30988 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is proposing to approve 

grammatical changes made to ARM 

17.8.102(1), and all revisions of 

17.8.802(1)(c) and 17.8.822(9) from the 

March 17, 2010 submittal. We propose 

to approve November 22, 2011 revisions 

to ARM 17.8.604(1)(a),17.8.610(2), 

17.8.612(10) and (11), 17.8.613(8) and 

(9), 17.8.614(8) and (9), 17.8.615(6) and 

(7), and 17.8.763(3). We propose to 

approve the September 19, 2014 

submittal’s citations and references to 

federal law and State rules superseding 

and replacing all previous versions of 

ARM 17.8.102(1)(a), 17.8.102(1)(b), and 

17.8.102(1)(c). Previous submittals were 

received on March 17, 2010 and August 

1, 2011. We also propose to approve 

language added to ARM 17.8.102(3) and 

17.8.102(4)(a) through (d) from the 

September 19, 2014 submittal. Our 

action also provides notice that 

language in ARM 17.8.102 was in effect 

between January 16, 2010 and 

publication of this notice. Finally, EPA 

proposes to correct erroneous 

amendatory instructions published in 

the Federal Register on January 29, 

2010 (75 FR 4698). 

V. Statutory and Executive Orders 

Review 

In this rule, the EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the Administrative Rules of Montana 

regarding citations and references to 

federal and State laws and regulations; 

open burning rules; air quality permits 

appeal process; and revocation of air 

quality permits discussed in section III, 

EPA’s Review of the State of Montana’s 

March 17, 2010; August 1, 2011; 

November 22, 2011; and September 19, 

2014 Submittals, and CFR Correction, of 

this preamble. The EPA has made, and 

will continue to make, these documents 

generally available electronically 

through www.regulations.gov and/or in 

hard copy at the appropriate EPA office 

(see the ADDRESSES section of this 

preamble for more information). 

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 some state law 

as meeting federal requirements and 

disapproves other state law because it 

does not meet federal requirements; this 

proposed action 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). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, 

Greenhouse gases, Lead, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: May 13, 2015. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2015–13129 Filed 5–29–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 97 

[FRL–9928–49–OAR] 

Availability of Data on Allocations of 

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule 

Allowances From New Unit Set-Asides 

for the 2015 Compliance Year 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of data availability 

(NODA). 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is providing notice of the 

availability of preliminary calculations 

of emission allowance allocations to 

certain units under the Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR). Under the 

CSAPR federal implementation plans 

(FIPs), portions of each covered state’s 

annual emissions budgets for each of the 

four CSAPR emissions trading programs 

are reserved for allocation to electricity 

generating units that commenced 

commercial operation on or after 

January 1, 2010 (new units) and certain 

other units not otherwise obtaining 

allowance allocations under the FIPs. 

The quantities of allowances allocated 

to eligible units from each new unit setaside (NUSA) under the FIPs are 

calculated in an annual one- or tworound allocation process. EPA has 

completed preliminary calculations for 

the first round of NUSA allowance 

allocations for the 2015 compliance year 

and has posted spreadsheets containing 

the calculations on EPA’s Web site. EPA 

will consider timely objections to the 

preliminary calculations (including 

objections concerning the identification 

of units eligible for allocations) and will 

promulgate a notice responding to any 

such objections no later than August 1, 

2015, the deadline for recording the 

first-round allocations in sources’ 

Allowance Management System 

accounts. This notice may concern 

CSAPR-affected units in the following 

states: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, 

Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, 

Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, 

Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, 

Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 30989 

1The latest spreadsheet of CSAPR FIP allowance 

allocations to existing units, updated in 2014 to 

reflect changes to CSAPR’s implementation 

schedule but with allocation amounts unchanged 

since June 2012, is available at http://www.epa.gov/ 

crossstaterule/actions.html. See Availability of Data 

on Allocations of Cross-State Air Pollution Rule 

Allowances to Existing Electricity Generating Units, 

79 FR 71674 (December 3, 2014). 

2The NUSA amounts range from two percent to 

eight percent of the respective state budgets. The 

variation in percentages reflects differences among 

states in the quantities of emission allowances 

projected to be required by known new units at the 

time the budgets were set or amended. 

3At this time, EPA is not aware of any unit 

eligible for a first-round allocation from any Indian 

country NUSA. 

