48730 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 157 / Friday, August 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA-APPROVED IOWA NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS—Continued 

Name of nonregulatory 

SIP provision 

Applicable geographic or 

nonattainment area 

State submittal 

date 

EPA Approval 

date Explanation 

(39) Regional Haze plan for the 

first implementation period.

Statewide .................................. 3/25/08 6/26/12, 77 FR 38007 [EPA–R07–OAR–2012–0153, 

FRL–9688–1] § 52.842(a); 

Limited Approval. 

[FR Doc. 2015–19588 Filed 8–13–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0454; FRL–9932–35- 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; 

Movement of the Northern Virginia 

Area From Virginia’s Nonattainment 

Area List to its Maintenance Area List 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the 

Virginia State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). The revisions move the localities 

(Counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Loudon, 

and Prince William; Cities of 

Alexandria, Fairfax, Falls Church, 

Manassas, and Manassas Park) of 

Northern Virginia from Virginia’s list of 

nonattainment areas to its list of 

maintenance areas for fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5). EPA is approving these 

revisions in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: This rule is effective on October 

13, 2015 without further notice, unless 

EPA receives adverse written comment 

by September 14, 2015. If EPA receives 

such comments, it will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register and inform the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2015–0454 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0454, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Program Planning, Air 

Protection Division, Mail code 3AP30, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2015– 

0454. 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. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality, 629 East Main 

Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Maria A. Pino, (215) 814–2181, or by 

email at pino.maria@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Particle pollution, or particulate 

matter, is a mixture of solid particles 

and liquid droplets found in the air. 

Particle pollution includes ‘‘inhalable 

coarse particles,’’ with diameters larger 

than 2.5 micrometers and smaller than 

10 micrometers and ‘‘fine particles,’’ 

with diameters that are 2.5 micrometers 

and smaller. Due to their small size, 

these particles often contribute to 

adverse health effects. EPA is required 

to set National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) under the authority 

of the CAA, for the purpose of 

controlling particle pollution. The first 

NAAQS for PM2.5 were established on 

July 16, 1997 (62 FR 38652). EPA 

promulgated an annual standard at a 

level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter 

(mg/m3), based on a three-year average of 

annual mean PM2.5 concentrations (the 

1997 annual PM2.5 standard). In the 

same rulemaking action, EPA 

promulgated a 24-hour standard of 65 

mg/m3, based on a three-year average of 

the 98th percentile of 24-hour 

concentrations. 

EPA published air quality area 

designations for the 1997 PM2.5

standards on January 5, 2005. In its 

rulemaking action, EPA designated the 

Washington, DC–MD–VA Area as 

nonattainment for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 standard. The Washington, DC– 

MD–VA area (Washington Area) is 

composed of the District of Columbia; 

Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince 

William Counties and the cities of 

Alexandria, Fairfax, Falls Church, 

Manassas, and Manassas Park in 

Virginia (the Northern Virginia area); 

and Charles, Frederick, Montgomery, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 157 / Friday, August 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 48731 

and Prince George’s Counties in 

Maryland. 

The District of Columbia Department 

of the Environment (DDOE), the 

Maryland Department of the 

Environment (MDE), and the Virginia 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(VADEQ), (collectively, the States), 

collaborated to develop redesignation 

requests and maintenance plans for the 

Washington Area for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA received the 1997 

annual PM2.5 redesignation requests and 

maintenance plans for the Washington 

Area from DDOE on June 3, 2013, from 

MDE on July 10, 2013, and from VADEQ 

on June 3, 2013. The Washington Area 

maintenance plan included motor 

vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for 

PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides (NOX) for the 

Washington Area for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 standard, which EPA approved for 

transportation conformity purposes. The 

emissions inventories included in the 

Washington Area maintenance plans 

were subsequently supplemented by the 

States to provide for emissions estimates 

of volatile organic compounds (VOC) 

and ammonia. The supplemental 

inventories were submitted to EPA on 

July 22, 2013 by DDOE, on July 26, 2013 

by MDE, and on July 17, 2013 by 

VADEQ. 

On October 6, 2014 (79 FR 60081), the 

EPA approved the States’ redesignation 

requests and maintenance plans for the 

Washington Area, including Northern 

Virginia, for the 1997 annual PM2.5

standard. Therefore, the designation of 

the Northern Virginia area, as part of the 

Washington Area, was changed from 

nonattainment to attainment. 

Subsequently, Virginia changed its lists 

of areas in nonattainment and 

maintenance within its regulations, 

located in 9 VAC5 Chapter 20, to reflect 

EPA’s redesignation of the Washington 

Area. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

On June 1, 2015, the Commonwealth 

of Virginia submitted a formal revision 

to its SIP. The SIP revision consists of 

a regulatory change that moves the 

Northern Virginia area (Counties of 

Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince 

William; Cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, 

Falls Church, Manassas, and Manassas 

Park), which was part of the Washington 

Area, from the list of nonattainment 

areas found in regulation 9 VAC 5–20– 

204 to the list of maintenance areas 

found in regulation 9 VAC 5–20–203. 

III. General Information Pertaining to 

SIP Submittals From the 

Commonwealth of Virginia 

In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation 

that provides, subject to certain 

conditions, for an environmental 

assessment (audit) ‘‘privilege’’ for 

voluntary compliance evaluations 

performed by a regulated entity. The 

legislation further addresses the relative 

burden of proof for parties either 

asserting the privilege or seeking 

disclosure of documents for which the 

privilege is claimed. Virginia’s 

legislation also provides, subject to 

certain conditions, for a penalty waiver 

for violations of environmental laws 

when a regulated entity discovers such 

violations pursuant to a voluntary 

compliance evaluation and voluntarily 

discloses such violations to the 

Commonwealth and takes prompt and 

appropriate measures to remedy the 

violations. Virginia’s Voluntary 

Environmental Assessment Privilege 

Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, provides 

a privilege that protects from disclosure 

documents and information about the 

content of those documents that are the 

product of a voluntary environmental 

assessment. The Privilege Law does not 

extend to documents or information 

that: (1) Are generated or developed 

before the commencement of a 

voluntary environmental assessment; (2) 

are prepared independently of the 

assessment process; (3) demonstrate a 

clear, imminent and substantial danger 

to the public health or environment; or 

(4) are required by law. 

On January 12, 1998, the 

Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the 

Attorney General provided a legal 

opinion that states that the Privilege 

Law, Va. Code § 10.1–1198, precludes 

granting a privilege to documents and 

information ‘‘required by law,’’ 

including documents and information 

‘‘required by Federal law to maintain 

program delegation, authorization or 

approval,’’ since Virginia must ‘‘enforce 

Federally authorized environmental 

programs in a manner that is no less 

stringent than their Federal 

counterparts. . . .’’ The opinion 

concludes that ‘‘[r]egarding § 10.1–1198, 

therefore, documents or other 

information needed for civil or criminal 

enforcement under one of these 

programs could not be privileged 

because such documents and 

information are essential to pursuing 

enforcement in a manner required by 

Federal law to maintain program 

delegation, authorization or approval.’’ 

Virginia’s Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 

10.1–1199, provides that ‘‘[t]o the extent 

consistent with requirements imposed 

by Federal law,’’ any person making a 

voluntary disclosure of information to a 

state agency regarding a violation of an 

environmental statute, regulation, 

permit, or administrative order is 

granted immunity from administrative 

or civil penalty. The Attorney General’s 

January 12, 1998 opinion states that the 

quoted language renders this statute 

inapplicable to enforcement of any 

Federally authorized programs, since 

‘‘no immunity could be afforded from 

administrative, civil, or criminal 

penalties because granting such 

immunity would not be consistent with 

Federal law, which is one of the criteria 

for immunity.’’ 

Therefore, EPA has determined that 

Virginia’s Privilege and Immunity 

statutes will not preclude the 

Commonwealth from enforcing its 

program consistent with the Federal 

requirements. In any event, because 

EPA has also determined that a state 

audit privilege and immunity law can 

affect only state enforcement and cannot 

have any impact on Federal 

enforcement authorities, EPA may at 

any time invoke its authority under the 

CAA, including, for example, sections 

113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the 

requirements or prohibitions of the state 

plan, independently of any state 

enforcement effort. In addition, citizen 

enforcement under section 304 of the 

CAA is likewise unaffected by this, or 

any, state audit privilege or immunity 

law. 

IV. Final Action 

EPA is approving the proposed 

regulatory amendment which moves the 

localities in Northern Virginia (Counties 

of Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and 

Prince William; Cities of Alexandria, 

Fairfax, Falls Church, Manassas, and 

Manassas Park) from the list of 

nonattainment areas found in regulation 

9 VAC 5–20–204 to the list of 

maintenance areas found in regulation 9 

VAC 5–20–203. EPA finds this revision 

to the SIP is in accordance with CAA 

requirements, including sections 107 

and 110 of the CAA. 

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because EPA views this 

as a noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipates no adverse comment. 

However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ 

section of today’s Federal Register, EPA 

is publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

SIP revision if adverse comments are 

filed. This rule will be effective on 

October 13, 2015 without further notice 

unless EPA receives adverse comment 

by September 14, 2015. If EPA receives 

adverse comment, EPA will publish a 

timely withdrawal in the Federal 

Register informing the public that the 

rule will not take effect. EPA will 

address all public comments in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
48732 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 157 / Friday, August 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

must 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. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rulemaking action, the EPA is 

finalizing regulatory text that includes 

incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, the EPA is finalizing the 

incorporation by reference of changes to 

9 VAC5 Chapter 20, specifically 

9VAC5–20–203 and 9VAC5–20–204, 

described in the amendments to 40 CFR 

part 52 set forth below. The EPA has 

made, and will continue to make, these 

documents generally available 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and/or in hard 

copy at the appropriate EPA office (See 

the ADDRESSES section of this preamble 

for more information). 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. General Requirements 

Under the CAA, 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 CAA. 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 CAA; 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 

revision applies to Northern Virginia 

and does not apply in Indian country, 

and EPA notes that it will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

B. Submission to Congress and the 

Comptroller General 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by October 13, 2015. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking action. This 

action, which moves the localities in 

Northern Virginia within the 

Washington Area (Counties of 

Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince 

William; Cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, 

Falls Church, Manassas, and Manassas 

Park) from the list of nonattainment 

areas found in regulation 9 VAC 5–20– 

204 to the list of maintenance areas 

found in regulation 9 VAC 5–20–203, 

may not be challenged later in 

proceedings to enforce its requirements. 

(See section 307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter. 

Dated: August 4, 2015. 

William C. Early, 

Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart VV—Virginia 

■ 2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entries 

for Sections 5–20–203 and 5–20–204. 

The revised text reads as follows: 

§ 52.2420 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 157 / Friday, August 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 48733 

EPA-APPROVED VIRGINIA REGULATIONS AND STATUTES

State citation Title/Subject State effective date EPA Approval date Explanation [former SIP citation] 

*******

9 VAC 5, Chapter 20 ..... General Provisions 

*******

Part II .............................. Air Quality Programs 

*******

5–20–203 ....................... Air Quality Maintenance 

Areas .............................

3/11/15 8/14/15 [Insert Federal 

Register Citation].

List of maintenance areas revised to include 

Northern Virginia localities for fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5). 

5–20–204 ....................... Nonattainment Areas .... 3/11/15 8/14/15 [Insert Federal 

Register Citation].

List of nonattainment areas revised to exclude 

Northern Virginia localities for fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5). 

*******

[FR Doc. 2015–20023 Filed 8–13–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0991; EPA–R05– 

OAR–2013–0435; FRL–9932–15-Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Indiana and Ohio; 

Infrastructure SIP Requirements for 

the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

approve elements of state 

implementation plan (SIP) submissions 

by Indiana regarding the infrastructure 

requirements of section 110 of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA) for the 2010 nitrogen 

dioxide (NO2) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS), and by Ohio regarding the 

infrastructure requirements of section 

110 of the CAA for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS. The infrastructure 

requirements are designed to ensure that 

the structural components of each 

state’s air quality management program 

are adequate to meet the requirements of 

the CAA. The proposed rulemaking for 

Ohio’s 2010 SO2 infrastructure 

submittal associated with today’s final 

action was published on July 25, 2014, 

and EPA received one comment letter 

during the comment period, which 

ended on August 25, 2015. In the July 

25, 2014 rulemaking, EPA also proposed 

approval for Ohio’s 2008 lead, 2008 

ozone, and 2010 NO2 infrastructure 

submittals. Those approvals have been 

finalized in separate rulemakings. The 

proposed rulemaking for Indiana’s 2010 

NO2 and SO2 infrastructure submittals 

associated with today’s final action was 

published on February 27, 2015, and 

EPA received one comment letter during 

the comment period, which ended on 

March 30, 2015. The concerns raised in 

these letters, as well as EPA’s responses, 

are addressed in this final action. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

September 14, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0991 (2010 

NO2 infrastructure elements) or EPA– 

R05–OAR–2013–0435 (2010 SO2

infrastructure elements). All documents 

in the docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., Confidential 

Business Information 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 www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and 

Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This 

facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays. We recommend that 

you telephone Sarah Arra at (312) 886– 

9401 before visiting the Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–9401, 

arra.sarah@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 is the background of these SIP 

submissions? 

II. What is our response to comments 

received on the proposed rulemaking? 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the background of these SIP 

submissions? 

A. What does this rulemaking address? 

This rulemaking addresses 

infrastructure SIP submissions from the 

Indiana Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM) submitted on 

January 15, 2013, for the 2010 NO2

NAAQS and on May 22, 2013, for the 

2010 SO2 NAAQS. This rulemaking also 

addresses infrastructure SIP 

submissions from the Ohio 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(OEPA) submitted on June 7, 2013, for 

the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

B. Why did the state make this SIP 

submission? 

Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the 

CAA, states are required to submit 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES