42624 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 174 / Monday, September 11, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

1Though DEA has used the term ‘‘final order’’ 

with respect to temporary scheduling orders in the 

past, this notice of intent adheres to the statutory 

language of 21 U.S.C. 811(h), which refers to a 

‘‘temporary scheduling order.’’ No substantive 

change is intended. 

2As discussed in a memorandum of 

understanding entered into by the Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) and the National Institute on 

Drug Abuse (NIDA), the FDA acts as the lead agency 

within the HHS in carrying out the Secretary’s 

scheduling responsibilities under the CSA, with the 

concurrence of NIDA. 50 FR 9518, Mar. 8, 1985. 

The Secretary of the HHS has delegated to the 

Assistant Secretary for Health of the HHS the 

authority to make domestic drug scheduling 

recommendations. 58 FR 35460, July 1, 1993. 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

21 CFR Part 1308 

[Docket No. DEA–472] 

Schedules of Controlled Substances: 

Temporary Placement of FUB-AMB 

Into Schedule I 

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement 

Administration, Department of Justice. 

ACTION: Proposed amendment; notice of 

intent. 

SUMMARY: The Administrator of the Drug 

Enforcement Administration is issuing 

this notice of intent to publish a 

temporary order to schedule the 

synthetic cannabinoid, Methyl 2-(1-(4- 

fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3- 

carboxamido)-3-methylbutanoate [FUBAMB, MMB-FUBINACA, AMBFUBINACA], into Schedule I. This 

action is based on a finding by the 

Administrator that the placement of this 

synthetic cannabinoid into Schedule I of 

the Controlled Substances Act is 

necessary to avoid an imminent hazard 

to the public safety. When it is issued, 

the temporary scheduling order will 

impose the administrative, civil, and 

criminal sanctions and regulatory 

controls applicable to Schedule I 

controlled substances under the 

Controlled Substances Act on the 

manufacture, distribution, possession, 

importation, exportation of, and 

research and conduct with, instructional 

activities of this synthetic cannabinoid. 

DATES: September 11, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael J. Lewis, Diversion Control 

Division, Drug Enforcement 

Administration; Mailing Address: 8701 

Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 

22152; Telephone: (202) 598–6812. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice of intent contained in this 

document is issued pursuant to the 

temporary schedule provisions of 21 

U.S.C. 811(h). The Drug Enforcement 

Administration (DEA) intends to issue a 

temporary scheduling order (in the form 

of a temporary amendment) to add FUBAMB to Schedule I under the Controlled 

Substances Act.1 The temporary 

scheduling order will be published in 

the Federal Register, but will not be 

issued before October 11, 2017. 

Legal Authority 

Section 201 of the Controlled 

Substances Act (CSA), 21 U.S.C. 811, 

provides the Attorney General with the 

authority to temporarily place a 

substance into Schedule I of the CSA for 

two years without regard to the 

requirements of 21 U.S.C. 811(b) if he 

finds that such action is necessary to 

avoid an imminent hazard to the public 

safety. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1). In addition, 

if proceedings to control a substance are 

initiated under 21 U.S.C. 811(a)(1), the 

Attorney General may extend the 

temporary scheduling for up to one 

year. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(2). 

Where the necessary findings are 

made, a substance may be temporarily 

scheduled if it is not listed in any other 

schedule under section 202 of the CSA, 

21 U.S.C. 812, or if there is no 

exemption or approval in effect for the 

substance under section 505 of the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FDCA), 21 U.S.C. 355. 21 U.S.C. 

811(h)(1); 21 CFR part 1308. The 

Attorney General has delegated 

scheduling authority under 21 U.S.C. 

811 to the Administrator of the DEA. 28 

CFR 0.100. 

Background 

Section 201(h)(4) of the CSA 21 U.S.C. 

811(h)(4), requires the Administrator to 

notify the Secretary of the Department 

of Health and Human Services (HHS) of 

his intention to temporarily place a 

substance into Schedule I of the CSA.2

The Acting Administrator transmitted 

notice of his intent to place FUB-AMB 

in Schedule I on a temporary basis to 

the Assistant Secretary for Health by 

letter dated May 19, 2017. The Assistant 

Secretary responded to this notice of 

intent by letter dated June 9, 2017, and 

advised that based on a review by the 

Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 

there were no approved new drug 

applications or active investigational 

new drug applications for FUB-AMB. 

The Assistant Secretary also stated that 

the HHS has no objection to the 

temporary placement of FUB-AMB into 

Schedule I of the CSA. FUB-AMB is not 

currently listed in any schedule under 

the CSA, and no exemptions or 

approvals are in effect for FUB-AMB 

under section 505 of the FDCA, 21 

U.S.C. 355. The DEA has found that the 

control of FUB-AMB in Schedule I on a 

temporary basis is necessary to avoid 

imminent hazard to the public safety. 

To find that placing a substance 

temporarily into Schedule I of the CSA 

is necessary to avoid an imminent 

hazard to the public safety, the 

Administrator is required to consider 

three of the eight factors set forth in 21 

U.S.C. 811(c): The substance’s history 

and current pattern of abuse; the scope, 

duration and significance of abuse; and 

what, if any, risk there is to the public 

health. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(3). 

Consideration of these factors includes 

actual abuse, diversion from legitimate 

channels, and clandestine importation, 

manufacture, or distribution. 21 U.S.C. 

811(h)(3). 

A substance meeting the statutory 

requirements for temporary scheduling 

may only be placed in Schedule I. 21 

U.S.C. 811(h)(1). Substances in 

Schedule I are those that have a high 

potential for abuse, no currently 

accepted medical use in treatment in the 

United States, and a lack of accepted 

safety for use under medical 

supervision. 21 U.S.C. 812(b)(1). 

FUB-AMB 

The illicit use of the synthetic 

cannabinoid (SC) methyl 2-(1-(4- 

fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3- 

carboxamido)-3-methylbutanoate (Street 

names: FUB-AMB, MMB-FUBINACA, 

AMB-FUBINACA) has dramatically 

increased over the past 12 months 

posing an imminent threat to public 

safety. Available data and information 

for FUB-AMB, summarized below, 

indicates that this SC has a high 

potential for abuse, no currently 

accepted medical use in treatment in the 

United States, and a lack of accepted 

safety for use under medical 

supervision. The DEA’s three factor 

analysis is available in its entirety under 

‘‘Supporting and Related Material’’ of 

the public docket for this action at 

www.regulations.gov under Docket 

Number DEA–372. 

Synthetic Cannabinoids 

SCs are substances synthesized in 

laboratories that mimic the biological 

effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol 

(THC), the main psychoactive ingredient 

in marijuana. It is believed that SCs 

were first introduced on the designer 

drug market in several European 

countries as ‘‘herbal incense’’ before the 

initial encounter in the United States by 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(CBP) in November 2008. From 2009 to 

the present, misuse and abuse of SCs 

has increased in the United States with 

law enforcement encounters describing 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 174 / Monday, September 11, 2017 / Proposed Rules 42625 

3The National Forensic Laboratory Information 

System (NFLIS) is a national drug forensic 

laboratory reporting system that systematically 

collects results from drug chemistry analyses 

conducted by state and local forensic laboratories 

in the United States. 

SCs applied onto plant material and in 

designer drug products intended for 

human consumption. It has been 

demonstrated that the substances and 

the associated designer drug products 

are abused for their psychoactive 

properties. With many generations of 

SCs having been encountered since 

2009, FUB-AMB is one of the latest, and 

the abuse of these substances is 

negatively impacting communities. 

As observed by the DEA and CBP, SCs 

originate from foreign sources, such as 

China. Bulk powder substances are 

smuggled via common carrier into the 

United States and find their way to 

clandestine designer drug product 

manufacturing operations located in 

residential neighborhoods, garages, 

warehouses, and other similar 

destinations throughout the country. 

According to online discussion boards 

and law enforcement encounters, 

applying by spraying or mixing the SCs 

with plant material provides a vehicle 

for the most common route of 

administration—smoking (using a pipe, 

a water pipe, or rolling the drug-laced 

plant material in cigarette papers). 

FUB-AMB has no accepted medical 

use in the United States. Use of this 

specific SC has been reported (see factor 

6) to result in adverse effects in humans. 

Use of other SCs has resulted in signs 

of addiction and withdrawal and based 

on the similar pharmacological profile 

of FUB-AMB, it is believed that there 

will be similar observed adverse effects. 

FUB-AMB is a SC that has 

pharmacological effects similar to the 

Schedule I hallucinogen THC and other 

temporarily and permanently controlled 

Schedule I synthetic cannabinoid 

substances. In addition, the misuse of 

FUB-AMB has been associated with 

multiple overdoses requiring emergency 

medical intervention (see factor 6). With 

no approved medical use and limited 

safety or toxicological information, 

FUB-AMB has emerged on the designer 

drug market, and the abuse of this 

substance for its psychoactive properties 

is concerning. 

Factor 4. History and Current Pattern of 

Abuse 

Synthetic cannabinoids have been 

developed by researchers over the last 

30 years as tools for investigating the 

endocannabinoid system, (e.g. 

determining CB1 and CB2 receptor 

activity). The first encounter of SCs 

within the United States occurred in 

November 2008 by CBP. Since then, the 

popularity of SCs in general and their 

associated products has increased as 

evidenced by law enforcement seizures, 

public health information, and media 

reports. FUB-AMB was originally 

encountered in 2014, but has since seen 

a large increase in its illicit use. The 

misuse of FUB-AMB has been 

associated with multiple overdoses 

requiring emergency medical 

intervention. 

Research and clinical reports have 

demonstrated that SCs are applied onto 

plant material so that the material may 

be smoked as users attempt to obtain a 

euphoric and psychoactive ‘‘high,’’ 

believed to be similar to marijuana. Data 

gathered from a published study, and 

supplemented by discussions on 

Internet Web sites, demonstrate that 

these products are being abused mainly 

by smoking for their psychoactive 

properties. The adulterated products are 

marketed as ‘‘legal’’ alternatives to 

marijuana. In recent cases of overdoses, 

FUB-AMB has been encountered in the 

form of herbal products, similar to the 

SCs that have been previously available. 

The powder form of SCs is typically 

dissolved in solvents (e.g., acetone) 

before being applied to plant material or 

dissolved in a propellant intended for 

use in electronic cigarette devices. Law 

enforcement personnel have 

encountered various application 

methods including buckets or cement 

mixers in which plant material and one 

or more SCs are mixed together, as well 

as large areas where the plant material 

is spread out so that a dissolved SC 

mixture can be applied directly. Once 

mixed, the SC plant material is then 

allowed to dry before manufacturer’s 

package the product for distribution, 

ignoring any control mechanisms to 

prevent contamination or to ensure a 

consistent, uniform concentration of the 

substance in each package. Adverse 

health consequences may also occur 

from directly ingesting the drug during 

the manufacturing process. FUB-AMB, 

similar to other SCs, has been 

encountered in the form of dried leave 

or herbal blends. 

The designer drug products laced 

with SCs, including FUB-AMB, are 

often sold under the guise of ‘‘herbal 

incense’’ or ‘‘potpourri,’’ use various 

product names, and are routinely 

labeled ‘‘not for human consumption.’’ 

Additionally, these products are 

marketed as a ‘‘legal high’’ or ‘‘legal 

alternative to marijuana’’ and are readily 

available over the Internet, in head 

shops, or sold in convenience stores. 

There is an incorrect assumption that 

these products are safe, that they are a 

synthetic form of marijuana, and that 

labeling these products as ‘‘not for 

human consumption’’ is a legal defense 

to criminal prosecution under the 

Controlled Substances Analogue 

Enforcement Act. 

It is believed most abusers of SCs or 

SC-related products are smoking the 

product following application to plant 

material. Law enforcement has also 

begun to encounter new variations of 

SCs in liquid form. It is believed abusers 

have been applying the liquid to 

hookahs or ‘‘e-cigarettes,’’ which allows 

the user to administer a vaporized 

liquid that can be inhaled. 

Factor 5. Scope, Duration and 

Significance of Abuse 

SCs including FUB-AMB continue to 

be encountered on the illicit market 

regardless of scheduling actions that 

attempt to safeguard the public from the 

adverse effects and safety issues 

associated with these substances. Novel 

substances are encountered each month, 

differing only by small modifications 

intended to avoid prosecution while 

maintaining the pharmacological effects. 

Law enforcement and health care 

professionals continue to report the 

abuse of these substances and their 

associated products. 

As described by the National Institute 

on Drug Abuse (NIDA), many 

substances being encountered in the 

illicit market, specifically SCs, have 

been available for years but have 

reentered the marketplace due to a 

renewed popularity. The threat of 

serious injury to the individual 

following the ingestion of FUB-AMB 

and other SCs persists. 

The following information details 

information obtained through NFLIS 3

(queried on May 16, 2017), including 

dates of first encounter, exhibits/reports, 

and locations. 

FUB-AMB: NFLIS—6,522 reports, first 

encountered in June 2014, locations 

include: Arkansas, Arizona, California, 

Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Idaho, 

Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, 

Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, 

Minnesota, Missouri, Mississippi, North 

Dakota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, 

New Mexico, New York, Ohio, 

Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, 

South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, 

Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. 

Factor 6. What, if Any, Risk There Is to 

the Public Health 

FUB-AMB has been identified in 

overdose cases attributed to its abuse. 

Adverse health effects reported from 

these incidents involving FUB-AMB 

have included: Nausea, persistent 

vomiting, agitation, altered mental 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
42626 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 174 / Monday, September 11, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

status, seizures, convulsions, loss of 

consciousness, and cardiotoxicity. By 

sharing pharmacological similarities 

with Schedule I substances (D9-THC, 

JWH-018 and other temporarily and 

permanently controlled schedule I SCs), 

SCs pose a risk to the abuser. While 

these adverse effects have been shown 

by a variety of SCs, similar concerns 

remain regarding the welfare of the user 

as it relates to abuse of products laced 

with FUB-AMB. The risk of adverse 

health effects is further increased by the 

fact that similar products vary in the 

composition and concentration of SCs 

applied on the plant material. 

Finding of Necessity of Schedule I 

Placement To Avoid Imminent Hazard 

to Public Safety 

In accordance with 21 U.S.C. 

811(h)(3), based on the available data 

and information summarized above, the 

continued uncontrolled manufacture, 

distribution, importation, exportation, 

conduct of research and chemical 

analysis, possession, and abuse of FUBAMB poses an imminent hazard to the 

public safety. The DEA is not aware of 

any currently accepted medical uses for 

FUB-AMB in the United States. A 

substance meeting the statutory 

requirements for temporary scheduling, 

21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1), may only be placed 

in schedule I. Substances in Schedule I 

are those that have a high potential for 

abuse, no currently accepted medical 

use in treatment in the United States, 

and a lack of accepted safety for use 

under medical supervision. Available 

data and information for FUB-AMB 

indicate that this SC has a high potential 

for abuse, no currently accepted medical 

use in treatment in the United States, 

and a lack of accepted safety for use 

under medical supervision. As required 

by section 201(h)(4) of the CSA, 21 

U.S.C. 811(h)(4), the Administrator, 

through a letter dated May 19, 2017, 

notified the Assistant Secretary of the 

DEA’s intention to temporarily place 

FUB-AMB in Schedule I. 

Conclusion 

This notice of intent initiates a 

temporary scheduling action and 

provides the 30-day notice pursuant to 

section 201(h) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 

811(h), of the DEA’s intent to issue a 

temporary scheduling order. In 

accordance with the provisions of 

section 201(h) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 

811(h), the Administrator considered 

available data and information, herein 

sets forth the grounds for his 

determination that it is necessary to 

temporarily schedule methyl 2-(1-(4- 

fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3- 

carboxamido)-3-methylbutanoate [FUBAMB, MMB-FUBINACA, AMBFUBINACA] in Schedule I of the CSA, 

and finds that the placement of FUBAMB into Schedule I of the CSA on a 

temporary basis is necessary to avoid an 

imminent hazard to the public safety. 

The temporary placement of FUBAMB into Schedule I of the CSA will 

take effect pursuant to a temporary 

scheduling order, which will not be 

issued before October 11, 2017. Because 

the Administrator hereby finds that it is 

necessary to temporarily place FUBAMB into Schedule I to avoid an 

imminent hazard to the public safety, 

the temporary order scheduling this 

substance will be effective on the date 

that order is published in the Federal 

Register, and will be in effect for a 

period of two years, with a possible 

extension of one additional year, 

pending completion of the regular 

(permanent) scheduling process. 21 

U.S.C. 811(h)(1) and (2). It is the 

intention of the Administrator to issue 

a temporary scheduling order as soon as 

possible after the expiration of 30 days 

from the date of publication of this 

document. Upon publication of the 

temporary order, FUB-AMB will then be 

subject to the regulatory controls and 

administrative, civil, and criminal 

sanctions applicable to the manufacture, 

distribution, importation, exportation, 

research, conduct of instructional 

activities, and chemical analysis and 

possession of a Schedule I controlled 

substance. 

The CSA sets forth specific criteria for 

scheduling a drug or other substance. 

Regular scheduling actions in 

accordance with 21 U.S.C. 811(a) are 

subject to formal rulemaking procedures 

done ‘‘on the record after opportunity 

for a hearing’’ conducted pursuant to 

the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 556 and 557. 

21 U.S.C. 811. The regular scheduling 

process of formal rulemaking affords 

interested parties with appropriate 

process and the government with any 

additional relevant information needed 

to make a determination. Final 

decisions that conclude the regular 

scheduling process of formal 

rulemaking are subject to judicial 

review. 21 U.S.C. 877. Temporary 

scheduling orders are not subject to 

judicial review. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(6). 

Regulatory Matters 

Section 201(h) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 

811(h), provides for an expedited 

temporary scheduling action where 

such action is necessary to avoid an 

imminent hazard to the public safety. 

As provided in this subsection, the 

Attorney General may, by order, 

schedule a substance in Schedule I on 

a temporary basis. Such an order may 

not be issued before the expiration of 30 

days from (1) the publication of a notice 

in the Federal Register of the intention 

to issue such order and the grounds 

upon which such order is to be issued, 

and (2) the date that notice of the 

proposed temporary scheduling order is 

transmitted to the Assistant Secretary. 

21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1). 

Inasmuch as section 201(h) of the 

CSA directs that temporary scheduling 

actions be issued by order and sets forth 

the procedures by which such orders are 

to be issued, the DEA believes that the 

notice and comment requirements of 

section 553 of the Administrative 

Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553, do 

not apply to this notice of intent. In the 

alternative, even assuming that this 

notice of intent might be subject to 

section 553 of the APA, the 

Administrator finds that there is good 

cause to forgo the notice and comment 

requirements of section 553, as any 

further delays in the process for 

issuance of temporary scheduling orders 

would be impracticable and contrary to 

the public interest in view of the 

manifest urgency to avoid an imminent 

hazard to the public safety. 

Although the DEA believes this notice 

of intent to issue a temporary 

scheduling order is not subject to the 

notice and comment requirements of 

section 553 of the APA, the DEA notes 

that in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 

811(h)(4), the Administrator will take 

into consideration any comments 

submitted by the Assistant Secretary 

with regard to the proposed temporary 

scheduling order. 

Further, the DEA believes that this 

temporary scheduling action is not a 

‘‘rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 601(2), 

and, accordingly, is not subject to the 

requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA). The requirements 

for the preparation of an initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis in 5 U.S.C. 

603(a) are not applicable where, as here, 

the DEA is not required by section 553 

of the APA or any other law to publish 

a general notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

Additionally, this action is not a 

significant regulatory action as defined 

by Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review), section 3(f), and, 

accordingly, this action has not been 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget. 

This action will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, in 

accordance with Executive Order 13132 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 174 / Monday, September 11, 2017 / Proposed Rules 42627 

(Federalism) it is determined that this 

action does not have sufficient 

federalism implications to warrant the 

preparation of a Federalism Assessment. 

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1308 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Drug traffic control, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set out above, the DEA 

proposes to amend 21 CFR part 1308 as 

follows: 

PART 1308—SCHEDULES OF 

CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1308 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b), 

unless otherwise noted. 

■ 2. In § 1308.11, add paragraph (h)(18) 

to read as follows: 

§ 1308.11 Schedule I. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(18) methyl 2-(1-(4-fluorobenzyl)- 

1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3- 

methylbutanoate, its optical, 

positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts of isomers 

(Other names: FUB-AMB, 

MMB-FUBINACA, AMBFUBINACA) ................................ (7021) 

Dated: August 14, 2017. 

Chuck Rosenberg, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2017–17639 Filed 9–8–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2015–0189; FRL–9966–97– 

Region 6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Arkansas; 

Approval of Regional Haze State 

Implementation Plan Revision and 

Withdrawal of Federal Implementation 

Plan for NOX for Electric Generating 

Units in Arkansas 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act), the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

is proposing to approve a proposed 

revision to the Arkansas Regional Haze 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submitted for parallel processing on July 

12, 2017, by the State of Arkansas 

through the Arkansas Department of 

Environmental Quality (ADEQ). 

Specifically, the EPA is proposing to 

approve the State’s proposed SIP 

revision, which addresses nitrogen 

oxide (NOX) requirements for the 

Arkansas Electric Cooperative 

Corporation (AECC) Bailey Plant Unit 1; 

AECC McClellan Plant Unit 1; the 

American Electric Power/Southwestern 

Electric Power Company (AEP/ 

SWEPCO) Flint Creek Plant Boiler No. 

1; Entergy Arkansas, Inc. (Entergy) Lake 

Catherine Plant Unit 4; Entergy White 

Bluff Plant Units 1 and 2 and the 

Auxiliary Boiler; and Entergy 

Independence Plant Units 1 and 2. In 

conjunction with this proposed 

approval, we are proposing to withdraw 

federal implementation plan (FIP) 

emission limits for NOX that would 

otherwise apply to the nine 

aforementioned units. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before October 11, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket No. EPA–R06– 

OAR–2015–0189, at http://

www.regulations.gov or via email to 

R6AIR_ARHaze@epa.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish 

any comment received to its public 

docket. Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact Dayana Medina, 

medina.dayana@epa.gov. For the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at the EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available at 

either location (e.g., CBI). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dayana Medina, 214–665–7241, 

medina.dayana@epa.gov. To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment with Dayana Medina or 

Mr. Bill Deese at 214–665–7253. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. The Regional Haze Program 

B. Our Previous Actions on Arkansas 

Regional Haze 

C. CSAPR as an Alternative to SourceSpecific NOX BART 

II. Our Evaluation of Arkansas’ Proposed 

Regional Haze SIP Revision 

A. Reliance on CSAPR To Satisfy NOX

BART 

B. Reasonable Progress Analysis for NOX

1. Regional Particulate Source 

Apportionment Tool (PSAT) Data for 

Caney Creek and Upper Buffalo 

2. Arkansas Source PSAT Data for Caney 

Creek and Upper Buffalo 

3. Arkansas’ Conclusions Regarding Key 

Pollutants and Source Category 

Contributions 

4. Our Evaluation of Arkansas’ Analysis 

C. Required Consultation 

III. Proposed Action 

A. Arkansas’ Proposed Regional Haze SIP 

Revision 

B. Partial FIP Withdrawal 

C. Clean Air Act Section 110(l) 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. The Regional Haze Program 

Regional haze is visibility impairment 

that is produced by a multitude of 

sources and activities that are located 

across a broad geographic area and emit 

fine particulates (PM2.5) (e.g., sulfates, 

nitrates, organic carbon (OC), elemental 

carbon (EC), and soil dust), and their 

precursors (e.g., sulfur dioxide (SO2), 

NOX, and in some cases, ammonia (NH3) 

and volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs)). Fine particle precursors react 

in the atmosphere to form PM2.5, which 

impairs visibility by scattering and 

absorbing light. Visibility impairment 

reduces the clarity, color, and visible 

distance that can be seen. PM2.5 can also 

cause serious adverse health effects and 

mortality in humans; it also contributes 

to environmental effects such as acid 

deposition and eutrophication. 

Section 169A of the CAA directs 

states to evaluate the use of retrofit 

controls at certain larger, often undercontrolled, older stationary sources in 

order to address visibility impacts from 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS