Proposed Settlement Agreement, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit, 67814-67815 [2012-27704]
Download as PDF
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
67814
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 14, 2012 / Notices
Discussion
Following Department of Energy
guidelines, Southwestern prepared a
2012 Current Power Repayment Study
using the existing Sam Rayburn Dam
Project rate schedule. The study shows
the cumulative amortization through FY
2011 at $24,993,504 on a total
investment of $30,254,778. The FY 2012
Revised Power Repayment Study
indicates the need for an increase in
annual revenues of $193,896, or 4.9
percent, to meet repayment criteria.
Southwestern deferred the indicated
rate adjustment because it fell within
Southwestern’s plus-or-minus five
percent isolated project rate adjustment
threshold and proposed extending the
current rate through September 30,
2013. The threshold was developed to
add efficiency to the process of
maintaining adequate rates and is
consistent with cost recovery criteria
within DOE Order Number RA 6120.2
regarding rate adjustment plans. The
extension is required because the
current rate expires September 30, 2012.
Southwestern will reevaluate the ability
of the existing rate to provide sufficient
revenues to satisfy costs projected in the
FY 2013 Power Repayment Studies.
Title 10, Part 903, Subpart A of the
Code of Federal Regulations,
‘‘Procedures for Public Participation in
Power and Transmission Rate
Adjustments and Extensions,’’ has been
followed in connection with the rate
extension. Opportunities for public
review and comment during a 30-day
period on the proposed Rayburn power
rate extension were announced by a
Federal Register (77 FR 50493) notice
published on August 21, 2012. Written
comments were accepted through
September 20, 2012. Southwestern
provided the Federal Register notice to
the customer and interested parties for
review and comment during the formal
period of public participation. In
addition, prior to the formal 30-day
public participation process,
Southwestern discussed with the
customer representatives the proposed
rate extension. Only one formal
comment was received from Gillis &
Angley, LLP, Counsellors at Law, on
behalf of Sam Rayburn Dam Electric
Cooperative, Inc., which stated that they
had no objection to the proposed rate
extension.
Upon conclusion of the comment
period in September 2012,
Southwestern finalized the rate
schedule extension for the annual rate
of $3,949,872 to be extended for one
year through September 30, 2013. This
rate extension will allow the FY 2013
Power Repayment Studies to evaluate
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:41 Nov 13, 2012
Jkt 229001
the ability of the existing rate to provide
sufficient revenues to accomplish
repayment in the required number of
years.
Comments and Responses
Southwestern received one comment
during the public comment period. The
comment, on behalf of Sam Rayburn
Dam Electric Cooperative, Inc.,
expressed no objection to the rate
extension through September 30, 2013.
Order
In view of the foregoing and pursuant
to the authority to extend rates,
previously confirmed and approved by
FERC, on an interim basis, of Title 10,
Part 903, Subpart A of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR part 903),
Sections 903.22(h) and 903.23(a)(3), I
hereby extend on an interim basis, for
the period of one year, effective October
1, 2012 through September 30, 2013,the
current FERC approved Sam Rayburn
Dam Project Rate for the sale of power
and energy.
Dated: November 7, 2012.
Daniel B. Poneman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–27674 Filed 11–13–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–9751–7]
Proposed Settlement Agreement,
Clean Air Act Citizen Suit
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed settlement
agreement; request for public comment.
AGENCY:
In accordance with section
113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as amended
(‘‘CAA’’ or the ‘‘Act’’), notice is hereby
given of a proposed settlement to
address a lawsuit filed by Public Service
Company of Oklahoma (‘‘Plaintiff’’) in
the United States Appeals Court for the
Tenth Circuit: Public Service Company
of Oklahoma v. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, et al., No. 12–9524.
On February 24, 2011, Plaintiff timely
filed a Petition for Review, challenging
the issuance of EPA’s final rule entitled,
‘‘Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Oklahoma;
Federal Implementation Plan for
Interstate Transport of Pollution
Affecting Visibility and Best Available
Retrofit Technology Determinations,’’ 76
FR 81,728 (Dec. 28, 2011) (the ‘‘Final
Rule’’). The Final Rule partially
approved and partially disapproved
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Oklahoma’s state implementation plan
(‘‘SIP’’) submitted under the ‘‘visibility’’
and ‘‘interstate transport’’ provisions of
the Clean Air Act (‘‘CAA’’). The Final
Rule included a federal implementation
plan (‘‘FIP’’) establishing Best Available
Retrofit Technology (‘‘BART’’) emission
limitations on sulfur dioxide (‘‘SO2’’) for
Units 3 and 4 of Plaintiff’s Northeastern
plant (‘‘Plaintiff’s Units’’) to address the
visibility and interstate transport
provisions of the CAA. On March 26,
2012, Sierra Club (‘‘Intervenor’’) filed a
timely motion to intervene. The motion
was granted March 27, 2012. The
proposed settlement agreement
establishes a deadline for EPA to take
action on a SIP to be drafted and
submitted by Oklahoma addressing
Plaintiff’s Units.
DATES: Written comments on the
proposed settlement agreement must be
received by December 14, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OGC–2012–0826, online at
www.regulations.gov (EPA’s preferred
method); by email to
oei.docket@epa.gov; by mail to EPA
Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; or by
hand delivery or courier to EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. Comments on a disk or CD–
ROM should be formatted in Word or
ASCII file, avoiding the use of special
characters and any form of encryption,
and may be mailed to the mailing
address above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lea
Anderson, Air and Radiation Law Office
(2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460; telephone: (202) 564–5571;
fax number (202) 564–5603; email
address: anderson.lea@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Additional Information About the
Proposed Settlement Agreement
The proposed settlement agreement
would resolve a lawsuit challenging the
issuance of EPA’s final rule partially
approving and partially disapproving
Oklahoma’s SIP submitted under the
‘‘visibility’’ and ‘‘interstate transport’’
provisions of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7410,
7491, and 7492. The Final Rule
included a FIP establishing BART
emission limitations on SO2 for Units 3
and 4 of Plaintiff’s Northeastern plant to
address the visibility and interstate
E:\FR\FM\14NON1.SGM
14NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 14, 2012 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
transport provisions of the CAA.
Specifically, the proposed settlement
agreement outlines the timeframe in
which Oklahoma Department of
Environmental Quality (‘‘ODEQ’’)
develops and the Oklahoma Secretary of
Environment submits to EPA for review
SIP revisions containing specific
elements as spelled out in Attachment
A of the settlement agreement to address
the ‘‘visibility’’ and ‘‘interstate
transport’’ provisions of the CAA, 42
U.S.C. § 7410, 7491, and 7492. In turn,
the proposed settlement agreement
establishes a deadline for EPA to take
final action on Oklahoma’s visibility
and interstate transport SIP revisions
addressing Plaintiff’s units within six
months from the date of EPA’s
determination that the revisions meet
the requirements of the CAA consistent
with 42 U.S.C. 7410(k)(1)(B). Because
this Agreement requires ODEQ to
develop and propose SIP revisions and
the Oklahoma Secretary of Environment
(‘‘Secretary’’) to submit these SIP
revisions to EPA under the visibility
and interstate transport provisions of
the CAA, and because ODEQ and the
Secretary prefer to regulate Plaintiff
under such SIP revisions rather than
EPA’s FIP, ODEQ and the Secretary are
parties to the settlement agreement as
are the Plaintiff and the Intervenor.
After EPA fulfills its obligations under
the proposed settlement agreement,
Plaintiff, Intervenor, and EPA will file a
joint stipulation of dismissal of
Plaintiff’s Petition for Review.
For a period of thirty (30) days
following the date of publication of this
notice, the Agency will accept written
comments relating to the proposed
settlement agreement from persons who
were not named as parties or
intervenors to the litigation in question.
EPA or the Department of Justice may
withdraw or withhold consent to the
proposed settlement agreement if the
comments disclose facts or
considerations that indicate that such
consent is inappropriate, improper,
inadequate, or inconsistent with the
requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or
the Department of Justice determines
that consent to this settlement
agreement should be withdrawn, the
terms of the proposed settlement
agreement will be affirmed.
II. Additional Information About
Commenting on the Proposed
Settlement Agreement
How can I get a copy of the settlement
agreement?
The official public docket for this
action (identified by Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OGC–2012–0826) contains a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:41 Nov 13, 2012
Jkt 229001
copy of the proposed settlement
agreement. The official public docket is
available for public viewing at the
Office of Environmental Information
(OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket Center,
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA Docket Center 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 OEI Docket is (202) 566–
1752.
An electronic version of the public
docket is available through
www.regulations.gov. You may use
www.regulations.gov to submit or view
public comments, access the index
listing of the contents of the official
public docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are
available electronically. Once in the
system, key in the appropriate docket
identification number then select
‘‘search’’.
It is important to note that EPA’s
policy is that public comments, whether
submitted electronically or in paper,
will be made available for public
viewing online at www.regulations.gov
without change, unless the comment
contains copyrighted material, CBI, or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information
claimed as CBI and other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute
is not included in the official public
docket or in the electronic public
docket. EPA’s policy is that copyrighted
material, including copyrighted material
contained in a public comment, will not
be placed in EPA’s electronic public
docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public
docket. Although not all docket
materials may be available
electronically, you may still access any
of the publicly available docket
materials through the EPA Docket
Center.
How and to whom do I submit
comments?
You may submit comments as
provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Please ensure that your comments are
submitted within the specified comment
period. Comments received after the
close of the comment period will be
marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not required to
consider these late comments.
If you submit an electronic comment,
EPA recommends that you include your
name, mailing address, and an email
address or other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD ROM you submit. This
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
67815
ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows
EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot
read your comment due to technical
difficulties or needs further information
on the substance of your comment. Any
identifying or contact information
provided in the body of a comment will
be included as part of the comment that
is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA’s electronic
public docket. 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.
Use of the www.regulations.gov Web
site to submit comments to EPA
electronically is EPA’s preferred method
for receiving comments. The electronic
public docket system is an ‘‘anonymous
access’’ system, which means EPA will
not know your identity, email address,
or other contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
In contrast to EPA’s electronic public
docket, EPA’s electronic mail (email)
system is not an ‘‘anonymous access’’
system. If you send an email comment
directly to the Docket without going
through www.regulations.gov, your
email address is automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA’s
electronic public docket.
Lorie J. Schmidt,
Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2012–27704 Filed 11–13–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
Federal Advisory Committee Act;
Communications Security, Reliability,
and Interoperability Council
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of public meeting.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, this
notice advises interested persons that
the Federal Communications
Commission’s (FCC) Communications
Security, Reliability, and
Interoperability Council (CSRIC) will
hold its sixth meeting. The Next
Generation Alerting Working Group,
DNSSEC Implementation Practices for
ISPs Working Group, Secure BGP
Deployment Working Group, and E 9–1–
1 Best Practices Working Group will be
presenting reports for a vote by the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\14NON1.SGM
14NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 220 (Wednesday, November 14, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67814-67815]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27704]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-9751-7]
Proposed Settlement Agreement, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed settlement agreement; request for public
comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (``CAA'' or the ``Act''), notice is hereby given of a proposed
settlement to address a lawsuit filed by Public Service Company of
Oklahoma (``Plaintiff'') in the United States Appeals Court for the
Tenth Circuit: Public Service Company of Oklahoma v. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, et al., No. 12-9524. On February 24, 2011, Plaintiff
timely filed a Petition for Review, challenging the issuance of EPA's
final rule entitled, ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation
Plans; Oklahoma; Federal Implementation Plan for Interstate Transport
of Pollution Affecting Visibility and Best Available Retrofit
Technology Determinations,'' 76 FR 81,728 (Dec. 28, 2011) (the ``Final
Rule''). The Final Rule partially approved and partially disapproved
Oklahoma's state implementation plan (``SIP'') submitted under the
``visibility'' and ``interstate transport'' provisions of the Clean Air
Act (``CAA''). The Final Rule included a federal implementation plan
(``FIP'') establishing Best Available Retrofit Technology (``BART'')
emission limitations on sulfur dioxide (``SO2'') for Units 3
and 4 of Plaintiff's Northeastern plant (``Plaintiff's Units'') to
address the visibility and interstate transport provisions of the CAA.
On March 26, 2012, Sierra Club (``Intervenor'') filed a timely motion
to intervene. The motion was granted March 27, 2012. The proposed
settlement agreement establishes a deadline for EPA to take action on a
SIP to be drafted and submitted by Oklahoma addressing Plaintiff's
Units.
DATES: Written comments on the proposed settlement agreement must be
received by December 14, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OGC-2012-0826, online at www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred method);
by email to oei.docket@epa.gov; by mail to EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; or by hand delivery or courier to
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. Comments on a disk or CD-ROM should be
formatted in Word or ASCII file, avoiding the use of special characters
and any form of encryption, and may be mailed to the mailing address
above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lea Anderson, Air and Radiation Law
Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone: (202) 564-5571; fax number (202) 564-5603; email address:
anderson.lea@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Additional Information About the Proposed Settlement Agreement
The proposed settlement agreement would resolve a lawsuit
challenging the issuance of EPA's final rule partially approving and
partially disapproving Oklahoma's SIP submitted under the
``visibility'' and ``interstate transport'' provisions of the CAA, 42
U.S.C. Sec. 7410, 7491, and 7492. The Final Rule included a FIP
establishing BART emission limitations on SO2 for Units 3
and 4 of Plaintiff's Northeastern plant to address the visibility and
interstate
[[Page 67815]]
transport provisions of the CAA. Specifically, the proposed settlement
agreement outlines the timeframe in which Oklahoma Department of
Environmental Quality (``ODEQ'') develops and the Oklahoma Secretary of
Environment submits to EPA for review SIP revisions containing specific
elements as spelled out in Attachment A of the settlement agreement to
address the ``visibility'' and ``interstate transport'' provisions of
the CAA, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7410, 7491, and 7492. In turn, the proposed
settlement agreement establishes a deadline for EPA to take final
action on Oklahoma's visibility and interstate transport SIP revisions
addressing Plaintiff's units within six months from the date of EPA's
determination that the revisions meet the requirements of the CAA
consistent with 42 U.S.C. 7410(k)(1)(B). Because this Agreement
requires ODEQ to develop and propose SIP revisions and the Oklahoma
Secretary of Environment (``Secretary'') to submit these SIP revisions
to EPA under the visibility and interstate transport provisions of the
CAA, and because ODEQ and the Secretary prefer to regulate Plaintiff
under such SIP revisions rather than EPA's FIP, ODEQ and the Secretary
are parties to the settlement agreement as are the Plaintiff and the
Intervenor. After EPA fulfills its obligations under the proposed
settlement agreement, Plaintiff, Intervenor, and EPA will file a joint
stipulation of dismissal of Plaintiff's Petition for Review.
For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication
of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the
proposed settlement agreement from persons who were not named as
parties or intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the
Department of Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed
settlement agreement if the comments disclose facts or considerations
that indicate that such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate,
or inconsistent with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the
Department of Justice determines that consent to this settlement
agreement should be withdrawn, the terms of the proposed settlement
agreement will be affirmed.
II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Settlement
Agreement
How can I get a copy of the settlement agreement?
The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2012-0826) contains a copy of the proposed settlement
agreement. The official public docket is available for public viewing
at the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA
Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center 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 OEI Docket is (202) 566-
1752.
An electronic version of the public docket is available through
www.regulations.gov. You may use www.regulations.gov to submit or view
public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the
official public docket, and to access those documents in the public
docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, key in
the appropriate docket identification number then select ``search''.
It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available
for public viewing online at www.regulations.gov without change, unless
the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information claimed as CBI
and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute is not
included in the official public docket or in the electronic public
docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material, including
copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not be placed
in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all
docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access
any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket
Center.
How and to whom do I submit comments?
You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD
ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or
contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included
as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. 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.
Use of the www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments to EPA
electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The
electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail
(email) system is not an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an
email comment directly to the Docket without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address is automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.
Lorie J. Schmidt,
Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2012-27704 Filed 11-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P