Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 2011 / Proposed Rules 20907 

accordance with the terms of a 

September 2005 Federal consent decree. 

The PM revisions reflect the permanent 

shutdown of and changes in unit 

identification for other Cargill units. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 16, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2010–0998, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: aburano.douglas@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 408–2279. 

4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, 

Control Strategies Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, 

Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt 

Rau, Environmental Engineer, Control 

Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch 

(AR–18J), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, 

(312) 886–6524, rau.matthew@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP submittal as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this rule, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. For additional information, 

see the direct final rule which is located 

in the Rules section of this Federal 

Register. 

Dated: April 4, 2011. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8869 Filed 4–13–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2011–0031; FRL–9295–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; New 

Mexico; Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration; Greenhouse Gas 

Tailoring Rule Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a revision to the New Mexico State 

Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted 

by the New Mexico Environment 

Department (NMED) to EPA on 

December 1, 2010. The proposed SIP 

revision modifies New Mexico’s 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) program to establish appropriate 

emission thresholds for determining 

which new stationary sources and 

modification projects become subject to 

New Mexico’s PSD permitting 

requirements for their greenhouse gas 

(GHG) emissions. Due to the SIP 

Narrowing Rule, 75 FR 82536, starting 

on January 2, 2011, the approved New 

Mexico SIP’s PSD requirements for GHG 

apply at the thresholds specified in the 

Tailoring Rule, not at the 100 or 250 

tons per year (tpy) levels otherwise 

provided under the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act), which would overwhelm New 

Mexico’s permitting resources. This rule 

clarifies the applicable thresholds in the 

New Mexico SIP, addresses the flaw 

discussed in the SIP Narrowing Rule, 

and incorporates State rule changes 

adopted at the State level into the 

Federally-approved SIP. EPA is 

proposing approval of New Mexico’s 

December 1, 2010, PSD SIP revision 

because the Agency has made the 

preliminary determination that this PSD 

SIP revision is in accordance with 

section 110 and part C of the Federal 

Clean Air Act and EPA regulations 

regarding PSD permitting for GHGs. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 16, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R06– 

OAR–2011–0031, by one of the 

following methods: 

(1) http://www.regulations.gov: 

Follow the on-line instructions for 

submitting comments. 

(2) E-mail: Mr. Jeff Robinson at 

robinson.jeffrey@epa.gov. Please also cc 

the person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph below. 

(3) U.S. EPA Region 6 ‘‘Contact Us’’ 

Web site: http://epa.gov/region6/ 

r6coment.htm. Please click on ‘‘6PD’’ 

(Multimedia) and select ‘‘Air’’ before 

submitting comments. 

(4) Fax: Mr. Jeff Robinson, Chief, Air 

Permits Section (6PD–R), at fax number 

214–665–6762. 

(5) Mail: Mr. Jeff Robinson, Chief, Air 

Permits Section (6PD–R), Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. 

(6) Hand or Courier Delivery: Mr. Jeff 

Robinson, Chief, Air Permits Section 

(6PD–R), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Such 

deliveries are accepted only between the 

hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. 

weekdays except for legal holidays. 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2011– 

0031. 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 

the disclosure of which is restricted by 

statute. Do not submit information 

through http://www.regulations.gov or 

e-mail, if you believe that it is CBI or 

otherwise protected from disclosure. 

The http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means that EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send an e-mail 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through http://www.regulations.gov, 

your e-mail 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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

20908 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1 ‘‘Limitation of Approval of Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning 

Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State 

Implementation Plans; Final Rule.’’ 75 FR 82536 

(December 30, 2010). 

2 ‘‘Endangerment and Cause or Contribute 

Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 

202(a) of the Clean Air Act.’’ 74 FR 66496 

(December 15, 2009). 

3 ‘‘Interpretation of Regulations that Determine 

Pollutants Covered by Clean Air Act Permitting 

Programs.’’ 75 FR 17004 (April 2, 2010). 

4 ‘‘Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission 

Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy 

Standards; Final Rule.’’ 75 FR 25324 (May 7, 2010). 

5Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title 

V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule.’’ 75 

FR 31514 (June 3, 2010). 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment along with any disk or CD– 

ROM submitted. 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 and any form of encryption 

and should 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 the disclosure of which 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 Air Permits Section (6PD–R), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. The file will be made 

available by appointment for public 

inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review 

Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. 

and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal 

holidays. Contact the person listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph below to make an 

appointment. If possible, please make 

the appointment at least two working 

days in advance of your visit. A 15 cent 

per page fee will be charged for making 

photocopies of documents. On the day 

of the visit, please check in at the EPA 

Region 6 reception area on the seventh 

floor at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, 

Dallas, Texas. 

The State submittals related to this 

SIP revision, and which are part of the 

EPA docket, are also available for public 

inspection at the State Air Agency listed 

below during official business hours by 

appointment: 

New Mexico Environment 

Department, Air Quality Bureau, 1190 

St. Francis Drive, Sante Fe, New 

Mexico, 87502. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Melanie Magee (6PD–R), Air Permits 

Section, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue 

(6PD–R), Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202– 

2733. The telephone number is (214) 

665–7161. Ms. Magee can also be 

reached via electronic mail at 

magee.melanie@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for EPA? 

II. Summary of New Mexico’s submittal 

III. What is the background for this proposed 

action? 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of New Mexico’s 

proposed SIP revision? 

V. What action is EPA taking? 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

When submitting comments, 

remember to: 

1. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

2. Follow directions—The EPA may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

3. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

4. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

5. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

6. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

7. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

8. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. Summary of New Mexico’s Submittal 

On December 1, 2010, NMED 

submitted a SIP revision request to EPA 

to establish appropriate emission 

thresholds for determining which new 

or modified stationary sources become 

subject to New Mexico’s PSD permitting 

requirements for GHG emissions. The 

submitted revisions to the SIP are 

enacted at 20.2.74.7 New Mexico Air 

Code (NMAC). Final approval of this 

SIP revision request will put in place 

the GHG emission thresholds for PSD 

applicability set forth in EPA’s Tailoring 

Rule, ensuring that smaller GHG sources 

emitting less than these thresholds are 

not subject to permitting requirements. 

Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, 

EPA is proposing to approve this 

revision into the New Mexico SIP. 

NMED also submitted revisions to the 

remainder of the New Mexico PSD 

program at 20.2.74.9, 20.2.74.200, 

20.2.74.300, and 20.2.74.320 NMAC that 

correctly update internal crossreferences to the PSD definitions. EPA 

is also proposing approval of these 

revisions pursuant to section 110 of the 

CAA. 

Also on December 1, 2010, NMED 

submitted revisions to the New Mexico 

Title V Operating Permits Program at 

20.2.70 NMAC. EPA will address these 

revisions to the New Mexico Title V 

program at a later date and in a separate 

action on the Title V Program. 

III. What is the background for this 

proposed action? 

This section briefly summarizes EPA’s 

recent GHG-related actions that provide 

the background for today’s proposed 

action. More detailed discussion of the 

background is found in the preambles 

for those actions. In particular, the 

background is contained in what we call 

the GHG PSD SIP Narrowing Rule,1 and 

in the preambles to the actions cited 

therein. 

A. GHG-Related Actions 

EPA has recently undertaken a series 

of actions pertaining to the regulation of 

GHGs that, although for the most part 

distinct from one another, establish the 

overall framework for today’s final 

action on the New Mexico SIP. Four of 

these actions include, as they are 

commonly called, the ‘‘Endangerment 

Finding’’ and ‘‘Cause or Contribute 

Finding,’’ which EPA issued in a single 

final action,2 the ‘‘Johnson Memo 

Reconsideration,’’ 3 the ‘‘Light-Duty 

Vehicle Rule,’’ 4 and the ‘‘Tailoring 

Rule.’’ 5 Taken together and in 

conjunction with the CAA, these actions 

established regulatory requirements for 

GHGs emitted from new motor vehicles 

and new motor vehicle engines; 

determined that such regulations, when 

they took effect on January 2, 2011, 

subjected GHGs emitted from stationary 

sources to PSD requirements; and 

limited the applicability of PSD 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 2011 / Proposed Rules 20909 

6Specifically, by notice dated December 13, 2010, 

EPA finalized a ‘‘SIP Call’’ that would require those 

States with SIPs that have approved PSD programs 

but do not authorize PSD permitting for GHGs to 

submit a SIP revision providing such authority. 

‘‘Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits 

Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 

Finding of Substantial Inadequacy and SIP Call,’’ 75 

FR 77698 (Dec. 13, 2010). EPA has begun making 

findings of failure to submit that would apply in 

any State unable to submit the required SIP revision 

by its deadline, and finalizing FIPs for such States. 

See, e.g. ‘‘Action To Ensure Authority To Issue 

Permits Under the Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration Program to Sources of Greenhouse 

Gas Emissions: Finding of Failure To Submit State 

Implementation Plan Revisions Required for 

Greenhouse Gases,’’ 75 FR 81874 (December 29, 

2010); ‘‘Action To Ensure Authority To Issue 

Permits Under the Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration Program to Sources of Greenhouse 

Gas Emissions: Federal Implementation Plan,’’ 75 

FR 82246 (December 30, 2010). Because New 

Mexico’s SIP already authorizes New Mexico to 

regulate GHGs once GHGs become subject to PSD 

requirements on January 2, 2011, New Mexico is 

not subject to the proposed SIP Call or FIP. 

7 ‘‘Limitation of Approval of Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning 

Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State 

Implementation Plans; Final Rule.’’ 75 FR 82536 

(December 30, 2010). 

8Tailoring Rule, 75 FR 31,517/1. 

9SIP Narrowing Rule, 75 FR 82,540/2. 

10 Id. at 82,542/3. 

11 Id. at 82,544/1. 

12 Id. at 82,540/2. 

13On December 1, 2010, Governor Richardson 

also submitted revisions to the New Mexico Title 

V program. These revisions were not submitted as 

part of the SIP and NMED did not request SIP 

approval for these regulations. EPA will take 

separate action on the title V program revisions in 

a separate rulemaking. 

requirements to GHG sources on a 

phased-in basis. EPA took this last 

action in the Tailoring Rule, which, 

more specifically, established 

appropriate GHG emission thresholds 

for determining the applicability of PSD 

requirements to GHG-emitting sources. 

PSD is implemented through the SIP 

system, and so in December 2010, EPA 

promulgated several rules to implement 

the new GHG PSD SIP program. 

Recognizing that some States had 

approved SIP PSD programs that did not 

apply PSD to GHGs, EPA issued a SIP 

call and, for some of these States, a FIP.6

Recognizing that other States had 

approved SIP PSD programs that do 

apply PSD to GHGs, but that do so for 

sources that emit as little as 100 or 250 

tpy of GHG, and that do not limit PSD 

applicability to GHGs to the higher 

thresholds in the Tailoring Rule, EPA 

issued the GHG PSD SIP Narrowing 

Rule. Under that rule, EPA withdrew its 

approval of the affected SIPs to the 

extent those SIPs covered GHG-emitting 

sources below the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds. EPA based its action 

primarily on the ‘‘error correction’’ 

provisions of CAA section 110(k)(6). 

B. New Mexico’s Actions 

On June 24, 2010, New Mexico 

provided a letter to EPA, in accordance 

with a request to all States from EPA in 

the Tailoring Rule, with confirmation 

that the State has the authority to 

regulate GHG in its PSD program. The 

letter confirmed that current New 

Mexico rules require regulating GHGs at 

the existing 100/250 tpy threshold, 

rather than at the higher thresholds set 

in the Tailoring Rule because the State 

does not have the authority to apply the 

meaning of the term ‘‘subject to 

regulation’’ established in the Tailoring 

Rule. New Mexico also submitted a 

letter on September 14, 2010, in 

response to the proposed GHG SIP Call 

again confirming that EPA correctly 

classified New Mexico as a State with 

authority to apply PSD requirements to 

GHGs. The September 14, 2010, letter 

also identifies that NMED is pursuing 

rulemaking activity to define the terms 

‘‘greenhouse gas’’ and ‘‘subject to 

regulation’’. See the docket for this 

proposed rulemaking for copies of New 

Mexico’s June 24, 2010, and September 

14, 2010, letters. 

In the SIP Narrowing Rule, published 

on December 30, 2010, EPA withdrew 

its approval of New Mexico’s SIP— 

among other SIPs—to the extent that SIP 

applies PSD permitting requirements to 

GHG emissions from sources emitting at 

levels below those set in the Tailoring 

Rule.7 As a result, New Mexico’s current 

approved SIP provides the State with 

authority to regulate GHGs, but only at 

and above the Tailoring Rule thresholds; 

and Federally requires new and 

modified sources to receive a PSD 

permit based on GHG emissions only if 

they emit at or above the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds. 

New Mexico has amended its State 

regulations to incorporate the Tailoring 

Rule thresholds, and has submitted the 

adopted regulations as revisions to the 

New Mexico SIP. EPA’s proposed 

approval of the New Mexico revisions 

will clarify the applicable thresholds in 

the New Mexico SIP. 

The basis for this SIP revision is that 

limiting PSD applicability to GHG 

sources to the higher thresholds in the 

Tailoring Rule is consistent with the SIP 

provisions that provide required 

assurances of adequate resources, and 

thereby addresses the flaw in the SIP 

that led to the SIP Narrowing Rule. 

Specifically, CAA section 110(a)(2)(E) 

includes as a requirement for SIP 

approval that States provide ‘‘necessary 

assurances that the State * * * will 

have adequate personnel [and] funding 

* * * to carry out such [SIP].’’ In the 

Tailoring Rule, EPA established higher 

thresholds for PSD applicability to 

GHG-emitting sources on grounds that 

the States generally did not have 

adequate resources to apply PSD to 

GHG-emitting sources below the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds,8 and no 

State, including New Mexico, asserted 

that it did have adequate resources to do 

so.9 In the SIP Narrowing Rule, EPA 

found that the affected States, including 

New Mexico, had a flaw in their SIP at 

the time they submitted their PSD 

programs, which was that the 

applicability of the PSD programs was 

potentially broader than the resources 

available to them under their SIP.10

Accordingly, for each affected State, 

including New Mexico, EPA concluded 

that EPA’s action in approving the SIP 

was in error, under CAA section 

110(k)(6), and EPA rescinded its 

approval to the extent the PSD program 

applies to GHG-emitting sources below 

the Tailoring Rule thresholds.11 EPA 

recommended that States adopt a SIP 

revision to incorporate the Tailoring 

Rule thresholds, thereby (i) assuring that 

under State law, only sources at or 

above the Tailoring Rule thresholds 

would be subject to PSD; and (ii) 

avoiding confusion under the Federallyapproved SIP by clarifying that the SIP 

applies to only sources at or above the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds.12

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of New 

Mexico’s proposed SIP revision? 

The regulatory revisions that NMED 

submitted on December 1, 2010, 

establish thresholds for determining 

which stationary sources and 

modification projects become subject to 

permitting requirements for GHG 

emissions under New Mexico’s PSD 

program. Specifically, the submittal 

includes changes to New Mexico’s PSD 

regulations at 20.2.74.7, 20.2.74.9, 

20.2.74.200, 20.2.74.300, and 

20.2.74.320 NMAC.13

New Mexico is currently a SIPapproved State for the PSD program, 

and has incorporated EPA’s 2002 New 

Source Review (NSR) reform revisions 

for PSD into its SIP. In letters provided 

to EPA on June 24, 2010, and September 

14, 2010, New Mexico notified EPA of 

its interpretation that the State currently 

has the authority to regulate GHGs 

under its PSD regulations. The current 

New Mexico program (adopted prior to 

the promulgation of EPA’s Tailoring 

Rule) applies to major stationary sources 

(having the potential to emit at least 100 

tpy or 250 tpy or more of a regulated 

NSR pollutant, depending on the type of 

source) or modifications constructing in 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

20910 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

areas designated attainment or 

unclassifiable with respect to the 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards. 

The changes to New Mexico’s PSD 

program regulations are substantively 

the same as the amendments to the 

Federal PSD regulatory provisions in 

EPA’s Tailoring Rule. As part of its 

review of this submittal, EPA performed 

a line-by-line review of New Mexico’s 

proposed revision and has determined 

that they are consistent with the 

Tailoring Rule. EPA’s Technical 

Support Document detailing our 

analysis of the proposed revisions to the 

New Mexico SIP is available in the 

docket for this action. 

V. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is proposing to approve New 

Mexico’s December 1, 2010, SIP 

submittal, relating to PSD requirements 

for GHG-emitting sources. Specifically, 

New Mexico’s December 1, 2010, 

proposed SIP revision establishes 

appropriate emissions thresholds for 

determining PSD applicability to new 

and modified GHG-emitting sources in 

accordance with EPA’s Tailoring Rule. 

EPA has made the determination that 

this SIP submittal is approvable because 

it is in accordance with the CAA and 

EPA regulations regarding PSD 

permitting for GHGs. 

If EPA finalizes our approval of New 

Mexico’s changes to its air quality 

regulations to incorporate the 

appropriate thresholds for GHG 

permitting applicability into New 

Mexico’s SIP, then paragraph (d) in 

Section 52.1634 of 40 CFR part 52, as 

included in EPA’s SIP Narrowing 

Rule—which codifies the limitation of 

EPA’s approval of New Mexico’s PSD 

SIP to not cover the applicability of PSD 

to GHG-emitting sources below the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds—is no longer 

necessary. In today’s proposed action, 

EPA is also proposing to amend Section 

52.1634 of 40 CFR part 52 to remove 

this unnecessary regulatory language. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Clean Air Act 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, Intergovernmental 

relations, and Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: April 6, 2011. 

Al Armendariz, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9099 Filed 4–13–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2010–0545; FRL–9295–2] 

Proposed Approval of Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; Indiana; Stage I 

Vapor Recovery Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

into the Indiana State Implementation 

Plan (SIP), amendments to the stage I 

vapor recovery rule and administrative 

changes to stage II vapor recovery rule 

submitted by the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management on June 11, 

2010. These rule revisions made volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) emission 

control requirements for filling at 

gasoline dispensing facilities more 

stringent by applying them statewide, 

making the rule applicable to smaller 

tanks and revising the requirements for 

newer submerged fill pipes. These new 

state requirements update the SIP 

consistent with new Federal 

requirements from January 10, 2008 area 

source National Emissions Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for gasoline 

dispensing facilities. The revisions also 

delete references to compliance dates 

which have passed. The rules are 

approvable because they are consistent 

with the Clean Air Act and EPA 

regulations, and should result in 

additional emission reductions of VOCs 

throughout Indiana. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 16, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2010–0545, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: aburano.douglas@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 408–2279. 

4. Mail: Doug Aburano, Chief, Control 

Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch 

(AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Doug Aburano, 

Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS