        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Parts 679 and 680
        [Docket No. 170412391-7391-01]
        RIN 0648-BG84
        Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area; American Fisheries Act; Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Crab Rationalization Program

          AGENCY:
          National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS issues a proposed rule to implement Amendment 48 to the Fishery Management Plan for Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands King and Tanner Crabs (Crab FMP) and a regulatory amendment to revise regulations implementing the American Fisheries Act (AFA) Program and the Crab Rationalization (CR) Program. This proposed rule would revise how NMFS determines the amount of limited access privileges held and used by groups in the Western Alaska Community Development Quota Program (CDQ Program) for the purposes of managing the excessive share limits under the AFA Program and the CR Program. This proposed rule is necessary to align regulations and the Crab FMP to be consistent with an amendment to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and NMFS' current method of managing excessive share limits for CDQ groups in the AFA Program and the CR Program. This proposed rule is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Crab FMP, and other applicable law.

          DATES:
          Submit comments on or before September 21, 2017.

          ADDRESSES:
          Submit comments, identified by docket number NOAA-NMFS-2017-0038, by either of the following methods:
          • Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2017-0038, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668.

            Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

          Electronic copies of Amendment 48 to the Crab FMP, the Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and the Categorical Exclusion prepared for this proposed action are available from http://www.regulations.gov or from the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.

          The CR Program Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), RIR, and Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, as well as the AFA Program EIS and RIR, are available from the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Keeley Kent, 907-586-7228.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Authority for Action

        NMFS manages the pollock fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off Alaska under the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI FMP). NMFS manages the king and Tanner crab fisheries in the U.S. EEZ of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) under the Crab FMP. The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared, and NMFS approved, the BSAI FMP and the Crab FMP under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations governing and implementing the BSAI FMP appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 679. Regulations governing and implementing the Crab FMP appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 680.

        A notice of availability for Amendment 48 to the Crab FMP was published in the Federal Register on August 3, 2017. Comment on Amendment 48 is invited through October 2, 2017. All relevant written comments received by the end of the comment period, whether specifically directed to the FMP amendment, this proposed rule, or both, will be considered in the approval/disapproval decision for Amendment 48 and addressed in the response to comments in the final rule.
        Background

        This proposed rule would modify regulations that specify how NMFS determines holding and use of limited access privileges (LAPs) for the purposes of managing excessive share limits for CDQ groups under the AFA Program and the CR Program. The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires NMFS to establish excessive share limits to prevent excessive consolidation of harvesting and processing LAPs in order to maintain an appropriate distribution of economic and social benefits for fishery participants and communities. NMFS has adopted regulations under its LAP programs to ensure that no person holds or uses more LAPs than authorized under excessive share limits established for each LAP program. Section 305(i) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act describes the Western Alaska Community Development Quota Program (CDQ Program) (16 U.S.C. 1855(i)). Regulations at 50 CFR 679.2 define the term “CDQ group” as an entity identified as eligible for the CDQ Program under 16 U.S.C. 1855(i)(1)(D).

