-800 through 173-400-
860, is limited to only those counties or sources where Ecology has
direct jurisdiction. The counties where Ecology has direct jurisdiction
are: Adams, Asotin, Chelan, Columbia, Douglas, Ferry, Franklin,
Garfield, Grant, Kittitas, Klickitat, Lincoln, Okanogan, Pend Oreille,
San Juan, Stevens, Walla Walla, and Whitman Counties, with the two
exceptions discussed below. The EPA also notes that under the SIP-
approved provisions of WAC 173-405-012, WAC 173-410-012, and WAC 173-
415-012, Ecology has statewide, direct jurisdiction for kraft pulp
mills, sulfite pulping mills, and primary aluminum plants, excluding
certain areas of Indian country as discussed further. The EPA is
therefore approving WAC 173-400-117 in all areas of the state under
Ecology's jurisdiction for those specified source categories.
    For the following exceptions the visibility FIP codified at 40 CFR
52.2498 will continue to apply and the EPA will retain responsibility
for issuing visibility permits for such sources:
a. Sources Under the Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC)
Jurisdiction
    By State statute, Ecology does not have authority to issue permits
to sources under the jurisdiction of EFSEC. See Chapter 80.50 of the
Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Therefore, the EPA's approval of WAC
173-400-116 and 173-400-117 excludes projects under the jurisdiction of
EFSEC. Such sources will continue to be subject to the visibility FIP
codified at 40 CFR 52.2498, until such time that EFSEC's corollaries to
WAC 173-400-116 and 173-400-117 are approved into the SIP.
b. Sources in Certain Areas of Indian Country
    Excluded from the scope of this final approval of the visibility
permitting program are all Indian reservations in the State, except as
specifically noted below, and any other area where the EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. Sources on such
lands will continue to be subject to the visibility FIP codified at 40
CFR 52.2498.
    Under the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement Act of 1989, 25
U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided state and local agencies in
Washington authority over activities on non-trust lands within the
exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation (also known as
the 1873 Survey Area) and the EPA is therefore proposing to approve
Ecology's visibility regulations into the SIP with respect to such
lands for those facilities where Ecology has direct jurisdiction.
c. Scope of Visibility FIP in Washington
    Consistent with the limitations on the scope of our approval of
Ecology's major NNSR program (79 FR at 43349), the EPA retains, but
significantly narrows, the scope of the current visibility FIP codified
at 40 CFR 52.2498.

D. The EPA's Oversight Role

    As discussed in the proposal, 80 FR at 845, in approving state new
source review rules into SIPs, the EPA has a responsibility to ensure
that all states properly implement their SIP-approved preconstruction
permitting programs. The EPA's approval of Ecology's PSD rules does not
divest the EPA of the responsibility to continue appropriate oversight
to ensure that permits issued by Ecology are consistent with the
requirements of the CAA, Federal regulations, and the SIP. The EPA's
authority to oversee permit program implementation is set forth in
sections 113, 167, and 505(b) of the CAA. For example, section 167
provides that the EPA shall issue administrative orders, initiate civil
actions, or take whatever other action may be necessary to prevent the
construction or modification of a major stationary source that does not
``conform to the requirements of'' the PSD program. Similarly, section
113(a)(5) of the CAA provides for administrative orders and civil
actions whenever the EPA finds that a state ``is not acting in
compliance with'' any requirement or prohibition of the CAA regarding
the construction of new

sources or modification of existing sources. Likewise, section
113(a)(1) provides for a range of enforcement remedies whenever the EPA
finds that a person is in violation of an applicable implementation
plan.
    In making judgments as to what constitutes compliance with the CAA
and regulations issued thereunder, the EPA looks to (among other
sources) its prior interpretations regarding those statutory and
regulatory requirements and policies for implementing them. It follows
that state actions implementing the Federal CAA that do not conform to
the CAA may lead to potential oversight action by the EPA.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the
Washington State Department of Ecology regulations listed in section
II.A. Rules Approved and Incorporated by Reference into the SIP of this
preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or
in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section
of this preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, 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);
     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 this action does not involve technical standards; and
     does not provide the 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 in
Washington except as specifically noted below and is also not approved
to apply in any other area where the 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 and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Washington's SIP is approved to apply on non-trust land within the
exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation, also known as
the 1873 Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement
Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided state and
local agencies in Washington authority over activities on non-trust
lands within the 1873 Survey Area. Consistent with EPA policy, the EPA
provided a consultation opportunity to the Puyallup Tribe in a letter
dated February 25, 2014. The EPA did not receive a request for
consultation.
    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. The 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 29, 2015. 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 13, 2015.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    For the reasons stated 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 WW--Washington

0
2. Section 52.2470 is amended in paragraph (c), Table 2--Additional
Regulations Approved for Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology)
Direct Jurisdiction by:
0
a. Revising the heading;
0
b. Revising the entries 173-400-036, 173-400-110, 173-400-111, 173-400-
112, and 173-400-113;
0
c. Adding in numerical order entries for 173-400-116 and 173-400-117;
0
d. Revising the entries 173-400-171 and 173-400-560;
0
e. Adding in numerical order entries for 173-400-700, 173-400-710, 173-

400-720, 173-400-730, 173-400-740, and 173-400-750; and
0
f. Removing the footnote at end of Table 2.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  52.2470  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

   Table 2--Additional Regulations Approved for Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) Direct Jurisdiction
 [Applicable in Adams, Asotin, Chelan, Columbia, Douglas, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield, Grant, Kittitas, Klickitat,
   Lincoln, Okanogan, Pend Oreille, San Juan, Stevens, Walla Walla, and Whitman counties, excluding facilities
 subject to Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) jurisdiction, Indian reservations (excluding non-
 trust land within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation), and any other area where the EPA
  or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. These regulations also apply statewide for
 facilities subject to the applicability sections of WAC 173-400-700, WAC 173-405-012, WAC 173-410-012, and WAC
                                                  173-415-012]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       State
 State citation    Title/subject     effective     EPA approval                    Explanations
                                       date            date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400--General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
173-400-036.....  Relocation of        12/29/12  04/29/15         ..............................................
                   Portable                       [Insert
                   Sources.                       Federal
                                                  Register
                                                  citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
173-400-110.....  New Source           12/29/12  04/29/15         Except:
                   Review (NSR)                   [Insert         173-400-110(1)(c)(ii)(C);
                   for Sources                    Federal         173-400-110(1)(e); 173-400-110(2)(d);
                   and Portable                   Register        The part of WAC 173-400-110(4)(b)(vi) that
                   Sources.                       citation].       says,
                                                                   ``not for use with materials
                                                                   containing toxic air pollutants, as listed in
                                                                   chapter 173-460 WAC,'';
                                                                  The part of 400-110 (4)(e)(iii) that says,
                                                                   ``where toxic air pollutants as
                                                                   defined in chapter 173-460 WAC are not
                                                                   emitted'';
                                                                  The part of 400-110(4)(e)(f)(i) that says,
                                                                   ``that are not toxic air pollutants
                                                                   listed in chapter 173-460 WAC'';
                                                                  The part of 400-110 (4)(h)(xviii) that says,
                                                                   ``, to the extent that toxic air
                                                                   pollutant gases as defined in chapter 173-460
                                                                   WAC are not emitted'';
                                                                  The part of 400-110 (4)(h)(xxxiii) that says,
                                                                   ``where no toxic air pollutants as
                                                                   listed under chapter 173-460 WAC are
                                                                   emitted'';
                                                                  The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxiv) that says,
                                                                   ``or <= 1% (by weight) toxic air
                                                                   pollutants as listed in chapter 173-460
                                                                   WAC'';
                                                                  The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxv) that says,
                                                                   ``or <= 1% (by weight) toxic air
                                                                   pollutants'';
                                                                  The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxvi) that says,
                                                                   ``or <= 1% (by weight) toxic air
                                                                   pollutants as listed in chapter 173-460
                                                                   WAC'';
                                                                  400-110(4)(h)(xl), second sentence; and
                                                                  The last row of the table in 173-400-110(5)(b)
                                                                   regarding exemption levels for Toxic Air
                                                                   Pollutants.
173-400-111.....  Processing           12/29/12  04/29/15         Except:
                   Notice of                      [Insert         173-400-111(3)(h);
                   Construction                   Federal         173-400-111(3)(i);
                   Applications                   Register        The part of 173-400-111(8)(a)(v) that says,
                   for Sources,                   citation].       ``and 173-460-040,''; and
                   Stationary                                     173-400-111(9).
                   Sources and
                   Portable
                   Sources.
173-400-112.....  Requirements         12/29/12  04/29/15         Except:
                   for New                        [Insert         173-400-112(8).
                   Sources in                     Federal
                   Nonattainment                  Register
                   Areas--Review                  citation].
                   for Compliance
                   with
                   Regulations.
173-400-113.....  New Sources in       12/29/12  04/29/15         Except:
                   Attainment or                  [Insert         173-400-113(3), second sentence.
                   Unclassifiable                 Federal
                   Areas--Review                  Register
                   for Compliance                 citation].
                   with
                   Regulations.
173-400-116.....  Increment             9/10/11  04/29/15         ..............................................
                   Protection.                    [Insert
                                                  Federal
                                                  Register
                                                  citation].

173-400-117.....  Special              12/29/12  04/29/15         ..............................................
                   Protection                     [Insert
                   Requirements                   Federal
                   for Federal                    Register
                   Class I Areas.                 citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
173-400-171.....  Public Notice        12/29/12  04/29/15         Except:
                   and                            [Insert         The part of 173-400-171(3)(b) that says,
                   Opportunity                    Federal          ``or any increase in emissions of a
                   for Public                     Register         toxic air pollutant above the acceptable
                   Comment.                       citation].       source impact level for that toxic air
                                                                   pollutant as regulated under chapter 173-460
                                                                   WAC''; and
                                                                  173-400-171(12).

                                                  * * * * * * *
173-400-560.....  General Order        12/29/12  04/29/15         Except:
                   of Approval.                   [Insert         The part of 173-400-560(1)(f) that says,
                                                  Federal         ``173-460 WAC''.
                                                  Register
                                                  citation].
173-400-700.....  Review of Major        4/1/11  04/29/15         ..............................................
                   Stationary                     [Insert
                   Sources of Air                 Federal
                   Pollution.                     Register
                                                  citation].
173-400-710.....  Definitions....      12/29/12  04/29/15         ..............................................
                                                  [Insert
                                                  Federal
                                                  Register
                                                  citation].
173-400-720.....  Prevention of        12/29/12  04/29/15         Except:
                   Significant                    [Insert         173-400-720(4)(a)(i-iv); 173-400-
                   Deterioration                  Federal          720(4)(b)(iii)(C); and 173-400-720(4)(a)(vi)
                   (PSD).                         Register         with respect to the incorporation by
                                                  citation].       reference of the text in 40 CFR
                                                                   52.21(b)(49)(v), 52.21(i)(5)(i), and
                                                                   52.21(k)(2).
173-400-730.....  Prevention of        12/29/12  04/29/15         ..............................................
                   Significant                    [Insert
                   Deterioration                  Federal
                   Application                    Register
                   Processing                     citation].
                   Procedures.
173-400-740.....  PSD Permitting       12/29/12  04/29/15         ..............................................
                   Public                         [Insert
                   Involvement                    Federal
                   Requirements.                  Register
                                                  citation].
173-400-750.....  Revisions to         12/29/12  04/29/15         Except:
                   PSD Permits.                   [Insert         173-400-750(2) second sentence.
                                                  Federal
                                                  Register
                                                  citation].

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

* * * * *

0
3. Section 52.2497 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to
read as follows:

Sec.  52.2497  Significant deterioration of air quality.

    (a) The requirements of sections 160 through 165 of the Clean Air
Act are not fully met because the plan does not include approvable
procedures for preventing the significant deterioration of air quality
from:
    (1) Facilities subject to the jurisdiction of the Energy Facilities
Site Evaluation Council pursuant to Chapter 80.50 Revised Code of
Washington (RCW);
    (2) Facilities with carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from
the industrial combustion of biomass in the following circumstances:
    (i) Where a new major stationary source or major modification would
be subject to Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
requirements for greenhouse gases (GHGs) under Sec.  52.21, but would
not be subject to PSD under the state implementation plan (SIP) because
CO2 emissions from the industrial combustion of biomass are
excluded from consideration as GHGs as a matter of state law under RCW
70.235.020(3); or
    (ii) Where a new major stationary source or major modification is
subject to PSD for GHGs under both the Washington SIP and the FIP, but
CO2 emissions from the industrial combustion of biomass are
excluded from consideration in the Ecology PSD permitting process
because of the exclusion in RCW 70.235.020(3);
    (3) Indian reservations in Washington, except for non-trust land
within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation (also
known as the 1873 Survey Area) as provided in the Puyallup Tribe of
Indians Settlement Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, and any other area
where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction; and
    (4) Sources subject to PSD permits issued by the EPA prior to
August 7, 1977, but only with respect to the general administration of
any such permits still in effect (e.g., modifications, amendments, or
revisions of any nature).

    (b) Regulations for preventing significant deterioration of air
quality. The provisions of Sec.  52.21, except paragraph (a)(1), are
hereby incorporated and made a part of the applicable plan for
Washington for the facilities, emission sources, geographic areas, and
permits listed in paragraph (a) of this section. For situations
addressed in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section, the EPA will issue a
Federal PSD permit under Sec.  52.21 to the new major stationary source
or major modification addressing PSD requirements applicable to GHGs
for all subject emission units at the source, regardless of whether
CO2 emissions resulted from the industrial combustion of
biomass or from other sources of GHGs at the facility. For situations
addressed in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section, the EPA will issue a
Federal PSD permit under Sec.  52.21 addressing PSD requirements
applicable to GHGs for each subject emissions unit that is permitted to
emit CO2 from the industrial combustion of biomass.
* * * * *

0
4. Section 52.2498 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to
read as follows:

Sec.  52.2498  Visibility protection.

    (a) The requirements of section 169A of the Clean Air Act are not
fully met because the plan does not include approvable procedures for
visibility new source review for:
    (1) Facilities subject to the jurisdiction of the Energy Facilities
Site Evaluation Council pursuant to Chapter 80.50 Revised Code of
Washington;
    (2) Sources subject to the jurisdiction of local air authorities;
    (3) Indian reservations in Washington except for non-trust land
within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation (also
known as the 1873 Survey Area) as provided in the Puyallup Tribe of
Indians Settlement Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, and any other area
where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction.
    (b) Regulations for visibility new source review. The provisions of
Sec.  52.28 are hereby incorporated and made a part of the applicable
plan for Washington for the facilities, emission sources, and
geographic areas listed in paragraph (a) of this section.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2015-09889 Filed 4-28-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: April 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 77)]
[Notices]
[Page 21072-21074]
[DOCID:fr22ap10-127]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61922; File No. SR-DTC-2010-07]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to
Enhance its Existing Processing Relating to End of Day Liquidity

DATE: April 15, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on

March 31, 2010, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been
prepared primarily by DTC. DTC filed the proposal pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \2\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(4) \3\ thereunder so
that the proposal was effective upon filing with the Commission. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the rule
change from interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change would amend DTC's rules in order to
enhance its existing processing as it relates to end of day liquidity.
Upon implementation of the new function, DTC participants
(``Participants'') would be able to set a profile in the Participant
Browser System (``PBS'') so that they can request that excess funds be
wired to their settling bank account at approximately 3:20 p.m. eastern
time.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, DTC included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. DTC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A),
(B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of these
statements.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Commission has modified the text of the summaries
prepared by DTC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(A) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    On December 23, 2009, DTC filed a rule change with the Commission
to extend its Settlement Progress Payment (``SPP'') \5\ and Principal &
Income (``P&I'') \6\ withdrawal cutoff times from 3 p.m. eastern time
to 3:20 p.m. eastern time.\7\ This change was consistent with DTC's
objective to maximize the early return of available liquidity to
Participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A SPP is a payment sent intraday via Fedwire to DTC when a
Participant has insufficient collateral or is at its net debit cap.
    \6\ P&I allocations are credited to a Participant's settlement
account throughout each processing day as payments are received.
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61318 (January 8,
2010), 75 FR 10542 (March 8, 2010) (SR-DTC-2009-18).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In an effort to further maximize the early return of available
liquidity to Participants, DTC will implement a new optional profile
(``profile'') in PBS. By setting its profile in PBS appropriately, a
Participant can create a standing instruction to have excess funds
wired to its DTC Settling Bank \8\ at approximately 3:20 p.m. eastern
time after the largest provisional net credit \9\ (``LPNC'') is
released to Participants at 3:05 p.m. eastern time. If a Participant
chooses to use the profile, the Participant will be required to set the
profile either to retain a minimum credit balance amount or at zero. A
Participant's funds will not be to wired funds to its Settling Bank
account if that would create a debit balance or cause the participant
to have insufficient collateral.\10\ If a Participant has more than one
SPP or P&I wire instruction on file with DTC, the Participant will be
required to set its profile to indicate to which account the funds
should be wired at its Settling Bank. In the event of a systemic,
operational, or other crisis event, DTC will have the ability to freeze
the profile.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ ``Settling Bank'' means a Participant that is a bank or
trust company, subject to supervision or regulation pursuant to
Federal or State banking laws, and is a party to an effective
Settling Bank Agreement.
    \9\ The LPNC discourages some Participants from requesting funds
until later in the day when activity has stabilized. LPNC procedures
provisionally withhold from Participants the benefit of the largest
net settlement credit they would have received in any Money Market
Instrument (``MMI'') program during most of the processing day. This
net credit is the Participant's LPNC (referred to as provisional
because of its reversible nature). The LPNC is neither made
available to the Participant as collateral to support its net debit
nor deemed a credit in the calculation of the Participant's net
debit. Because transactions in a failing MMI issue would be reversed
only if DTC is informed of the default by 3 p.m., eastern time, LPNC
procedures remain in effect only until approximately 3:05 p.m.,
eastern time, at which time, assuming no issuer default, the credit
becomes final (i.e., it is no longer ``provisional'') and is applied
to calculate the Participant's collateral and net debit.
    \10\ The term ``collateral'' of a Participant on any Business
Day means the sum of (i) the Participant's Actual Participants Fund
Deposit, (ii) the Participant's Actual Preferred Stock Investment,
(iii) all of the Participant's Net Additions, and (iv) any SPPs
wired by the Participant to DTC's account at the Federal Reserve
Bank of New York in the manner specified in DTC's procedures. A
Participant must always have sufficient collateral to support its
debit balance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DTC is also modifying its procedures as they relate to the intraday
return of SPPs and withdrawal of P&I allocations. Currently,
Participants are able to withdraw the sum of all P&I payments allocated
to their account subject to DTC's risk management controls.
Participants are also able to request that DTC return all or a portion
of an SPP submitted earlier in the day provided they have sufficient
collateral and net debit cap \11\ to do so. In order to streamline the
processing of securities transactions, DTC is modifying its procedures
so that a Participant may request the return of an SPP and withdraw a
P&I allocation only if it will not create a debit balance for the
Participant. DTC is also updating its P&I withdrawal process in order
to make it more efficient. Withdrawals that are blocked as a result of
insufficient collateral or net debit cap will no longer recycle until
enough collateral or settlement credits are generated to satisfy the
collateral or net debit cap deficiency. Instead a withdrawal request
will be completed when the Participant makes the request or it will
drop if there is insufficient collateral or net debit cap thereby
requiring the Participant to submit a new withdrawal request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ A Participant's ``net debit cap'' is the maximum amount by
which a Participant's Gross Debit Balance may exceed its Gross
Credit Balance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, DTC is making technical updates to its Settlement
Processing Schedule in order to properly reflect the input methods
available to Participants.\12\ These changes will necessitate revisions
to the existing DTC Settlement Guide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ In 2008, DTCC completed a multi-year initiative to
transition all Participant Terminal System (``PTS'') functions to
the Participant Browser System (``PBS''). Now, rather than toggle
between the two tools, Participants can manage all their needs via
the Web-based PBS, which is more flexible than PTS and offers
greater functionality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 17A of the
Act,\13\ as amended, and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to DTC. The proposed rule change will maximize the early
return of available liquidity to Participants and will be implemented
consistently with the safeguarding of securities and funds in DTC's
custody or control or for which it is responsible because all of DTC's
risk management controls will continue to be in effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    DTC does not believe that the proposed rule change will have any
impact or impose any burden on competition.

(C) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments relating to the proposed rule change were not and
are not intended to be solicited or received. DTC will notify the
Commission of any written comments received by DTC.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective upon filing
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \14\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(4) \15\ thereunder because the proposed rule change effects a
change in an existing service of DTC that: (i) Does not adversely
affect the safeguarding of securities or funds in the custody or
control of DTC or for which it is responsible and (ii) does not
significantly affect the respective rights or obligations of DTC or
persons using the service. At any time within sixty days of the filing
of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such
rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-DTC-2010-07 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Elizabeth
M. Murphy, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-DTC-2010-07. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filings also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of DTC and on DTC's Web
site at http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/rule_filings/2010/dtc/
2010-07.pdf. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-DTC-
2010-07 and should be submitted on or before May 13, 2010.

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2010-9279 Filed 4-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 21 (Wednesday, January 31, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 4431]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01916]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2002-0001; FRL-9973-52--Region 1]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Hatheway & Patterson
Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On December 1, 2017 EPA published a direct final Notice of
Deletion for the Hatheway & Patterson Superfund Site from the National
Priorities List. The EPA is withdrawing the direct final Notice of
Deletion due to adverse comments that were received during the public
comment period.

DATES: This direct final rule published at 82 FR 56890, on December 1,
2017 is withdrawn effective January 30, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Information Repositories: Comprehensive information on the
Site, as well as the comments that we received during the comment
period, are available in docket EPA-HQ-SFUND-2002-0001, accessed
through the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the
docket index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statue. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in
hard copy at: U.S. EPA Region 1, Superfund Records Center, 5 Post
Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Monday-Friday: 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday--Closed.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly White, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, Mailcode
OSRR07-1, Boston, MA, 02109-3912, telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: After consideration of the comments
received, if appropriate, EPA will publish a notification of deletion
in the Federal Register based on the parallel Notice of Intent to
Delete (82 FR 56939) and place a copy of the final deletion package,
including a Responsiveness Summary, if prepared, in docket EPA-HQ-
SFUND-2002-0001, accessed through the http://www.regulations.gov
website and in the Site repositories.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water Supply.

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1321(d); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 13626,
77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, 2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3
CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp.,
p. 193.

    Dated: January 23, 2018.
Alexandra Dapolito Dunn,
Regional Administrator, Region 1.

0
Accordingly, the amendment to table 1 of appendix B to 40 CFR part 300
published on December 1, 2017 (82 FR 56890), is withdrawn January 30,
2018.

[FR Doc. 2018-01916 Filed 1-30-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 68 (Tuesday, April 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21155-21157]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08183]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2010-0009]

Presence Sensing Device Initiation (PSDI) Standard; Extension of
the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information
Collection (Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning its proposal to
extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the
information collection requirements specified in the Presence Sensing
Device Initiation (PSDI) Standard (29 CFR 1910.217(h)).

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
June 10, 2013.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit a copy of your comments and
attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2010-0009,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210.
Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service) are
accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket Office's normal
business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and OSHA
docket number (OSHA-2010-0009) for the Information Collection Request
(ICR). All comments, including any personal information you provide,
are placed in the public docket without change, and may be made
available online at http://www.regulations.gov. For further information
on submitting comments see the ``Public Participation'' heading in the
section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download from the Web site. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Theda Kenney at
the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theda Kenney or Todd Owen, Directorate
of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3609,
200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
2222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accord with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that information
is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs) is minimal,
collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's estimate of
the information collection burden is accurate. The Occupational Safety
and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) authorizes
information collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for
enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing information regarding the
causes and prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and
accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also requires that OSHA obtain
such information with minimum burden upon employers, especially those
operating small businesses, and to reduce to the maximum extent
feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in obtaining information
(29 U.S.C. 657).
    Description of the requirements. A number of paragraphs in the
Standard contain paperwork requirements. These requirements include:
Certifying brake-monitor adjustments, alternatives to photoelectric
presence sensing devices (PSDs), safety system design and installation,
and worker training; annual recertification of safety systems;
establishing and maintaining the original certification and validation
records as well as the most recent recertification and revalidation
records; affixing labels to test rods and to certified and recertified
presses; and notifying an OSHA-recognized third-party validation
organization when a safety system component fails, the employer
modifies the safety system, or a point-of-operation injury occurs.
    Use and purpose of the requirements. Requiring employers to certify
brake-monitor adjustments, alternatives to photoelectric PSDs, and
safety system design and installation, and to recertify safety systems
annually, provides the employer, systems engineers, maintenance
personnel, and other workers with reliable information regarding the
status and operating characteristics of the presses, which they can use
to determine that the systems are operating according to the
requirements of the Standard. The training certification requirement
assures employers that workers receive the training specified by the
Standard at the required frequencies and, therefore, can safely operate
a PSDI-equipped mechanical power press. Specifying that employers
establish and maintain for each press the original certification and
validation records, as well as the most recent recertification and
revalidation records, allows employers, engineers, maintenance
personnel, and other workers to determine if the presses are operating
within required specifications, thereby ensuring that the presses
remain in safe operating condition.
    Having employers affix labels to test rods provides information to
workers about the minimum object sensitivity of the sensing field,
thereby allowing them to use the test rods in determining that a field
is operating correctly. The provision specifying that employers affix
labels to certified and recertified presses gives assurance to
employers and workers that the presses meet the requirements of the
Standard and, therefore, that workers can operate them safely.
    Requiring employers to notify an OSHA-recognized third-party
validation organization when a safety system component fails, or a
point-of-operation injury occurs, permits these organizations to
identify and correct design problems in the safety systems. Having
employers inform these organizations of modifications made to safety
systems allows the organizations to review the modifications and
determine if the presses will continue to operate safely.
    By complying with these paperwork requirements, employers ensure
that PSDI-equipped mechanical power presses are in safe working order,
thereby preventing severe injury and death to press operators and other
workers who work near this equipment. In addition, these records
provide the most efficient means for an OSHA compliance officer to
determine that an employer performed the requirements and that the
equipment is safe.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    To date, OSHA has not recognized a third-party organization to
validate employer and manufacturer certifications that their PSDI
equipment and practices meet the requirements of the Standard.
Therefore, the Agency cannot attribute burden hours and cost to the
paperwork requirements of the Standard.
    OSHA is proposing that OMB approve the information collection
requirements specified by the Standard so that it can enforce these
requirements if employers obtain third-party certification/validation;
thus, the Agency reports no program changes or adjustments and requests
that it be allowed to retain its previous estimate of one burden hour
should the requirements of the standard be implemented.
    The Agency will summarize the comments submitted in response to
this notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB to
extend the approval of the information collection requirements
contained in the Standard.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Presence Sensing Device Initiation (PSDI) (29 CFR
1910.217(h)).
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0143.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits; Not-for-profit
organizations;

Federal Government; State, Local, or Tribal Government.
    Number of Respondents: 0.
    Total Responses: 0.
    Frequency: Initially; Annually; On occasion.
    Average Time per Response: 0.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name
and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2010-0009). You
may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments
by your name, date, and the docket number so the Agency can attach them
to your comments.
    Due to security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>). Comments
and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
dates of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download through this
Web site.
    All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available for
inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on using
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments and access
the docket is available at the Web site's ``User Tips'' link. Contact
the OSHA Docket Office for information about materials not available
through the Web site, and for assistance in using the Internet to
locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012
(77 FR 3912).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on April 3, 2013.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2013-08183 Filed 4-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 21, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 7471]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03506]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Effectiveness of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Docket Nos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Panda Hummel Station LLC..............  EG18-14-000
Wildwood Lessee, LLC..................  EG18-15-000
Red Dirt Wind Project, LLC............  EG18-16-000
ORNI 39 LLC...........................  EG18-17-000
ORNI 41 LLC...........................  EG18-18-000
Hamakua Energy, LLC...................  EG18-19-000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Take notice that during the month of January 2018, the status of
the above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators became
effective by operation of the Commission's regulations. 18 CFR 366.7(a)
(2017).

    Dated: February 14, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-03506 Filed 2-20-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P