Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 199 / Friday, October 16, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 53167 

to assess all costs and benefits of 

available regulatory alternatives and, 

when regulation is necessary, to select 

regulatory approaches that maximize 

net benefits (including potential 

economic, environmental, public health 

and safety, and other advantages; 

distributive impacts; and equity). The 

agency believes that this final rule is not 

a significant regulatory action under the 

Executive order. 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act 

requires agencies to analyze regulatory 

options that would minimize any 

significant impact of a rule on small 

entities. Because classification of this 

device into class II will relieve 

manufacturers of the cost of complying 

with the premarket approval 

requirements of section 515 of the act 

(21 U.S.C. 360e), and may permit small 

potential competitors to enter the 

marketplace by lowering their costs, the 

agency certifies that the final rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

Section 202(a) of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires 

that agencies prepare a written 

statement, which includes an 

assessment of anticipated costs and 

benefits, before proposing ‘‘any rule that 

includes any Federal mandate that may 

result in the expenditure by State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 

or more (adjusted annually for inflation) 

in any one year.’’ 

The current threshold after 

adjustment for inflation is $133 million, 

using the most current (2008) Implicit 

Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic 

Product. FDA does not expect this final 

rule to result in any 1-year expenditure 

that would meet or exceed this amount. 

IV. Does This Final Rule Have 

Federalism Implications? 

FDA has analyzed this final rule in 

accordance with the principles set forth 

in Executive Order 13132. Section 4(a) 

of the Executive order requires agencies 

to ‘‘construe * * * a Federal statute 

to preempt State law only where the 

statute contains an express preemption 

provision or there is some other clear 

evidence that the Congress intended 

preemption of State law, or where the 

exercise of State authority conflicts with 

the exercise of Federal authority under 

the Federal statute.’’ Federal law 

includes an express preemption 

provision that preempts certain State 

requirements ‘‘different from or in 

addition to’’ certain federal 

requirements applicable to devices (21 

U.S.C. 360k; Medtronic v. Lohr, 518 U.S. 

470 (1996); Riegel v. Medtronic, 128 S. 

Ct. 999 (2008)). 

The special controls established by 

this final rule create ‘‘requirements’’ for 

specific medical devices under 21 

U.S.C. 360k, even though product 

sponsors have some flexibility in how 

they meet those requirements (Papike v. 

Tambrands, Inc., 107 F.3d 737, 740–42 

(9th Cir. 1997)). 

V. How Does This Rule Comply With 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995? 

This final rule contains no collections 

of information. Therefore, clearance by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 is not required. Elsewhere 

in this issue of the Federal Register, 

FDA is issuing a notice announcing the 

guidance for the final rule. This 

guidance, ‘‘Class II Special Controls 

Guidance Document: Wound Dressing 

With Poly (Diallyl Dimethyl 

Ammonium Chloride) (pDADMAC) 

Additive,’’ references previously 

approved collections of information 

found in FDA regulations. 

VI. What References Are on Display? 

The following reference has been 

placed on display in the Division of 

Dockets Management (HFA–305), Food 

and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers 

Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, 

and may be seen by interested persons 

between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday. 

1. Petition from Quick-Med Technologies, 

Inc., May 10, 2007. 

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 878 

Medical devices. 

■ Therefore, under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under 

authority delegated to the Commissioner 

of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 878 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 878—GENERAL AND PLASTIC 

SURGERY DEVICES 

■ 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR 

part 878 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 

360j, 360l, 371. 

■ 2. Section 878.4015 is added to 

subpart E to read as follows: 

§ 878.4015 Wound dressing with poly 

(diallyl dimethyl ammonium chloride) 

(pDADMAC) additive. 

(a) Identification. A wound dressing 

with pDADMAC additive is intended for 

use as a primary dressing for exuding 

wounds, 1st and 2d degree burns, and 

surgical wounds, to secure and prevent 

movement of a primary dressing, and as 

a wound packing. 

(b) Classification. Class II (special 

controls). The special control is: the 

FDA guidance document entitled ‘‘Class 

II Special Controls Guidance Document: 

Wound Dressing With Poly (Diallyl 

Dimethyl Ammonium Chloride) 

(pDADMAC) Additive.’’ See § 878.1(e) 

for availability of this guidance 

document. 

Dated: October 2, 2009. 

Jeffrey Shuren, 

Acting Director, Center for Devices and 

Radiological Health. 

[FR Doc. E9–24963 Filed 10–15–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160–01–S 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2009–0455(a); FRL–8969– 

9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; South 

Carolina; Clean Air Interstate Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve a revision to the South 

Carolina State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) submitted by the State of South 

Carolina through the South Carolina 

Department of Health and 

Environmental Control on December 4, 

2008. This revision addresses the 

requirements of EPA’s Clean Air 

Interstate Rule (CAIR) and the transition 

of the State’s Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) 

Budget Trading Program to the State’s 

CAIR NOX Ozone Season Program. 

Although the District of Columbia 

Circuit Court (D.C. Circuit Court) found 

CAIR to be flawed, the rule was 

remanded without vacatur and thus 

remains in place. Thus, EPA is 

continuing to approve CAIR provisions 

into SIPs as appropriate. CAIR, as 

promulgated, requires states to reduce 

emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and 

NOX that significantly contribute to, or 

interfere with maintenance of, the 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS) for fine particulates and/or 

ozone in any downwind state. CAIR 

establishes budgets for SO2 and NOX for 

states that significantly contribute or 

interfere with maintenance and requires 

such states to submit SIP revisions that 

implement these budgets. States have 

the flexibility to choose which control 

measures to adopt to achieve the 

budgets, including participation in EPAadministered cap-and-trade programs 


CPrice-Sewell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with RULES
53168 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 199 / Friday, October 16, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

addressing SO2, NOX annual, and NOX

ozone season emissions. EPA is 

approving the full SIP revision, as 

interpreted and clarified herein, as fully 

implementing the CAIR requirements 

for South Carolina through participation 

in these cap-and-trade programs. 

Consequently, this action will also 

cause the CAIR Federal Implementation 

Plans (CAIR FIPs) concerning SO2, NOX

annual, and NOX ozone season 

emissions by South Carolina sources to 

be automatically withdrawn. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective November 30, 2009, unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

November 16, 2009. If adverse 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2009–0455, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: 404–562–9019. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2009–0455, 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2009– 

0455. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

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 through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The http:// 

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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

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. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the http:// 

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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Scofield, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9034. 

Mr. Scofield can also be reached via 

electronic mail at 

scofield.steve@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What Action Is EPA Taking? 

II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR 

and the CAIR FIPs? 

III. What Are the General Requirements of 

CAIR and the CAIR FIPs? 

IV. What Are the Types of CAIR SIP 

Submittals? 

V. Analysis of South Carolina’s CAIR SIP 

Submittal 

A. Elements of South Carolina’s SIP 

Submittal 

B. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations 

C. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs 

D. Applicability Provisions 

E. NOX Allowance Allocations 

F. Allocation of NOX Allowances From 

Compliance Supplement Pool 

G. Individual Opt-in Units 

VI. Final Action 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Action Is EPA Taking? 

EPA is taking direct final action to 

approve the full SIP revision submitted 

by South Carolina on December 4, 2008, 

as interpreted and clarified herein, as 

meeting the applicable CAIR 

requirements by requiring certain 

electric generating units (EGUs) to 

participate in the EPA-administered 

CAIR cap-and-trade programs 

addressing SO2, NOX annual, and NOX

ozone season emissions. This action 

also approves the addition of non-EGUs 

(from the State’s NOX Budget Trading 

Program) to the CAIR NOX Ozone 

Season Trading Program. Since EPA 

will no longer administer the NOX

Budget Trading Program and the 

requirements of that program are now 

addressed by the State’s CAIR NOX

Ozone Season Program (Regulations 61– 

62.96, Subparts AAAA through IIII), 

South Carolina chose to terminate the 

State’s NOX Budget Program (Regulation 

61–62.96, Subparts A through I), which 

was established to meet the 

requirements of the NOX SIP Call. EPA 

is, therefore, approving provisions 

which terminate the State’s NOX Budget 

Trading Program (Regulation 61–62.96, 

Subparts A through I). As a consequence 

of the SIP approval, the CAIR FIPs 

concerning SO2, NOX annual, and NOX

ozone season emissions for South 

Carolina are automatically withdrawn. 

This notice deletes and reserves the 

provisions in Part 52 that establish the 

CAIR FIPs for South Carolina sources. 

On October 9, 2007, EPA approved an 

‘‘abbreviated SIP’’ for South Carolina, 

primarily consisting of rules governing 

allocation of NOX allowances to EGUs 

for use in the trading programs 

established pursuant to CAIR and rules 

allowing sources to opt into the CAIR 

programs (72 FR 57209). The 

abbreviated SIP was implemented in 


CPrice-Sewell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 199 / Friday, October 16, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 53169 

conjunction with a FIP for the State that 

specified requirements for emissions 

monitoring, permit provisions, and 

other elements of CAIR programs. EPA 

is now approving the addition of nonEGUs to the CAIR NOX Ozone Season 

Trading Program and is issuing a ‘‘full 

SIP’’ approval under which various 

CAIR implementation provisions will be 

governed by State rules rather than FIP 

rules. EPA finds that South Carolina’s 

rules meet the applicable CAIR 

requirements by requiring certain EGUs 

to participate in the EPA-administered 

CAIR cap-and-trade programs 

addressing SO2, NOX annual and NOX

ozone season emissions and by 

requiring the non-EGUs from the State’s 

NOX Budget Trading Program to 

participate in the CAIR program for NOX

ozone season emissions. 

II. What Is the Regulatory History of the 

CAIR and the CAIR FIPs? 

EPA published CAIR on May 12, 2005 

(70 FR 25162). In this rule, EPA 

determined that 28 states and the 

District of Columbia contribute 

significantly to nonattainment and 

interfere with maintenance of the 

NAAQS for fine particles (PM2.5) and/or 

8-hour ozone in downwind states in the 

eastern part of the country. As a result, 

EPA required those upwind States to 

revise their SIPs to include control 

measures that reduce emissions of SO2, 

which is a precursor to PM2.5 formation, 

and/or NOX, which is a precursor to 

both ozone and PM2.5 formation. For 

jurisdictions that contribute 

significantly to downwind PM2.5

nonattainment, CAIR sets annual Statewide emission reduction requirements 

(i.e., budgets) for SO2 and annual Statewide emission reduction requirements 

for NOX. Similarly, for jurisdictions that 

contribute significantly to 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment, CAIR sets State-wide 

emission reduction requirements or 

budgets for NOX for the ozone season 

(May 1st to September 30th). Under 

CAIR, states may implement these 

reduction requirements by participating 

in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade 

programs or by adopting any other 

control measures. 

CAIR explains to subject States what 

must be included in SIPs to address the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D) of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA) with regard to 

interstate transport with respect to the 

8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA 

made national findings, effective on 

May 25, 2005, that the states had failed 

to submit SIPs meeting the requirements 

of section 110(a)(2)(D). The SIPs were 

due in July 2000, 3 years after the 

promulgation of the 8-hour ozone and 

PM2.5 NAAQS. These findings started a 

two-year clock for EPA to promulgate a 

FIP to address the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D). Under CAA section 

110(c)(1), EPA may issue a FIP anytime 

after such findings are made and must 

do so within two years unless a SIP 

revision correcting the deficiency is 

approved by EPA before the FIP is 

promulgated. 

On April 28, 2006, EPA promulgated 

FIPs for all states covered by CAIR in 

order to ensure the emissions reductions 

required by CAIR are achieved on 

schedule. The CAIR FIPs require EGUs 

to participate in the EPA-administered 

CAIR SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone 

season trading programs, as appropriate. 

The CAIR FIP SO2, NOX annual, and 

NOX ozone season trading programs 

impose essentially the same 

requirements as, and are integrated 

with, the respective CAIR SIP trading 

programs. The integration of the FIP and 

SIP trading programs means that these 

trading programs will work together to 

effectively create a single trading 

program for each regulated pollutant 

(SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone 

season) in all states covered by the CAIR 

FIP or SIP trading program for that 

pollutant. Further, as provided in a rule 

published by EPA on November 2, 2007, 

a State’s CAIR FIP is automatically 

withdrawn when EPA approves a SIP 

revision, in its entirety and without any 

conditions, as fully meeting the 

requirements of CAIR. Where only 

portions of the SIP revision are 

approved, the corresponding portions of 

the FIP are automatically withdrawn, 

and the remaining portions of the FIP 

stay in place. Finally, the CAIR FIPs 

also allow states to submit abbreviated 

SIP revisions that, if approved by EPA, 

will automatically replace or 

supplement certain CAIR FIP provisions 

(e.g., the methodology for allocating 

NOX allowances to sources in the State), 

while the CAIR FIP remains in place for 

all other provisions. 

On April 28, 2006, EPA published 

two additional CAIR-related final rules 

that added the States of Delaware and 

New Jersey to the list of states subject 

to CAIR for PM2.5 and announced EPA’s 

final decisions on reconsideration of 

five issues, without making any 

substantive changes to the CAIR 

requirements. On October 19, 2007, EPA 

amended the CAIR model trading rules 

and the CAIR FIPs to clarify the 

definition of ‘‘cogeneration unit’’ and 

thus the applicability of the CAIR 

trading programs to cogeneration units. 

EPA was sued by a number of parties 

on various aspects of CAIR, and on July 

11, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the DC Circuit issued its decision to 

vacate and remand both CAIR and the 

associated CAIR FIPs in their entirety. 

North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836 

(DC Cir. Jul. 11, 2008). However, in 

response to EPA’s petition for rehearing, 

the Court issued an order remanding 

CAIR to EPA without vacating either 

CAIR or the CAIR FIPs. North Carolina 

v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (DC Cir. Dec. 23, 

2008). The Court thereby left CAIR in 

place in order to ‘‘temporarily preserve 

the environmental values covered by 

CAIR’’ until EPA replaces it with a rule 

consistent with the Court’s opinion. Id. 

at 1178. The Court directed EPA to 

‘‘remedy CAIR’s flaws’’ consistent with 

its July 11, 2008 opinion, but declined 

to impose a schedule on EPA for 

completing that action. Id. Therefore, 

CAIR and the CAIR FIP are currently in 

effect in South Carolina. 

III. What Are the General Requirements 

of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs? 

CAIR establishes State-wide emission 

budgets for SO2 and NOX and is to be 

implemented in two phases. The first 

phase of NOX reductions starts in 2009 

and continues through 2014, while the 

first phase of SO2 reductions starts in 

2010 and continues through 2014. The 

second phase of reductions for both 

NOX and SO2 starts in 2015 and 

continues thereafter. CAIR requires 

states to implement the budgets by 

either: (1) Requiring EGUs to participate 

in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade 

programs; or (2) adopting other control 

measures of the State’s choosing and 

demonstrating that such control 

measures will result in compliance with 

the applicable State SO2 and NOX

budgets. 

The May 12, 2005, and April 28, 2006 

CAIR rules provide model rules that 

states must adopt (with certain limited 

changes, if desired) if they want to 

participate in the EPA-administered 

trading programs. With two exceptions, 

only states that choose to meet the 

requirements of CAIR through methods 

that exclusively regulate EGUs are 

allowed to participate in the EPAadministered trading programs. One 

exception is for states that adopt the 

opt-in provisions of the model rules to 

allow non-EGUs individually to opt into 

the EPA-administered trading programs. 

The other exception is for states that 

include all non-EGUs from their NOX

SIP Call trading program in their CAIR 

NOX ozone season trading program. 

IV. What Are the Types of CAIR SIP 

Submittals? 

States have the flexibility to choose 

the type of control measures they will 

use to meet the requirements of CAIR. 

EPA notes that all states chose to meet 

the CAIR requirements by selecting an 


CPrice-Sewell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with RULES
53170 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 199 / Friday, October 16, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

1The Court also determined that the CAIR trading 

programs were unlawful (Id. at 906–8) and that the 

treatment of CAA title IV allowances in CAIR was 

unlawful (Id. at 921–23). For the same reasons that 

EPA is approving the provisions of South Carolina’s 

SIP revision that use the SO2 and NOX budgets set 

in CAIR, EPA is also approving, as discussed below, 

South Carolina’s SIP revision to the extent the SIP 

revision adopts the CAIR trading programs, 

including the provisions addressing applicability, 

allowance allocations, and use of title IV 

allowances. 

option that requires EGUs to participate 

in the EPA-administered CAIR cap-andtrade programs. EPA provided states 

two approaches for submitting and 

obtaining approval for CAIR SIP 

revisions implementing that option. 

States may submit full SIP revisions that 

adopt the model CAIR cap-and-trade 

rules. If approved, these SIP revisions 

will fully replace the CAIR FIPs. 

Alternatively, states may submit 

abbreviated SIP revisions. These SIP 

revisions will not replace the CAIR FIPs; 

however, the CAIR FIPs provide that, 

when approved, the provisions in these 

abbreviated SIP revisions will be used 

instead of or in conjunction with, as 

appropriate, the corresponding 

provisions of the CAIR FIPs (e.g., the 

NOX allowance allocation 

methodology). 

A State submitting a full SIP revision 

may either adopt regulations that are 

substantively identical to the model 

rules or incorporate by reference the 

model rules. CAIR provides that states 

may only make limited changes to the 

model rules if the states want to 

participate in the EPA-administered 

trading programs. A full SIP revision 

may change the model rules only by 

altering their applicability and 

allowance allocation provisions to: 

1. Include all NOX SIP Call trading 

sources that are not EGUs under CAIR 

in the CAIR NOX ozone season trading 

program; 

2. Provide for State allocation of NOX

annual or ozone season allowances 

using a methodology chosen by the 

State; 

3. Provide for State allocation of NOX

annual allowances from the compliance 

supplement pool (CSP) using the State’s 

choice of allowed, alternative 

methodologies; or 

4. Allow units that are not otherwise 

CAIR units to opt individually into the 

CAIR SO2, NOX annual, or NOX ozone 

season trading programs under the optin provisions in the model rules. 

An approved CAIR full SIP revision 

addressing EGUs’ SO2, NOX annual, or 

NOX ozone season emissions will 

replace the CAIR FIP for that State for 

the respective EGU emissions. As 

discussed above, EPA approval in full, 

without any conditions, of a CAIR full 

SIP revision causes the CAIR FIPs to be 

automatically withdrawn. 

V. Analysis of South Carolina’s CAIR 

SIP Submittal 

A. Elements of South Carolina’s SIP 

Submittal 

The rulemaking EPA completed on 

October 9, 2007 (72 FR 57209), granting 

South Carolina abbreviated SIP 

approval, addressed annual and ozone 

season NOX allocations and opt-in 

provisions. EPA is today acting on 

South Carolina’s full set of rules, 

submitted on December 4, 2008, and 

constituting a full SIP that will 

supersede the FIPs that are currently in 

effect in South Carolina. Although some 

rules approved on October 9, 2007, have 

not changed, and thus arguably need not 

be approved again, EPA is acting again 

on these rules in conjunction with the 

remainder of South Carolina’s rule for 

the purposes of clarity and 

administrative convenience. 

B. State Budgets for Allowance 

Allocations 

The CAIR NOX annual and ozone 

season budgets were developed from 

historical heat input data for EGUs. 

Using these data, EPA calculated annual 

and ozone season regional heat input 

values, which were multiplied by 0.15 

pounds per million British thermal unit 

(lb/mmBtu) for phase 1, and 0.125 lb/ 

mmBtu, for phase 2, to obtain regional 

NOX budgets for 2009–2014 and for 

2015 and thereafter, respectively. EPA 

derived the State NOX annual and ozone 

season budgets from the regional 

budgets using State heat input data 

adjusted by fuel factors. 

The CAIR State SO2 budgets were 

derived by discounting the tonnage of 

emissions authorized by annual 

allowance allocations under the Acid 

Rain Program under title IV of the CAA. 

Under CAIR, each allowance allocated 

in the Acid Rain Program for the years 

in phase 1 of CAIR (2010 through 2014) 

authorizes 0.50 ton of SO2 emissions in 

the CAIR trading program, and each 

Acid Rain Program allowance allocated 

for the years in phase 2 of CAIR (2015 

and thereafter) authorizes 0.35 ton of 

SO2 emissions in the CAIR trading 

program. 

In today’s action, EPA is approving 

South Carolina’s SIP revision that 

adopts the budgets established for the 

State in CAIR. These budgets are 32,662 

tons for NOX annual emissions from 

2009 through 2014, and 27,219 tons 

from 2015 and thereafter; 15,249 tons 

for NOX ozone season emissions from 

2009 through 2014, and 12,707 tons 

from 2015 and thereafter; and 57,271 

tons for SO2 annual emissions from 

2010 through 2014, and 40,089 tons 

from 2015 and thereafter. Additionally, 

because South Carolina has chosen to 

include all non-EGUs in the State’s NOX

Budget Trading Program, the CAIR NOX

ozone season budget will be increased 

annually by 3,479 tons to account for 

such NOX SIP Call trading sources. This 

results in a total budget of 18,728 tons 

for NOx ozone season emissions from 

2009 through 2014 and 16,186 tons from 

2015 and thereafter. South Carolina’s 

SIP revision sets these budgets as the 

total amounts of allowances available 

for allocation for each year under the 

EPA-administered cap-and-trade 

programs. 

EPA notes that, in North Carolina, 531 

F.3d at 916–21, the Court determined, 

among other things, that the State SO2

and NOX budgets established in CAIR 

were arbitrary and capricious.1

However, as discussed above, the Court 

also decided to remand CAIR but to 

leave the rule in place in order to 

‘‘temporarily preserve the 

environmental values covered by CAIR’’ 

pending EPA’s development and 

promulgation of a replacement rule that 

remedies CAIR’s flaws. North Carolina, 

550 F.3d at 1178. EPA had indicated to 

the Court that development and 

promulgation of a replacement rule 

would take about two years. Reply in 

Support of Petition for Rehearing or 

Rehearing en Banc at 5 (filed Nov. 17, 

2008, in North Carolina v. EPA, Case 

No. 05–1224, D.C. Cir.). The process at 

EPA of developing a proposal that will 

undergo notice and comment and result 

in a final replacement rule is ongoing. 

In the meantime, consistent with the 

Court’s orders, EPA is implementing 

CAIR by approving State SIP revisions 

that are consistent with CAIR (such as 

the provisions setting State SO2 and 

NOX budgets for the CAIR trading 

programs) in order to temporarily 

preserve the environmental benefits 

achievable under the CAIR trading 

programs. 

C. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs 

The CAIR NOX annual and ozoneseason model trading rules both largely 

mirror the structure of the NOX SIP Call 

model trading rule in 40 CFR Part 96, 

subparts A through I. While the 

provisions of the NOX annual and 

ozone-season model rules are similar, 

there are some differences. For example, 

the NOX annual model rule (but not the 

NOX ozone season model rule) provides 

for a CSP, which is discussed below and 

under which allowances may be 

awarded for early reductions of NOX

annual emissions. As a further example, 

the NOX ozone season model rule 


CPrice-Sewell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 199 / Friday, October 16, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 53171 

reflects the fact that the CAIR NOX

ozone season trading program replaces 

the NOX SIP Call trading program after 

the 2008 ozone season and is 

coordinated with the NOX SIP Call 

program. The NOX ozone season model 

rule provides incentives for early 

emissions reductions by allowing 

banked, pre-2009 NOX SIP Call 

allowances to be used for compliance in 

the CAIR NOX ozone-season trading 

program. In addition, states have the 

option of continuing to meet their NOX

SIP Call requirement by participating in 

the CAIR NOX ozone season trading 

program and including all their NOX SIP 

Call trading sources in that program. 

The provisions of the CAIR SO2

model rule are also similar to the 

provisions of the NOX annual and ozone 

season model rules. However, the SO2

model rule is coordinated with the 

ongoing Acid Rain SO2 cap-and-trade 

program under CAA title IV. The SO2

model rule uses the title IV allowances 

for compliance, with each allowance 

allocated for 2010–2014 authorizing 

only 0.50 ton of emissions and each 

allowance allocated for 2015 and 

thereafter authorizing only 0.35 ton of 

emissions. Banked title IV allowances 

allocated for years before 2010 can be 

used at any time in the CAIR SO2 capand-trade program, with each such 

allowance authorizing 1 ton of 

emissions. Title IV allowances are to be 

freely transferable among sources 

covered by the Acid Rain Program and 

sources covered by the CAIR SO2 capand-trade program. 

EPA also used the CAIR model 

trading rules as the basis for the trading 

programs in the CAIR FIPs. The CAIR 

FIP trading rules are virtually identical 

to the CAIR model trading rules, with 

changes made to account for federal 

rather than state implementation. The 

CAIR model SO2, NOX annual, and NOX

ozone season trading rules and the 

respective CAIR FIP trading rules are 

designed to work together as integrated 

SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone 

season trading programs. 

In the SIP revision, South Carolina 

chooses to implement its CAIR budgets 

by requiring EGUs to participate in EPAadministered cap-and-trade programs 

for SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone 

season emissions. South Carolina 

adopted a full SIP revision that adopts, 

with certain allowed changes discussed 

below, the CAIR model cap-and-trade 

rules for SO2, NOX annual, and NOX

ozone season emissions. Finally, South 

Carolina’s rules provide that non-EGUs 

that were required to participate in the 

NOx Budget Trading Program must 

participate in the CAIR NOX Ozone 

Season Trading Program. 

D. Applicability Provisions 

In general, the CAIR model trading 

rules apply to any stationary, fossil-fuelfired boiler or stationary, fossil-fuelfired combustion turbine serving at any 

time, since the later of November 15, 

1990, or the start-up of the unit’s 

combustion chamber, a generator with 

nameplate capacity of more than 25 

megawatt electrical (MWe) producing 

electricity for sale. 

States have the option of bringing in, 

for the CAIR NOX ozone season program 

only, those units in the State’s NOX SIP 

Call trading program that are not EGUs 

as defined under CAIR. Under this 

option, the CAIR NOX ozone season 

program must cover all large industrial 

boilers and combustion turbines, as well 

as any small EGUs (i.e. units serving a 

generator with a nameplate capacity of 

25 MWe or less) that the State currently 

requires to be in the NOX SIP Call 

trading program. 

South Carolina chose to expand the 

applicability provisions of the CAIR 

NOX ozone season trading program to 

include all non-EGUs in the State’s NOX

SIP Call trading program. Additionally, 

South Carolina has initiated rulemaking 

to revise the applicability section in its 

CAIR NOX ozone season rule in order to 

clarify that, as intended by the State, all 

non-EGUs subject to its NOX Budget 

Trading Program are brought into its 

CAIR NOx ozone season trading 

program and are to be treated as CAIR 

NOX ozone season units and that certain 

definitions (such as the definition of 

‘‘fossil-fuel-fired’’) from Regulation 61– 

62.96, Subparts A through I apply to the 

applicability provisions that bring these 

units into the CAIR program. EPA 

determined after review of South 

Carolina’s CAIR rules, including the 

amended rules submitted on December 

4, 2008, that these provisions need 

clarification. However, while the 

clarifications are needed, EPA interprets 

South Carolina’s current rules to 

provide that all non-EGUs covered by 

the State’s NOx Budget Trading Program 

are subject to the requirements for CAIR 

NOX ozone season units and that the 

NOX Budget Trading Program 

definitions are used in applying the 

applicability provisions that bring in 

those non-EGUs. 

South Carolina has also initiated 

rulemaking to further revise the 

definitions of ‘‘commence commercial 

operation’’ and ‘‘commence operation’’ 

in its CAIR NOX ozone season rule in 

order to clarify that, for non-EGUs 

brought into the CAIR trading program, 

those definitions shall be consistent 

with the corresponding definitions in 

the NOx SIP Call model trading rule (40 

CFR 96.2). EPA determined after review 

of South Carolina’s CAIR rules that 

these provisions needed clarification. 

EPA received a letter from South 

Carolina dated October 8, 2009, 

concurring with EPA’s interpretation of 

the current applicability provisions 

concerning non-EGUs and provides a 

commitment to make these revisions in 

its CAIR rules. In the October 8, 2009, 

letter, South Carolina commits to make 

the revisions discussed above to its 

CAIR NOX Ozone Season trading rule, 

Regulation 61–62.96. However, while 

the clarifications are needed, EPA 

interprets South Carolina’s current rules 

to apply to non-EGUs the definitions in 

40 CFR 96 of these terms. 

Finally, as discussed above, EPA 

amended the definition of ‘‘cogeneration 

unit’’ in CAIR on October 19, 2007. 

South Carolina’s SIP revision 

incorporates by reference the definitions 

in the CAIR model trading rules as of 

October 19, 2007, consistent with the 

change. 

E. NOX Allowance Allocations 

Under the NOX allowance allocation 

methodology in the CAIR model trading 

rules and in the CAIR FIP, NOX annual 

and ozone season allowances are 

allocated to units that have operated for 

five years, based on heat input data from 

a three-year period that are adjusted for 

fuel type by using fuel factors of 1.0 for 

coal, 0.6 for oil, and 0.4 for other fuels. 

The CAIR model trading rules and the 

CAIR FIP also provide a new unit setaside from which units without five 

years of operation are allocated 

allowances based on the units’ prior 

year emissions. 

States may establish in their SIP 

submissions a different NOX allowance 

allocation methodology that will be 

used to allocate allowances to sources in 

the states if certain requirements are met 

concerning the timing of submission of 

units’ allocations to the Administrator 

for recordation and the total amount of 

allowances allocated for each control 

period. In adopting alternative NOX

allowance allocation methodologies, 

states have flexibility with regard to: 

1. The cost to recipients of the 

allowances, which may be distributed 

for free or auctioned; 

2. The frequency of allocations; 

3. The basis for allocating allowances, 

which may be distributed, for example, 

based on historical heat input or electric 

and thermal output; and 

4. The use of allowance set-asides 

and, if used, their size. 

South Carolina chose to distribute 

NOX annual and NOX ozone season 

allowances with its own methodology. 

South Carolina chose to distribute NOX


CPrice-Sewell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with RULES
53172 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 199 / Friday, October 16, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

allowances by largely adopting, with 

certain revisions, the CAIR NOX annual 

and CAIR NOX ozone season trading 

program model rule provisions. The 

State’s NOX ozone season allocation 

provisions have been further modified 

to add requirements associated with 

South Carolina’s option to bring its nonEGUs into the CAIR NOX ozone season 

trading program. Specifically, the State 

chose to distribute CAIR NOX ozone 

season allowances to non-EGU’s in 

accordance with South Carolina’s 

Regulation 61–62.96.342(e). 

Additionally, South Carolina chose to 

allocate in four-year blocks of time 

rather than adding one additional year 

of allowances each year. EPA finds 

these modifications consistent with the 

flexibility given to states in CAIR. 

In South Carolina’s Regulation 61– 

62.96, Subparts FF and FFFF, the State 

largely incorporates by reference the 

model rule language for allowance 

recordation and adopts a minor 

modification to Sections 96.153(c) and 

96.353(c). The timing for recordation of 

allowances by EPA in the recordation 

schedules, as referenced and modified, 

do not exactly match the timing for the 

State’s submission to EPA of allowance 

allocations as set forth in Sections 

96.141(b) and 96.341(b) for existing 

units. EPA interprets, and South 

Carolina confirms in a letter dated 

October 8, 2009, that the allowance 

recordation should occur in 4 year 

blocks every four years to match up 

with the allocation submissions to EPA. 

In other words, EPA will record 

allowance allocations for existing 

sources by December 1 of the year in 

which the allocations are determined by 

the State and submitted to EPA. South 

Carolina commits in its October 8, 2009, 

letter to revise its CAIR rules to make 

the allowance and recordation dates 

match. 

F. Allocation of NOX Allowances From 

Compliance Supplement Pool 

The CAIR establishes a CSP to 

provide an incentive for early 

reductions in NOX annual emissions. 

The CSP consists of 200,000 CAIR NOX

annual allowances of vintage 2009 for 

the entire CAIR region, and a State’s 

share of the CSP is based upon the 

projected magnitude of the emission 

reductions required by CAIR in that 

State. States may distribute CSP 

allowances, one allowance for each ton 

of early reduction, to sources that make 

NOX reductions during 2007 or 2008 

beyond what is required by any 

applicable State or Federal emission 

limitation. States also may distribute 

CSP allowances based upon a 

demonstration of need for an extension 

of the 2009 deadline for implementing 

emission controls. 

The CAIR annual NOX model trading 

rule establishes specific methodologies 

for allocations of CSP allowances. States 

may choose an allowed, alternative CSP 

allocation methodology to be used to 

allocate CSP allowances to sources in 

the states. 

Consistent with the flexibility given to 

states in the model trading rule, South 

Carolina has chosen to modify the 

provisions of the CAIR NOX annual 

model trading rule concerning the 

allocation of allowances from the CSP. 

South Carolina has chosen to distribute 

CSP allowances by essentially adopting 

the CAIR NOX annual CSP provisions in 

the model rule at 40 CFR 96.143. 

G. Individual Opt-in Units 

The opt-in provisions of the CAIR SIP 

model trading rules allow certain nonEGUs (i.e., boilers, combustion turbines, 

and other stationary fossil-fuel-fired 

devices) that do not meet the 

applicability criteria for a CAIR trading 

program to participate voluntarily in 

(i.e., opt into) the CAIR trading program. 

A non-EGU may opt into one or more 

of the CAIR trading programs. In order 

to qualify to opt into a CAIR trading 

program, a unit must vent all emissions 

through a stack and be able to meet 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

recording requirements of 40 CFR part 

75. The owners and operators seeking to 

opt a unit into a CAIR trading program 

must apply for a CAIR opt-in permit. If 

the unit is issued a CAIR opt-in permit, 

the unit becomes a CAIR unit, is 

allocated allowances, and must meet the 

same allowance-holding and emissions 

monitoring and reporting requirements 

as other units subject to the CAIR 

trading program. The opt-in provisions 

provide for two methodologies for 

allocating allowances for opt-in units, 

one methodology that applies to opt-in 

units in general and a second 

methodology that allocates allowances 

only to opt-in units that the owners and 

operators intend to repower before 

January 1, 2015. 

States have several options 

concerning the opt-in provisions. States 

may adopt the CAIR opt-in provisions 

entirely or may adopt them but exclude 

one of the methodologies for allocating 

allowances. States may also decline to 

adopt the opt-in provisions at all. 

Consistent with the flexibility given to 

states in the FIPs, South Carolina has 

chosen to allow non-EGUs meeting the 

requirements in the CAIR model trading 

rule’s opt-in provisions to participate in 

the CAIR NOX annual, NOX ozone 

season, and SO2 trading programs. The 

South Carolina rule allows for both of 

the opt-in allocation methods as 

specified in the CAIR model rules. 

VI. Final Action 

EPA is approving, as interpreted and 

clarified herein, South Carolina’s full 

CAIR SIP revision submitted on 

December 4, 2008. Under the approved 

SIP revision, South Carolina is 

providing for continued participation in 

the EPA-administered CAIR cap-andtrade programs for SO2, NOX annual, 

and NOX ozone season emissions. The 

SIP revision, as interpreted and clarified 

herein, meets the applicable 

requirements of CAIR, which are set 

forth in 40 CFR 51.123(o) and (aa), with 

regard to NOX annual and NOX ozone 

season emissions, and 40 CFR 51.124(o), 

with regard to SO2 emissions. EPA is 

also approving provisions that terminate 

the State’s NOX Budget Trading Program 

(Regulation 61–62.96, Subparts A 

through I) because those requirements 

are now addressed by the CAIR NOX

ozone season trading program, as 

clarified herein. In accordance with 40 

CFR 52.35 and 52.36, as an automatic 

consequence of the approval of South 

Carolina’s full SIP revision, EPA is also 

withdrawing the CAIR FIPs for SO2, 

NOX annual, and NOX ozone season 

emissions for South Carolina sources. 

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. However, in the proposed 

rules section of this Federal Register 

publication, EPA is publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to approve South Carolina’s 

SIP revision if adverse written 

comments on this direct final rule are 

filed. This direct final rule will be 

effective on November 30, 2009 without 

further notice unless we receive relevant 

adverse written comments by November 

16, 2009. If EPA receives such 

comments, EPA will withdraw this 

action before the effective date by 

publishing a subsequent document that 

will withdraw the final action. All 

public comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed action. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

If we do not receive any comments, this 

action will be effective November 30, 

2009. EPA also notes that, if an adverse 

comment is timely received, that may be 

insufficient time for EPA to respond and 

issue a subsequent final rule before the 

2009 compliance deadline (November 

30, 2009) for the CAIR NOX ozone 

season trading program. In that event, 

EPA may determine that the 


CPrice-Sewell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 199 / Friday, October 16, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 53173 

applicability provisions of that trading 

program cannot be expanded for 2009 to 

include non-EGUs and that non-EGUs 

cannot be allocated CAIR NOX ozone 

season allowances for 2009. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

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 proposed 

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 final 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 rule 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. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by November 30, 2009. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Electric utilities, 

Intergovernmental relations, 

Incorporation by Reference, Carbon 

monoxide, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

dioxide. 

Dated: October 9, 2009. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

■ Chapter I, title 40, Code of Federal 

Regulations, is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart PP—South Carolina 

■ 2. Section 52.2120(c) is amended by 

revising the entry for ‘‘Regulation No. 

62.96: to read as follows: 

§ 52.2120 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS FOR SOUTH CAROLINA

State citation Title/subject State effective date 

EPA approval 

date 

Federal register 

notice 

* * * * * * * 

Regulation No. 62.96 ................ Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) and Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Budget 

Trading Program General Provisions.

10/24/2009 ... 10/16/2009 ... [Insert citation of 

publication] 

* * * * * * * 


CPrice-Sewell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with RULES
53174 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 199 / Friday, October 16, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E9–25055 Filed 10–15–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0076; FRL–8794–4] 

Azoxystrobin; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation amends the 

established tolerances for residues of 

azoxystrobin in or on barley bran; barley 

grain; and barley straw. Interregional 

Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) 

requested these tolerances under the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

October 16, 2009. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before December 15, 2009, and 

must be filed in accordance with the 

instructions provided in 40 CFR part 

178 (see also Unit I.C. of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under docket 

identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2009–0076. All documents in the 

docket are listed in the docket index 

available at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

(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 in the electronic docket at 

http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the OPP 

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– 

4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 

2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The 

Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. 

to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The Docket 

Facility telephone number is (703) 305– 

5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laura Nollen, Registration Division 

(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 305–7390; e-mail address: 

nollen.laura@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this Action Apply to Me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. Potentially 

affected entities may include, but are 

not limited to those engaged in the 

following activities: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this unit could also 

be affected. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes have been provided to 

assist you and others in determining 

whether this action might apply to 

certain entities. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies 

of this Document? 

In addition to accessing electronically 

available documents at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, you may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may 

also access a frequently updated 

electronic version of EPA’s tolerance 

regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through 

the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR 

cite at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr. 

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing 

Request? 

Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, 21 

U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an 

objection to any aspect of this regulation 

and may also request a hearing on those 

objections. You must file your objection 

or request a hearing on this regulation 

in accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure 

proper receipt by EPA, you must 

identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2009–0076 in the subject line on 

the first page of your submission. All 

requests must be in writing, and must be 

mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk 

as required by 40 CFR part 178 on or 

before December 15, 2009. 

In addition to filing an objection or 

hearing request with the Hearing Clerk 

as described in 40 CFR part 178, please 

submit a copy of the filing that does not 

contain any CBI for inclusion in the 

public docket that is described in 

ADDRESSES. Information not marked 

confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 

may be disclosed publicly by EPA 

without prior notice. Submit this copy, 

identified by docket ID number EPA– 

HQ–OPP–2009–0076, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. 

• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public 

Docket (7502P), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket 

Facility’s normal hours of operation 

(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Docket Facility telephone number is 

(703) 305–5805. 

II. Petition for Tolerance 

In the Federal Register of April 8, 

2009 (74 FR 15971) (FRL–8407–4), EPA 

issued a notice pursuant to section 

408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 

346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a 

pesticide petition (PP 8E7474) by 

Interregional Research Project Number 4 

(IR-4), IR-4 Project Headquarters, 500 

College Rd. East, Suite 201 W., 

Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition 

requested that 40 CFR 180.507 be 

amended by increasing established 

tolerances for residues of the fungicide 

azoxystrobin, [methyl( E )-2-(2-(6-(2- 

cyanophenoxy) pyrimidin-4- 

yloxy)phenyl)-3-methoxyacrylate] and 

the Z-isomer of azoxystrobin, [methyl( Z 

)-2-(2-(6-(2-cyanophenoxy)pyrimidin-4- 

yloxy)phenyl)-3 methoxyacrylate], in or 

on barley, grain from 0.1 parts per 

million (ppm) to 3.0 ppm and barley, 

straw from 4.0 ppm to 7.0 ppm. That 

notice referenced a summary of the 

petition prepared on behalf of IR-4 by 

Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc., the 

registrant, which is available to the 

public in the docket, http:// 

www.regulations.gov. There were no 

comments received in response to the 

notice of filing. 

Based upon review of the data 

supporting these petitions, EPA has 

determined that the currently 

established tolerance in or on barley 

bran should also be increased and has 


CPrice-Sewell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with RULES