        This proposed rule would revise the regulations that prescribe the calculation of excessive share limits for CDQ groups for two LAP programs: The AFA Program and the CR Program. CDQ groups participate in LAP programs, including the AFA and the CR Program, by purchasing harvesting and processing privileges and through ownership of vessels and processors that participate in these fisheries. The Magnuson-Stevens Act was amended by the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-241; the Coast Guard Act) to specify the method that NMFS must use for monitoring excessive share limits as they apply to CDQ groups—the proportional or “individual and collective” rule. Section 305(i)(1)(F)(i) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, as amended by the Coast Guard Act, provides that CDQ groups shall be subject to any excessive share ownership, harvesting, or processing limitations in the fisheries of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area only to the extent of the CDQ group's proportional ownership (16 U.S.C. 1855(i)(1)(F)(i)).
        NMFS has implemented in practice the method specified in the 2006 amendment to the Magnuson-Stevens Act for CDQ groups to monitor excessive share limits in the AFA Program and the CR Program; however, the regulations for the AFA Program and the CR Program and the Crab FMP have not been revised to be consistent with the 2006 amendment to the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
        The following sections describe (1) excessive share limits, which are also called holding and use caps, (2) AFA Program use caps, (3) CR Program holding and use caps, (4) CDQ Program holding and use caps, and (5) this proposed rule and the anticipated effects of the action.
        Excessive Share Limits
        Section 301(a)(4) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act specifies that if conservation and management measures allocate or assign fishing privileges, the measures must be carried out so that no particular individual, corporation, or other entity acquires an excessive share of such privileges (16 U.S.C. 1851(a)(4)). Section 303A(c)(5)(D) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act requires regional fishery management councils to establish excessive share limits for LAP programs to prevent excessive accumulation of privileges by participants in the LAP programs (16 U.S.C. 1853a(c)(5)(D)). The intent of these limits or caps is to prevent excessive consolidation in the harvesting and processing sectors in order to maintain an appropriate distribution of economic and social benefits for fishery participants and communities. Because determination of excessive shares must consider the specific circumstances of each fishery, the Council has implemented different excessive share limits in the LAP programs in Alaska's fisheries, including the AFA and CR Programs.
        NMFS implemented use caps for the AFA Program in 2002 (67 FR 79692; December 30, 2002) and holding and use caps for the CR Program in 2005 (70 FR 10174; March 2, 2005). The regulations prohibit a person from using more than the harvesting and processing limits established in the AFA Program and from holding and using more than a specific portion of the LAPs allocated under the CR Program. Under 50 CFR 679.2, “person” includes individuals, corporations, partnerships, associations, and other non-individual entities. To monitor holdings and use of LAPs, NMFS determines what portion of a program's harvesting and processing privileges a person holds and uses to ensure that no person holds or uses more privileges than authorized by the applicable excessive share cap.
        NMFS determines a person's holding and use of a LAP in the AFA Program and CR Program by summing (1) the amount directly held and used by that person, and (2) the amount held and used by that person indirectly through an ownership interest in or control of another entity that also holds and uses the LAP. Businesses that hold and use LAPs in the AFA Program and the CR Program are often composed of multiple owners that have ownership interests in multiple fishing businesses. In cases where a LAP is held by a business entity with more than one owner, NMFS applies the holding and use caps to each entity that holds or controls the LAP to monitor whether those entities each exceed the established caps. Ownership attribution refers to the method NMFS uses to assess the relationships between different entities that participate in LAP programs.
        NMFS uses two ownership attribution methods to determine holdings and use of LAPs. These two methods for attributing ownership and use of a LAP are commonly known as the “individual and collective rule” and the “10-percent rule.” Under the individual and collective rule, NMFS attributes holding and use of LAPs by one person proportionally to their ownership in or control of another entity that holds and uses LAPs. For example, if Company A has a 15 percent ownership of Company B that holds LAPs, Company A would be attributed 15 percent of Company B's holding and use of the LAPs. In contrast, under the 10-percent rule, a person is attributed 100 percent of an entity's LAPs if that person owns or otherwise controls ten percent or more of that entity. Thus, if Company A holds or controls 10 percent or more of Company B, then 100 percent of Company B's holdings and use of LAPs are attributed to Company A. When a person owns or controls 10 percent or more of another entity, the individual and collective rule is less restrictive than the 10-percent rule because a person is only attributed holding and use in proportion to how much that person owns or controls of other entities, rather than attributing 100 percent of the other entity's LAP holdings once the 10-percent ownership or control threshold is met. Thus, under a holding and use cap, the individual and collective rule would allow a person to hold and use more LAPs than if the person was evaluated using the 10-percent rule.
        AFA Program Use Caps

        Congress passed the AFA in October 1998 to implement additional U.S. ownership requirements for vessels harvesting fish from the EEZ. The purpose of the AFA was to tighten U.S. ownership standards that had been exploited under the Commercial Fishing Industry Vessel Anti-Reflagging Act of 1987 (Pub. L. 100-239) and to provide the BSAI pollock fleet the opportunity to conduct their fishery in a more rational manner (i.e., stopping the race for fish) while protecting non-AFA participants in the other fisheries. The AFA established sector allocations in the BSAI pollock fishery, determined eligible vessels and processors, allowed for the formation of cooperatives, set limits on the participation of AFA vessels in other fisheries, and imposed special catch weighing and monitoring requirements on AFA vessels. The AFA also divided the available BSAI pollock directed fishing allowance among three harvesting sectors, after CDQ allocations and an amount for incidental catch of pollock by non-AFA vessels were deducted.

        Section 210(e) of the AFA set out excessive harvesting and processing limits for participants. Section 210(e)(1) of the AFA restricts an individual, corporation, or other entity to harvesting no more than 17.5 percent of the pollock available to be harvested in the directed pollock fishery. This limit is codified at 50 CFR 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(6). Every year, this limit is published in the annual harvest specifications (82 FR 11826; February 27, 2017).

        Section 210(e)(2) of the AFA directed the Council to create management measures to prevent any particular individual or entity from processing an excessive share of pollock available in the directed pollock fishery. The Council and NMFS set this limit at 30 percent of the sum of the directed fishing allowances for pollock. This limit is codified at 50 CFR 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(7). Every year, this limit is published in the annual harvest specifications (82 FR 11826; February 27, 2017).
        Section 210(e)(3) of the AFA also specified that any entity in which 10 percent or more of the interest is held or controlled by another individual or entity shall be considered to be the same entity as the other individual or entity for purposes of monitoring the harvesting and processing use caps. This section of the AFA directed NMFS to use the 10-percent rule to determine the use of AFA Program harvesting and processing privileges. NMFS implemented this AFA requirement in part by defining an “AFA entity” at 50 CFR 679.2 as a group of affiliated individuals, corporations, or other business concerns that harvest or process pollock in the Bering Sea directed pollock fishery. The proposed rule to implement the AFA Program stated that the concept of “affiliation” is central to the definition of “AFA entity” (66 FR 65028, 65049; December 17, 2001). As the December 2001 proposed rule explained, “affiliation” means a relationship between two or more individuals, corporations, or other business concerns in which one concern directly or indirectly owns a 10 percent or greater interest in the other, exerts 10 percent or greater control over the other, or has the power to exert 10 percent or greater control over the other; or a third individual, corporation, or other business concern directly or indirectly owns a 10 percent or greater interest in both, exerts 10 percent or greater control over both, or has the power to exert 10 percent or greater control over both (see regulations at § 679.2 for the definition of “affiliation” and Section 2.6.3 of the RIR for more information).
        CR Program Use Caps
        The CR Program was implemented on April 1, 2005 (70 FR 10174; March 2, 2005). The CR Program established a LAP program for nine crab fisheries in the BSAI and assigned quota share (QS) to persons based on their historic participation in one or more of those nine BSAI crab fisheries during a specific period. Each year, a person who holds QS may receive an exclusive harvest privilege for a portion of the annual total allowable catch (TAC). This annual exclusive harvest privilege is called individual fishing quota (IFQ).
        NMFS also issued processor quota share (PQS) under the CR Program. Each year, PQS yields an exclusive privilege to process a portion of the IFQ in each of the nine BSAI crab fisheries. This annual exclusive processing privilege is called individual processor quota (IPQ). Only a portion of the QS issued yields IFQ that is required to be delivered to a processor with IPQ. Each year there is a one-to-one match of the total pounds of IFQ that must be delivered to a processor with IPQ with the total pounds of IPQ issued in each crab fishery.
        When the Council recommended the CR Program, it expressed concern about the potential for excessive consolidation of QS and PQS, in which too few persons control all of the QS or PQS and the resulting annual IFQ and IPQ. The Council determined that excessive consolidation could have adverse effects on crab markets, price setting negotiations between harvesters and processors, employment opportunities for harvesting and processing crew, tax revenue to communities in which crab are landed, and other factors considered and described in the CR Program EIS. To address this concern, the CR Program includes limits on the amount of QS and PQS that a person can hold and the amount of IFQ and IPQ that a person can use.
        The CR Program has QS and IFQ holding and use caps that vary by fishery because of different fleet characteristics and differences in historical dependency of participants on different crab fisheries. 50 CFR 680.42(a)(2) specifies that NMFS uses the individual and collective rule to apply holding and use caps for QS and IFQ for all CR Program participants, including CDQ groups, as recommended by the Council for monitoring harvesting privileges (see Section 2.7 of the RIR for more information).
        For processing privileges, the CR Program limits a person to holding no more than 30 percent of the PQS initially issued in the fishery, and to using no more than the amount of IPQ resulting from 30 percent of the PQS initially issued in a given fishery, with a limited exemption for persons receiving more than 30 percent of the initially-issued PQS (50 CFR 680.42(b)). 50 CFR 680.42(b)(3) specifies that NMFS uses the 10-percent rule to monitor holding and use caps for PQS and IPQ for all CR Program participants as recommended by the Council and addressed in the preamble to the proposed rule for the CR Program (69 FR 63200, 63219 & 63226; October 29, 2004).
        Use Caps for CDQ Groups
        The CDQ Program was established by the Council and NMFS in 1992, and in 1996, authorization for the Program was incorporated into the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The purpose of the CDQ Program is (1) to provide eligible western Alaska villages with the opportunity to participate and invest in fisheries in the BSAI, (2) to support economic development in western Alaska, (3) to alleviate poverty and provide economic and social benefits for residents of western Alaska, and (4) to achieve sustainable and diversified local economies in western Alaska (16 U.S.C. 1855(i)(1)(A)).
        Section 305(i) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act describes the CDQ Program and identifies the villages eligible to participate in the CDQ Program through the six entities specified in Section 305(i)(1)(D) as the CDQ groups (16 U.S.C. 1855(i)). Regulations at 50 CFR 679.2 define the term “CDQ group” as an entity identified as eligible for the CDQ Program under 16 U.S.C. 1855(i)(1)(D). The CDQ Program consists of six different non-profit managing organizations (CDQ groups) representing different geographical regions in Alaska. The CDQ Program receives annual allocations of TACs for a variety of commercially valuable species in the BSAI groundfish, crab, and halibut fisheries, which are in turn allocated among the CDQ groups (see Section 2.8 of the RIR).

        The Secretary of Commerce approved regulations establishing the CDQ Program pollock allocation (57 FR 54936; November 23, 1992). When the AFA Program was implemented, the CDQ Program received an allocation of 10 percent of the Bering Sea pollock TAC (67 FR 79692, 79696; December 30, 2002). CDQ groups participate in the AFA Program primarily through ownership (wholly or partially) in vessels authorized to fish for Bering Sea pollock under the AFA. Vessel ownership varies by CDQ group (see Section 2.8.1 of the RIR). When the CR Program was implemented in 2005, the CDQ Program received an allocation of 10 percent of the TACs for some CR Program fisheries (70 FR 10174, 10176-77; March 2, 2005). In addition to the CDQ allocations, the CDQ groups hold QS and PQS directly as well as indirectly through ownership in other entities that hold QS and PQS (see Section 2.8.3 of the RIR).

        Need for This Proposed Rule
        In 2006, Congress passed the Coast Guard Act (Pub. L. 109-241), which amended the CDQ Program to give CDQ groups and their communities greater autonomy based on recommendations from the State of Alaska's Blue Ribbon Panel. Section 416(a) of the Coast Guard Act revised section 305(i) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and made significant changes to the management and oversight of the CDQ Program. The amendments to section 305(i) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act were intended to promote the ability of CDQ groups to responsibly manage their allocations similar to the LAPs provided by NMFS to most other participants in the BSAI fisheries, while promoting the goals of the CDQ Program (see Section 2.8 of the RIR).

        The Coast Guard Act also revised section 305(i)(1)(F)(i) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act to specify that CDQ groups would be subject to excessive share ownership, harvesting, and processing limitations proportional to their ownership of entities holding such privileges (i.e., holdings and use of LAPs by CDQ groups are to be determined by the “individual and collective rule”) (16 U.S.C. 1855(i)(1)(F)(i)). This requires NMFS to use the individual and collective rule to determine holding and use of harvesting and processing privileges for CDQ groups under all LAP programs in the BSAI. After the 2006 amendment to the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS reviewed its methods for determining holding and use of harvesting and processing privileges in all LAP programs in the BSAI and determined that modifications were required for the methods used to determine CDQ group holdings and use for (1) harvesting and processing privileges under the AFA and (2) PQS and IPQ under the CR Program. These modifications were required because the regulations implementing these programs specified that NMFS would use the 10-percent rule to determine holding and use of these harvesting and processing privileges for CDQ groups.
        This Proposed Rule and Its Anticipated Effects
        This proposed rule would revise 50 CFR 679.2, 679.7(k)(6) and (7), 680.2, and 680.42(b).
        This proposed rule would revise the AFA Program to specify that NMFS uses the individual and collective rule for CDQ groups to attribute harvesting and processing privileges of AFA pollock proportionally to the CDQ groups' ownership of vessels and processors active in those fisheries. For example, if a CDQ group holds 15 percent ownership of an entity that holds and uses AFA harvesting and processing privileges, this proposed rule would specify that the CDQ group is attributed 15 percent of the harvest or processing privileges of that company for purposes of monitoring excessive harvesting and processing use caps under the AFA.
        The proposed rule would also implement Amendment 48 to the Crab FMP and revise the CR Program to specify that NMFS uses the individual and collective rule for CDQ groups to attribute holding and use of PQS and IPQ based on the CDQ groups' proportional ownership of entities that hold and use PQS and IPQ. For example, if a CDQ group holds 15 percent ownership of a company that holds or uses PQS or IPQ, this proposed rule would specify that the CDQ group is attributed 15 percent of the holding or use of that PQS or IPQ. The proposed rule would not alter the regulations for the QS and IFQ holding and use caps under the CR Program because current CR Program regulations specify that NMFS uses the individual and collective rule for all program participants, including CDQ groups, to attribute any participants' holding and use of QS and IFQ based on their proportional ownership of entities that hold and use QS and IFQ.
        NMFS has used the individual and collective rule for CDQ group ownership attribution for both the AFA Program and the CR Program since enactment of the Coast Guard Act; however, the regulations and the Crab FMP have not been updated to reflect this change. This proposed rule would update the regulations and the Crab FMP to be consistent with NMFS' current method of ownership attribution for CDQ groups and the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This proposed rule would benefit CDQ groups and the public by clarifying the method NMFS uses to attribute holding and use of harvesting and processing privileges by CDQ groups for purposes of monitoring holding and use caps for the AFA and CR Programs.
        Classification
        Pursuant to sections 304(b)(1)(A) and 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with Amendment 48, the Crab FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration of comments received during the public comment period.
        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866. The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. NMFS requests comments on the decision to certify this proposed rule. The factual basis for this determination is as follows:
        This proposed action would revise regulations and the Crab FMP so that they are consistent with the ownership attribution method mandated by the Magnuson-Stevens Act for CDQ groups for monitoring limitations on the holding and use of harvesting and processing privileges in the AFA and CR Programs.
        The CDQ groups would be the directly regulated entities under the proposed regulatory revisions. All six of the CDQ groups are non-profit corporations and are considered small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. As NMFS, one of the agencies that manages these holding and use limitations, has already implemented these provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act in practice, this proposed action is not expected to materially change how any small entities are regulated, nor is the proposed action expected to impose significant compliance costs or materially change how any small entities comply with the applicable regulations. Rather, this proposed rule would benefit CDQ groups and the public by clarifying the method NMFS uses to attribute holding and use of harvesting and processing privileges by CDQ groups for purposes of monitoring holding and use caps for the AFA and CR Programs. This proposed action therefore is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of the small entities regulated by this proposed action—the CDQ groups. As a result, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required, and none has been prepared.

        The economic analysis contained in the RIR for this action (see ADDRESSES) further describes the regulatory and operational characteristics of the CDQ Program, including the participation of CDQ groups in the AFA Program and the CR Program, the history of this action, and the details of the alternatives considered for this action, including the preferred alternative.
        Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

        This rule references collection-of-information requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), which have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB Control Number 0648-0514. The annual application for a crab IFQ permit and the application for a crab IPQ permit are mentioned in this rule; however, there are no changes to these forms or to who is required to submit the forms for this proposed rule, and therefore there would be no change in burden or cost.

        Send comments on these or any other aspects of the collection of information, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES), and by email to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or fax to 202-395-5806.

        Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirement of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number. All currently approved NOAA collections of information may be viewed at: http://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/prasubs.html.

        Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With This Proposed Rule
        No relevant Federal rules have been identified that would duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed rule.

          List of Subjects
          50 CFR Part 679
          Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
          50 CFR Part 680
          Alaska, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: August 15, 2017.
          Samuel D. Rauch III,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

        For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50 CFR part 679 and part 680 as follows:

          PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA

        1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 679 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
           16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et seq.; 3631 et seq.; Pub. L. 108-447; Pub. L. 111-281.

        2. In § 679.2, revise the definitions for “AFA entity” and “Affiliation for the purpose of defining AFA and the Rockfish Program” to read as follows:

          § 679.2
          Definitions.

            AFA entity means a group of affiliated individuals, corporations, or other business concerns, except for a CDQ group, that harvests or processes pollock in the BS directed pollock fishery.

            Affiliation for the purpose of defining AFA and the Rockfish Program means a relationship between two or more individuals, corporations, or other business concerns, except CDQ groups, in which one concern directly or indirectly owns a 10 percent or greater interest in another, exerts control over another, or has the power to exert control over another; or a third individual, corporation, or other business concern directly or indirectly owns a 10 percent or greater interest in both, exerts control over both, or has the power to exert control over both.

        3. In § 679.7 revise paragraphs (k)(6) and (k)(7) to read as follows:

          § 679.7
          Prohibitions.

          (k) * * *
          (6) Excessive harvesting shares. It is unlawful for an AFA entity or a CDQ group to harvest, through a fishery cooperative or otherwise, an amount of BS pollock that exceeds the 17.5 percent excessive share limit specified under § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(6). A CDQ group's harvest of BS pollock will be calculated through its proportional ownership of individuals, corporations, or other business concerns that harvest BS pollock. The owners and operators of the individual vessels comprising the AFA entity or CDQ group that harvest BS pollock will be held jointly and severally liable for exceeding the excessive harvesting share limit.
          (7) Excessive processing shares. It is unlawful for an AFA entity or a CDQ group to process an amount of BS pollock that exceeds the 30-percent excessive share limit specified under § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(7). The amount of BS pollock processed by a CDQ group will be calculated through its proportional ownership of individuals, corporations, or other business concerns that process BS pollock. The owners and operators of the individual processors comprising the AFA entity or CDQ group that process BS pollock will be held jointly and severally liable for exceeding the excessive processing share limit.

          PART 680—SHELLFISH FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA

        4. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 680 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
           16 U.S.C. 1862; Pub. L. 109-241; Pub. L. 109-479.

        5. In § 680.2, revise the introductory text to the definition for “Affiliation” and the introductory text of paragraph (1) of the definition for “Affiliation” to read as follows:

          § 680.2
          Definitions.

            Affiliation means a relationship between two or more entities, except for CDQ groups, in which one directly or indirectly owns or controls a 10 percent or greater interest in, or otherwise controls, another, or a third entity directly or indirectly owns or controls a 10 percent or greater interest in, or otherwise controls, both. For the purpose of this definition, the following terms are further defined:
          (1) Entity. An entity may be an individual, corporation, association, partnership, joint-stock company, trust, or any other type of legal entity, except for a CDQ group, any receiver, trustee in bankruptcy or similar official or liquidating agent, or any organized group of persons whether incorporated or not, that holds direct or indirect interest in:

        6. In § 680.42, revise paragraphs (b)(3)(ii), (b)(3)(iii), and (b)(3)(iv) to read as follows:

          § 680.42
          Limitations on use of QS, PQS, IFQ, and IPQ.

          (b) * * *
          (3) * * *
          (ii) Is not a CDQ group and directly or indirectly owns a 10 percent or greater interest in an entity that holds PQS.

          (iii) A person that is not a CDQ group and holds PQS is limited to a PQS use cap that is calculated based on the sum of all PQS held by that PQS holder and all PQS held by any affiliate of the PQS holder. A CDQ group that holds PQS is limited to a PQS use cap that is calculated based on the sum of all PQS held, individually or collectively, by that CDQ group.

          (iv) A person that is not a CDQ group and holds IPQ is limited to an IPQ use cap that is calculated based on the sum of all IPQ held by that IPQ holder and all IPQ held by any affiliate of the IPQ holder. A CDQ group that holds IPQ is limited to an IPQ use cap that is calculated based on the sum of all IPQ held, individually or collectively, by that CDQ group.

      [FR Doc. 2017-17607 Filed 8-21-17; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 180
        [EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0006; FRL-9977-12]
        Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities; Correction

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Notice of filing of petitions; correction.

          SUMMARY:
          EPA issued a proposed rule in the Federal Register of March 21, 2018, concerning a Notice of filing—Amended Tolerance Exemptions for Inerts (Except PIPS). This document corrects the Company name and address.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Robert McNally, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (7511P); email address: BPPDFRNotices@epa.gov; Michael Goodis, Registration Division, (7505P); email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov; Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 305-7090.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        I. General Information
        A. Does this action apply to me?
        The Agency included in the March 21, 2018, (83 FR 12311) (FRL-9974-76) proposed rule a list of those who may be potentially affected by this action.
        B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

        The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0006, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

        II. What does this correction do?
        This document corrects the Company name and address.
        FR Doc. 2018-05639 published in the Federal Register of March 21, 2018 (83 FR 12311) (FRL-9974-76) is corrected as follows:
        1. On page 12312, second column, under the heading Notice of Filing—Amended Tolerance Exemptions for Inerts (Except PIPS), paragraph 1, line 4, correct Aceto Corporation, 4 Tri Harbor Court, Port Washington, NY 11050 to read Avian Enterprises Limited, LLC, 2000 Pontiac Drive Sylvan Lake, MI 48320.

          Authority:
          21 U.S.C. 346a.

          Dated: April 25, 2018.
          Hamaad A. Syed,
          Acting Director, Information Technology and Resources Management Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

      [FR Doc. 2018-10344 Filed 5-14-18; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 63
        [EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0747; FRL-9937-04-OAR]
        RIN 2060-AS13
        Oil and Natural Gas Sector: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Request for information.

          SUMMARY:
          This action requests information related to hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions from sources in the oil and natural gas production and natural gas transmission and storage segments of the oil and natural gas sector. In 2012, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revised the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Oil and Natural Gas Production Facilities and the Natural Gas Transmission and Storage Facilities major source categories. This action requests additional data and information that was not available at that time. In particular, we are requesting data on storage vessels without potential flash emissions (PFE) and data on HAP emissions from regulated small glycol dehydrators. With regard to the small glycol dehydrators we are particularly interested in data regarding any emissions of HAP other than benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX), information on available control options for any such HAP and information regarding a potential compliance demonstration issue with respect to the 2012 standards for small glycol dehydration units, as they apply to units with very low emissions.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before January 26, 2016.

          ADDRESSES:

          Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0747, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. 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, 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. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, EPA WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          For further information about this action, contact Mr. Matthew Witosky, Sector Policies and Programs Division (E143-05), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number: (919) 541-2865; facsimile number: (919) 541-3740; email address: witosky.matthew@epa.gov. For further information on the EPA's oil and natural gas sector regulatory program, contact Mr. Bruce Moore, Sector Policies and Programs Division (E143-05), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number: (919) 541-5460; facsimile number: (919) 541-3470; email address: moore.bruce@epa.gov. For additional contact information, see the following SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        I. General Information
        A. Does this action apply to me?
        Categories and entities potentially affected by this action include:

          TABLE 1—Industrial Source Categories Affected by This Action

            Category
            NAICS code 1

            Examples of regulated entities

            Industry
            211111
            Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas Extraction.

            211112
            Natural Gas Liquid Extraction.

            221210
            Natural Gas Distribution.

            486110
            Pipeline Distribution of Crude Oil.

            486210
            Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas.

            Federal government

            Not affected.

            State/local/tribal government

            Not affected.

            1 North American Industry Classification System.

        This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather is meant to provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult either the air permitting authority for the entity or your EPA Regional representative as listed in 40 CFR 60.4 or 40 CFR 63.13 (General Provisions).
        B. What should I consider as I prepare my information/comments to the EPA?

        Do not submit information containing CBI to the EPA through www.regulations.gov or email. Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the following address: OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-02), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0747. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
        II. Background
        In 2012, the EPA issued a final rule titled “Oil and Natural Gas Sector: New Source Performance Standards and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Reviews,” 77 FR 49490 (August 16, 2012). The final rule contains final actions on two different national standards for the oil and natural gas industry promulgated by the EPA under the Clean Air Act (CAA): (1) The new source performance standards (NSPS), promulgated under section 111 of the CAA, and (2) the NESHAP, promulgated under section 112 of the CAA. The NESHAP portion of the final rule (“the 2012 NESHAP revisions”) included the EPA's residual risk and technology review of the NESHAP for the Oil and Natural Gas Production Facilities and the NESHAP for the Natural Gas Transmission and Storage Facilities major source categories (40 CFR part 63 subpart HH 1
           and HHH, respectively) pursuant to sections 112(f)(2) and (d)(6) of the CAA. In addition, pursuant to section 112(d)(2) and (3) of the CAA, the EPA established emission standards for BTEX based on maximum achievable control technology (MACT) for a subcategory of glycol dehydrators referred to as the “small glycol dehydration units.”

            1 40 CFR part 63, subpart HH also includes standards for certain area source glycol dehydration units, which were not a subject of the 2012 NESHAP revisions.

        This request is to obtain additional data and information. We are interested in receiving information on HAP emissions from some affected facilities in the oil and natural gas production, and the natural gas transmission and storage segments of the oil and natural gas sector. In particular, the EPA is interested in the following information:
        1. HAP emissions from storage vessels without PFE from the oil and natural gas production segment;
        2. Emission information on HAP other than BTEX from small glycol dehydrators and available control options.
        In addition, the EPA recently learned of a potential compliance demonstration issue with respect to the 2012 BTEX MACT standards for small glycol dehydration units as they apply to units with very low BTEX emissions. The EPA is also soliciting comment and information related to this issue. The Agency also requests any additional relevant information for sources covered by the NESHAP.
        Section III of this action discusses in more detail the information identified above. The EPA is providing a 60-day period for the public to submit the requested information.
        III. Solicitation of Data and Comments
        The following presents the issues on which we are particularly interested in receiving feedback, data, and information.
        A. Storage Vessels Without Potential Flash Emissions
        We request available data on storage vessels without PFE. Crude oil, condensate, and produced water are typically stored in fixed-roof storage vessels. Some vessels used for storing produced water may be open-top tanks. These fixed-roof vessels, which are operated at or near atmospheric pressure conditions, are typically located in tank batteries at well sites and at centralized gathering facilities. A tank battery refers to the collection of process components used to separate, treat, and store crude oil, condensate, intermediate hydrocarbon liquids, and produced water. The extracted products from production wells enter the tank battery through the production header, which may collect product from many wells.
        Emissions from storage vessels are a result of working, breathing, and flash losses. Working losses occur due to the emptying and filling of storage vessels. Breathing losses are the release of gas associated with daily temperature fluctuations and other equilibrium effects. Flash losses occur when a liquid with entrained gases is transferred from a vessel with higher pressure to a vessel with lower pressure, and thus, allowing entrained gases or a portion of the liquid to vaporize or flash. In the oil and natural gas production segment, flashing losses occur when crude oil or condensate flows into a storage vessel from a processing vessel operated at a higher pressure. Typically, the larger the pressure drop, the more flash emissions will occur in the storage vessel. Temperature of the liquid may also influence the amount of flash emissions.
        In 1999, the EPA promulgated the NESHAP for the Oil and Natural Gas Production Facilities major source category (40 CFR part 63, subpart HH). The 1999 NESHAP included the MACT standards for storage vessels with PFE, which are defined in subpart HH, 40 CFR 63.761.

        The 1999 NESHAP left unregulated storage vessels without PFE (i.e., storage vessels that do not meet the above definition). In the 2011 proposal to revise the Oil and Natural Gas NESHAP,2
           the EPA proposed MACT standards for storage vessels without PFE pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(2) and (3), but did not take final action on that proposal. As explained in the preamble to the 2012 NESHAP revisions, “we need (and intend to gather) additional data on these sources in order to analyze and establish MACT emission standards for this subcategory of storage vessels under section 112(d)(2) and (3) of the CAA.” 77 FR 49503.

            2 Proposed Rule, Oil and Natural Gas Sector: New Source Performance Standards and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Reviews, 76 FR 52738 (August 23, 2011).

        We request available data regarding storage vessels without PFE. In particular, we are interested in data and other relevant information characterizing emissions and emission rates of storage vessels in the oil and natural gas production segment that do not have PFE, but that nonetheless emit HAP. We also request information on technologies and/or practices for reducing emissions from storage vessels without PFE.
        B. Studies of HAP Emissions From Small Glycol Dehydrators
        The EPA is specifically interested in receiving data for units with low inlet concentration of BTEX and the amount of these HAP emissions from small glycol dehydration units. In 2012, pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(2) and (3), the EPA revised 40 CFR part 63, subparts HH and HHH to include MACT standards for “small glycol dehydration units.” See 40 CFR 63.761 and 63.1271. The standards for both existing and new sources of small glycol dehydration units are in the form of a unit-specific BTEX emission limit determined by the equations provided in that subpart.
        The EPA recently learned of a potential compliance demonstration issue for certain small glycol dehydration units with very low BTEX emissions. Specifically, we were informed that for certain small glycol dehydrators that operate with low BTEX inlet concentrations, the equations may result in emission standards that are below the detection limit for the reference method used for compliance purposes. If there are units that fit this criterion, it is theoretically possible that neither the source nor the EPA could verify compliance using the methods specified in the rule. To enable us to fully evaluate this issue, we are requesting source data that demonstrates whether compliance with the standard can be verified at small glycol dehydration units for which this is a potential issue. We request that commenters submit estimates on the number of units where this is a potential problem and the data showing the HAP inlet concentrations for these units.3

            3 The EPA is not requesting information that would identify the units. Rather, we are requesting information demonstrating that for an affected facility, the applicable standard would be below the detection limit of the EPA method used to show compliance.

        We are also requesting information on emissions of HAP other than BTEX from small glycol dehydrators. As explained above, in the 2012 NESHAP revisions, the EPA established MACT standards for BTEX emitted from small glycol dehydration units. While our data indicate that there is potential for other HAP to be emitted from small glycol dehydration units, we do not have sufficient information to establish MACT standards for other HAP emitted from these units. We are, therefore, requesting data that show the types and quantities of HAP emissions other than BTEX from small glycol dehydration units. In addition to non-BTEX HAP emissions data, we are requesting information on methods employed to control these non-BTEX HAP, including whether BTEX control measures are an effective method for other non-BTEX HAP emitted by the units.

          Dated: November 3, 2015.
          Janet G. McCabe,
          Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation.

      [FR Doc. 2015-30103 Filed 11-25-15; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 300
        [EPA-HQ-SFUND-1990-0011; FRL-9780-5]
        National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan National Priorities List: Deletion of the Kerr-McGee (Sewage Treatment Plant) Superfund Site

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule: notice of intent.

          SUMMARY:
          The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 5 is issuing a Notice of Intent to Delete the Kerr-McGee Sewage Treatment Plant Superfund Site located in West Chicago, DuPage County, Illinois from the National Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comments on this proposed action. The NPL, promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an appendix of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). EPA and the State of Illinois, through the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA), have determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been completed. However, this deletion does not preclude future actions under Superfund.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received by March 21, 2013.

          ADDRESSES:
          Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-1990-0011, by one of the following methods:
          • http://www.regulations.gov: Follow online instructions for submitting comments.
          • Email: Gladys Beard, NPL Deletion Process Manager, at beard.gladys@epa.gov or Janet Pope, Community Involvement Coordinator, at pope.janet@epa.gov.
          • Fax: Gladys Beard, NPL Deletion Process Manager, at (312) 697-2077.
          • Mail: Timothy Fischer, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (SR-6J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886-7253, or Janet Pope, Community Involvement Coordinator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (SI-7J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 353-0628 or (800) 621-8431.
          • Hand delivery: Janet Pope, Community Involvement Coordinator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (SI-7J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The normal business hours are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. CST, excluding federal holidays.

            Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-1990-0011. 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 information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or email. 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 email comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email 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.

            Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information may not be publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in the hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:
          • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, Phone: (312) 353-1063.  Hours: Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. CST, excluding federal holidays.
          • West Chicago Public Library, 118 West Washington Street, West Chicago, IL 60185, Phone: (630) 231-1552. Hours: Monday through Thursday, 9:30 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. CST, Friday and Saturday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. CST, Sunday, 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. CST.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Timothy Fischer, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (SR-6J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886-4737, or fischer.timothy@epa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        In the “Rules and Regulations” section of today's Federal Register, we are publishing a direct final Notice of Deletion of the Kerr-McGee (Sewage Treatment Plant) Superfund Site without prior Notice of Intent to Delete because we view this as a noncontroversial revision and anticipate no adverse comment. We have explained our reasons for this deletion in the preamble to the direct final Notice of Deletion, and those reasons are incorporated herein. If we receive no adverse comment(s) on this deletion action, we will not take further action on this Notice of Intent to Delete. If we receive adverse comment(s), we will withdraw the direct final Notice of Deletion, and it will not take effect. We will, as appropriate, address all public comments in a subsequent final Notice of Deletion based on this Notice of Intent to Delete. We will not institute a second comment period on this Notice of Intent to Delete. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.

        For additional information, see the direct final Notice of Deletion which is located in the “Rules and Regulations” section of this Federal Register.

          List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
          Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Radiation protection, Radionuclides, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water pollution control, and Water supply.

          Authority:
           33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.

          Dated: January 28, 2013.
          Susan Hedman,
          Regional Administrator, Region 5.

      [FR Doc. 2013-03602 Filed 2-15-13; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
        10 CFR Parts 430 and 431
        [EERE-2018-BT-STD-0018]
        Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Furnaces and Commercial Water Heaters

          AGENCY:
          Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.

          ACTION:
          Notice of petition for rulemaking; extension of public comment period.

          SUMMARY:

          On November 1, 2018, the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) published in the Federal Register a notice of petition for rulemaking and request for comment regarding whether DOE should issue an interpretive rule stating that DOE's proposed energy conservation standards for residential furnaces and commercial water heaters would result in the unavailability of “performance characteristics” within the meaning of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended, and withdraw its proposals for amended standards for those products/equipment based upon such findings. The comment period in that notice was set to close on January 30, 2019. In the intervening period, DOE received two requests from interested parties seeking an extension of the comment period in order to develop additional data relevant to the petition. This notice announces an extension of the public comment period for submitting comments in response to that notice of petition for rulemaking. The comment period is hereby extended by 30 days to March 1, 2019.

          DATES:
          The comment period for the notice of petition for rulemaking and request for comment published on November 1, 2018 (83 FR 54883) is extended. Written comments and information are requested and will be accepted on or before March 1, 2019.

          ADDRESSES:
          Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments, identified by “Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Furnaces and Commercial Water Heaters” and Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-0018, by any of the following methods:
          1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          2. Email: ResFurnaceCommWaterHeater2018STD0018@ee.doe.gov. Include Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-0018 in the subject line of the message.
          3. Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC, 20585-0121. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc (“CD”), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
          4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC, 20024. Telephone: (202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
          No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted.

            Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for review at http://www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available. The docket web page can be found at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2018-BT-STD-0018. The docket web page contains instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-5827. Email: Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        On November 1, 2018, the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) published in the Federal Register a notice of petition for rulemaking and request for comment regarding whether DOE should issue an interpretive rule stating that DOE's proposed energy conservation standards for residential furnaces and commercial water heaters would result in the unavailability of “performance characteristics” within the meaning of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 6291 et seq.) and withdraw its proposals for amended standards for such products/equipment based upon such findings (the “notice of petition”). 83 FR 54883. (The notice of petition can be found at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2018-BT-STD-0018-0002.) The document provided for submitting written comments and information by January 30, 2019. In the intervening period, DOE has received a request from the Natural Resources Defense Council; Earthjustice; Appliance Standards Awareness Project; American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy; Consumer Federation of America; Alliance to Save Energy; National Consumer Law Center; and Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships (jointly the “Joint Commenters”) dated January 18, 2019, to provide an additional 30 days to submit comments pertaining to the notice of petition. DOE also received a separate request from the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) dated January 18, 2019, which similarly requested a 30-day comment period extension until March 1, 2019. These requests can be found at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2018-BT-STD-0018-0008 and https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2018-STD-0018-0009, respectively. Both requests stated that additional time is needed to develop data and information relevant to consideration of the petition, and NEEA specifically referenced a market research study they had commissioned which is nearing completion.
        An extension of the comment period would allow additional time for the Joint Commenters, NEEA, and other interested parties to consider the issues presented in the notice of petition, gather any additional data and information, and submit comments to DOE.

        In light of the requests from the Joint Commenters and NEEA, DOE has determined that a 30-day extension of the public comment period is appropriate. Accordingly, the comment period is extended to March 1, 2019.

          Signed in Washington, DC, on January 23, 2019.
          Daniel R Simmons,
          Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

      [FR Doc. 2019-00257 Filed 1-28-19; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 6450-01-P