### 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 allocatedto eligible units from each new unit setaside (NUSA) under the FIPs arecalculated 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


### 30989 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules

1 The 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).

2 The 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. 3 At this time, EPA is not aware of any unit eligible for a first-round allocation from any Indian country NUSA.

4 The 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. 5 Subsequent 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 (NO X Annual Trading Program), 97.511(b) and 97.512 (NO X Ozone Season Trading Program), 97.611(b) and 97.612 (SO 2 Group 1 Trading Program), and 97.711(b) and 97.712 (SO 2 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

_ NO X

_ Annual

_ 1st

_ Round

_ Prelim

_Data’’, ‘‘CSAPR

_ NUSA

_ 2015

_ NO X

_ OS

_ 1st

_ Round

_ Prelim

_ Data’’, and ‘‘CSAPR

_ NUSA

_ 2015

_ SO 2

_ 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 NO X Annual, NO X Ozone Season, and SO 2 (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


### 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.