Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 43153 

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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

and Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: June 30, 2011. 

Al Armendariz, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart GG—New Mexico 

■ 2. Section 52.1620 is amended in 

paragraph (c) by revising the entry for 

Part 74 under ‘‘New Mexico 

Administrative Code (NMAC) Title 20— 

Environment Protection Chapter 2—Air 

Quality’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.1620 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA APPROVED NEW MEXICO REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject 

State 

approval/ 

effective date 

EPA approval date Comments 

New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) Title 20—Environment Protection Chapter 2—Air Quality 

*******

Part 74 .............. Permits—Prevention of Significant Deterioration.1/1/2011 7/20/2011 [Insert FR page number where 

document begins].

* * * * * * * 

§ 52.1634 [Amended] 

■ 3. Section 52.1634 is amended by 

removing and reserving paragraph (d). 

[FR Doc. 2011–18125 Filed 7–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2010–1025; FRL–9436–2] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plan; New 

Jersey and New York; Final 

Disapproval of Interstate Transport 

State Implementation Plan Revision for 

the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

disapprove the New Jersey and the New 

York State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted to address 

significant contribution to 

nonattainment or interference with 

maintenance in another state with 

respect to the 2006 24-hour fine particle 

(PM2.5) national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS). On January 20, 

2010, New Jersey submitted a SIP 

revision to address sections of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA) concerning interstate 

transport requirements, and the sections 

of the CAA concerning infrastructure 

requirements. On March 23, 2010, New 

York submitted a SIP revision to address 

the section of the CAA concerning 

interstate transport, and sections 

110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA concerning 

infrastructure SIP requirements. In this 

action, EPA is taking final action to 

disapprove the portion of the New 

Jersey and the New York SIP revisions 

that addresses the requirement 

prohibiting a state’s emissions from 

significantly contributing to 

nonattainment or interfering with 

maintenance of the NAAQS in any other 

state. The remaining elements of the 

submittals are not addressed in this 

action and will be addressed in a 

separate action. The intended effect of 

this action will be the implementation 

of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) 

for the State no later than 2 years from 

date of the disapproval. The proposed 

Transport Rule, when final, is the FIP 

that EPA intends to implement for the 

State. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective on August 19, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R02–OAR– 

2010–1025. All documents in the docket 

are listed at http://www.regulations.gov. 

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, 

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 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. This Docket 

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

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays. The Docket telephone 

number is 212–637–4249. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kenneth Fradkin 

(fradkin.kenneth@epa.gov), Air 

Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th 

Floor, New York, New York 10007– 

1866, (212) 637–4249. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This section provides additional 

information by addressing the following 

questions: 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

II. What comments did EPA receive in 

response to the proposal? 

III. What are EPA’s conclusions? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is taking final action to 

disapprove portions of the submissions 

from the State of New Jersey and the 

State of New York that were submitted 

to demonstrate that those states have 

adequately addressed elements of CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). Those 

elements require a state’s SIP to contain 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
43154 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

adequate provisions to prohibit air 

pollutant emissions from sources within 

a state from significantly contributing to 

nonattainment in or interference with 

maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS in any other state. The New 

Jersey and New York submissions do 

not contain adequate provisions to 

prohibit air pollutant emissions from 

within the states from significantly 

contributing to nonattainment in or 

interference with maintenance of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in other 

downwind states. 

The remaining elements of the New 

Jersey and New York submittals, 

including the section 110 infrastructure, 

and section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) regarding 

interfering with measures required in 

the applicable SIP for another state 

designed to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality and protect 

visibility, are not addressed in this 

action and will be acted on in a separate 

rulemaking. 

For additional details on EPA’s 

analysis and findings, the reader is 

referred to the proposal published in the 

January 26, 2011 Federal Register (76 

FR 4579) which is available on line at 

http://www.regulations.gov, Docket 

number EPA–R02–OAR–2010–1025. 

II. What comments did EPA receive in 

response to the proposal? 

EPA received one comment letter on 

the January 26, 2011 proposal. The letter 

can be found on the internet in the 

electronic docket for this action. To 

access the letter, please go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and search for 

Docket No. EPA–R02–OAR–2010–1025, 

or contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph above. The discussion below 

addresses those comments and our 

response. 

A. Comment From the State of New 

Jersey Concerning the New Jersey 

Submittal 

Comment: The commenter requests 

that EPA approve its SIP Revision 

because New Jersey has adopted multipollutant performance standards and 

met its rule commitments to address the 

emissions from electric generating units. 

In addition, New Jersey’s air quality 

levels are in compliance with the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

EPA Response: EPA recognizes New 

Jersey’s actions in improving air quality 

in the state and reducing the transport 

of emissions to downwind areas, 

including adopting multi-pollutant 

performance standards for electric 

generating units. However, despite such 

actions by New Jersey, EPA’s 

evaluation, as discussed in the proposed 

disapproval, demonstrated that New 

Jersey’s submittal is inadequate. 

EPA notes that much of the recent 

improvement in air quality has resulted 

from the promulgation of the Clean Air 

Interstate Rule (CAIR). This rule was 

remanded to EPA in 2008 and will not 

remain in place indefinitely. Reductions 

associated with the CAIR thus also 

cannot be said to be permanent. EPA’s 

modeling analysis, conducted for the 

proposed Transport Rule, as proposed 

on August 2, 2010, in the Federal 

Register (75 FR 45210) demonstrates 

that emissions from New Jersey 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS in downwind areas. Therefore, 

EPA cannot approve New Jersey’s 

submittal. 

III. What are EPA’s conclusions? 

EPA has evaluated the New Jersey and 

New York submittals for consistency 

with the CAA, EPA regulations, and 

EPA policy. The demonstrations 

submitted by New Jersey and New York 

do not meet the requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) because the states did 

not evaluate or demonstrate with a 

technical analysis that the emissions 

reduction measures provided in their 

SIP revisions assure that they do not 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is finalizing 

the disapproval of the portions of the 

New Jersey and the New York SIP 

revisions that address the section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirement 

prohibiting a state’s emissions from 

significantly contributing to 

nonattainment or interfering with 

maintenance of the NAAQS in any other 

state. 

EPA is taking no action at this time on 

the remainder of the demonstration, 

including sections 110(a)(1) and (2) 

regarding infrastructure requirements, 

and section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) regarding 

interference with measures required in 

the applicable SIP for another state 

designed to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality and protect 

visibility. They will be addressed in a 

separate rulemaking. 

Under section 179(a) of the CAA, final 

disapproval of a submittal that 

addresses a requirement of a Part D Plan 

(42 U.S.C. 7501–7515) or is required in 

response to a finding of substantial 

inadequacy as described in section 

110(k)(5) (42 U.S.C. 7410(k)(5)) (SIP 

call) starts a sanctions clock. The 

provisions in the submittal we are 

disapproving were not submitted to 

meet either of those requirements. 

Therefore, no sanctions are triggered for 

this disapproval. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

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 act on state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. 

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and is therefore not 

subject to review under the Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq, because this 

SIP disapproval under section 110 and 

subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act 

will not in-and-of-itself create any new 

information collection burdens but 

simply disapproves certain State 

requirements for inclusion into the SIP. 

Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to conduct 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements unless the 

agency certifies that the rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small not-for-profit enterprises, and 

small governmental jurisdictions. For 

purposes of assessing the impacts of 

today’s rule on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 

CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a 

city, county, town, school district or 

special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s rule on small entities, 

I certify that this action will not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 43155 

number of small entities. This rule does 

not impose any requirements or create 

impacts on small entities. This SIP 

disapproval under section 110 and 

subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act 

will not in-and-of-itself create any new 

requirements but simply disapproves 

certain State requirements for inclusion 

into the SIP. Accordingly, it affords no 

opportunity for EPA to fashion for small 

entities less burdensome compliance or 

reporting requirements or timetables or 

exemptions from all or part of the rule. 

The fact that the Clean Air Act 

prescribes that various consequences 

(e.g., higher offset requirements) may or 

will flow from this disapproval does not 

mean that EPA either can or must 

conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis 

for this action. Therefore, this action 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action contains no Federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538 for State, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. EPA 

has determined that the disapproval 

action does not include a Federal 

mandate that may result in estimated 

costs of $100 million or more to either 

State, local, or tribal governments in the 

aggregate, or to the private sector. This 

action disapproves pre-existing 

requirements under State or local law, 

and imposes no new requirements. 

Accordingly, no additional costs to 

State, local, or tribal governments, or to 

the private sector, result from this 

action. 

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999), requires EPA to develop an 

accountable process to ensure 

‘‘meaningful and timely input by State 

and local officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have federalism 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have 

federalism implications’’ is defined in 

the Executive Order to include 

regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct 

effects on the States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government.’’ 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132, because it 

merely disapproves certain State 

requirements for inclusion into the SIP 

and does not alter the relationship or 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. Thus, Executive Order 13132 

does not apply to this action. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because the SIP EPA is 

disapproving would not 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. Thus, Executive 

Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because it 

because it is not an economically 

significant regulatory action based on 

health or safety risks subject to 

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997). This SIP disapproval 

under section 110 and subchapter I, part 

D of the Clean Air Act will not in-andof-itself create any new regulations but 

simply disapproves certain State 

requirements for inclusion into the SIP. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 

2001) because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 

note) directs EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards in its regulatory 

activities unless to do so would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical 

standards (e.g., materials specifications, 

test methods, sampling procedures, and 

business practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA 

to provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. 

The EPA believes that this action is 

not subject to requirements of Section 

12(d) of NTTAA because application of 

those requirements would be 

inconsistent with the Clean Air Act. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 

(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA lacks the discretionary authority 

to address environmental justice in this 

action. In reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve or disapprove 

state choices, based on the criteria of the 

Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action 

merely disapproves certain State 

requirements for inclusion into the SIP 

under section 110 and subchapter I, part 

D of the Clean Air Act and will not inand-of itself create any new 

requirements. Accordingly, it 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. 

K. 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. 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
43156 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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

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

L. 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 19, 

2011. 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).) 

Statutory Authority 

The statutory authority for this action 

is provided by sections 110 of the CAA, 

as amended (42 U.S.C. 7410). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter. 

Dated: June 1, 2011. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2011–17742 Filed 7–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2011–0215; FRL–9435–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plan; Missouri; 

Final Disapproval of Interstate 

Transport State Implementation Plan 

Revision for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 

NAAQS 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to our authority 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), 

the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) is taking final action to 

disapprove the portion of the 

‘‘Infrastructure’’ State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) (CAA section 110(a)(1) and 

(2)) submittal from the State of Missouri 

intended to address the CAA section 

relating to the ‘‘interstate transport’’ 

requirements for the 2006 24-hour fine 

particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) that 

prohibit a state from significantly 

contributing to nonattainment or 

interfering with maintenance of the 

NAAQS in any other state. This final 

action to disapprove the ‘‘interstate 

transport’’ portion of the Missouri SIP 

submittal received by EPA on December 

28, 2009, only relates to those 

provisions and does not address the 

other portions of Missouri’s December 

28, 2009, submission. The rationale for 

this action and additional detail on this 

disapproval were described in EPA’s 

proposed rulemaking published in the 

Federal Register on March 18, 2011. 

The effect of this action will be the 

promulgation of a Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) for Missouri 

no later than two years from the date of 

disapproval. EPA’s proposed Transport 

Rule, when final, is the FIP that EPA 

intends to implement for Missouri. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective on August 19, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R07–OAR–2011–0215. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., Confidential Business Information 

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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 7, in the Air Planning 

and Development Branch, of the Air and 

Waste Management Division, 901 North 

5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. 

EPA requests that, if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The 

interested persons wanting to examine 

these documents should make an 

appointment with the office at least 24 

hours in advance. The Regional Office 

official hours of business are Monday 

through Friday, 8 to 4:30, excluding 

Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Elizabeth Kramer, Environmental 

Scientist, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas 

City, Kansas 66101; telephone number: 

(913) 551–7186; fax number: (913) 551– 

7844; e-mail address: 

kramer.elizabeth@epa.gov. 

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 September 19, 2011. 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).) 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. These sections provide additional 

information on this final action: 

I. Background 

II. Final Action 

III. Administrative Requirements 

I. Background 

On March 18, 2011 (76 FR 14835), 

EPA proposed to disapprove a portion 

of the ‘‘Infrastructure’’ SIP (CAA 

110(a)(1) and (2)) submittal from the 

State of Missouri relating to the 

interstate transport element of 

infrastructure (CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)). EPA received no 

comments on the proposed disapproval. 

For additional detail on EPA’s rationale 

this final action, see the proposed 

rulemaking. 

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

thirteen required elements that 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIPs must address, as 

applicable, including section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i), which pertains to 

interstate transport of certain emissions. 

These ‘‘good neighbor’’ provisions 

require each state to submit a SIP that 

prohibits emissions which adversely 

affect another state in the ways 

contemplated in the statute. The section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i), portion of Missouri’s SIP 

must prevent sources in the State from 

emitting pollutants in amounts which 

will: (I) Contribute significantly to 

nonattainment of the NAAQS in other 

states and interfere with maintenance of 

the NAAQS in other states and (II) 

interfere with provisions to prevent 

significant deterioration of air quality in 

other states or interfere with efforts to 

protect visibility in other states. 

On December 28, 2009, EPA received 

a SIP revision from the State of Missouri 

intended to address the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2) including the 

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

for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In 

this final rulemaking, EPA is 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES