25236 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 83 / Tuesday, April 30, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1EPA issued a revised 8-hour ozone standard on 

March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436). On September 22, 

2011, EPA clarified that the current ozone standard 

is set at 75 ppb. EPA is not addressing the 2008 

ozone NAAQS in this rulemaking. 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: April 25, 2013, 

Martha Kanter, 

Under Secretary for Education. 

[FR Doc. 2013–10104 Filed 4–29–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0274, FRL–9807–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; New York; 

Infrastructure SIP for the 1997 8-Hour 

Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 Fine 

Particulate Matter Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

most elements of New York’s State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

submitted to demonstrate that the State 

meets the requirements of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA) for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

and the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA is 

also proposing to conditionally approve 

certain elements of New York’s 

submittals. The CAA requires that each 

state adopt and submit a SIP for the 

implementation, maintenance and 

enforcement of each NAAQS 

promulgated by the EPA and is 

commonly referred to as an 

infrastructure SIP. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 30, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID number EPA– 

R02–OAR–2013–0274, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Ruvo.Richard@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 212–637–3901. 

• Mail: Richard Ruvo, Acting Chief, 

Air Programs Branch, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007–1866. 

• Hand Delivery: Richard Ruvo, 

Acting Chief, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th 

Floor, New York, New York 10007– 

1866. Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Regional Office’s normal 

hours of operation. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 

excluding Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R02–OAR–2013– 

0274. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

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 www.regulations.gov 

or email. The 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 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. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

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 in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2 Office, Air Programs Branch, 

290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 

New York 10007–1866. EPA requests, if 

at all possible, that you contact the 

individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to view 

the hard copy of the docket. You may 

view the hard copy of the docket 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirk 

J. Wieber, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007–1866, (212) 637–4249, or by 

email at wieber.kirk@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. What action is EPA proposing? 

II. What is the background information? 

III. What is a section 110(a)(1) and (2) SIP? 

IV. What elements are required under section 

110(a)(1) and (2)? 

V. What did New York submit? 

VI. How has the State addressed the elements 

of the section 110(a)(1) and (2) 

‘‘infrastructure’’ provisions? 

VII. What action is EPA taking? 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA proposing? 

EPA is proposing to approve and 

conditionally approve elements of the 

State of New York Infrastructure SIP as 

meeting the section 110(a) infrastructure 

requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

for the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 

PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS or standards). As 

explained below, the State has the 

necessary infrastructure, resources, and 

general authority to implement the 1997 

8-hour ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

standards, except where specifically 

noted. 

II. What is the background 

information? 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated 

new and revised NAAQS for 8-hour 

ozone (62 FR 38856) and PM2.5 (62 FR 

38652). The ozone NAAQS is based on 

8-hour average concentrations. The 8- 

hour averaging period replaced the 

previous 1-hour averaging period, and 

the level of the NAAQS was changed 

from 0.12 parts per million (ppm) to 

0.08 ppm 1. The new PM2.5 NAAQS 

established a health-based standard of 

15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/ 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 83 / Tuesday, April 30, 2013 / Proposed Rules 25237 

2EPA issued a revised PM2.5 standard on January 

15, 2013 (78 FR 3086). EPA is not addressing the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in this rulemaking. 

3 ‘‘Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under 

Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour 

Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards’’ which can be found at http:// 

www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/ 

110a_sip_guid_fin100207.pdf and ‘‘Guidance on 

SIP Elements Required Under Sections 11O(a)(l) 

and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)’’ 

which can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ 

oarpg/t1/memoranda/ 

20090925_harnett_pm25_sip_110a12.pdf. 

m3) based on a 3-year average of annual 

mean PM2.5 concentrations, and a 24- 

hour standard of 65 mg/m3 based on a 

3-year average of the 98th percentile of 

24-hour concentrations. EPA 

strengthened the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

from 65 mg/m3 to 35 mg/m3 on October 

17, 2006 (71 FR 61144) 2. 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

states to submit State Implementation 

Plans (SIPs) that provide for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of new or revised NAAQS 

within three years following the 

promulgation of such NAAQS. 

III. What is a section 110(a)(1) and (2) 

SIP? 

Section 110(a)(1) provides the 

procedural and timing requirements for 

SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific 

elements that states must meet for 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP requirements 

related to a newly established or revised 

NAAQS. Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of 

the CAA requires, in part, that states 

submit to EPA plans to implement, 

maintain and enforce each of the 

NAAQS promulgated by EPA. EPA 

interprets this provision to require states 

to address basic SIP requirements 

including emission inventories, 

monitoring, and modeling to assure 

attainment and maintenance of the 

standards. By statute, SIPs meeting the 

requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2) 

are to be submitted by states within 

three years after promulgation of a new 

or revised standard. These SIPs are 

commonly called infrastructure SIPs. In 

1997, EPA promulgated the 8-hour 

ozone primary and secondary NAAQS 

and a new annual and 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. Intervening litigation over the 

1997 standards caused a delay in SIP 

submittals. In 2006, EPA promulgated a 

new 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

IV. What elements are required under 

section 110(a)(1) and (2)? 

The infrastructure requirements are 

listed in EPA’s October 2, 2007, 

memorandum entitled ‘‘Guidance on 

SIP Elements Required Under Section 

110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-Hour 

Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards’’ and September 25, 

2009, memorandum entitled ‘‘Guidance 

on SIP Elements Required Under 

Section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 

24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards.3 The 14 

elements required to be addressed are as 

follows: (1) Emission limits and other 

control measures; (2) ambient air quality 

monitoring/data system; (3) program for 

enforcement of control measures; (4) 

interstate transport; (5) adequate 

resources; (6) stationary source 

monitoring system; (7) emergency 

power; (8) future SIP revisions; (9) 

consultation with government officials; 

(10) public notification; (11) prevention 

of significant deterioration (PSD) and 

visibility protection; (12) air quality 

modeling/data; (13) permitting fees, and 

(14) consultation/participation by 

affected local entities. 

Two elements identified in section 

110(a)(2) are not governed by the 3 year 

submission deadline of section 110(a)(1) 

because SIPs incorporating necessary 

local nonattainment area controls are 

not due within 3 years after 

promulgation of a new or revised 

NAAQS, but rather due at the time that 

the nonattainment area plan 

requirements are due pursuant to 

section 172. See 77 FR 46354 (August 3, 

2012); 77 FR 60308 (October 3, 2012, 

footnote 1). These requirements are: (1) 

submissions required by section 

110(a)(2)(C) to the extent that subsection 

refers to a permit program as required in 

part D Title I of the CAA, and (2) 

submissions required by section 

110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the 

nonattainment planning requirements of 

part D, Title I of the CAA. As a result, 

this action does not address the above 

infrastructure elements related to 

section 110(a)(2)(C) or 110(a)(2)(I). 

This action also does not address the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

for the 1997 ozone and 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS, since they had been addressed 

in previous rulemakings. See January 

24, 2008 (73 FR 4109). Additionally, 

this action does not address the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, which was 

addressed in a previous EPA 

rulemaking. See July 20, 2011 (76 FR 

43153). 

Scope of Infrastructure SIPs 

This rulemaking will not cover four 

substantive issues that are not integral 

to acting on a state’s infrastructure SIP 

submission: (i) Existing provisions 

related to excess emissions during 

periods of start-up, shutdown, or 

malfunction (‘‘SSM’’) at sources, that 

may be contrary to the CAA and EPA’s 

policies addressing such excess 

emissions; (ii) existing provisions 

related to ‘‘director’s variance’’ or 

‘‘director’s discretion’’ that purport to 

permit revisions to SIP approved 

emissions limits with limited public 

process or without requiring further 

approval by EPA, that may be contrary 

to the CAA (‘‘director’s discretion’’); (iii) 

existing provisions for minor source 

NSR programs that may be inconsistent 

with the requirements of the CAA and 

EPA’s regulations that pertain to such 

programs (‘‘minor source NSR’’); and, 

(iv) existing provisions for PSD 

programs that may be inconsistent with 

current requirements of EPA’s ‘‘Final 

NSR Improvement Rule,’’ 67 FR 80186 

(December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 

FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (‘‘NSR 

Reform’’). A detailed rationale for why 

these four substantive issues are not part 

of the scope of infrastructure SIP 

rulemakings can be found in EPA’s July 

13, 2011, final rule entitled, ‘‘Approval 

and Promulgation of Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; Illinois; Indiana; 

Michigan; Minnesota; Ohio; Wisconsin; 

Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 

1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ in the 

section entitled, ‘‘What is the scope of 

this final rulemaking?’’ (76 FR 41075 at 

41076–41079). 

V. What did New York Submit? 

EPA is acting on three New York SIP 

submittals, dated December 13, 2007, 

October 2, 2008 and March 15, 2010, 

which address the section 110 

infrastructure requirements for the three 

NAAQS: the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, the 1997 annual and 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

December 13, 2007 SIP submission 

New York’s section 110 infrastructure 

submittal was submitted by the New 

York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) 

on December 13, 2007 and addressed 

the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Effective April 

28, 2008, the submittal was determined 

to be complete for all elements except 

110(a)(2)(C). 73 FR 16205 (March 27, 

2008). New York’s December 13, 2007 

section 110 submittal demonstrates how 

the State, where applicable, has a plan 

in place that meets the requirements of 

section 110 for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. This plan references the 

current New York Air Quality SIP, the 

New York Codes of Rules and 

Regulations (NYCRR), the New York 

Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) 

and the New York Public Officer’s Law 

(POL). The NYCRR, ECL and POL 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
25238 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 83 / Tuesday, April 30, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

referenced in the submittal are publicly 

available. New York’s air pollution 

control regulations that have been 

previously approved by EPA and 

incorporated into the New York SIP can 

be found at 40 CFR 52.1670 and are 

posted on the Internet at: http:// 

www.epa.gov/region02/air/sip/ 

ny_reg.htm. 

October 2, 2008 SIP submission 

New York’s section 110 infrastructure 

submittal for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS 

was submitted by the NYSDEC on 

October 2, 2008, and the submittal was 

deemed complete April 2, 2009. 

March 15, 2010 SIP submission 

New York’s section 110 infrastructure 

submittal for the 2006 PM2.5 24-hour 

NAAQS was submitted by the NYSDEC 

on March 15, 2010, and the submittal 

was deemed complete September 15, 

2010. 

EPA’s evaluation of all three 

submittals is detailed in the ‘‘Technical 

Support Document for EPA’s Proposed 

Rulemaking for the New York’s State 

Implementation Plan Revision: State 

Implementation Plan Revision For 

Meeting the Infrastructure Requirements 

In the Clean Air Act Dated December 13, 

2007, October 2, 2008 and March 15, 

2010’’ (TSD). As explained in the 

ADDRESSES section of this action, the 

TSD is available in the docket (EPA– 

R02–OAR–2013–0274) for this action 

and at the EPA Region 2 Office. 

VI. How has the State addressed the 

elements of the section 110(a)(1) and (2) 

‘‘infrastructure’’ provisions? 

A. Emission Limits and Other Control 

Measures 

Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires SIPs to 

include enforceable emission limits and 

other control measures, means, or 

techniques, and schedules for 

compliance. EPA notes that the specific 

nonattainment area plan requirements 

of section 110(a)(2)(I) are subject to the 

timing requirement of section 172, not 

the timing requirement of section 

110(a)(1). New York’s ECL section 19– 

0301, provides the NYSDEC with power 

to formulate, adopt and promulgate, 

amend and repeal codes and rules and 

regulations for preventing, controlling 

and prohibiting air pollution in such 

areas of the State as shall or may be 

affected by air pollution. The federally 

enforceable New York SIP contains 

enforceable emission limits and other 

control measures. EPA is proposing to 

determine that New York has met the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) of 

the CAA with respect to the 1997 8-hour 

ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

B. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data 

System 

Section 110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to 

include provisions to provide for 

establishment and operation of ambient 

air quality monitors, to monitor, 

compile and analyze ambient air quality 

data, and to make these data available 

to EPA upon request. New York, under 

its authority provided in ECL subsection 

19–0305(2)(d), operates and maintains a 

network of ambient air quality monitors 

used to sample the degree of air 

pollution throughout the State and 

submits the data collected to EPA. New 

York has submitted annual air 

monitoring network plans which have 

been approved by EPA. The most recent 

was approved by EPA on October 18, 

2012. EPA is proposing to determine 

that New York has met the requirements 

of section 110(a)(2)(B) of the CAA with 

respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone and 

the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

C. Program for Enforcement of Control 

Measures 

Section 110(a)(2)(C) requires states to 

have a plan that includes a program 

providing for enforcement of all SIP 

measures and the regulation of the 

modification and construction of any 

stationary source, including a program 

to meet Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) and minor source 

new source review. 

The NYSDEC is authorized by ECL 

section 19–0305, to enforce the codes, 

rules and regulations of the NYCRR. The 

minor source permitting and 

enforcement programs operate under 

Title 6 NYCRR Part 201, ‘‘Permits and 

Registrations’’. EPA proposes to find 

that the State has adequate authority 

and regulations to insure that SIP 

approved control measures are enforced 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 

PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

On March 3, 2009, the State of New 

York, through the NYSDEC, submitted 

to EPA Region 2 revisions to the New 

York SIP. The submittal consists of 

revisions to three regulations. The 

affected regulations are: 6 NYCRR Part 

231, ‘‘New Source Review for New and 

Modified Facilities’’; 6 NYCRR Part 200, 

‘‘General Provisions’’; and 6 NYCRR 

Part 201, ‘‘Permits and Certificates’’. 

The purpose of these revisions were to 

revise the New York State PSD program 

regulations and to update the existing 

New York State nonattainment 

regulations consistent with changes to 

the Federal NSR regulations published 

on December 31, 2002 (67 FR 80186). 

On November 17, 2010 (75 FR 70140), 

EPA approved the New York PSD 

program. 

EPA proposes to find that the State 

has adequate authority and regulations 

to ensure that SIP-approved control 

measures are enforced. EPA also finds 

that based on the approval of New 

York’s PSD program, New York has the 

authority to regulate the construction of 

new or modified stationary sources to 

meet the PSD program requirements. 

EPA is proposing to determine that New 

York has met the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(C) and (J) of the CAA 

with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

D. Interstate Transport 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) is divided into 

two subsections, 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

consists of two subsections (I) and (II), 

each of which has two ‘‘prongs.’’ The 

two prongs under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

prohibit any source or other type of 

emissions activity within the State from 

emitting any air pollutants in amounts 

which will (prong 1) contribute 

significantly to nonattainment in any 

other state with respect to any primary 

or secondary NAAQS, and (prong 2) 

interfere with maintenance by any other 

state with respect to any primary or 

secondary NAAQS. The two prongs 

under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) prohibit any 

source or other type of emissions 

activity within the state from emitting 

any air pollutants in amounts which 

will interfere with measures required to 

be included in the applicable 

implementation plan for any other state 

under part C (prong 3) to prevent 

significant deterioration of air quality or 

(prong 4) to protect visibility. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) addresses 

interstate and international pollution 

abatement, and requires SIPs to include 

provisions insuring compliance with 

sections 115 and 126 of the CAA, 

relating to interstate and international 

pollution abatement. 

In this action for New York, with 

respect to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), we are 

only addressing prong 3 (i.e., 

interference with PSD) and prong 4 (i.e., 

to protect visibility) of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). 

EPA previously took rulemaking action 

on prong 1 and prong 2 on January 24, 

2008 (73 FR 4109) for the 1997 ozone 

and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, and July 20, 

2011 (76 FR 43153) for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, respectively. For prong 3, as 

discussed previously under (C) 

(Program for enforcement of control 

measures), on November 17, 2010 (75 

FR 70140), EPA approved the New York 

PSD program. A state’s infrastructure 

SIP submittal can be considered for 

approvability with respect to prong 3 if 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 83 / Tuesday, April 30, 2013 / Proposed Rules 25239 

EPA has issued final approval of that 

state’s PSD SIP or, alternatively, has 

issued final approval of a SIP that EPA 

has otherwise found adequate to 

prohibit interference with other states’ 

measures to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality. Therefore, 

we are proposing to approve New York’s 

110(a) submissions for prong 3 of 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) because New York has 

a federally approved PSD program. 

For prong 4, New York has met its 

obligations pursuant to section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for visibility 

protection for all three NAAQS through 

its Regional Haze SIP submittals, which 

were approved by EPA on August 28, 

2012 (77 FR 51915). The regional haze 

rule specifically requires that a state 

participating in a regional planning 

process include all measures needed to 

achieve its apportionment of emission 

reduction obligations agreed upon 

through that process. Thus, New York’s 

approved Regional Haze SIP will ensure 

that emissions from sources within the 

State are not interfering with measures 

to protect visibility in other states. 

Therefore, EPA proposes to find for 8- 

hr ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS that New 

York satisfies the section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requirement for 

visibility. 

Regarding section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii), 

which relates to interstate and 

international pollution abatement, as 

noted above, on November 17, 2010 (75 

FR 70140), EPA approved the New York 

PSD program which is consistent with 

40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(iv), and requires a 

source to notify air agencies whose 

lands may be affected by emissions from 

that source (see 6 NYCRR sections 231– 

7.4(f) and 8.5(f)). New York has no 

pending obligations under section 115 

or 126(b) of the CAA. Therefore, we are 

proposing to approve New York’s 

submissions for infrastructure element 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii). 

E. Adequate Resources 

Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires each 

state to provide necessary assurances 

that the state (i) will have adequate 

personnel, funding, and authority under 

state law to carry out the SIP (and is not 

prohibited by any provision of federal or 

state law from carrying out the SIP or 

portion thereof), (ii) will comply with 

the requirements respecting state boards 

under section 128, and (iii) where the 

state has relied on a local or regional 

government, agency, or instrumentality 

for the implementation of any SIP 

provision, the state has responsibility 

for ensuring adequate implementation 

of such SIP provision. 

New York has adequate authority, 

under ECL sections 19–0301, 0303 and 

0305, to carry out its SIP obligations 

with respect to the 1997 ozone and 1997 

and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. New York 

receives sections 103 and 105 grant 

funds along with required Statematching funds to provide funding 

necessary to carry out its SIP 

requirements. Therefore, EPA proposes 

to find New York has sufficient 

resources to meet the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) for the 1997 8-hr 

ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

Congress added section 128 in the 

1977 amendments. Titled ‘‘State 

boards,’’ section 128 provides in 

relevant part: (a) Not later than the date 

one year after August 7, 1977, each 

applicable implementation plan shall 

contain requirements that: (1) Any 

board or body which approves permits 

or enforcement orders under [this Act] 

shall have at least a majority of members 

who represent the public interest and do 

not derive any significant portion of 

their income from persons subject to 

permits or enforcement orders under 

[this Act], and (2) Any potential 

conflicts of interest by members of such 

board or body or the head of an 

executive agency with similar powers be 

adequately disclosed. New York does 

not have a state board that approves 

permits or enforcement orders under the 

CAA. Instead, permits and enforcement 

orders are approved by the State’s 

Commissioner of Environmental 

Conservation. Thus, the requirements of 

subsection 128(a)(1) are not applicable 

to New York. New York is subject to the 

requirements of section 128(a)(2). In its 

SIP submission New York cited POL 

sections 74(2) and 74(3)(e) which 

address conflict of interest. However, 

after further discussion with NYSDEC, it 

is more relevant to cite POL section 73- 

a, ‘‘Financial disclosure’’ and 19 NYCRR 

937, ‘‘Access To Publicly Available 

Records,’’ as satisfying the section 

128(a)(2) requirement. EPA proposes to 

conditionally approve the infrastructure 

SIP in fulfilling the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for 1997 8-hour 

ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, provided the 

State submits POL section 73-a and 19 

NYCRR 937 for approval as part of the 

SIP. In the alternative, should New York 

provide this information before we take 

final rulemaking, EPA will fully 

approve section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii). 

Section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii) requires states 

to provide necessary assurances that, 

where the state has relied on a local or 

regional government, agency or 

instrumentality for the implementation 

of any provision of the SIP, the state has 

responsibility for ensuring adequate 

implementation of the SIP provision. 

The NYSDEC has delegation authority 

for inspection and enforcement efforts 

of various regulations under the general 

enforcement powers provided in ECL 

section 19–0305. 

While New York has the authority to 

delegate responsibilities to county or 

local governments to implement certain 

SIP responsibilities, the information 

provided in both infrastructure SIP 

submittals does not identify the specific 

organizations that will participate in 

developing, implementing, and 

enforcing the plan and the 

responsibilities of such organizations. 

EPA proposes to conditionally approve 

the infrastructure SIP with regard to the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii). 

The State must identify the county or 

local governments or entities that 

participate in the SIP planning efforts, 

identify the county or local governments 

or entities that have been delegated 

responsibilities to implement or enforce 

portions of the SIP, and provide copies 

of the delegation orders or memoranda 

of understanding (MOUs) between the 

State and the county or local 

governments or entities. Since it is 

EPA’s understanding that this 

deficiency involves information that 

exists but was not provided in the SIP 

submittal, EPA proposes to 

conditionally approve section 

110(a)(2)(E)(iii) for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. In the alternative, should New 

York provide this information before we 

take final rulemaking, EPA will fully 

approve section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii). 

F. Stationary Source Monitoring System 

Section 110(a)(2)(F) requires states to 

establish a system to monitor emissions 

from stationary sources and to submit 

periodic emission reports. 

The NYSDEC has the authority 

pursuant to ECL subsection 19– 

0311(3)(c) to require emissions 

monitoring, recordkeeping and 

reporting of stationary sources before an 

operating permit is issued or renewed. 

NYSDEC has adopted regulations to 

implement the federal requirements for 

stationary source emissions monitoring, 

reporting and recordkeeping in 6 

NYCRR Part 201–6.4(b) and (c). 

The NYSDEC adopted 6 NYCRR Part 

202, ‘‘Emission Verification,’’ to require 

emissions reports from stationary 

sources. Further 6 NYCRR Part 616, 

Access to Records, specifically allows 

emission information to be made 

available to the public. 

Based on the authority pursuant to 

ECL subsection 19–0311(3)(c) and the 

adoption of the Part 202, specifically 

subpart 202–2, ‘‘Emission Statements,’’ 

EPA is proposing to find that New York 

has met the requirements of section 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
25240 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 83 / Tuesday, April 30, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

4See Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under 

Sections 110(a)(l) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine 

Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS), from William T. Harnett, 

Director, Air Quality Policy Division, Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards, dated September 

25, 2009. 

110(a)(2)(F) for the 1997 8-hr ozone and 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

G. Emergency Power 

Section 110(a)(2)(G) requires states to 

provide for authority to address 

activities causing imminent and 

substantial endangerment to public 

health, including contingency plans to 

implement the emergency episode 

provisions in their SIPs. 

For PM2.5, EPA’s guidance dated 

September 25, 2009 4 provides 

clarification that states that have air 

quality control regions identified as 

either Priority I, Priority IA or Priority 

II by the ‘‘Prevention of Air Pollution 

Emergency Episodes’’ rules at 40 CFR 

51.150 must develop emergency episode 

contingency plans. States are required to 

develop emergency episode plans for 

any area that has monitored and 

recorded 24-hour PM2.5 levels greater 

than 140.4 mg/m3 since 2006. A state 

that has never exceeded this level since 

2006 is considered to be Priority III. 40 

CFR 51.150(f). In accordance with the 

guidance, a Priority III area may certify 

that it has appropriate general 

emergency powers to address PM2.5- 

related episodes, and is not required to 

adopt specific emergency episode plans 

at this time, given the existing 

monitored levels. 

Since 2006, air-quality monitors in 

New York show that PM2.5 levels have 

been below the 140.5 mg/m3 threshold. 

Based on air quality data, New York 

should be classified as a Priority III 

region and, therefore, emergency 

episode plans for PM2.5 are not required. 

However, in general and for the 1997 

ozone standard, the section 110(a)(2)(G) 

requirements are addressed by New 

York’s ECL, Articles 3 and 19, which are 

implemented through 6 NYCRR Part 

207, ‘‘Control Measures for Air 

Pollution Episodes.’’ Among other 

things, 6 NYCRR Part 207 requires 

persons who own a significant air 

contamination source to submit a 

proposed episode action plan to the 

NYSDEC Commissioner, and enable the 

Commissioner to designate air pollution 

episodes which trigger the action plans. 

Pursuant to Part 207.3(a), the NYSDEC 

Commissioner shall have on file and 

make available the criteria used in 

determining the need to designate 

episodes. The NYSDEC maintains an 

‘‘Episode Action Plan’’ with guidelines 

and protocols/criteria to be followed in 

case of an air pollution emergency. The 

NYSDEC’s Episode Action Plan has 

been updated to reflect the PM2.5

Significant Harm Levels (SHLs) 

proposed by EPA on January 15, 2009 

along with revised values for ozone 

episodes. Therefore, New York has met 

the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(G) 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 

and 2006 PM2.5 standards. 

H. Future SIP Revisions 

Section 110(a)(2)(H) requires states to 

have the authority to revise their SIPs in 

response to changes in the NAAQS, 

availability of improved methods for 

attaining NAAQS, and in response to an 

EPA finding that the SIP is substantially 

inadequate. 

Revisions to the New York SIP are 

authorized by Article 19 and sections 3– 

0301, 19–0103, 19–0301, 19–0303 and 

19–0305 of the ECL. Article 19 of the 

ECL was adopted to protect New York’s 

air resources from pollution and to put 

into effect the policy of the State to 

maintain a reasonable degree of purity 

of the air resources, consistent with the 

public health and welfare and the 

industrial development of the State. 

NYSDEC is granted specific powers and 

duties, including the power to 

promulgate regulations for preventing, 

controlling, or prohibiting air pollution. 

NYSDEC also has the specific authority 

to regulate motor vehicle exhaust and 

approve air contaminant control 

systems as well as regulate fuels. 

Section 71–2103 provides general 

enforcement authority for the New York 

State air regulations. Section 71–2105 

provides criminal enforcement 

authority. Thus, New York has the 

authority to revise SIPs and provide for 

enforcement in response to changes in 

the NAAQS and improve methods for 

attaining the NAAQS. EPA proposes to 

find that the State has adequate 

authority to develop and implement 

plans and programs that fulfill the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(H) for 

the 1997 8-hr ozone and 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

I. Nonattainment Area Plans Under Part 

D 

Section 110(a)(2)(I) of the CAA 

requires that each such plan shall ‘‘in 

the case of a plan or plan revision for 

an area designated as a nonattainment 

area, meet the applicable requirements 

of part D of this subchapter (relating to 

nonattainment areas).’’ EPA is not 

evaluating nonattainment-related 

provisions, the NSR program required 

by part D in section 110(a)(2)(C) and 

measures for attainment required by 

section 110(a)(2)(I), as part of the 

infrastructure SIPs because, as 

discussed elsewhere in this proposal, 

these submittals have been addressed by 

other SIP revisions which EPA has or 

will be acting on in other rulemakings. 

J. Consultation With Government 

Official, Public Notification, PSD, and 

Visibility Protection 

Section 110(a)(2)(J) requires states to 

meet the applicable requirements of 

CAA section 121, relating to 

consultation, CAA section 127, relating 

to public notification, and CAA title I, 

part C, relating to the prevention of 

significant deterioration of air quality 

and visibility protection. 

Consultation With Government 

Officials 

Section 121 requires a process for 

consultation with local governments 

and Federal Land Managers carrying out 

NAAQS implementation requirements. 

EPA finds that the 110(a) submittals 

from New York, and the cited authority 

of section 3–0303 of the ECL, meet the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) for 

consultation with government officials. 

Public Notification 

Section 127 requires that the state 

plan include measures to effectively 

notify the public of any NAAQS 

exceedances, advise the public of health 

hazards associated with such pollution, 

and include measures to enhance public 

awareness of measures that can be taken 

to prevent exceedances. 

The NYSDEC’s Web site, at http:// 

www.dec.nv.qov/chemical/34985.html 

contains an Air Quality Index (AQI) for 

reporting daily air quality to the public. 

It describes how clean or polluted the 

air is, and what associated health effects 

might be a concern. It was created as a 

way to correlate levels of different 

pollutants to one scale; the higher the 

AQI value, the greater the health 

concern. When levels of ozone and/or 

fine particles are expected to exceed an 

AQI value of 100, an Air Quality Health 

Advisory is issued alerting sensitive 

groups to take the necessary 

precautions. The NYSDEC, in 

cooperation with the New York State 

Department of Health, posts warnings 

on the above-referenced Web site and 

issues press releases to local media 

outlets if dangerous conditions are 

expected to occur. The Air Quality 

Forecast displays the predicted AQI 

value for eight regions in New York 

State. It also displays the observed 

values for the previous day. Air quality 

measurements from New York’s 

statewide continuous monitoring 

network are updated hourly where 

available. Parameters monitored include 

ozone, fine particulate, carbon 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 83 / Tuesday, April 30, 2013 / Proposed Rules 25241 

monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen 

oxides, methane/nonmethane 

hydrocarbons, and meteorological data. 

EPA is proposing to find that New 

York’s SIP submittal has met the public 

notification requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(J) for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

and 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 

section 19–0305 of the ECL. 

PSD 

Section 110(a)(2)(J) also requires 

states to meet applicable requirements 

of Part C related to prevention of 

significant deterioration and visibility 

protection. EPA evaluated this 

requirement in the context of section 

110(a)(2)(C) with respect to permitting 

(see discussion under (C) (program for 

enforcement of control measures)). EPA 

interprets this section 110 provision 

relating to visibility as not being 

‘‘triggered’’ by a new NAAQS because 

the visibility requirements in part C are 

not changed by a new NAAQS. 

On November 17, 2010 (75 FR 70140), 

EPA approved the New York PSD 

program, as discussed under (C) 

(program for enforcement of control 

measures). The approvability of a state’s 

PSD program in its entirety is essential 

to the approvability of the infrastructure 

SIP with respect to section 110(a)(2)(J). 

Therefore, EPA proposes to approve 

New York’s infrastructure SIP with 

respect to the PSD sub-element of 

110(a)(2)(J). 

K. Air Quality and Modeling/data 

Section 110(a)(2)(K) requires that SIPs 

provide for air quality modeling for 

predicting effects on air quality of 

emissions from any NAAQS pollutant 

and submission of such data to EPA 

upon request. 

Authorized pursuant to sections 3– 

0301, 19–0103, 19–0301, 19–0303 and 

19–0305 of the ECL, NYSDEC performs 

modeling as necessary to assess the 

degree of pollution in New York State. 

The NYSDEC certifies that the air 

quality modeling and analysis used in 

its SIPs complies with EPA’s guidance 

on the use of models in attainment 

demonstrations, and commits to 

continue to use air quality models in 

accordance with EPA’s approved 

modeling guidance and to submit data 

to EPA if requested. EPA proposes to 

find that the State has adequate 

authority to perform air quality 

modeling that fulfills the requirements 

of section 110(a)(2)(K). 

L. Permitting Fees 

Section 110(a)(2)(L) requires SIPs to 

require each major stationary source to 

pay permitting fees to cover the cost of 

reviewing, approving, implementing 

and enforcing a permit, until such time 

as the SIP fee requirement is superseded 

by EPA’s approval of the State’s Title V 

operating permit program. 

EPA’s full approval of the Title V 

program for New York became effective 

on November 30, 2001. In New York 

State, the Title V Permit Fee Program is 

established in ECL section 19–0311(c) 

requiring the NYSDEC to promulgate 

regulations that, among other things, 

require applications to identify and 

describe facility emissions in sufficient 

detail to establish the basis for the fees 

and applicability of requirements of the 

CAA. ECL section 72–0303 requires 

major stationary sources to pay 

operating permit program fees sufficient 

to support an appropriation approved 

by the legislature for the direct and 

indirect costs associated with the 

operating permit program established in 

section 19–0311. 

In addition, paragraph 201–6.5(a)(7) 

of 6 NYCRR subpart 201–6, the 

NYSDEC’s approved Title V program, 

specifically states that ‘‘The owner and/ 

or operator of a stationary source shall 

pay fees to the department consistent 

with the fee schedule authorized by 

Subpart 482–2 of this Title.’’ 

EPA proposes to find that the State 

has met the requirements for section 

110(a)(2)(L). 

M. Consultation/participation by 

Affected Local Entities 

Section 110(a)(2)(M) requires states to 

provide for consultation and 

participation in SIP development by 

local political subdivisions affected by 

the SIP. 

EPA proposes to find that the State 

has adequate authority and procedures 

that fulfills the requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(M). See ECL section 3–0303(3). 

VII. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is proposing to approve New 

York’s submittals as fully meeting the 

infrastructure requirements for the 1997 

8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS for the following section 

110(a)(2) elements and sub-elements: 

(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II) prongs 3 and 4, 

(D)(ii), (E)(i), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), 

and (M). EPA is also proposing that 

EPA’s action on October 22, 2008 (73 FR 

62902) for New York has been satisfied. 

EPA is proposing to conditionally 

approve New York’s submittals for the 

1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS for the following 

110(a)(2) sub-elements: E(ii) (state 

boards and conflict of interest 

provisions) and E(iii) (delegations). New 

York must commit in writing on or 

before May 30, 2013 to correct the 

deficiencies discussed above. New York 

must then correct the deficiencies and 

submit them to EPA within one year of 

EPA’s final action on this SIP action. 

Some of the deficiencies involve 

providing information that EPA is 

familiar with and believes currently 

exists, but was not included in the 

State’s submittal. Should New York 

provide this information before we take 

final rulemaking, EPA is also proposing 

in the alternative to fully approve New 

York’s submittals for the section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and section 

110(a)(2)(E)(iii) sub-elements. 

Under section 110(k)(4) of the CAA, 

EPA may conditionally approve a plan 

based on a commitment from a State to 

adopt specific enforceable measures by 

a date certain, but not later than one 

year from the date of approval. If EPA 

conditionally approves the commitment 

in a final rulemaking action, the State 

must meet its commitment to complete 

requirements of each section 110(a)(2) 

element listed above. If New York fails 

to do so for any section 110(a)(2) 

element, our conditional approval of 

that element will, by operation of law, 

become a disapproval for New York one 

year from the date of final approval. 

EPA will notify the State by letter that 

this action has occurred. At that time, 

this commitment will no longer be a 

part of the approved SIP for New York. 

EPA subsequently will publish a 

document in the Federal Register 

notifying the public that the conditional 

approval automatically converted to a 

disapproval. If New York meets its 

commitments within the applicable 

time frame, the conditionally approved 

submission will remain a part of the SIP 

or SIPs until EPA takes final action 

approving or disapproving the element 

in question. 

If EPA disapproves a State’s new 

submittal, the conditionally approved 

section 110(a)(2) element will also be 

disapproved at that time. If EPA 

approves the submittal, the section 

110(a)(2) element will be fully approved 

in its entirety and replace the 

conditionally approved 110(a)(2) 

element in the SIP. Finally, if, based on 

information received before EPA takes 

final action on this proposal, EPA 

determines that it cannot issue a final 

conditional approval for one or more 

elements for which EPA has proposed a 

conditional approval, then EPA will 

instead issue a disapproval for such 

elements. 

As discussed in section I, above, EPA 

is not acting on New York’s submittal as 

it relates to nonattainment provisions, 

the NSR program required by part D in 

section 110(a)(2)(C) and the measures 

for attainment required by section 

110(a)(2)(I), as part of the infrastructure 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
25242 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 83 / Tuesday, April 30, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

SIPs because these submittals have been 

addressed by other SIP revisions which 

EPA has or will be acting on in other 

rulemakings. 

EPA is soliciting public comments on 

the issues discussed in this proposal. 

These comments will be considered 

before EPA takes final action. Interested 

parties may participate in the Federal 

rulemaking procedure by submitting 

written comments to the EPA Regional 

Office listed in the ADDRESSES section of 

this Federal Register, or by submitting 

comments electronically, by mail, or 

through hand delivery or courier 

following the directions in the 

ADDRESSES section of this Federal 

Register. 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the CAA and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

state choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: April 19, 2013. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2013–10168 Filed 4–29–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 60 and 61 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0981; FRL 9806–2] 

Delegation of New Source 

Performance Standards and National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants for the States of Arizona, 

California, and Nevada 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

updates to the Code of Federal 

Regulations delegation tables to reflect 

the current delegation status of New 

Source Performance Standards (NSPS) 

and National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) in 

Arizona, California, and Nevada. 

DATES: Any comments on this proposal 

must arrive by May 30, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2011–0981, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. 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: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California 94105–3901. 

While all documents in the docket are 

listed at www.regulations.gov, some 

information may be publicly available 

only at the hard copy location (e.g., 

copyrighted material, large maps), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adrianne Borgia at (415) 972–3576, 

borgia.adrianne@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

proposal will update the delegation 

tables in Title 40 Code of Federal 

Regulation Parts 60 and 61, to allow 

easier access by the public to the status 

of NSPS and NESHAP delegations in 

Arizona, California, and Nevada. In the 

Rules and Regulations section of this 

Federal Register, we are updating these 

delegations tables in a direct final action 

without prior proposal because we 

believe these delegations are not 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1