26426 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 89 / Thursday, May 8, 2014 / Notices 

Dated: May 2, 2014. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2014–10585 Filed 5–7–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[Petitions IV–2012–1 Through 5; FRL–9910– 

57–Region 4] 

Clean Air Act Operating Permit 

Program; Petitions for Objection to 

State Operating Permit Renewals for 

Georgia Power/Southern Company 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Notice of final order on 

petitions to object to a state operating 

permit. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Administrator signed an 

Order, dated April 14, 2014, partially 

granting and partially denying petitions 

to object to Clean Air Act (CAA) title V 

operating permit renewals issued by the 

Georgia Environmental Protection 

Division to Georgia Power Company for 

the following steam-electric generation 

stations: Hammond located near Coosa 

in Floyd County, Georgia; Kraft located 

near Port Wentworth in Chatham 

County, Georgia; McIntosh located near 

Rincon in Effingham County, Georgia; 

Scherer located near Juliette in Monroe 

County, Georgia; and Wansley located 

near Carrollton in Heard County, 

Georgia. This Order constitutes a final 

action on the petitions submitted by 

GreenLaw on behalf of Sierra Club and 

other environmental groups (Petitioners) 

and received by EPA on June 13 and 15, 

September 5, October 23 and November 

13, 2012, respectively. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Order, the 

petitions, and all pertinent information 

relating thereto are on file at the 

following location: EPA Region 4; Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division; 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, 

Georgia 30303–8960. The Order is also 

available electronically at the following 

address: http://www.epa.gov/region07/

air/title5/petitiondb/petitions/ga_

power_plants_response2012.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Art 

Hofmeister, Air Permits Section, EPA 

Region 4, at (404) 562–9115 or 

hofmeister.art@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CAA 

affords EPA a 45-day period to review 

and, as appropriate, the authority to 

object to operating permits proposed by 

state permitting authorities under title V 

of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7661–7661f. 

Section 505(b)(2) of the CAA and 40 

CFR 70.8(d) authorize any person to 

petition the EPA Administrator to object 

to a title V operating permit within 60 

days after the expiration of EPA’s 45- 

day review period if EPA has not 

objected on its own initiative. Petitions 

must be based only on objections to the 

permit that were raised with reasonable 

specificity during the public comment 

period provided by the state, unless the 

petitioner demonstrates that it was 

impracticable to raise these issues 

during the comment period or the 

grounds for the issues arose after this 

period. Pursuant to sections 307(b) and 

505(b)(2) of the CAA, a petition for 

judicial review of those parts of the 

Order that deny issues in the petition 

may be filed in the United States Court 

of Appeals for the appropriate circuit 

within 60 days from the date this notice 

is published in the Federal Register. 

Petitioners submitted petitions 

regarding the aforementioned Georgia 

Power facilities, requesting that EPA 

object to the CAA title V operating 

permit renewals (#4911–115–0003–V– 

03–0, 4911–051–0006–V–03–0, 4911– 

103–0003–V–03–0, 4911–207–0008–V– 

03–0, and 4911–149–0001–V–03–0, 

respectively). Petitioners alleged that 

the permit renewals were not consistent 

with the CAA because they: (1) Lack 

sufficiently detailed information 

regarding the facilities’ compliance 

obligations related to hazardous air 

pollutant emissions under the National 

Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants for electric utility steam 

generating units; (2) fail to assure 

compliance with the sulfur dioxide 

(SO2) emissions limit in Georgia’s rules 

due to a permit provision authorizing 

facilities not to operate their SO2

continuous emission monitoring 

systems during startup, shutdown, 

malfunction and other periods; (3) lack 

sufficient monitoring requirements to 

assure compliance with applicable 

particulate matter limits; (4) contain 

vague and unenforceable fugitive dust 

control requirements; and (5) fail to 

apply preconstruction requirements 

under the CAA’s Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration and 

Nonattainment New Source Review 

programs to recent and planned 

upgrades to Scherer’s steam turbines. 

On April 14, 2014, the Administrator 

issued an Order partially granting and 

partially denying the petitions. The 

Order explains EPA’s rationale for 

partially granting and partially denying 

the petitions. 

Dated: May 1, 2014. 

A. Stanley Meiburg 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2014–10589 Filed 5–7–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION 

Notice of Agreements Filed 

The Commission hereby gives notice 

of the filing of the following agreements 

under the Shipping Act of 1984. 

Interested parties may submit comments 

on the agreements to the Secretary, 

Federal Maritime Commission, 

Washington, DC 20573, within twelve 

days of the date this notice appears in 

the Federal Register. Copies of the 

agreements are available through the 

Commission’s Web site (www.fmc.gov) 

or by contacting the Office of 

Agreements at (202) 523–5793 or 

tradeanalysis@fmc.gov. 

Agreement No.: 011961–015. 

Title: The Maritime Credit Agreement. 

Parties: Alianca Navegacao e Logistica 

Ltda. & Cia.; A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S 

trading under the name of Maersk Line; 

China Shipping Container Lines Co., 

Ltd.; CMA CGM S.A.; Companhia Libra 

de Navegacao; Compania Libra de 

Navegacion Uruguay S.A.; Compania 

Sud Americana de Vapores, S.A.; 

COSCO Container Lines Company 

Limited; Dole Ocean Cargo Express; 

Hamburg-Su ̈d; Hanjin Shipping Co., 

Ltd.; Independent Container Line Ltd.; 

Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd.; Nippon 

Yusen Kaisha; Norasia Container Lines 

Limited; United Arab Shipping 

Company (S.A.G.); Wallenius 

Wilhelmsen Logistics AS; Zim 

Integrated Shipping Services, Ltd. 

Filing Party: Wayne R. Rohde, Esq.; 

Cozen O’Connor; 1627 I Street NW., 

Suite 1100; Washington, DC 20006. 

Synopsis: The amendment removes 

Hyundai Merchant Marine Co., Ltd. as 

a party to the Agreement. 

Agreement No.: 012037–006. 

Title: Maersk Line/CMA CGM 

Transatlantic Slot Exchange Agreement. 

Parties: A.P. Moeller-Maersk A/S 

trading under the name of Maersk Line; 

and CMA CGM S.A. 

Filing Party: Wayne R. Rohde, Esq.; 

Cozen O’Connor; 1627 I Street NW., 

Suite 1100; Washington, DC 20006– 

4007. 

Synopsis: The amendment converts 

the agreement from a space charter 

agreement to a slot exchange agreement 

and makes changes necessary to reflect 

the bi-lateral nature of the exchange. 

The amendment also adds the U.S. Gulf 

Coast to and deletes Panama from the 

geographic scope of the agreement. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES