8593 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 36 / Monday, February 24, 2003 / Notices Wednesday, April 30, 2003 Application of the 1600 series Methods to Monitor Trace Metal Levels in South Texas Estuaries. Determination of Mercury in Ice Cores to Track Earth's Activities. Application of EPA Method 1631, Revision E, to Routine Low level Mercury Analyses. Determination of Arsenic and Selenium Species in Water with a Dynamic Reaction Cell and ICP/ MS. Evaluation of Techniques for Reducing the Reporting Limit for Perchlorate to Sub ppb Levels. Establishment of Total Maximum Daily Loads ( TMDLs) for PCBs and Other Pollutants in Lakes and Estuaries. Effect of Various Means of Calculating Dioxin Toxic Equivalents for Nondetected PCB Congeners on Risk Assessment. A History of Nutrient Excursions Above Ambient Water Quality Criteria in the Great Lakes and Mitigation Strategies, including Total Maximum Daily Loads ( TMDLs) and Waste Load Allocations ( WLAs). Determination of Alkylphenol Ethoxylates in Various Matrices. Determination of Pharmaceuticals Pollutants and Sterols in Water and Biosolids by HPLC/ MS/ MS. Determination of Brominated Organics, including PBDDs/ PBDFs, PBDEs, and PBBs, in Multi media Samples by GC/ HRMS.

Thursday, May 1, 2003 Public Meeting on EPA's Assessment of Detection and Quantitation Procedures Applied under the Clean Water Act. EPA's Office of Water recently completed an in depth assessment of detection and quantitation limit concepts and their application under Clean Water Act programs. The Agency intends to make the results of this assessment available through a public notice to be published in the Federal Register in March 2003. EPA is sponsoring a public meeting to describe this assessment, present the findings, and discuss recommendations. Following presentations by EPA, the public is invited to present comments on the assessment. Time will be made available to interested parties who send in a formal request to comment by April 5, 2003. Requests must include the commenter's name, organization, address, telephone number, fax number ( if applicable), and e mail address ( if applicable). Requests must be sent to: Jennifer Maglinao, DynCorp, 6101 Stevenson Ave., Alexandria, VA 22304   3540. Requests received by April 5, 2003, will be acknowledged and assigned a time slot. Commenters are requested to provide copies of any presentation materials for the public record, and for meeting participants. There is no registration fee to attend the public meeting. For questions, please call Jennifer Maglinao at ( 703) 461   2137. This meeting/ event will be held in a building which is accessible to persons using wheel chairs and scooters. If you wish to request that other arrangements be made because of your disability in order to enable you to participate or if you have questions about accessibility, please contact Jennifer Maglinao at ( 703) 461   2137 as soon as possible, but preferably no less than 5 business days before the event is scheduled.

Dated: February 13, 2003. Pamela Barr, Acting Director, Office of Science and Technology. [ FR Doc. 03   4247 Filed 2   21   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPP   2003   0024; FRL   7291   9]

FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel; Notice of Public Meeting AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: There will be a meeting of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel ( FIFRA SAP) to consider and review the effect of atrazine on amphibians. DATES: Pre meeting teleconference: May 21, 2003, from 1 p. m. to 3 p. m, eastern standard time. Face to face meetings: June 3   5, 2003, from 8: 30 a. m. to 5 p. m, eastern standard time. Comments: Deadlines for submission of requests to present oral comments and submission of written comments, see Unit I. F. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Nominations: Nominations of persons to serve as an ad hoc member of the FIFRA SAP for the pre meeting teleconference and face to face meetings should be provided on or before March 6, 2003. Special seating: Requests for special seating arrangements or other special accomodations should be made at least 5 business days prior to the meeting. ADDRESSES: Pre meeting teleconference: This meeting will be held at the Environmental Protection Agency, 1201 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., EPA East Bldg, Conference Room 4225, Washington, DC. For additional information about the pre meeting teleconference, including how to receive the teleconference telephone number, contact the Designated Federal Official ( DFO) listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Face to face meetings: The meeting will be held at the Sheraton Crystal City Hotel, 1800 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA. 22202. The telephone number for the Sheraton Crystal City Hotel is ( 703) 486   1111. Comments: Written comments may be submitted electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Nominations, requests to present oral comments, and special seating: To submit nominations to serve as an ad hoc member of the FIFRA SAP for the pre meeting teleconference and face toface meetings, or requests for special seating arrangements, or requests to present oral comments, notify the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Lewis, DFO, Office of Science Coordination and Policy ( 7202M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: ( 202) 564   8450; fax number: ( 202) 564   8382; e mail address: lewis. paul@ epa. gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general. This action may, however, be of interest to persons who are or may be required to conduct testing of chemical substances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ( FFDCA), FIFRA, and the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 ( FQPA). Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPP   2003   0024. The official public VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 14: 33 Feb 21, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 24FEN1. SGM 24FEN1 8594 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 36 / Monday, February 24, 2003 / Notices docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is 703   305   5805. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. Meeting agendas relevant to these meetings are now available. EPA's position paper, charge/ questions to FIFRA SAP, and FIFRA SAP composition ( i. e., permanent members and ad hoc members for this meeting) will be available as soon as possible, but no later than early May 2003. In addition, the Agency may provide additional background documents as the materials become available. You may obtain electronic copies of these documents, and certain other related documents that might be available electronically, from the FIFRA SAP Internet Home Page at http:// www. epa. gov/ scipoly/ sap. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number. Certain types of information will not be accessible through EPA Dockets. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public docket, also will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. In addition, EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. To the extent feasible, publicly available docket materials will be made available in EPA's electronic public docket. When a document is selected from the index list in EPA Dockets, the system will identify whether the document is available for viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. EPA intends to work towards providing electronic access to all of the publicly available docket materials through EPA's electronic public docket. For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or on paper, will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket. Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief description written by the docket staff.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments? You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket ID number in the subject line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked `` late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late comments. If you wish to submit CBI or information that is otherwise protected by statute, please follow the instructions in Unit I. D. Do not use EPA Dockets or e mail to submit CBI or information protected by statute. 1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as prescribed in this unit, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other contact information in the body of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once in the system, select `` search,'' and then key in docket ID number OPP   2003   0024. The system is an `` anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity, e mail address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. ii. E mail. Comments may be sent by e mail to opp docket@ epa. gov, Attention: Docket ID Number OPP   2003   0024. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e mail system is not an `` anonymous access'' system. If you send an e mail comment directly to the docket without going through EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e mail system automatically captures your e mail address. E mail addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e mail system are included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM that you mail to the mailing address identified in Unit I. C. 2. These electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect or ASCII file format. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption. 2. By mail. Send your comments to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB) ( 7502C), Office VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 14: 33 Feb 21, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 24FEN1. SGM 24FEN1 8595 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 36 / Monday, February 24, 2003 / Notices of Pesticide Programs ( OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001, Attention: Docket ID Number OPP   2003   0024. 3. By hand delivery or courier. Deliver your comments to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Office of Pesticide Programs ( OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, Attention: Docket ID Number OPP   2003   0024. Such deliveries are only accepted during the docket's normal hours of operation as identified in Unit I. B. 1.

D. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency?

Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI electronically through EPA's electronic public docket or by e mail. You may claim information that you submit to EPA as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI ( if you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is CBI). Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket. If you submit the copy that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/ or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternative ways to improve the notice or collection activity. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this document. 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register citation.

F. How May I Participate in this Meeting? You may participate in this meeting by following the instructions in this unit. For submission of CBI, see Unit I. D. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket ID number OPP   2003   0024 in the subject line on the first page of your request. 1. Oral comments. Oral comments presented at the meetings should not be repetitive of previously submitted oral or written comments. Each individual or group wishing to make brief oral comments to the FIFRA SAP is strongly advised to submit their request to the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT no later than noon, eastern standard time, May 28, 2003, in order to be included on the meeting agenda. The request should identify the name of the individual making the presentation, the organization ( if any) the individual will represent, and any requirements for audiovisual equipment ( e. g., overhead projector, 35 mm projector, chalkboard). Oral comments before the FIFRA SAP are limited to approximately 5 minutes unless prior arrangements have been made. In addition, each speaker should bring 30 copies of his or her comments and presentation slides for distribution to the FIFRA SAP at the meeting. 2. Written comments. Although submission of written comments are accepted until the date of the meeting ( unless otherwise stated), the Agency encourages that written comments be submitted, using the instructions in Unit I., no later than noon, eastern standard time, May 28, 2003, to provide the FIFRA SAP the time necessary to consider and review the written comments. There is no limit on the extent of written comments for consideration by the FIFRA SAP. Persons wishing to submit written comments at the meeting should contact the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT and submit 30 copies. 3. Seating at the meeting. Seating at the meeting will be on a first come basis. Individuals requiring special accommodations at this meeting, including wheelchair access, should contact the DFO at least 5 business days prior to the meeting using the information under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT so that appropriate arrangements can be made. 4. Request for nominations of persons to serve as ad hoc members of the FIFRA SAP for this meeting. The FIFRA SAP staff routinely solicit the stakeholder community for nominations to serve as ad hoc members of the FIFRA SAP for each meeting. Any interested person or organization may nominate qualified individuals to serve on the FIFRA SAP for a specific meeting. No interested person shall be ineligible to serve by reason of their membership on any other advisory committee to a Federal department or agency or their employment by a Federal department or agency ( except the EPA). Individuals nominated should have expertise in one or more of the following areas: i. Amphibian toxicology and ecology. ii. Xenopus and/ or xenopus husbandry. iii. Developmental biology, gonadal development, and/ or endocrinology. iv. Ecotoxicology and risk assessment. Nominees should be scientists who have sufficient professional qualifications, including training and experience, to be capable of providing expert comments on the issues for this meeting. Nominees should be identified by name, occupation, position, address, and telephone number. Nominations should be provided to the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by March 6, 2003. The criteria for selecting scientists to serve on the FIFRA SAP are that these persons be recognized scientists experts in their fields; that they be as impartial and objective as possible; that they represent an array of backgrounds and perspectives ( within their disciplines); have no financial conflict of interest; have not previously been involved with the scientific peer review of the issue( s) presented; and that they be available to participate fully in the review, which will be conducted over a relatively short time frame. Nominees will be asked to attend the public meetings and to participate in the discussion of key issues and assumptions at these meetings. Finally, they will be asked to review and to help finalize the meeting minutes. If a FIFRA SAP nominee is considered to assist in a review by the FIFRA SAP for a particular session, the nominee is subject to the provisions of 5 CFR part 2634, Executive Branch Financial Disclosure, as supplemented by the EPA in 5 CFR part 6401. As such, the FIFRA SAP nominee is required to submit a VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 14: 33 Feb 21, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 24FEN1. SGM 24FEN1 8596 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 36 / Monday, February 24, 2003 / Notices Confidential Financial Disclosure Form for Special Government Employees Serving on Federal Advisory Committees at the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA Form 3110   48 5   02) which shall fully disclose, among other financial interests, the nominee's employment, stocks, and bonds, and where applicable, sources of research support. EPA will evaluate the nominee's financial disclosure form to assess that there are no formal conflict of interests before the nominee is considered to serve on the FIFRA SAP. Selected FIFRA SAP members will be hired as a Special Government Employee. The Agency will review all nominations; nominees who are selected for the meeting will be posted on the FIFRA SAP web site or may be obtained by contacting the PIRIB at the address or telephone number listed in Unit I.

II. Background A. Purpose of the FIFRA SAP Amendments to FIFRA enacted November 28, 1975 ( 7 U. S. C. 136w( d)), include a requirement under section 25( d) of FIFRA that notices of intent to cancel or reclassify pesticides pursuant to section 6( b)( 2) of FIFRA, as well as proposed and final forms of rulemaking pursuant to section 25( a) of FIFRA, be submitted to a SAP prior to being made public or issued to a registrant. In accordance with section 25( d) of FIFRA, the FIFRA SAP is to have an opportunity to comment on the health and environmental impact of such actions. The FIFRA SAP also shall make comments, evaluations, and recommendations for operating guidelines to improve the effectiveness and quality of analyses made by Agency scientists. Members are scientists who have sufficient professional qualifications, including training and experience, to be capable of providing expert comments as to the impact on health and the environment of regulatory actions under sections 6( b) and 25( a) of FIFRA. The Deputy Administrator appoints seven individuals to serve on the FIFRA SAP for staggered terms of 4 years, based on recommendations from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. Section 104 of FQPA ( Public Law 104   170) established the FQPA Science Review Board ( SRB). These scientists shall be available to the FIFRA SAP on an ad hoc basis to assist in reviews conducted by the FIFRA SAP. B. Pre meeting Teleconference This pre meeting teleconference is open to the public and seating will be on a first come basis. The public may also attend via telephone. For further information concerning the meeting or how to obtain the telephone number, please contact the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The purpose of this public premeeting teleconference is to: 1. Discuss the charge and the adequacy of the review materials provided to the FIFRA SAP. 2. Clarify any questions and issues relating to the charge and the review materials. 3. Discuss specific charge assignments to the Panelists. 4. Clarify specific points of interest raised by the Panelists in preparation for the face to face meetings to be held from June 3   5, 2003.

C. Face to Face Public Meeting The FIFRA SAP will meet to consider and review the effects of atrazine on amphibians. Recent research has generated conflicting results on the effects of atrazine on gonadal developmental ( e. g., male hermaphroditism) in amphibians and how these effects influence secondary sexual characteristics ( e. g., laryngeal muscle mass). The FIFRA SAP will be asked to consider the range of effects associated with exposure of amphibians to atrazine and to determine the significance of these effects for risk assessment and the likely threshold exposure value for eliciting these effects. The Agency requests the Panel to identify what additional, specific information, if any, would significantly reduce uncertainties in determining a causal relationship between atrazine exposure and development in amphibians and the extent to which any changes in development can be related to effects on survival, growth and reproductive performance. To the extent that significant knowledge gaps or areas of variability in the existing knowledge base are identified, the FIFRA SAP will be asked to prioritize what additional types of data would lead to the greatest incremental reductions in risk assessment uncertainties.

D. FIFRA SAP Meeting Minutes The FIFRA SAP will prepare meeting minutes summarizing its recommendations to the Agency in approximately 60 days. The meeting minutes will be posted on the FIFRA SAP web site or may be obtained by contacting the PIRIB at the address or telephone number listed in Unit I. List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

Dated: February 11, 2003. Joseph J. Merenda, Director, Office of Science Coordination and Policy. [ FR Doc. 03   4248 Filed 2   21   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ FRL   7453   3]

Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants; Procedures for Detection and Quantitation; Public Meeting AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: EPA's Office of Water recently completed an assessment of detection and quantitation concepts and their application under Clean Water Act programs. The Agency intends to make the results of this assessment available through a public notice to be published in the Federal Register in March 2003. EPA is sponsoring a public meeting to describe this assessment, present the findings, and discuss recommendations. Following presentations by EPA, the public is invited to present comments on the assessment. Time will be made available to interested parties who send in a formal request to comment by April 5, 2003. Commenters are requested to provide copies of any presentation materials for the public record and for meeting participants. DATES: The public meeting on Detection and Quantitation will be held on May 1, 2003, from 10 a. m. to 3 p. m., with a onehour break from 12 p. m. to 1 p. m. Parties interested in presenting comments at the meeting must send in a formal request to comment by April 5, 2003. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Holiday Inn Chicago Mart Plaza Hotel, 350 North Orleans Street, Chicago, Illinois, U. S. A. 60654. Formal requests to present comments at the meeting must be submitted by April 5, 2003, to Jennifer Maglinao, DynCorp, 6101 Stevenson Ave., Alexandria, VA 22304   3540, or by e mail to jennifer. maglinao@ dyncorp. com.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The public meeting is being coordinated by DynCorp System & Solutions LLC. Questions regarding public meeting logistics or requests to present VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 14: 33 Feb 21, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 24FEN1. SGM 24FEN1


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 228 (Friday, November 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74199-74200]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30143]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0397]

Commercial Driver's License: Oregon Department of Transportation;
Application for Exemption

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

ACTION: Notice of application for exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that it has received an application from the
Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) for a limited exemption from
the Agency's commercial learner's permit (CLP) requirement in 49 CFR
383.25(c). The regulation provides that the CLP be valid for no more
than 180 days from the date of issuance. The State of issuance may
renew the CLP for an additional 180 days without requiring the CLP
holder to retake the general and endorsement knowledge tests. ODOT
proposes that it be allowed to extend the 180-day timeline to one year
for CLPs issued to its drivers for multiple reasons. ODOT believes that
there would be no impact on safety if the exemption is granted. FMCSA
requests public comment on ODOT's application for exemption. In
addition, because the issues concerning ODOT's request could be
applicable to each State, FMCSA requests public comments whether the
exemption, if granted, should apply to all State Driver's Licensing
Agencies (SDLAs).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 28, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA FMCSA-2015-0397 using any of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow
the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without
change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to www.regulations.gov at any time or visit Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The on-line FDMS is available 24 hours each
day, 365 days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received
your comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or
postcard or print the acknowledgement page that appears after
submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning this
notice, contact Ms. Pearlie Robinson, FMCSA Driver and Carrier
Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety
Standards; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact
Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and
related materials.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (FMCSA-2015-0397), indicate the specific section of this
document to which the comment applies, and provide a reason for
suggestions or recommendations. You may submit your comments and
material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so the Agency can contact you if it has questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to www.regulations.gov and put
the docket number, ``FMCSA-2015-0397'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and
click ``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on ``Comment
Now!'' button and type your comment into the text box in the following
screen. Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual
or on behalf of a third party and then submit. If you submit your
comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no
larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they
reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard
or envelope. FMCSA will consider all comments and material received
during the comment period and may grant or not grant this application
based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to www.regulations.gov and insert
the docket number, ``FMCSA-2015-0397'' in the ``Keyword'' box and click
``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket Folder'' button and choose the
document listed to review. If you do not have access to the Internet,
you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

II. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations. FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in
the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the
public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant to the
application, including any safety analyses that have been conducted.
The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public comment on the
request.

    The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted,
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying or granting the application
and, if granted, the name of the person or class of persons receiving
the exemption, and the regulatory provision from which the exemption is
granted. The notice must also specify the effective period and explain
the terms and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be renewed
(49 CFR 381.300(b)).

III. Request for Exemption

    ODOT requests an exemption from the Agency's CLP requirement in 49
CFR 383.25(c). The regulation provides that the CLP be valid for no
more than 180 days from the date of issuance. The State may renew the
CLP for an additional 180 days without requiring the CLP holder to
retake the general and endorsement knowledge tests. ODOT proposes that
it be allowed to extend the 180-day timeline to one year for CLPs
issued to its drivers.
    ODOT provided multiple reasons for regulatory relief from the CLP
rule. First, ODOT believes that the 180-day time line required to renew
the CLP adds nothing to the effectiveness of the rule itself, the
purpose of which is to ``enhance safety by ensuring that only qualified
drivers are allowed to operate commercial vehicles on our nation's
highways'' (76 FR 26854, May 9, 2011). ODOT asserts that neither FMCSA
staff nor the States were able to identify any highway safety
enhancement arising from this requirement. ODOT states that it is
unaware of any data suggesting that persons who have not renewed their
CLP or obtained their CDL within six months pose less risk on the
Nation's highways.
    Second, ODOT agrees that requiring CLP holders to retake the
knowledge test after not obtaining a CDL within one year improves
highway safety, but disagrees that the requirement for renewal at six
months is needed. According to ODOT, if the exemption is granted,
ODOT's CLP would have a validity period of one year with no renewal
allowed. All applicable knowledge tests would be required before a new
CDL could be issued, which would accomplish the objective of not
allowing a person to have a CLP longer than one year without passing
knowledge tests.
    The third reason for the request ODOT advises; is that Oregon's
``Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) field offices have a very large
volume of work to accomplish and, at best, limited resources with which
to accomplish it. Adding the bureaucratic requirement for a CLP holder
to visit a DMV office and pay a fee in order to get a second six months
of CLP validity will add unnecessary workload to offices already
stretched to the limit. ODOT is confident there would be no negative
impact on safety if the exemption is granted.''
    According to ODOT, ``If this exemption is not granted, Oregon
drivers with CLPs who have not passed the CDL skills test within six
months of CLP issuance would have to go to a DMV office and pay for a
renewal of the CLP. This would cause undue hardship to the drivers,
from the perspectives of both their time and their pocketbooks. It
would also cause undue hardship to our agency, where scarce resources
would be used to process bureaucratic transactions that add nothing to
highway safety.'' ODOT advises that it would not be able to change the
validity period of the CLP until a statutory change can be made.
    In addition, because the issues concerning ODOT's request could be
applicable in each State, FMCSA requests public comment on whether the
exemption, if granted, should apply to all SDLAs.
    A copy of ODOT's application for exemption is available for review
in the docket for this notice.

    Dated: November 6, 2015.
 Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-30143 Filed 11-25-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: November 5, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 213)]
[Notices]
[Page 57303]
[DOCID:fr05no09-41]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings No. 2

October 19, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP09-704-002.
    Applicants: Destin Pipeline Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Destin Pipeline Company, LLC submits Second Sub Eighth
Revised No 136 to its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 10/09/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091013-0036.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 23, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-855-002.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC.
    Description: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC submits
First Revised Sheet No 465 et al. to its FERC Gas Tariff, Seventh
Revised Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 10/09/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091013-0037.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 23, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-117-001.
    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company.
    Description: El Paso Natural Gas Company submits Second Revised
Volume 1A et al. to be effective 10/1/09.
    Filed Date: 10/15/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091016-0110.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 27, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-1019-001.
    Applicants: Quest Pipelines (KPC).
    Description: Quest Pipelines submits First Revised Sheet No 185 et
al. to its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No 1.
    Filed Date: 10/09/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091013-0035.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 23, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-1089-001.
    Applicants: Northwest Pipeline GP.
    Description: Northwest Pipeline GP submits Sub. Fifth Revised Sheet
399 et al. of its FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 10/07/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091008-0240.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 23, 2009.

    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all
the parties to the proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons
unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-26616 Filed 11-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 248 (Friday, December 28, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67079-67081]
[FR Doc No: 2018-28245]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2018-1021]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone for Fireworks Display; Spa Creek, Annapolis, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
certain waters of Spa Creek. This action is necessary to provide for
the safety of life on these navigable waters of Spa Creek at Annapolis,
MD, for a fireworks display on December 31, 2018. This regulation
prohibits persons and vessels from entering the safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region
or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 11 p.m. on December 31, 2018,
through 1 a.m. on January 1, 2019.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-1021 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this rule,
call or email Mr. Ron Houck, Sector Maryland-National Capital Region
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 410-576-
2674, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On October 17, 2018, Pyrotecnico, Inc., of New Castle, PA, notified
the Coast Guard that it will be conducting a fireworks display from
11:55 p.m. on December 31, 2018, to 12:30 a.m. on January 1, 2019,
sponsored by the City of Annapolis, MD. The fireworks are to be
launched from a barge in Spa Creek, in Annapolis, MD. Additional
details were received on November 5, 2018. In response, on November 27,
2018, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
titled ``Safety Zone for Fireworks Display; Spa Creek, Annapolis, MD''
(83 FR 60802). There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited
comments on our proposed regulatory action related to this fireworks
display. During the comment period that ended December 12, 2018, we
received seven comments.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest
because immediate action is needed to mitigate the potential safety
hazards associated with a fireworks display in this location.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The

Captain of the Port (COTP) Maryland-NCR has determined that potential
hazards associated with the planned fireworks display on December 31,
2018, will be a safety concern for anyone within a 400-foot radius of
the fireworks barge. This rule is needed to ensure safety of vessels on
the navigable waters within 400 feet of the fireworks barge on Spa
Creek before, during, and after the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received 7 public submissions to the docket
responding to our NPRM published November 27, 2018. We thank all of the
commenters for taking time to review the NPRM and submit comments
regarding this action.
    The majority of commenters expressed support for the rule, but
there were some concerns. Below in this section we have presented our
summaries of comments in italics, and have stated our responses after
each summary.
    Winds during winter could carry burning embers and projectiles
farther than the 400 feet distance established for the zone. The 400
feet from the fireworks barge is an insufficient distance and the
safety zone should be increased in size.
    The minimum safe distance from the fireworks barge used by the
Coast Guard to determine the size of the safety zone is based on
industry standards for outdoor aerial fireworks set by the National
Fire Protection Association (NFPA). The NFPA standard for this
fireworks display is 280 feet from the discharge site. At the request
of the contracted fireworks company, Pyrotecnico, the Coast Guard is
using 400 feet for the size of its safety zone, which is an increase of
more than 40 percent above the safe distance set by the NFPA.
    Like people and property, the protection of wildlife should be
considered and any fireworks that end up in the waterway should be
recovered and disposed of following the display.
    After completing the required analysis for the rule, the Coast
Guard has determined that this rulemaking will not have a significant
effect on the human environment. In accordance with applicable
environmental laws, this analysis is of the action being taken by the
Coast Guard, the creation of the safety zone, not the underlying
triggering event--the fireworks, which appear to be the commenter's
source of concern with respect to wildlife. The Coast Guard agrees that
considering the effects of fireworks on the environment is important;
however, it is up to the event sponsor to determine the appropriate
level of clean up for falling debris and the potential impact of the
fireworks on wildlife.
    There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the
proposed rule in the NPRM.
    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone from 11 p.m. on
December 31, 2018, through 1 a.m. on January 1, 2019. The safety zone
will cover all navigable waters within 400 feet of the fireworks barge
in Spa Creek located within 400 feet of the fireworks barge in
approximate position latitude 38[deg]58'32.48'' N, longitude
076[deg]28'57.55'' W, located at Annapolis, MD. The duration of the
safety zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these
navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled fireworks
display. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone
without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. This zone covers the
entire navigable channel. Although vessel traffic will not be able to
safely transit around this safety zone, the impact will be for 2 hours
during the evening when vessel traffic in Spa Creek is normally low.
The Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM
marine channel 16 about the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent

with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements
described in Executive Order 13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the
Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is
one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves
a safety zone lasting 2 hours that prohibits entry within a portion of
Spa Creek. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS
Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; and; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T05-1021 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-1021   Safety Zone for Fireworks Display; Spa Creek,
Annapolis, MD.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of Spa Creek within 400 feet of the fireworks barge in
approximate position latitude 38[deg]58'32.48'' N, longitude
076[deg]28'57.55'' W, located at Annapolis, MD. All coordinates refer
to datum NAD 1983.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section:
    (1) Captain of the Port (COTP) means the Commander, U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region.
    (2) Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the
Port Maryland-National Capital Region to assist in enforcing the safety
zone described in paragraph (a) of this section.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative. All vessels underway within this
safety zone at the time it is activated are to depart the zone.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
designated representative by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or on Marine
Band Radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). The Coast Guard vessels
enforcing this section can be contacted on Marine Band Radio VHF-FM
channel 16 (156.8 MHz).
    (3) Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.
    (d) Enforcement officials. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in
the patrol and enforcement of the safety zone by Federal, State, and
local agencies.
    (e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 11 p.m.
on December 31, 2018 through 1 a.m. on January 1, 2019.

    Dated: December 21, 2018,
Joseph B. Loring,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National
Capital Region.
[FR Doc. 2018-28245 Filed 12-27-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 234 (Thursday, December 9, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70161-70162]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26641]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2021-0172]

Commercial Driver's License Skills Testing: Application for
Exemption; American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA)

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

ACTION: Application for exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that the American Association of Motor Vehicle
Administrators (AAMVA) requests a multi-year exemption to allow the
State Driver Licensing Agencies (SDLAs) in Maryland, New Hampshire, and
Virginia to continue using the revised Commercial Driver's License
(CDL) pre-trip vehicle inspection and revised control skills test
procedures, after current field tests being conducted as part of a
pilot program under a waiver granted by the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration (FMCSA) have been completed. AAMVA states that
the requested exemption would enable these States to continue operating
under the pilot model without the burden of reverting to the older CDL
test model requiring cost and delays associated with the re-
configuration of testing locations and retraining of CDL test
examiners. FMCSA requests public comment on the applicant's request for
exemption.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 10, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket
Management System Number FMCSA-2021-0172 by any of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. See the
Public Participation and Request for Comments section below for further
information.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
E.T., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
(FMCSA-2021-0172) for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to www.regulations.gov at any time or visit Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you,
please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting Dockets
Operations.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its regulatory process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Richard Clemente, Driver and
Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle
Safety Standards, FMCSA, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by e-mail at [email protected].
If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Docket Services at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and
related materials.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (FMCSA-2021-0172), indicate the specific section of this
document to which the comment applies, and provide a reason for
suggestions or recommendations. You may submit your comments and
material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so the Agency can contact you if it has questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to www.regulations.gov and put
the docket number, ``FMCSA-2021-0172'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and
click ``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on the ``Comment
Now!'' button and type your comment into the text box in the following
screen. Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual
or on behalf of a third party and then submit. If you submit your
comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no
larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they
reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard
or envelope. FMCSA will consider all comments and material received
during the comment period and may grant or not grant this application
based on your comments.

II. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs). FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in the
Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the
public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant to the
application, including any safety analyses that have been conducted.
The Agency must provide an opportunity for public comment on the
request.
    The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The Agency must
publish its decision in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(b)) with
the reasons for denying or granting the application and, if granted,
the name of the person or class of persons receiving the exemption and

the regulatory provision from which the exemption is granted. The
notice must specify the effective period and explain the terms and
conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be renewed (49 CFR
381.300(b)).

III. Background

Current Regulatory Requirements

    The Commercial Driver's License (CDL) requirements in 49 CFR part
383, subpart G, Required Knowledge and Skills, specifically section 49
CFR 383.133(c)(1)-(2) require the following: Test methods: (1) A State
must develop, administer and score the skills tests based solely on the
information and standards contained in the driver and examiner manuals
referred to in Sec.  383.131(a) and (b); and (2) A State must use the
standardized scores and instructions for administering the tests
contained in the examiner manual referred to in Sec.  383.131(b).

Applicant's Request

    On October 25, 2021, the American Association of Motor Vehicle
Administrators (AAMVA) requested that FMCSA consider granting the
States of Maryland, New Hampshire, and Virginia (the pilot States) a
multi-year exemption to allow these 3 pilot States to continue using
revised CDL vehicle inspection and revised control skills procedures.
The requested exemption would enable these pilot States to continue
operating under the pilot model without the burden of reverting to the
older CDL test model requiring cost and delays associated with the re-
configuration of testing locations and retraining of CDL test
examiners.
    On August 16, 2021, AAMVA requested a 90-day waiver from 49 CFR
383.133 to enable the pilot States to complete field tests of the new
CDL skills test procedures. This waiver request was subsequently
granted on August 31, 2021 for the period of September 1, 2021 through
December 1, 2021, after FMCSA determined that CDL skills testing
conducted under the terms and conditions of the waiver would achieve an
equivalent level of safety to the current regulations. AAMVA now seeks
to allow the pilot States to continue operating under the revised CDL
vehicle inspection and revised control skills procedures once the field
test waiver period has concluded. According to AAMVA, the requested
exemption ``would permit these States to continue CDL testing without
the burden of reverting back to the older CDL test model which would
require cost and delays associated with re-configuration of testing
locations and retraining of CDL examiners.''
    AAMVA also notes that the requested exemption would allow continued
use of the revised testing system by the pilot States operating under
the current waiver while AAMVA and FMCSA analyze the field test results
and determine if any additional adjustments warrant further review by
the Agency and testing by these pilot States. If the Agency adopts the
modernized test, the requested exemption will minimize the back-and-
forth and confusion of rotating between CDL test models in the 3 pilot
States during the exemption period. If FMCSA does not accept the
modernized test, the pilot States would revert to the current system
but would need up to 30 days to transition and notify industry of the
return to the current CDL test model. A copy of the AAMVA exemption
application is in the docket listed at the beginning of this notice.

IV. Equivalent Level of Safety

    In granting AAMVA's original waiver request from 49 CFR 383.133,
the FMCSA determined that a waiver of the traditional pre-trip
inspection and basic vehicle control skills testing requirements would
not have an adverse impact on safety because the revised skills test
will provide a comparable level of rigor as the current tests to ensure
that participating CDL applicants demonstrate a level of knowledge and
skills that prove they can operate commercial motor vehicles safely.
AAMVA requested the exemption be granted under the same terms and
conditions as the waiver. Under the terms of the waiver, the tests must
be administered in a controlled setting, located within States' skills
testing facilities. All other safety requirements, such as requiring
the applicant to pass the traditional on-road test segment of the
skills test, continue to apply. In addition, the pilot States may
administer the revised examinations only to applicants who are
domiciled in their respective States. The pilot States must continue to
be prohibited from issuing CDLs to field test applicants unless the
applicant passes all the required segments of the skills test.

V. Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), FMCSA requests public
comment from all interested persons on the American Association of
Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) application for an exemption from
49 CFR 383.133(c)(1)-(2). All comments received before the close of
business on the comment closing date indicated at the beginning of this
notice will be considered and will be available for examination in the
docket at the location listed under the Addresses section of this
notice. Comments received after the comment closing date will be filed
in the public docket and will be considered to the extent practicable.
In addition to late comments, FMCSA will also continue to file, in the
public docket, relevant information that becomes available after the
comment closing date. Interested persons should continue to examine the
public docket for new material.

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-26641 Filed 12-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 37 (Thursday, February 25, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9391-9395]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03894]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0315; FRL-9942-73-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor
Recovery Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve, as a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP), a
submittal by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM)
on April 27, 2015 and September 10, 2015. The submittal concerns the
state's Stage II vapor recovery (Stage II) program for Clark and Floyd
counties in southern Indiana as part of the Louisville, Kentucky ozone
nonattainment area, and Lake and Porter counties in northwest Indiana
as part of the Chicago ozone nonattainment area. The submittal removes
Stage II requirements from both nonattainment areas, as a component of
the Indiana ozone SIP. The submittal also includes a demonstration
under the Clean Air Act (CAA) that addresses emission impacts
associated with the removal of the Stage II program.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 28, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2015-0315 at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person

identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francisco J. Acevedo, Mobile Source
Program Manager, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. Background
II. What changes have been made to the Indiana Stage II Vapor
Recovery Program?
III. What is EPA's analysis of the state's submittal?
IV. What action is EPA proposing to take?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Stage II and onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) are two types
of emission control systems that capture fuel vapors from vehicle gas
tanks during refueling. Stage II systems are specifically installed at
gasoline dispensing facilities (GDF) and capture the refueling fuel
vapors at the gasoline pump nozzle. The system carries the vapors back
to the underground storage tank at the GDF to prevent the vapors from
escaping to the atmosphere. ORVR systems are carbon canisters installed
directly on automobiles to capture the fuel vapors evacuated from the
gasoline tank before they reach the nozzle. The fuel vapors captured in
the carbon canisters are then combusted in the engine when the
automobile is in operation.
    Both Stage II and ORVR were required by the 1990 Amendments to the
CAA under sections 182(b)(3) and 202(a)(6), respectively. In some
areas, Stage II has been in place for over 25 years. It was not,
however, widely implemented by the states until the early to mid-1990s
as a result of the CAA requirements for ``moderate,'' ``serious,''
``severe,'' and ``extreme'' ozone nonattainment areas, classified under
section 181 of the CAA, and for states in the Northeast Ozone Transport
Region (OTR) under section 184(b)(2) of the CAA.
    Under section 202(a)(6) of the CAA, Congress required EPA to
promulgate regulations for ORVR for light-duty vehicles (passenger
cars). EPA adopted these requirements in 1994, at which point moderate
ozone nonattainment areas were no longer subject to the section
182(b)(3) Stage II requirement. See 59 FR 16262 (April 6, 1994).
However, some moderate areas retained Stage II requirements to provide
a control method to comply with rate-of-progress emission reduction
targets. ORVR equipment has been phased in for new passenger vehicles
beginning with model year 1998, and starting in 2001 for light-duty
trucks and most heavy-duty gasoline-powered vehicles. ORVR equipment
has been installed on nearly all new gasoline-powered light-duty
vehicles, light-duty trucks and heavy-duty vehicles since 2006. During
the phase-in of ORVR controls, Stage II has provided volatile organic
compound (VOC) reductions in ozone nonattainment areas and certain
attainment areas of the OTR. Under section 202(a)(6) of the CAA,
Congress recognized that ORVR and Stage II could eventually become
largely redundant technologies, and provided authority to the EPA to
allow states to remove Stage II from their SIPs after EPA finds that
ORVR is in widespread use. On May 16, 2012, EPA determined that ORVR
was in widespread nationwide use for control of gasoline emissions
during refueling of vehicles at GDFs (77 FR 28772).
    In 2012, more than 75 percent of gasoline refueling nationwide
occurred with ORVR-equipped vehicles, so Stage II programs have become
largely redundant control systems and Stage II systems achieve an ever
declining emissions benefit as more ORVR-equipped vehicles continue to
enter the on-road motor vehicle fleet.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In areas where certain types of vacuum-assist Stage II
systems are used, the differences in operational design
characteristics between ORVR and some configurations of these Stage
II systems result in the reduction of overall control system
efficiency compared to what could have been achieved relative to the
individual control efficiencies of either ORVR or Stage II emissions
from the vehicle fuel tank.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On that date, EPA also exercised its authority under section
202(a)(6) of the CAA to waive certain Federal statutory requirements
for Stage II at GDFs. This decision exempted all new ozone
nonattainment areas classified serious or above from the requirement to
adopt Stage II control programs. Similarly, any state currently
implementing Stage II programs was authorized to submit SIP revisions
that, once approved by EPA, would allow for the phase-out of Stage II
control systems.
    To assist states in the development of SIP revisions to remove
Stage II requirements from their SIPs, EPA issued its ``Guidance on
Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control Programs from State
Implementation Plans and Assessing Comparable Measures'' (EPA-457/B-12-
001) on August 7, 2012. In that document, EPA provided both technical
and policy recommendations to states and local areas on how to develop
and submit and approvable SIP revision seeking to phase out an existing
Stage II program.

II. What changes have been made to the Indiana Stage II Vapor Recovery
Program?

    Indiana originally submitted a SIP revision request to EPA on
February 25, 1994, to satisfy the requirements of section 182(b)(3) of
the CAA. The submission applied to Clark and Floyd counties Indiana as
part of the Louisville, Kentucky ozone nonattainment area and Lake and
Porter counties Indian as part of the Chicago ozone nonattainment area.
EPA fully approved Indiana's Stage II program on April 28, 1994 (59 FR
10111), including the program's legal authority and administrative
requirements found in Section 8-4-6 of Title 326 of the Indiana
Administrative Code (326 IAC).
    In January 2013, IDEM issued a Nonrule Policy Document, Air-036
(NPD), addressing EPA's May 16, 2012 determination. In the NPD, IDEM
stated that it would not enforce the requirements for Stage II at new
and modified GDFs in Clark, Floyd, Lake and Porter counties. At the
same time Indiana also initiated a rulemaking process to revise its SIP
to remove Stage II requirements for all facilities in Clark, Floyd,
Lake and Porter counties. As part of that process, Indiana completed a
state-specific analysis following EPA's recommended methodology. In
that analysis, Indiana concluded that, during calendar year 2016, ORVR
would be in widespread use in Indiana and that there would no remaining
emissions reduction benefit from Stage II requirements beyond the
benefits from ORVR.
    On April 27, 2015 and September 10, 2015, IDEM submitted rules as
SIP revision requests of amendments to 326 IAC 8-4-6 and 326 IAC 8-4-1.
These amendments would remove Stage II requirements from the Indiana
ozone SIP and allow GDFs currently implementing Stage II in the four
program counties to decommission their systems. To support the removal
of the Stage II requirements, the revised rules included copies of 326
IAC 8-4-1 and 326 IAC 8-4-6, as published in the Indiana Register on
March 4, 2015; a summary of state-specific calculations

based on EPA guidance used to calculate program benefits and
demonstrate widespread use of ORVR in Indiana; and a section 110(l)
demonstration that includes offset emission documentation that
addresses the 2013-2015 period, when Stage II requirements were waived
in Indiana but widespread use of ORVR had not yet occurred.

III. What is EPA's analysis of the state's submittal?

    Revisions to SIP-approved control measures must meet the
requirements of section 110(l) of the CAA in order to be approved by
EPA. Section 110(l) states:
    ``The Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the
revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in section 171),
or any other applicable requirement of this Act.''
    EPA evaluates each section 110(l) non-interference demonstration on
a case-by-case basis considering the circumstances of each SIP
revision. EPA interprets section 110(l) to apply to all requirements of
the CAA and to all areas of the country, whether attainment,
nonattainment, unclassifiable, or maintenance for one or more of the
six criteria pollutants. EPA also interprets section 110(l) to require
a demonstration addressing all criteria pollutants whose emissions and/
or ambient concentrations may change as a result of the SIP revision.
The degree of analysis focused on any particular national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) in a non-interference demonstration varies
depending on the nature of the emissions associated with the proposed
SIP revision.
    In the absence of an attainment demonstration, to demonstrate no
interference with any applicable NAAQS or requirement of the CAA under
section 110(l), EPA believes it is appropriate to allow states to
substitute equivalent emissions reductions to compensate for any change
to a SIP-approved program, as long as actual emissions in the air are
not increased. ``Equivalent'' emissions reductions mean reductions
which are equal to or greater than those reductions achieved by the
control measure approved in the SIP. To show that compensating
emissions reductions are equivalent, modeling or adequate justification
must be provided. The compensating, equivalent reductions must
represent actual, new emissions reductions achieved in a
contemporaneous time frame to the change of the existing SIP control
measure, in order to preserve the status quo level of emissions in the
air. In addition to being contemporaneous, the equivalent emissions
reductions must also be permanent, enforceable, quantifiable, and
surplus to be approved into the SIP.
    The implementation of the Stage II program in Indiana has resulted
in reductions of VOC emissions. VOCs contribute to the formation of
ground-level ozone. Thus the potential increase in VOC needs to be
offset with equivalent (or greater) emissions reductions from another
control measure in order to demonstrate non-interference with the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. The Indiana Stage II SIP revision includes a 110(l)
demonstration for both areas that uses equivalent emissions reductions
to compensate for emission reduction losses between 2013 and 2015
resulting from the removal of Stage II systems at a number of GDFs
before ORVR is in widespread use as allowed by Indiana's NPD. IDEM has
calculated that by 2016, ORVR will be in widespread use in both areas
and the absence of the Indiana Stage II program after 2016 would not
result in a net VOC emissions increase compared to the continued
utilization of this emissions control technology. The emission
reduction losses resulting from removing Stage II before 2016 are
transitional and relatively small since ORVR-equipped vehicles will
continue to phase into the fleet over the coming years. IDEM's
calculation indicates a maximum potential loss of 0.02317 tons per
summer day (tpsd) in Lake and Porter counties and 0.00408 tpsd in Clark
and Floyd counties from 2013 through 2015.
    For Lake and Porter Counties, IDEM is proposing the use of VOC
emission reductions associated with the shutdown of the State Line
Energy Generating Plant (State Line Energy) formerly located in Lake
County, Indiana to offset the 0.02317 tpsd increase in those counties.
State Line ceased operations in March 31, 2012 and its operating permit
has been revoked. The expiration and revocation of this source's permit
enables the state to use the VOC emission credits associated with this
facility for other purposes under the SIP and makes such credits
permanent and enforceable. Using the last three full years of
operations (2009-2011) State Line Energy averaged 0.215 tpsd of VOC of
emissions offsets. Table 1 shows the increase of emissions associated
with the removal of Stage II systems at facilities in Lake and Porter
counties, as well as offset emissions associated with State Line
Energy. In the table, the number of facilities removing Stage II
equipment for 2013 represents the actual number of facilities that
sought an exemption from implementing the Stage II requirements. For
2014 and 2015, the number of facilities removing Stage II equipment is
a conservative estimate.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The actual number of facilities expected to remove Stage II
equipment during this timeframe believed to be less, thus resulting
in lower emissions increase.

                                Table 1--Lake and Porter Counties Offset Analysis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                State Line
                                    Number of       Emissions       Emissions    Energy offsets
                                   facilities      factor VOC     increase VOC    VOC tons/avg.   Offset greater
              Year               removing Stage  tons/ facility/    tons/avg.      summer day    than  increase?
                                       II          avg. summer     summer day    (avg. of 2009-
                                                       day                            2011)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2013...........................               6     0.000944006     0.005664035           0.215  Yes.
2014...........................              12     0.000654335     0.007852014           0.215  Yes.
2015...........................              24     0.000402349     0.009656365           0.215  Yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As illustrated in Table 1, and documented in Indiana's SIP
revision, for Lake and Porter counties, for each year prior to the
widespread use of ORVR in Indiana (2016), the VOC emissions increase
associated with the removal of Stage II systems is more than offset by
the VOC emission reductions

attributed to the permanent closure of the State Line Energy facility.
    For Clark and Floyd counties, IDEM is proposing the use of offsets
generated by the Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM)
coatings rule adopted by Indiana at 326 IAC 8-14. Indiana's AIM
coatings rule goes above and beyond the Federal AIM rule by adopting a
rule that is similar to the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) model
rule. According to a 2006 Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium
(LADCO) white paper, the OTC model rule provides a 31% to 48.4%
(depending on the AIM coatings category) reduction in VOC emissions
compared to uncontrolled 2002 base case emissions while the Federal AIM
rule alone only provides a 20% reduction compared to base case.
    The Indiana AIM rule was approved into the SIP on August 30, 2012
(77 FR 52606). Indiana was not required to adopt an AIM coatings rule
but did so as a multi-state effort to help reduce ozone levels at the
regional level. Indiana did not adopt the AIM rule to comply with any
Indiana SIP planning requirements and has not taken credit for it in
air quality plans, nor has it been included in maintenance year
horizons or rate of further progress (RFP) inventories. Therefore,
these SIP approved AIM limits can be used as offsets for other
purposes, such as this SIP revision. Offsets of 0.234 tpsd of VOC are
available based on calculations derived using the 2011 National
Emissions Inventory data. Table 2 shows the increase of VOC emission
associated with the removal of Stage II systems at facilities in Clark
and Floyd between 2013 and 2015, as well as offset emissions associated
with AIM coatings. In the table, the number of facilities removing
Stage II equipment for 2013 represents the actual number of facilities
that have sought an exemption from implementing the Stage II
requirements. For 2014 and 2015, the number of facilities removing
Stage II equipment is a conservative estimate.

                                Table 2--Clark and Floyd Counties Offset Analysis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                AIM Coatings
                                    Number of       Emissions       Emissions      offsets VOC
                                   facilities      factor VOC     increase VOC      tons/avg.     Offset greater
              Year               removing Stage  tons/ facility/    tons/avg.      summer day    than  increase?
                                       II          avg. summer     summer day    (avg. of 2009-
                                                       day                            2011)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2013...........................               0     0.000659923     0.0                   0.292  Yes.
2014...........................               4     0.000457424     0.001829695           0.292  Yes.
2015...........................               8     0.000281269     0.002250149           0.292  Yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As illustrated in Table 2, and documented in Indiana's SIP
revision, for Clark and Floyd counties, for each year prior to the
widespread use of ORVR in Indiana (2016), the VOC emissions increase
associated with the removal of Stage II systems is more than offset by
the VOC emission reductions attributed to reductions in AIM coatings
emissions. For both the Clark and Floyd counties and Lake and Porter
counties analyses, Indiana is requesting to use only the portion of the
emissions offsets necessary to offset the emissions increase due to the
removal of Stage II systems before Indiana's 2016 widespread use
timeframe. Indiana retains the right to utilize any remaining emissions
offsets in the future.
    Based on the use of permanent, enforceable, contemporaneous,
surplus emissions reductions achieved through the shutdown of the
previously permitted State Line Energy facility in Lake and Porter
counties and the offsets from VOC reductions in AIM coatings emissions
in Clark and Floyd counties, EPA believes that the removal of the
Indiana Stage II program does not interfere with southeast Indiana's
ability to demonstrate compliance with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    EPA also examined whether the removal of Stage II program
requirements in both areas will interfere with attainment of other air
quality standards. Lake and Porter counties are designated attainment
for all standards other than ozone, including sulfur dioxide and
nitrogen dioxide. Clark and Floyd counties are designated attainment
for all standards other than ozone and particulate matter.\3\ EPA has
no reason to believe that the removal of the Stage II program in
Indiana will cause the areas to become nonattainment for any of these
pollutants. In addition, EPA believes that removing the Stage II
program requirements in Indiana will not interfere with the areas'
ability to meet any other CAA requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Clark and Floyd counties are currently designated
nonattainment for the 1997 Annual fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) standard. While VOC is one of the precursors for
particulate matter (NAAQS) formation, studies have indicated that in
the southeast which includes the Louisville, KY ozone nonattainment
area, emissions of direct PM2.5 and the precursor sulfur
oxides are more significant to ambient summertime PM2.5
concentrations than emissions of nitrogen oxides and anthropogenic
VOC. See. E.g., Journal of Environmental Engineering--Quantifying
the sources of ozone, fine particulate matter, and regional haze in
the Southeastern United States (June 24, 2009), available at: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-ofenvironmental-management.
Currently, Clark and Floyd counties are no designated nonattainment
for any of the other criteria pollutants (i.e. sulfur dioxide,
nitrogen dioxide, lead or carbon monoxide) and those pollutants are
not affected by the removal of Stage II requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the above discussion and the state's section 110(l)
demonstration, EPA believes that removal of the Stage II program will
not interfere with attainment or maintenance of any of the NAAQS in
both the Chicago and Louisville, Kentucky ozone nonattainment areas and
would not interfere with any other applicable requirement of the CAA,
and thus, are approvable under CAA section 110(l).

IV. What action is EPA proposing to take?

    EPA is proposing to approve, as a revision to the Indiana ozone
SIP, regulations submitted by IDEM on April 27, 2015 and September 10,
2015. EPA finds that the revisions will not interfere with any
applicable CAA requirement.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rulemaking, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference Indiana rules 326 IAC 8-4-1 ``Applicability'' and 326 IAC 8-
4-6 ``Gasoline dispensing facilities'', effective March 5, 2015. EPA
has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally
available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the appropriate EPA
office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more
information).

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. 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 application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation
land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the
rule does not have tribal implications 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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 11, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2016-03894 Filed 2-24-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P