[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 144 (Friday, July 26, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45114-45116]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18051]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0508; FRL-9838-3]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Antelope
Valley Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Antelope Valley
Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern standards for
continuous emissions monitoring systems and oxides of sulfur
(SOX) emissions. We are approving local rules that regulate
continuous emissions monitoring systems and standards for gaseous
sulfur emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We
are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final
action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by August 26, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2013-0508, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. 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. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105-3901.
While all documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov,
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be
publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415)
947-4122<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rules did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of these rules?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
    D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates
that they were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board.

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Local agency                Rule No.              Rule title               Adopted        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AVAQMD............................             218  Continuous Emission                 07/17/12        02/06/13
                                                     Monitoring.
AVAQMD............................           218.1  Continuous Emission                 07/17/12        02/06/13
                                                     Monitoring Performance
                                                     Specifications.
AVAQMD............................           431.1  Sulfur Content of Gaseous           08/21/12        04/22/13
                                                     Fuels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 9, 2013 for AVAQMD Rules 218 and 218.1, and on June 26,
2013 for AVAQMD Rule 431.1, EPA determined the submittals met the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met
before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    We approved an earlier version of Rule 218 into the SIP on
September 2, 2008 (73 FR 51226). AVAQMD adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version on July 17, 2012 and CARB submitted them to us on
February 6, 2013.
    There is no previous version of Rule 218.1 in the SIP. AVAQMD
adopted Rule 218.1 on July 17, 2012 and CARB submitted it to us on
February 6, 2013.
    We approved an earlier version of Rule 431.1 into the SIP on
October 19, 1984 (49 FR 41028).\1\ AVAQMD adopted revisions to Rule
431.1 on August 21,

2012 and CARB submitted them to us on April 22, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The 1984 SIP approval of Rule 431.1 was actually for the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The Antelope
Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) was formed on July 1,
1997 from the SCAQMD. All South Coast rules in effect at the time
remain in effect under the newly formed AVAPCD until such time that
Antelope Valley amended or rescinded the rule. On January 1, 2002,
Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District replaced the AVAPCD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While we can act on only the most recently submitted version of
these rules, we have reviewed materials provided with previous
submittals.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?

    Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) help produce ground-level
ozone, smog and particulate matter, which harm human health and the
environment. Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) exposure is associated
with adverse respiratory effects and can contribute to fine particle
pollution. Carbon Monoxide (CO) contributes to the formation of smog
and can also harm human health. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires
States to submit regulations that control the primary and secondary
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), which includes
NOX, SO2, and CO emissions.
    Rule 218 establishes requirements for continuous emission monitors
of NOX, SO2, gaseous sulfur compounds, and CO.
Rule 218 was amended to better define specifications and guidelines for
continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS), delete obsolete
language, and clarify administrative requirements. The original SIP
approved rule was separated into an administrative portion and a
technical portion. Rule 218 now contains the administrative
requirements for CEMS and covers applicability, the application and
approval process for CEMS, and recordkeeping and reporting requirements
for CEMS. The technical requirements for CEMS were update and form the
basis for a new rule, Rule 218.1.
    Rule 218.1 is a new rule and contains requirements for the
certification of CEMS, the performance specifications of CEMS, and the
operation and maintenance of CEMS.
    Rule 431.1 limits the sulfur content of fuels such as landfill
gases, sewage digester gases, refinery gases and other gaseous fuels.
    EPA's technical support documents (TSD) have more information about
these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193). The AVAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment area classified as
severe for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. AVAQMD is in attainment for the
1971 primary CO standard and designated as ``better than national
standard'' for the 1971 primary SO2 standard (see 40 CFR
Part 81.305).
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability requirements consistently include the following:

1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. 40 CFR 60 Appendix B--Performance Specifications.
4. 40 CFR 60 Appendix F--Quality Assurance Procedures.
5. SO2 Guideline Document, EPA 452/R-94-008, February
1994.

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. AVAQMD's staff
report for Rule 431.1 estimates there is a maximum SOx emissions
shortfall of approximately 10 pounds per day (~2 tons per year) when
the locally enforced limit of 40 ppm is raised to 250 ppm. Since the
existing SIP limit is 250 ppm, we do not consider this a SIP
relaxation. AVAQMD also amended the 250 ppm sulfur limit in Rule 431.1
for selling sewage digester gases. The rule now allows two compliance
options. The first option, a 40 ppm daily average, is clearly more
stringent than the existing 250 ppm SIP limit. The second option, a 40
ppm monthly average combined with a 500 ppm 15-minute average allows
short term intermittent emissions to exceed the existing 250 ppm SIP
limit for selling sewage digester gas. We do not believe this short
term 500 ppm 15-minute average would adversely impact the District's
ability to maintain the SO2 NAAQS for the following reasons:
(1) A 40 ppm monthly average effectively limits a facility from
emitting 500 ppm more than two days per month before it will exceed the
40 ppm monthly average limit; (2) District staff indicated there are
two publicly owned treatment works and to their knowledge, the sewage
digester gases are burned or flared (800 ppm existing SIP limit) and
are not sold (250 ppm existing SIP limit); and (3) AVAQMD is in
attainment for the 1971 primary SO2 NAAQS, and California
points out that for the 2010 SO2 primary standard, ambient
air quality monitoring in the Mojave Desert Air Basin shows a 2009 1-
hour SO2 design value of 10 ppb, well below the 2010 federal
standard of 75 ppb and that there have been no violations of the
federal 1-hour SO2 standard measured over the last two
decades, and violations are not expected in the future.\2\ Since AVAQMD
is in attainment for the SO2 NAAQS, Rule 431.1 is not a
required SIP submittal. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Letter from the California Air Resources Board (James
Goldstene) to EPA Region 9 (Jared Blumenfeld) dated June 20, 2011,
Page A24-32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules

    Our comments to draft Rule 431.1 recommended AVAQMD revisit its
Best Available Control Technology (BACT) analysis at a future date and
consider cost information and data that may become available on carbon
adsorption technology being tested under an experimental research
permit in the South Coast Air Quality Management District. We are
including this recommendation for the District to evaluate the next
time AVAQMD amends Rule 431.1. We have no recommendations for Rules 218
or 218.1.

D. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    Because EPA believes the submitted rules fulfill all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve them as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate these rules into the federally
enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve State law
as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     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 Clean Air Act; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    In addition, this proposed action does not have tribal implications
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Carbon monoxide, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

    Dated: July 12, 2013.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2013-18051 Filed 7-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 14 (Wednesday, January 22, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 3711]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00942]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2019-0023; OMB No. 1660-0113]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; FEMA Preparedness Grants: Tribal Homeland Security
Grant Program (THSGP)

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public to take this opportunity to comment on an extension,
with change, of a currently approved information collection. In
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice seeks
comments concerning the FEMA Preparedness Grants: Tribal Homeland
Security Grant Program (THSGP). The THSGP investment justification
allows certain Tribes to apply for Federal funding to support efforts
to build and sustain core capabilities across the Prevention,
Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery mission areas to protect
the homeland.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before March 23, 2020.

ADDRESSES: To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use
only one of the following means to submit comments:
    (1) Online. Submit comments at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
FEMA-2019-0023. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Docket Manager, Office of
Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW, 8NE, Washington, DC 20472-
3100.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material,
all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any
personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this
information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act
notice that is available via the link in the footer of
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cornelius Jackson, Program Analyst,
DHS FEMA, Grant Programs Directorate,<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may contact
the Information Management Division for copies of the proposed
collection of information at email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of the THSGP to make grants
available to Federally-recognized ``directly eligible tribes'' to
provide Tribes with the ability to develop and deliver core
capabilities using the combined efforts of the whole community, rather
than the exclusive effort of any single organization or level of
government. The THSGP's allowable costs support efforts of Tribes to
build and sustain core capabilities across the prevention, protection,
mitigation, response, and recovery mission areas. The THSGP also plays
an important role in the implementation of the National Preparedness
System by supporting the building, sustainment, and delivery of core
capabilities essential to achieving DHS FEMA's National Preparedness
Goal of a secure and resilient Nation. Federally-recognized Tribes are
those defined by section 4(e) of the Indian Self-Determination Act (25
U.S.C. 450b(e)). ``Directly eligible tribes'' are defined in Section
2001 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as amended (Pub. L. 107-296)
(6 U.S.C. 601).

Collection of Information

    Title: FEMA Preparedness Grants: Tribal Homeland Security Grant
Program (THSGP).
    Type of Information Collection: Extension, with change, of a
currently approved information collection.
    OMB Number: 1660-0113.
    FEMA Forms: FEMA Form 089-22, THSGP--Tribal Investment
Justification Template.
    Abstract: The THSGP provides supplemental funding to directly
eligible Tribes to help strengthen the nation against risks associated
with potential terrorist attacks. This program provides funds to build
capabilities at the Tribal governmental level.
    Affected Public: Tribal Governments.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 50.
    Estimated Number of Responses: 50.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 15,000.
    Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost: $624,750.
    Estimated Respondents' Operation and Maintenance Costs: $0.
    Estimated Respondents' Capital and Start-Up Costs: $0.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost to the Federal Government: $246,141.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Maile Arthur,
Deputy Director of Information Management, Mission Support, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2020-00942 Filed 1-21-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-46-P


[Federal Register: December 29, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 250)]
[Notices]
[Page 78418-78419]
[DOCID:fr29de06-54]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP99-176-120]

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America; Notice of Proposed
Changes in Ferc Gas Tariff And Negotiated Rates

December 22, 2006.
    Take notice that on December 21, 2006, Natural Gas Pipeline Company
of America (Natural) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas
Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to
become effective January 1, 2007, and related Rate Schedule FTS

Service Agreements with a Negotiated Rate Exhibit.

Third Revised Sheet No. 26A.02
Third Revised Sheet No. 414A.01

    Natural states that copies of the filing are being mailed to all
parties set out on the Commission's official service list.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions 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 or intervention 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>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-22373 Filed 12-28-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P