[Federal Register: May 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 97)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 28707-28710]
[DOCID:fr19my08-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0203]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; Escorted Vessels in Captain of the Port Zone
Jacksonville, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Interim rule with request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a security zone around any
vessel being escorted by one or more Coast Guard, State, or local law
enforcement assets within the Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville,
FL. This action is necessary to ensure the safe transit of escorted
vessels as well as the safety and security of personnel and port
facilities. No vessel or person is allowed inside the security zone
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Jacksonville, FL or a
designated representative.

DATES: This interim rule is effective May 19, 2008. Comments and
related material must reach the Docket Management Facility on or before
June 18, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2008-0203 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one
of the following methods:
    (1) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    (3) Hand delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground Floor of the West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call LCDR Austin Ives at Sector Jacksonville<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you
have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-
9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the
Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management
Facility. Please see DOT's ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2008-0203), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each
comment. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address,
an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your document so
that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
For example, we may ask you to resubmit your comment if we are not able
to read your original submission. You may submit your comments and
material by electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery to the Docket
Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES; but please submit
your comments and material by only one means. If you submit them by
mail or 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 them by mail and would like to know that they reached the
Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change this rule in view of them.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov at
any time. Enter the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-2008-0203)
in the Search box, and click ``Go >>.'' You may also visit either 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., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays or the Coast Guard Sector Jacksonville Prevention Department,
4200 Ocean Street, Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233, between 8 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Department of
Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit http://
DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under
ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that
one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place
announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

Regulatory Information

    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. Publishing a NPRM and delaying
the effective date would be contrary to public interest since the
security zones around escorted vessels are necessary to ensure the safe
transit of the escorted vessels as well as the public. Certain vessel
movements are more vulnerable to terrorist acts and it would be
contrary to the public interest to publish an NPRM that would delay the
effective date of this rule. The Coast Guard coordinates escorts for
vessels in this waterway for the port's safety and security. Recently,
recreational boaters have endangered themselves and others by not
following the verbal guidance of on scene law enforcement officials. To
ensure safe boating, it is imperative that a standard exclusionary zone
be broadcast and safe speeds be followed for all escorted vessels.
    For the same reasons above, 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.

Background and Purpose

    The terrorist attacks of September 2001 heightened the need for
development of various security measures throughout the seaports of the
United States, particularly around vessels and facilities whose
presence or movement creates a heightened vulnerability to terrorist
acts; or those for which the consequences of terrorist acts represent a
threat to national security. The President of the United States has
found that the security of the United States is and continues to be
endangered following the attacks of September 11 (E.O. 13,273, 67 FR
56215, Sep. 3, 2002 and 72 FR 54205, Sep. 21, 2007). Additionally,
national security and intelligence officials continue to warn that
future terrorist attacks are likely.
    King's Bay, GA, and the Ports of Jacksonville, FL, and Canaveral,
FL frequently receive vessels that require additional security,
including, but not limited to, vessels that carry sensitive Department
of Defense cargoes, vessels that carry dangerous cargoes, and foreign
naval vessels. The Captain of the Port (COTP) Jacksonville has
determined that these vessels have a significant vulnerability to
subversive activity by vessels or persons or, in some cases, themselves
pose a risk to a port and the public, within the Jacksonville Captain
of the Port Zone, as described in 33 CFR 3.35-20. This rule enables the
COTP Jacksonville to provide effective port security, while minimizing
the public's confusion and ease the administrative burden of
implementing separate temporary security zones for each escorted
vessel.

Discussion of Rule

    This rule establishes a security zone that prohibits persons and
vessels from coming within 500 yards of all escorted vessels within the
navigable waters of the Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville, FL, as
described in 33 CFR 3.35-20. Persons or vessels that receive permission
to enter the security zone must proceed at a minimum safe speed and
must comply with all orders issued by the COTP or a designated
representative. No vessel or person may enter within a 100-yard radius
of an escorted vessel.

    An escorted vessel is defined as a vessel, other than a large U.S.
naval vessel as defined in 33 CFR 165.2015, that is accompanied by one
or more Coast Guard assets or other Federal, State or local law
enforcement agency assets clearly identifiable by lights, vessel
markings, or with agency insignia as listed below:
    Coast Guard surface or air asset displaying the Coast Guard
insignia.
    State and/or local law enforcement asset displaying the applicable
agency markings and/or equipment associated with the agency.
    When escorted vessels are moored, dayboards or other visual
indications such as lights or buoys may be used. In all cases,
broadcast notice to mariners will be issued to advise mariners of these
restrictions.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a
full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures
of DHS is unnecessary. The limited geographic area impacted by the
security zone will not restrict the movement or routine operation of
commercial or recreational vessels through the Ports within the Captain
of the Port Zone Jacksonville.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. 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. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit in the vicinity of escorted vessels. This rule would not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because
the zones are limited in size, in most cases leaving ample space for
vessels to navigate around them. The zones will not significantly
impact commercial and passenger vessel traffic patterns, and mariners
will be notified of the zones via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. Where
such space is not available and security conditions permit, the Captain
of the Port will attempt to provide flexibility for individual vessels
to transit through the zones as needed.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    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.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

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 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.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an

explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials,
performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures;
and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD
which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. A final ``Environmental Analysis Check
List'' and a final ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

0
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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.773 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.773  Security Zone; Escorted Vessels in Captain of the Port
Zone Jacksonville, Florida.

    (a) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
    COTP means Captain of the Port Jacksonville, FL.
    Designated representatives means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders
including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers
operating Coast Guard vessels or aircraft, and federal, state, and
local officers designated by or assisting the COTP, in the enforcement
of the security zone.
    Escorted vessel means a vessel, other than a large U.S. naval
vessel as defined in 33 CFR 165.2015, that is accompanied by one or
more Coast Guard assets or other Federal, State, or local law
enforcement agency assets clearly identifiable by lights, vessel
markings, or with agency insignia as follows:
    (1) Coast Guard surface or air asset displaying the Coast Guard
insignia.
    (2) State and/or local law enforcement asset displaying the
applicable agency markings and/or equipment associated with the agency.
    (3) When escorted vessels are moored, dayboards or other visual
indications such as lights or buoys may be used. In all cases,
broadcast notice to mariners will be issued to advise mariners of these
restrictions.
    Minimum safe speed means the speed at which a vessel proceeds when
it is fully off plane, completely settled in the water and not creating
excessive wake. Due to the different speeds at which vessels of
different sizes and configurations may travel while in compliance with
this definition, no specific speed is assigned to minimum safe speed.
In no instance should minimum safe speed be interpreted as a speed less
than that required for a particular vessel to maintain steerageway. A
vessel is not proceeding at minimum safe speed if it is:
    (1) On a plane;
    (2) In the process of coming up onto or coming off a plane; or
    (3) Creating an excessive wake.
    (b) Regulated Area. All navigable waters, as defined within Captain
of the Port Zone, Jacksonville, Florida as defined in 33 CFR 3.35-20.
    (c) Security Zone. A 500-yard security zone is established around
each escorted vessel within the regulated area described in paragraph
(b) of this section. This is a moving security zone when the escorted
vessel is in transit and becomes a fixed zone when the escorted vessel
is anchored or moored. A security zone will not extend beyond the
boundary of the regulated area in this section.
    (d) Regulations. (1) The general regulations for security zones
contained in Sec.  165.33 of this part applies to this section.
    (2) A vessel may request the permission of the COTP or a designated
representative to enter the security zone described in paragraph (c) of
this section. If permitted to enter the security zone, a vessel must
proceed at the minimum safe speed and must comply with the orders of
the COTP or a designated representative. No vessel or person may enter
the inner 100-yard portion of the security zone closest to the vessel.
    (e) Notice of Security Zone. The COTP will inform the public of the
existence or status of the security zones around escorted vessels in
the regulated area by Broadcast Notice to Mariners. Coast Guard assets
or other Federal, State or local law enforcement agency assets will be
clearly identified by lights, vessel markings, or with agency insignia.
When escorted vessels are moored, dayboards or other visual indications
such as lights or buoys may be used.
    (f) Contact Information. The COTP Jacksonville may be reached via
phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Any on scene Coast Guard or designated
representative assets may be reached via VHF-FM channel 16.

    Dated: May 6, 2008.
P.F. Thomas,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville,
Florida.
[FR Doc. E8-11141 Filed 5-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 148 (Friday, August 1, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44728-44729]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18226]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0476; FRL- 9914-58-Region-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Allegheny County's Adoption of Control Techniques
Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing;
Flexible Package Printing; and Industrial Solvent Cleaning Operations
for Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan (SIP)
submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. This SIP revision
includes amendments to the Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD)
Rules and Regulations, Article XXI, Air Pollution Control, and meets
the requirement to adopt Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
for sources covered by EPA's Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG)
standards for the following categories: Offset lithographic printing
and letterpress printing, flexible package printing, and industrial
solvent cleaning operations. EPA is proposing to approve the revision
to the Pennsylvania SIP in accordance with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 2,
2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2014-0476 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0476, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2014-0476. EPA's policy is that all comments received 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 information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. 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: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the Allegheny County Health Department, Bureau of
Environmental Quality, Division of Air Quality, 301 39th Street,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15201.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Shandruk,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides that SIPs for nonattainment
areas must include reasonably available control measures (RACM),
including RACT, for sources of emissions. Section 182(b)(2)(A) provides
that for certain nonattainment areas, states must revise their SIP to
include RACT for sources of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions
covered by a CTG document issued after November 15, 1990 and prior to
the area's date of attainment. EPA defines RACT as ``the lowest
emission limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by
the application of control technology that is reasonably available
considering technological and economic feasibility.'' 44 FR 53761
(September 17, 1979).
    CTGs are documents issued by EPA intended to provide state and
local air pollution control authorities information that should assist
them in determining RACT for VOC emissions from various sources.
Section 183(e)(3)(c) provides that EPA may issue a CTG in lieu of a
national regulation as RACT for a product category where EPA determines
that the CTG will be substantially as effective as regulations in
reducing emissions of VOC in ozone nonattainment areas. The
recommendations in the CTG are based upon available data and
information and may not apply to a particular situation based upon the
circumstances. States can follow the CTG and adopt state regulations to
implement the recommendations contained therein, or they can adopt
alternative approaches. In either case, states must submit their RACT
rules to EPA for review and approval as part of the SIP process.
    In 1993, EPA published a draft CTG for offset lithographic
printing. 58 FR 59261. After reviewing comments on the draft CTG and
soliciting additional information to help clarify those comments, EPA
published an alternative control techniques (ACT) document in June 1994
that provided supplemental information for states to use in developing
rules based on RACT for offset lithographic printing. In December 1978,
EPA published a CTG for graphic arts (rotogravure printing and
flexographic printing) that included flexible package printing. In
1994, EPA developed an ACT document for industrial cleaning solvents.
After reviewing the 1978/1993/1994 CTGs and ACTs for these industries,
conducting a review of currently existing state and local VOC emission
reduction approaches for these industries, and taking into account any
information that has become available

since then, EPA developed new CTGs entitled Control Techniques
Guidelines for Offset Lithographic and Letterpress Printing
(Publication No. EPA 453/R-06-002; September 2006); Control Techniques
Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing (Publication No. EPA 453/R-06-
003; September 2006); Control Techniques Guidelines for Industrial
Cleaning Solvents (Publication No. EPA 453/R-06-001; September 2006).
The CTG recommendations may not apply to a particular situation based
upon the circumstances of a specific source. Regardless of whether a
state chooses to implement the recommendations contained within the
CTGs through state rules, or to issue state rules that adopt different
approaches for RACT for VOCs, states must submit their RACT rules to
EPA for review and approval as part of the SIP process.

III. Summary of SIP Revision

    On November 15, 2013, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection (PADEP) submitted to EPA a SIP revision concerning the
adoption of the EPA CTGs for offset lithographic printing and
letterpress printing; flexible package printing; and industrial
cleaning solvent operations in Allegheny County. These regulations are
contained in the ACHD Rules and Regulations, Article XXI, Air Pollution
Control sections 2105.80, 2105.81, and 2105.82 in order to: (1)
Establish applicability for offset lithographic printing and
letterpress printing, flexible package printing, and industrial
cleaning solvent operations at facilities; (2) establish exemptions;
(3) establish record-keeping and work practice requirements; and (4)
establish emission limitations. More detailed information on these
provisions as well as a detailed summary of EPA's review and rationale
for proposing to approve this SIP revision can be found in the
Technical Support Document (TSD) for this action which is available on
line at www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0476.

IV. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania SIP
revision submitted on November 15, 2013, which consists of amendments
to the ACHD Rules and Regulations, Article XXI, Air Pollution Control,
and meets the requirement to adopt RACT for sources located in
Allegheny County covered by EPA's CTG standards for the following
categories: Offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing,
flexible package printing, and industrial solvent cleaning operations.
EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.

V. 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 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 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, this proposed rule, pertaining to ACHD's adoption of
CTG standards for offset lithographic printing and letterpress
printing, flexible package printing, and industrial solvent cleaning
operations 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, Ozone, Volatile organic
compounds.

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

    Dated: July 14, 2014.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2014-18226 Filed 7-31-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 9, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 236)]
[Notices]
[Page 73220]
[DOCID:fr09de05-57]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER99-3491-007, ER00-2184-005, ER00-2185-005, EL05-124-002]

PPL Montana, LLC; PPL Colstrip I, LLC; PPL Colstrip II, LLC;
Notice of Filing

December 2, 2005.
    Take notice that on November 14, 2005, PPL Montana, LLC, PPL
Colstrip I, LLC; and PPL Colstrip II, LLC, submitted for filing a
complete revised filing, including new transmittal letter, a new
affidavit; and exhibits and workpapers to replace the original filing
submitted on October 31, 2005.
    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, 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 on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    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 email
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>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on December 9, 2005.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-7138 Filed 12-8-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 185 (Wednesday, September 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57080-57081]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22584]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0594; FRL-9915-54]

Pesticide Chemicals; Registration Review; Draft Human Health and
Ecological Risk Assessment; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's draft human
health and ecological risk assessments for the registration review of
2-EEEBC (debacarb) and isoxaben, and opens a public comment period on
these documents. Registration review is EPA's periodic review of
pesticide registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to
satisfy the statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide
can perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects
on human health or the environment. As part of the registration review
process, the Agency has completed draft human health and ecological
risk assessments, including an endangered species assessment, for all
uses of the previously listed pesticide chemicals. After reviewing
comments received during the public comment period, EPA will issue
revised risk assessments, explain any changes to the draft risk
assessments, and respond to comments and may request public input on
risk mitigation before completing proposed registration review
decisions for the previously listed pesticide chemicals. Through this
program, EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is based on
current scientific and other knowledge, including its effects on human
health and the environment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 24, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number for the specific pesticide of interest provided in the
table in Unit III.A., by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For pesticide specific information contact: Chemical Review Manager
identified in the table in Unit III.A. for the pesticide of interest.
    For general questions on the registration review program, contact:
Richard Dumas, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

 A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry;
pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may 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 Chemical Review Manager listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, 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 claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes 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.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. Authority

    EPA is conducting its registration review of 2-EEEBC (debacarb),
acephate, allethrins, chlorethoxyfos, coumaphos, daminozide,
dimethoate, isoxaben, picaridin, and propoxur pursuant to section 3(g)
of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and
the Procedural Regulations for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155,
subpart C. Section 3(g) of FIFRA provides, among other things, that the
registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under
FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only
if it meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA
section 3(c)(5). When used in accordance with widespread and commonly
recognized practice, the pesticide product must

perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on
the environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the
environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the
use of a pesticide in or on food.

III. Registration Reviews

 A. What action is the Agency taking?

    As directed by FIFRA section 3(g), EPA is reviewing the pesticide
registrations for 2-EEEBC (debacarb) and isoxaben, to ensure that they
continue to satisfy the FIFRA standard for registration--that is, that
these pesticides can still be used without unreasonable adverse effects
on human health or the environment.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.53(c), EPA is providing an opportunity,
through this notice of availability, for interested parties to provide
comments and input concerning the Agency's draft human health and
ecological risk assessments for 2-EEEBC (debacarb) and isoxaben. Such
comments and input could address, among other things, the Agency's risk
assessment methodologies and assumptions, as applied to these draft
risk assessments. The Agency will consider all comments received during
the public comment period and make changes, as appropriate, to the
draft human health and ecological risk assessments. EPA will then issue
revised risk assessments, explain any changes to the draft risk
assessments, and respond to comments. In the Federal Register notice
announcing the availability of the revised risk assessments, if the
revised risk assessments indicate risks of concern, the Agency may
provide a comment period for the public to submit suggestions for
mitigating the risk identified in the revised risk assessments. At
present, EPA is releasing registration review draft risk assessments
for the pesticide cases identified in the following table and further
described after the table.

           Table 1--Registration Review Draft Risk Assessments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Chemical review
 Registration review case name   Pesticide docket    manager, telephone
            and No.                   ID No.           No., and email
                                                          address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2-EEEBC (Debacarb) (Case 4031)  EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0  Roy Johnson (703) 347-
                                 802.               0492,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Isoxaben (Case 7219)..........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-1  Christina Scheltema,
                                 038.<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. 2-EEEBC (debacarb). Debacarb is a fungicide registered for use
to control certain diseases in ornamental trees. The fungicide is
applied to mature trees by injection through the trunk. EPA has
completed a draft ecological risk assessment, including a screening-
level listed species assessment. A human health risk assessment is not
needed because the method of application limits the possibility for
applicator or other human exposure. EPA acknowledges that further
refinements to the listed species assessment will be completed in
future revisions and requests public comment on any aspect of the
ecological risk assessment, particularly any information on the
disposition of the fungicide within the plant after application, the
extent of use of the registered products, or any data available on
adverse effects to potentially exposed non-target species.
    2. Isoxaben. Isoxaben is a broad spectrum pre-emergent herbicide
used to control broadleaf weeds, grasses, and vines. Isoxaben is used
around non-bearing food crops, ornamental trees, and shrubs in
agriculture nurseries, rights-of-way, and urban areas. It is also used
on bearing nut trees and grape vineyards. EPA has completed draft human
health and ecological risk assessments, including a screening-level
listed species assessment, for all isoxaben uses. EPA acknowledges that
further refinements to the listed species assessment will be completed
in future revisions and requests public comment on specific areas that
will reduce the uncertainties associated with the characterization of
risk to listed species identified in the current assessment.
    3. Other related information. Additional information on chemicals
2-EEEBC (debacarb) and isoxaben, is available for each pesticide, at
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/chemicalsearch and in each chemical's
individual docket listed in the table in Unit III.A. Information on the
Agency's registration review program and its implementing regulation is
available at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation.
    4. Information submission requirements. Anyone may submit data or
information in response to this document. To be considered during a
pesticide's registration review, the submitted data or information must
meet the following requirements:
     To ensure that EPA will consider data or information
submitted, interested persons must submit the data or information
during the comment period. The Agency may, at its discretion, consider
data or information submitted at a later date.
     The data or information submitted must be presented in a
legible and useable form. For example, an English translation must
accompany any material that is not in English and a written transcript
must accompany any information submitted as an audiographic or
videographic record. Written material may be submitted in paper or
electronic form.
     Submitters must clearly identify the source of any
submitted data or information.
     Submitters may request the Agency to reconsider data or
information that the Agency rejected in a previous review. However,
submitters must explain why they believe the Agency should reconsider
the data or information in the pesticide's registration review.
    As provided in 40 CFR 155.58, the registration review docket for
each pesticide case will remain publicly accessible through the
duration of the registration review process; that is, until all actions
required in the final decision on the registration review case have
been completed.

    Authority:  7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: September 12, 2014.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2014-22584 Filed 9-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P