4The quantities of allowances to be allocated 

through the NUSA allowance allocation process 

may differ slightly from the NUSA amounts set 

forth in §§ 97.410(a), 97.510(a), 97.610(a), and 

97.710(a) because of rounding in the spreadsheet of 

CSAPR FIP allowance allocations to existing units. 

5Subsequent allocations of any allowances 

remaining in any 2015 NUSA after first-round 

allocations will be addressed in future notices. Any 

such allocations will be made according to the 

procedures set forth in §§ 97.412(a)(9)–(10) and 

(12), 97.512(a)(9)–(10) and (12), 97.612(a)(9)–(10) 

and (12), and 97.712(a)(9)–(10) and (12). Generally, 

new units that commenced commercial operations 

in 2014 or 2015 will receive second-round 2015 

NUSA allocations sufficient to bring the totals of 

their first- and second-round allocations up to their 

2015 emissions as reported under 40 CFR part 75 

unless the total of such second-round allocations 

for all eligible units would exceed the remaining 

amount of allowances in the NUSA, in which case 

the second-round allocations will be reduced on a 

pro-rata basis. Any allowances remaining in any 

NUSA after second-round allocations to new 

units—along with any allowances remaining in any 

corresponding Indian country NUSA—will be 

allocated to the state’s existing units in proportion 

to their respective 2015 CSAPR FIP allocations of 

non-NUSA allowances. 

York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, 

Pennsylvania, South Carolina, 

Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West 

Virginia, and Wisconsin. 

DATES: Objections to the information 

referenced in this notice must be 

received on or before July 1, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your objections via 

email to CSAPR_NUSA@epa.gov. 

Include ‘‘2015 NUSA allocations’’ in the 

email subject line and include your 

name, title, affiliation, address, phone 

number, and email address in the body 

of the email. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Questions concerning this action should 

be addressed to Robert Miller at (202) 

343–9077 or miller.robertl@epa.gov or 

Kenon Smith at (202) 343–9164 or 

smith.kenon@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

CSAPR FIPs, the mechanisms by which 

initial allocations of emission 

allowances are determined differ for 

‘‘existing’’ and ‘‘new’’ units. For 

‘‘existing’’ units—that is, units 

commencing commercial operation 

before January 1, 2010—the specific 

amounts of CSAPR FIP allowance 

allocations for all compliance years 

have been established through 

rulemaking. EPA has announced the 

availability of spreadsheets showing the 

CSAPR FIP allowance allocations to 

existing units in previous notices.1

‘‘New’’ units—that is, units 

commencing commercial operation on 

or after January 1, 2010—as well as 

certain older units that would not 

otherwise obtain FIP allowance 

allocations do not have pre-established 

allowance allocations. Instead, the 

CSAPR FIPs reserve a portion of each 

state’s total annual emissions budget for 

each CSAPR emissions trading program 

as a new unit set-aside (NUSA) 2 and 

establish an annual process for 

allocating NUSA allowances to eligible 

units. States with Indian country within 

their borders have separate Indian 

country NUSAs. The annual process for 

allocating allowances from the NUSAs 

and Indian country NUSAs to eligible 

units is set forth in the CSAPR 

regulations at 40 CFR 97.411(b) and 

97.412 (NOX Annual Trading Program), 

97.511(b) and 97.512 (NOX Ozone 

Season Trading Program), 97.611(b) and 

97.612 (SO2 Group 1 Trading Program), 

and 97.711(b) and 97.712 (SO2 Group 2 

Trading Program). Each NUSA 

allowance allocation process involves 

up to two rounds of allocations to new 

units followed by the allocation to 

existing units of any allowances not 

allocated to new units. EPA provides 

public notice at certain points in the 

process. This notice concerns 

preliminary calculations for the first 

round of NUSA allowance allocations 

for the 2015 compliance year.3

The units eligible to receive firstround NUSA allocations are defined in 

§§ 97.412(a)(1), 97.512(a)(1), 

97.612(a)(1), and 97.712(a)(1). 

Generally, eligible units include any 

CSAPR–affected unit that has not been 

allocated allowances as an existing unit 

as well as certain units that have been 

allocated allowances as existing units 

but whose allocations have been 

deducted or not recorded because of 

corrections or multi-year breaks in 

operations. EPA notes that a valid 

allowance allocation may consist of zero 

allowances; thus, an existing unit 

specifically allocated zero allowances in 

the spreadsheet of CSAPR FIP 

allowance allocations to existing units is 

generally ineligible to receive a NUSA 

allowance allocation. 

The quantity of allowances to be 

allocated through the 2015 NUSA 

allowance allocation process for each 

state and emissions trading program is 

generally the state’s 2015 emissions 

budget less the sum of (1) the total of the 

2015 CSAPR FIP allowance allocations 

to existing units and (2) the amount of 

the 2015 Indian country NUSA, if any.4

The amounts of NUSA allowances may 

be increased in certain circumstances as 

set forth in §§ 97.412(a)(2), 97.512(a)(2), 

97.612(a)(2), and 97.712(a)(2). 

The amounts of first-round allocations 

to eligible units from each NUSA are 

calculated according to the procedures 

set forth in §§ 97.412(a)(3)–(7) and (12), 

97.512(a)(3)–(7) and (12), 97.612(a)(3)– 

(7) and (12), and 97.712(a)(3)–(7) and 

(12). Generally, the procedures call for 

each eligible unit to receive a first-round 

2015 NUSA allocation equal to its 2014 

emissions as reported under 40 CFR part 

75 unless the total of such allocations to 

all eligible units would exceed the 

amount of allowances in the NUSA, in 

which case the allocations are reduced 

on a pro-rata basis.5

EPA notes that an allocation or lack 

of allocation of allowances to a given 

EGU does not constitute a determination 

that CSAPR does or does not apply to 

the EGU. EPA also notes that allocations 

are subject to potential correction. 

The detailed unit-by-unit data and 

preliminary allowance allocation 

calculations are set forth in Excel 

spreadsheets titled ‘‘CSAPR_NUSA_

2015_NOX_Annual_1st_Round_Prelim

_Data’’, ‘‘CSAPR_NUSA_2015

_NOX_OS_1st_Round_Prelim_Data’’, 

and ‘‘CSAPR_NUSA_2015_SO2_1st

_Round_Prelim_Data,’’ available on 

EPA’s Web site at http://www.epa.gov/

crossstaterule/actions.html. The three 

spreadsheets show EPA’s initial 

determinations of 2015 NUSA 

allocations for new units subject to the 

CSAPR NOX Annual, NOX Ozone 

Season, and SO2 (Group 1 and Group 2) 

trading programs, respectively. Each of 

the spreadsheets contains a separate 

worksheet for each state covered by that 

program showing, for each unit 

identified as eligible for a first-round 

NUSA allocation, (1) the unit’s 

emissions in the 2014 control period 

(annual or ozone season as applicable), 

(2) the maximum first-round 2015 

NUSA allowance allocation for which 

the unit is eligible (typically the unit’s 

emissions in the 2014 control period), 

(3) various adjustments to the unit’s 

maximum allocation, many of which are 

necessary only if the NUSA pool is 

oversubscribed, and (4) the preliminary 

calculation of the unit’s first-round 2015 

NUSA allowance allocation. 

Each state worksheet also contains a 

summary showing (1) the quantity of 

allowances initially available in that 

state’s 2015 NUSA, (2) the sum of the 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
30990 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

first-round 2015 NUSA allowance 

allocations that will be made to new 

units in that state, assuming there are no 

corrections to the data, and (3) the 

quantity of allowances that would 

remain in the 2015 NUSA for use in 

second-round allocations to new units 

(or ultimately for allocation to existing 

units), again assuming there are no 

corrections to the data. 

Objections should be strictly limited 

to the data and calculations upon which 

the NUSA allowance allocations are 

based and should be emailed to the 

address identified in ADDRESSES. 

Objections must include: (1) Precise 

identification of the specific data and/or 

calculations the commenter believes are 

inaccurate, (2) new proposed data and/ 

or calculations upon which the 

commenter believes EPA should rely 

instead to determine allowance 

allocations, and (3) the reasons why 

EPA should rely on the commenter’s 

proposed data and/or calculations and 

not the data referenced in this notice. 

Authority: 40 CFR 97.411(b), 97.511(b), 

97.611(b), and 97.711(b). 

Dated: May 22, 2015. 

Reid P. Harvey, 

Director, Clean Air Markets Division. 

[FR Doc. 2015–13031 Filed 5–29–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2015–0030; 

FF09E42000 156 FXES11130900000] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a 

Petition To Remove the Bone Cave 

Harvestman (Texella reyesi) From the 

List of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition 

finding. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 

90-day finding on a petition to remove 

the Bone Cave harvestman (Texella 

reyesi) from the List of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). Based on our review, we 

find that the petition does not present 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that the 

petitioned action may be warranted. 

Therefore, we are not initiating a status 

review in response to this petition. 

However, we ask the public to submit to 

us any new information that becomes 

available concerning the status of, or 

threats to, the Bone Cave harvestman or 

its habitat at any time. 

DATES: The finding announced in this 

document was made on June 1, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition are 

available in the docket associated with 

this notice at http://

www.regulations.gov and at http://

fws.gov/southwest/es/austintexas/ or 

upon request from the Field Supervisor 

of the Austin Ecological Services Field 

Office, 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200, 

Austin, TX 78758. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, 

Austin Ecological Services Field Office, 

10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200, Austin, 

TX 78758; by telephone at 512–490– 

0057; or by facsimile at 512–490–0974. 

If you use a telecommunications device 

for the deaf (TDD), please call the 

Federal Information Relay Service 

(FIRS) at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires 

that we make a finding on whether a 

petition to list, delist, or reclassify a 

species presents substantial scientific or 

commercial information indicating that 

the petitioned action may be warranted. 

We are to base this finding on 

information provided in the petition, 

supporting information submitted with 

the petition, and information otherwise 

available in our files. To the maximum 

extent practicable, we are to make this 

finding within 90 days of our receipt of 

the petition and publish our notice of 

the finding promptly in the Federal 

Register. 

Our standard for substantial scientific 

or commercial information within the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with 

regard to a 90-day petition finding is 

‘‘that amount of information that would 

lead a reasonable person to believe that 

the measure proposed in the petition 

may be warranted’’ (50 CFR 

424.14(b)(1)). If we find that substantial 

scientific or commercial information 

was presented, we are required to 

promptly conduct a species status 

review, which we subsequently 

summarize in a 12-month finding. 

Petition History 

On June 2, 2014, we received a 

petition from John Yearwood, Kathryn 

Heidemann, Charles and Cheryl Shell, 

the Walter Sidney Shell Management 

Trust, the American Stewards of 

Liberty, and Steven W. Carothers 

requesting that we remove the 

endangered Bone Cave harvestman from 

the Federal lists of endangered and 

threatened species. The petition clearly 

identified itself as a petition and 

included the requisite identification 

information for the petitioners, as 

required in 50 CFR 424.14(a). This 

finding addresses the petition. 

Previous Federal Actions 

The Bone Cave harvestman was 

originally listed as endangered on 

September 16, 1988 (53 FR 36029). In an 

August 18, 1993, Federal Register 

document (58 FR 43818), the Service 

gave the Bone Cave harvestman 

protection under the Act as a separate 

species. It had previously been listed as 

endangered as a part of the Bee Creek 

Cave harvestman (Texella reddelli), 

which was subsequently re-classified 

into two species, and this final rule set 

forth technical corrections to ensure that 

the species continued to receive 

protection under the Act. On March 14, 

1994, we published a 90-day finding (59 

FR 11755) on a petition to delist the 

Bone Cave harvestman in which we 

found that the petition did not present 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that the 

petitioned action may have been 

warranted. A draft recovery plan was 

available for public review and 

comment on June 7, 1993, and a final 

recovery plan was published on August 

25, 1994 (Service 1994). On December 4, 

2009, we completed a 5-year review of 

the Bone Cave harvestman, which 

recommended that the species remain 

listed as endangered (Service 2009). 

Species Information 

For information on the biology and 

life history of the Bone Cave 

harvestman, see the final rule listing 

this species (53 FR 36029), the 

Endangered Karst Invertebrates 

Recovery Plan for Travis and 

Williamson Counties (Service 1994), 

and the 5-year Status Review for the 

Bone Cave Harvestman (Service 2009), 

all posted at http://ecos.fws.gov/

speciesProfile/profile/

speciesProfile.action?spcode=J009. For 

information on preserve design and 

management for karst invertebrate 

species conservation, see the Karst 

Preserve Design Recommendations 

(Service 2012) and the Karst Preserve 

Management and Monitoring 

Recommendations (Service 2014) posted 

at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/

AustinTexas/ESA_Sp_KarstInverts.html. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS