41846 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

(COTP) or the designated 

representatives. 

(1) Definitions. The following 

definitions apply to this section: 

(i) Designated Representative. A 

‘‘designated representative’’ is any Coast 

Guard commissioned, warrant or petty 

officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has 

been designated by the COTP, Sector 

Long Island Sound, to act on his or her 

behalf. The designated representative 

may be on an official patrol vessel or 

may be on shore and will communicate 

with vessels via VHF-FM radio or 

loudhailer. In addition, members of the 

Coast Guard Auxiliary may be present to 

inform vessel operators of this 

regulation. 

(ii) Official Patrol Vessels. Official 

patrol vessels may consist of any Coast 

Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or 

local law enforcement vessels assigned 

or approved by the COTP Sector Long 

Island Sound. 

(iii) Spectators. All persons and 

vessels not registered with the event 

sponsor as participants or official patrol 

vessels. 

(2) Spectators desiring to enter or 

operate within the regulated area should 

contact the COTP Sector Long Island 

Sound at 203–468–4401 (Sector LIS 

command center) or the designated 

representative via VHF channel 16 to 

obtain permission to do so. Spectators 

given permission to enter or operate in 

the regulated area must comply with all 

directions given to them by the COTP 

Sector Long Island Sound or the 

designated on-scene representative. 

(3) Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast 

Guard vessel or the designated 

representative, by siren, radio, flashing 

light or other means, the operator of the 

vessel shall proceed as directed. Failure 

to comply with a lawful direction may 

result in expulsion from the area, 

citation for failure to comply, or both. 

(4) Fireworks barges used in this 

location will have a sign on their port 

and starboard side labeled 

‘‘FIREWORKS—STAY AWAY’’. This 

sign will consist of 10 inch high by 1.5 

inch wide red lettering on a white 

background. 

Dated: June 20, 2013. 

J.M. Vojvodich, 

Captain, U. S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Sector Long Island Sound. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16713 Filed 7–11–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2012–1084] 

Safety Zones; Annual Fireworks 

Events in the Captain of the Port 

Buffalo Zone 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of 

regulation. 

SUMMARY: At various times throughout 

the month of July, the Coast Guard will 

enforce certain safety zones for annual 

fireworks events in the Captain of the 

Port Buffalo Zone. This action is 

necessary and intended for the safety of 

life and property on navigable waters 

during this event. During each 

enforcement period, no person or vessel 

may enter the respective safety zone 

without the permission of the Captain of 

the Port Buffalo. 

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 

165.939 will be enforced on the dates 

and times listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this notice, call 

or email Waterways Management 

Division, Coast Guard Sector Buffalo, 1 

Fuhrmann Blvd. Buffalo, NY 14203; 

Coast Guard telephone 716–843–9343, 

email 

SectorBuffaloMarineSafety@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast 

Guard will enforce the Safety Zones; 

Annual Fireworks Events in the Captain 

of the Port Buffalo Zone listed in 33 CFR 

165.939 for the following events: 

(1) Sheffield Lake Fireworks, Sheffield 

Lake, OH; The safety zone listed in 33 

CFR 165.939(a)(27) from 9:30 p.m. to 

10:50 p.m. on July 12, 2013. 

(2) French Festival Fireworks, Cape 

Vincent, NY; The safety zone listed in 

33 CFR 165.939(a)(3) from 9:15 p.m. to 

11 p.m. on July 13, 2013. 

(3) Oswego Harborfest, Oswego, NY; 

The safety zone listed in 33 CFR 

165.939(a)(7) from 8:30 p.m. to 10:30 

p.m. on July 27, 2013. 

Pursuant to 33 CFR 165.23, entry into, 

transiting, or anchoring within these 

safety zones during an enforcement 

period is prohibited unless authorized 

by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his 

designated representative. Those 

seeking permission to enter one of these 

safety zones may request permission 

from the Captain of Port Buffalo via 

channel 16, VHF–FM. Vessels and 

persons granted permission to enter one 

of these safety zones shall obey the 

directions of the Captain of the Port 

Buffalo or his designated representative. 

While within a safety zone, all vessels 

shall operate at the minimum speed 

necessary to maintain a safe course. 

This notice is issued under authority 

of 33 CFR 165.939 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). 

In addition to this notice in the Federal 

Register, the Coast Guard will provide 

the maritime community with advance 

notification of these enforcement 

periods via Broadcast Notice to 

Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners. If 

the Captain of the Port Buffalo 

determines that one of these safety 

zones need not be enforced for the full 

duration stated in this notice he or she 

may use a Broadcast Notice to Mariners 

to grant general permission to enter the 

respective safety zone. 

Dated: June 27, 2013. 

J.S. Imahori, 

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting 

Captain of the Port Buffalo. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16863 Filed 7–11–13; 8:45 a.m.] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0180, FRL–9830–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; New York State 

Ozone Implementation Plan Revision 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a revision to 

the New York State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) for ozone concerning the 

control of oxides of nitrogen. The SIP 

revision consists of amendments to Title 

6 of the New York Codes, Rules and 

Regulations Part 200, ‘‘General 

Provisions,’’ Part 212, ‘‘General Process 

Emission Sources,’’ Part 220, ‘‘Portland 

Cement Plants and Glass Plants,’’ and 

Subpart 227–2, ‘‘Reasonably Available 

Control Technology (RACT) For Major 

Facilities of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX).’’ 

The intended effect of this action is to 

approve control strategies, required by 

the Clean Air Act, which will result in 

emission reductions that will help attain 

and maintain the national ambient air 

quality standards for ozone. 

DATES: This rule will be effective August 

12, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0180. All 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 41847 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

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, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

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. The Air 

Programs Branch dockets are available 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Air Programs Branch 

telephone number is 212–637–4249. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirk 

J. Wieber, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007–1866, (212) 637–3381. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What was included in New York’s 

submittals? 

II. What comments did EPA receive in 

response to its proposal? 

III. What is EPA’s evaluation of part 212, 

‘‘General Process Emission Sources’’? 

IV. What is EPA’s evaluation of part 220, 

‘‘Portland Cement Plants and Glass 

Plants’’? 

V. What is EPA’s evaluation of part 227–2, 

‘‘Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) For Major Facilities 

of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX)’’? 

VI. What other revisions did New York 

make? 

VII. What is EPA’s conclusion? 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What was included in New York’s 

submittals? 

On August 19, 2010 and December 15, 

2010, the New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), 

submitted to EPA proposed revisions to 

the SIP, which included State adopted 

revisions to four regulations contained 

in Title 6 of the New York Code of Rules 

and Regulations (6 NYCRR) Part 200, 

‘‘General Provisions,’’ Part 212, 

‘‘General Process Emission Sources,’’ 

Part 220, ‘‘Portland Cement Plants and 

Glass Plants,’’ and Part 227–2, 

‘‘Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) For Major Facilities 

of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX),’’ with 

effective dates of January 1, 2011, 

September 30, 2010, July 11, 2010 and 

July 8, 2010, respectively. 

II. What comments did EPA receive in 

response to its proposal? 

On April 10, 2013 (78 FR 21302), EPA 

proposed to approve New York’s revised 

Parts 200, 212, 220 and 227–2. For a 

detailed discussion on the content and 

requirements of the revisions to New 

York’s regulations, the reader is referred 

to EPA’s proposed rulemaking action. 

In response to EPA’s April 10, 2013 

proposed rulemaking action, EPA 

received no public comments. 

III. What is EPA’s evaluation of part 

212, ‘‘General Process Emission 

Sources’’? 

The NYSDEC revised 6 NYCRR Part 

212, by adding section 212.12, ‘‘Hot mix 

asphalt production plants,’’ to include 

control requirements for hot mix asphalt 

production plants. These control 

requirements will be specifically aimed 

at reducing NOX emissions resulting 

from combustion during the aggregate 

drying and heating process. 

With the exception of section 212.12, 

NOX RACT requirements under Part 212 

affect only major facilities. Major 

facilities or major sources are those that 

have a potential to emit NOX emissions 

in excess of 100 tons/yr (upstate) and 25 

tons/yr (downstate or in the New York 

Metropolitan Area). Most, if not all, hot 

mix asphalt plants in New York State 

are minor sources. These new 

requirements will therefore be targeted 

primarily at minor sources. On February 

28, 2013, New York submitted a letter 

to EPA certifying that there are no 

‘‘major source’’ asphalt production 

plants located in New York State. 

Part 212 contains the required 

elements for a federally enforceable 

rule: Emission control requirements, 

compliance procedures and test 

methods, compliance dates and record 

keeping provisions. Therefore, EPA is 

approving the revisions to Part 212. 

IV. What is EPA’s evaluation of part 

220, ‘‘Portland Cement Plants and Glass 

Plants’’? 

The NYSDEC revised 6 NYCRR Part 

220, which is divided into two subparts: 

220–1 for portland cement plants; and 

220–2 for glass manufacturing plants. In 

addition to other requirements, the 

existing regulation imposed RACT 

requirements on NOX emissions from 

portland cement kilns. The NYSDEC 

revised Part 220 to require updated NOX

RACT for cement kilns at portland 

cement plants, and to require NOX

RACT for glass furnaces at glass plants. 

The revisions will apply statewide to 

major facilities only. Major facilities are 

those that have a potential to emit NOX

emissions that exceed 100 tons/yr 

(upstate) and 25 tons/yr (downstate). 

The NYSDEC is taking a RACT 

approach that requires a facility specific 

analysis. The plant owner or operator 

will be required to perform a facility 

specific RACT analysis for emissions of 

NOX that includes proposed NOX RACT 

emission limit(s), identifies the 

procedures and monitoring equipment 

to be used to demonstrate compliance 

with the proposed NOX RACT emission 

limit(s), and includes a schedule for 

equipment installation. The RACT 

analysis will be submitted to the 

NYSDEC for review and approval and 

subsequently submitted to EPA as a 

proposed revision to the SIP. 

Subpart 220–1 Portland Cement Plants 

It is EPA’s understanding that there 

are three portland cement plants located 

in New York State that are subject to the 

RACT provisions of subpart 220–1 

(Holcim, Lafarge and Lehigh). These 

three facilities are also subject to New 

York’s regional haze plan’s best 

available retrofit technologies (BART) 

provisions pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 

249. 

On August 28, 2012 (77 FR 51915), 

EPA approved the BART determinations 

for the three portland cement plants 

pursuant to Part 249. Although EPA 

believes that the BART determinations 

approved for these facilities would also 

constitute RACT, New York is obligated 

to perform RACT evaluations and 

submit the RACT determinations to EPA 

as SIP revisions in order to satisfy the 

subpart 220–1.6(b)(4) RACT 

requirement and sections 172(c)(1) and 

182(b) of the Clean Air Act (Act). In a 

letter dated February 28, 2013 to EPA, 

New York commits to submit the 

applicable single source NOX RACT 

determinations to EPA by December 1, 

2013. 

EPA evaluated the provisions of 

subpart 220–1 for consistency with the 

Act, EPA regulations, and EPA policy, 

and is conditionally approving them 

based on New York submitting the 

individual single source RACT 

determinations to EPA by December 1, 

2013. 

Subpart 220–2 Glass Plants 

It is EPA’s understanding that there 

are four glass plants located in New 

York State. Subpart 220–2 does not 

identify a specific control strategy or 

emission limit as RACT for these 

facilities and requires individual source 

specific RACT determinations. To date, 

EPA has not received any of those 

source specific RACT determinations. 

However, in a letter dated February 28, 

2013 to EPA, New York commits to 

submit the applicable single source NOX


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
41848 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

RACT determinations to EPA by 

December 1, 2013. 

EPA evaluated the provisions of 

subpart 220–2 for consistency with the 

Act, EPA regulations, and EPA policy, 

and is conditionally approving them 

based on New York submitting the 

individual single source RACT 

determinations to EPA by December 1, 

2013. 

V. What is EPA’s evaluation of part 

227–2, ‘‘Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) for Major Facilities 

of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX)’’? 

New York adopted revisions to 

Subpart 227–2 for the purpose of 

imposing more stringent emission limits 

on major stationary sources of NOX that 

contribute to local and regional 

nonattainment of the 1997 and 2008 

ozone standards. The revisions to 

Subpart 227–2 essentially entail 

increasing the stringency of emissions 

limits for six of the source categories 

and lowering of the size thresholds for 

two categories of sources. There are also 

two revisions that will allow subject 

sources increased flexibility in 

achieving compliance—one allows 

different owners to engage in a systems 

averaging plan and the second allows a 

permanent shutdown by a date certain 

as a compliance option. 

Regarding the systems averaging plan, 

EPA has not classified any 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment areas in New York as 

‘‘severe.’’ However, EPA classified the 

New York City Metropolitan area 

(NYMA) as severe nonattainment for the 

1-hour standard. Although EPA revoked 

the 1-hour standard, the ‘‘severe’’ 

classification for the NYMA 1-hour area 

was retained to maintain consistency 

with existing SIP-approved regulations 

and the ‘‘anti-backsliding’’ provisions of 

the Act. The counties affected by the 1- 

hour ‘‘severe’’ classification are the 

same counties defined by EPA for New 

York’s marginal 2008 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area for the NYMA and 

include the same counties now being 

maintained for the 1997 8-hour 

moderate ozone NYMA. As discussed in 

the April 10, 2013 proposed rule, since 

New York avoids potential confusion by 

defining the affected counties in the 

‘‘severe nonattainment area,’’ this is 

acceptable to EPA. 

Therefore, since the NYMA is the 

only area designated as severe for ozone, 

sources in the NYMA cannot average 

with sources outside the NYMA. 

EPA believes that the new 

presumptive emission limits and other 

control requirements will result in 

additional NOX reductions throughout 

the State thereby strengthening New 

York’s ozone SIP and will help the State 

attain and maintain the 1997 ozone 

standard and help achieve attainment of 

the 2008 8-hour ozone standard. In 

addition, New York’s revised system 

averaging plan is acceptable to EPA as 

it is enforceable through federally 

enforceable Title V operating permits 

and it reflects current situations where 

there could be multiple ownership of a 

particular facility. 

EPA evaluated the provisions of Part 

227–2 for consistency with the Act, EPA 

regulations, and EPA policy and is 

approving them. 

VI. What other revisions did New York 

make? 

New York also made administrative 

changes to Part 200, ‘‘General 

Provisions’’ which reflect 

implementation of the Part 212, 220 and 

227–2 provisions. The Part 200 

revisions also reflect implementation of 

provisions for three previously 

approved New York regulations, Part 

228, ‘‘Surface Coating Processes, 

Commercial and Industrial Adhesives, 

Sealants and Primers,’’ Part 234, 

‘‘Graphic Arts,’’ and Part 241, ‘‘Asphalt 

Pavement and Asphalt Based Surface 

Coating,’’ (see 77 FR 13974). It is 

important to note that EPA is approving 

only those revisions made to Part 200, 

specifically sections 200.1 and 200.9, as 

effective January 1, 2011. 

VII. What is EPA’s conclusion? 

EPA has evaluated New York’s 

submittal for consistency with the Act, 

EPA regulations, and EPA policy. EPA 

is approving revisions made to 6 

NYCRR Part 200, ‘‘General Provisions,’’ 

Part 212, ‘‘General Process Emission 

Sources,’’ Part 220, ‘‘Portland Cement 

Plants and Glass Plants,’’ and Part 227– 

2, ‘‘Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) For Major Facilities 

of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX)’’ with 

effective dates of January 1, 2011, 

September 30, 2010, July 11, 2010 and 

July 8, 2010, respectively, as meeting 

the SIP requirements of the Act. EPA is: 

Approving sections 200.1 and 200.9; 

approving Part 212; conditionally 

approving Part 220 based on New York’s 

commitment to submit the individual 

RACT determinations to EPA as SIP 

revisions by December 1, 2013; and, 

approving Part 227–2. These revisions 

meet the requirements of the Act and 

EPA’s regulations, and are consistent 

with EPA’s guidance and policy. EPA is 

taking this action pursuant to section 

110 and part D of the Act and EPA’s 

regulations. 

EPA is conditionally approving New 

York’s proposed revisions to 6 NYCRR 

Part 220 based on New York’s February 

28, 2013 letter, committing to submit 

the applicable NOX RACT single source 

SIPs by December 1, 2013. 

EPA is also correcting a typographical 

error to table (c), ‘‘EPA approved 

regulations’’ in 40 CFR 52.1670 for the 

Part 241, ‘‘Asphalt Pavement and 

Asphalt Based Surface Coating’’ entry 

which EPA approved on March 8, 2012 

(77 FR 13974). 

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 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 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 41849 

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. 

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). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by September 10, 

2013. 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. This action 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, Hydrocarbons, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of 

Nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: June 27, 2013. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations 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 HH—New York 

■ 2. In 52.1670, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended under Title 6 by: 

■ a. Revising the entry for Part 200, 

Section 200.1; 

■ b. Removing the entry for Sections 

200.6, 200.7 and 200.9, and adding in its 

place an entry for Sections 200.6 and 

200.7, and an entry for Section 200.9; 

■ c. Revising the entries for Parts 212, 

220, Subpart 227–2 and Part 241 to read 

as follows: 

52.1670 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED NEW YORK STATE REGULATIONS AND LAWS

New York State regulation State 

effective date Latest EPA approval date Comments 

Title 6: 

Part 200, General Provisions

Section 200.1 

1/1/11 7/12/13 [Insert page number 

where the document begins].

The word odor is removed from the Subpart 

200.1(d) definition of ‘‘air contaminant or air pollutant.’’ 

Redesignation of non-attainment areas to attainment areas (200.1(av)) does not relieve a source 

from compliance with previously applicable requirements as per letter of Nov. 13, 1981 from 

H. Hovey, NYSDEC. 

Changes in definitions are acceptable to EPA unless a previously approved definition is necessary for implementation of an existing SIP regulation. 

EPA is including the definition of ‘‘Federally enforceable’’ with the understanding that (1) the 

definition applies to provisions of a Title V permit 

that are correctly identified as Federally enforceable, and (2) a source accepts operating limits 

and conditions to lower its potential to emit to 

become a minor source, not to ‘‘avoid’’ applicable requirements. 

Sections 200.6 and 200.7 2/25/00 4/22/08, 73 FR 21548. 

Section 200.9 1/1/11 7/12/13 [Insert page number 

where the document begins].

EPA is approving reference documents that are not 

already Federally enforceable. 

* * * * * * * 

Part 212, General Process 

Emission Sources.

9/30/10 7/12/13 [Insert page number 

where the document begins].

SIP revisions submitted in accordance with 

§ 212.10(c)(3) and 212.12(c) are effective only if 

approved by EPA. 

* * * * * * * 

Part 220, Portland Cement 

Plants and Glass Plants.

7/11/10 7/12/13 [Insert page number 

where the document begins].

SIP revisions submitted in accordance with § 220– 

1.6(b)(4) and 220–2.3(a)(4) are effective only if 

approved by EPA. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
41850 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA-APPROVED NEW YORK STATE REGULATIONS AND LAWS—Continued 

New York State regulation State 

effective date Latest EPA approval date Comments 

*******

Subpart 227–2, Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT) For Major 

Facilities of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX).

7/8/10 7/12/13 [Insert page number 

where the document begins].

SIP revisions submitted in accordance with § 227– 

2.3(c) are effective only if approved by EPA. 

* * * * * * * 

Part 241, Asphalt Pavement 

and Asphalt Based Surface 

Coating.

1/1/11 3/8/12, 77 FR 13974. 

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–16493 Filed 7–11–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2007–0602; FRL–9831–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans for North 

Carolina: Partial Withdrawal 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule; partial withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: Due to comments received, 

EPA is publishing a partial withdrawal 

of the direct final approval of revisions 

to the North Carolina State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). EPA stated 

in the direct final rule that if EPA 

received adverse comments by June 17, 

2013, the rule would be withdrawn and 

not take effect. 

DATES: This partial withdrawal is 

effective July 12, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara 

Waterson, Air Planning Branch, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Phone 

number: (404) 562–9061; Email: 

waterson.sara@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 

16, 2013 (78 FR 28747), EPA published 

a direct final rulemaking to approve a 

portion of North Carolina’s February 3, 

2010, SIP submission that updates the 

North Carolina SIP to incorporate EPA’s 

current national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) for ozone, lead, and 

particulate matter (PM). The SIP 

submission contains amendments to 

North Carolina Rules 15A NCAC 02D 

.0405, .0408, .0409, and .0410 reflecting 

EPA’s current NAAQS for the 

aforementioned criteria pollutants. On 

May 16, 2013, EPA also published an 

accompanying proposed rulemaking to 

approve the SIP revision in the event 

that EPA received adverse comments on 

the direct final rulemaking. See 78 FR 

28775. 

In the direct final rulemaking, EPA 

explained that the Agency was 

publishing the rule without prior 

proposal because the Agency viewed the 

submittal as a non-controversial SIP 

amendment and anticipated no adverse 

comments. Further, EPA explained that 

the Agency was publishing a separate 

document in the proposed rules section 

of the Federal Register to serve as the 

proposal to approve the SIP revision 

should an adverse comment be filed. 

EPA also noted that the rules would be 

effective on July 15, 2013, without 

further notice unless the Agency 

received adverse comment by June 17, 

2013. EPA explained that if the Agency 

received such comments, then EPA 

would publish a document withdrawing 

the final rule and informing the public 

that the rule would not take effect. It 

was also explained that all public 

comments received would then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed rule, and that 

EPA would not institute a second 

comment period on these actions. The 

public was advised that if no comments 

were received that the rules would be 

effective on July 15, 2013, with no 

further actions on the proposed rule. 

On May 23, 2013, EPA received a 

comment from a single commenter that 

could be viewed as adverse with regard 

to the approval action that EPA 

contemplated for the PM portion of the 

North Carolina SIP revision. In 

summary, the commenter noted that the 

portion of North Carolina’s SIP revision 

related to the PM2.5 NAAQS that was 

addressed in EPA’s May 16, 2013, 

rulemaking actions did not reflect EPA’s 

December 2012 revision to this 

standard. The commenter recommended 

that EPA approve the SIP as submitted 

and encourage North Carolina to update 

its SIP to reflect the December 2012 

update within a reasonable amount of 

time. The commenter expressed support 

for EPA’s approval of the portions of the 

SIP revision that incorporated updates 

to the other NAAQS subject to the May 

16, 2013, rulemakings. 

As result of this comment, EPA is 

withdrawing the direct final action 

related solely to the PM portion of the 

North Carolina SIP revision. 

Specifically, through today’s action, 

EPA is withdrawing the May 16, 2013, 

direct final approval of North Carolina’s 

SIP submission to update the PM 

NAAQS via incorporation of amended 

North Carolina Rules 15A NCAC 02D 

.0410 ‘‘PM2.5 Particulate Matter’’ and 

15A NCAC 02D .0409 ‘‘PM10 Particulate 

Matter’’ into the SIP. 

As indicated in the direct final 

rulemaking, EPA’s May 16, 2013, 

proposed rulemaking approving North 

Carolina’s SIP revision related to the PM 

NAAQS is still in effect. The Agency is 

not opening an additional comment 

period and will only consider the 

comments received prior to June 17, 

2013, the close of the public comment 

period. If EPA determines that it is 

appropriate to finalize the proposed 

approval of the North Carolina SIP 

revision related to the PM NAAQS, EPA 

will publish a final rule which will 

include a response to the comment 

received. In the event that EPA 

determines that it is not appropriate to 

finalize the proposed approval related to 

the PM NAAQS, EPA may issue a 

subsequent proposal with a different 

course of action. 

Today’s withdrawal action does not 

affect EPA’s May 16, 2013, direct final 

action on North Carolina’s SIP revision 

related to the ozone and lead NAAQS. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES