47092 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

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 proposed rule for 

clarifying the statutes and regulations in 

the Maryland State Implementation Plan 

for the preconstruction permitting 

requirements for electric generating 

stations in Maryland 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, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: July 22, 2011. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2011–19799 Filed 8–3–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[Docket No. EPA–R02–OAR–2011–0499; 

FRL–9448–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Reasonably 

Available Control Technology for 

Oxides of Nitrogen for a Specific 

Source in the State of New Jersey 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) for ozone submitted by the 

State of New Jersey. This SIP revision 

consists of a source-specific reasonably 

available control technology (RACT) 

determination for controlling oxides of 

nitrogen from the stationary 

reciprocating, diesel fuel fired, internal 

combustion engines operated by the 

Naval Weapons Station Earle located in 

Colts Neck, New Jersey. This action 

proposes an approval of the sourcespecific RACT determination that was 

made by New Jersey in accordance with 

the provisions of its regulation to help 

meet the national ambient air quality 

standard for ozone. The intended effect 

of this proposed rule is to approve 

source-specific emissions limitations 

required by the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 6, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket Number EPA–R02– 

OAR–2011–0499, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: Werner.Raymond@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 212–637–3901. 

• Mail: Raymond Werner, Chief, Air 

Programs Branch, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007–1866. 

• Hand Delivery: Raymond Werner, 

Chief, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th 

Floor, New York, New York 10007– 

1866. Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Regional Office’s normal 

hours of operation. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 

excluding Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket No. EPA–R02–OAR- 2011–0499. 

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 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://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 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 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 or any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

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

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region II Office, Air Programs Branch, 

290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 

New York 10007–1866. EPA requests, if 

at all possible, that you contact the 

individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to view 

the hard copy of the docket. You may 

view the hard copy of the docket 

Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 

4 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Raymond K. Forde, Air Programs 

Branch, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New 

York, New York 10007–1866, (212) 637– 

3716 or Forde.Raymond@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. EPA’s Proposed Action 

A. What action is EPA proposing today? 

B. Why is EPA proposing this action? 

C. What are the Clean Air Act requirements 

for NOX RACT? 

D. What is EPA’s evaluation of New 

Jersey’s SIP revision? 

II. New Jersey’s SIP Revision 

A. What are New Jersey’s NOX RACT 

requirements? 

B. What are New Jersey’s facility specific 

NOX RACT requirements? 

C. When was New Jersey’s RACT 

determination proposed and adopted? 

D. When was New Jersey’s proposed SIP 

revision submitted to EPA? 

III. Conclusion 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. EPA’s Proposed Action 

A. What action is EPA proposing today? 

EPA is proposing to approve New 

Jersey’s revision to the ozone State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on 

May 14, 2009. This SIP revision relates 

to New Jersey’s NOX RACT 

determination for the Naval Weapons 


rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules 47093 

Station Earle (NWSE) facility located in 

Colts Neck, New Jersey, Monmouth 

County. The facility contains two 

stationary reciprocating, diesel fuel 

fired, internal combustion engines—one 

existing and one new engine. 

B. Why is EPA proposing this action? 

EPA is proposing this action to: 

• Give the public the opportunity to 

submit comments on EPA’s proposed 

action, as discussed in the DATES and 

ADDRESSES sections. 

• Fulfill New Jersey’s and EPA’s 

requirements under the Clean Air Act 

(Act). 

• Make New Jersey’s RACT 

determination federally enforceable. 

C. What are the Clean Air Act 

requirements for NOX RACT? 

The Act requires certain states to 

develop RACT regulations for stationary 

sources of NOX and to provide for the 

implementation of the required 

measures as soon as practicable. Under 

the Act, the definition of a major 

stationary source is based on the tons 

per year (tpy) of air pollution a source 

emits and the quality of the air in the 

area of a source. In ozone transport 

regions, attainment/unclassified areas as 

well as marginal and moderate ozone 

attainment areas, a major stationary 

source for NOX is considered to be one 

which emits or has the potential to emit 

100 tpy or more of NOX and is subject 

to the requirements of a moderate 

nonattainment area. New Jersey is 

within the Northeast ozone transport 

region, established by section 184(a) of 

the Act, and has defined a major 

stationary source of NOX as a source 

which has the potential to emit 25 tpy, 

the level set for severe nonattainment 

areas. For detailed information on the 

Act requirements for NOX RACT, see the 

Technical Support Document (TSD) 

prepared in support of this proposed 

action. A copy of the TSD is available 

upon request from the EPA Regional 

Office listed in the ADDRESSES section or 

it can be viewed at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

D. What is EPA’s evaluation of New 

Jersey’s SIP revision? 

EPA has determined that New Jersey’s 

proposed SIP revision for the NOX

RACT determination for NWSE’s 

engines is consistent with New Jersey’s 

NOX RACT regulation and EPA’s 

guidance. EPA’s basis for evaluating 

New Jersey’s proposed SIP revision is 

whether it meets the SIP requirements 

described in section 110 of the Act. EPA 

has determined that New Jersey’s 

proposed SIP revision will not interfere 

with any applicable requirement 

concerning attainment and reasonable 

further progress, or any other applicable 

requirement of the Act. 

After reviewing New Jersey’s SIP 

revision submittal, EPA found it 

administratively and technically 

complete. EPA has determined that the 

NOX emission limits identified in New 

Jersey’s Conditions of Approval 

document represent RACT for NWSE’s 

engines. The conditions contained in 

the Conditions of Approval document 

currently specify emissions limits, work 

practice standards, testing, monitoring, 

and recordkeeping/reporting 

requirements. These conditions are 

consistent with the NOX RACT 

requirements specified in Subchapter 19 

of Chapter 27, Title 7 of the New Jersey 

Administrative Code and conform to 

EPA NOX RACT guidance. More 

specifically, EPA proposes to approve 

the current Conditions of Approval 

document which includes the following, 

to limit the: 

1. NOX emissions rate from each 

engine to 11.3 g/bhp-hr, 

2. Total NOX emissions rate while 

combusting 100% distillate oil to 4.67 

tons per year for both engines 

combined, 

3. Combined hours of operation for 

both engines to less than 675 hours per 

year, 

4. Operation of each engine to 75% 

load or less, and 

5. Annual fuel usage to 20,047.50 

gallons per year combined for both 

engines. 

In addition, the Conditions of 

Approval specify the NOX emissions 

limits, combustion process adjustments 

mentioned above, emission testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements, which States 

and sources will need to provide for 

through the Title V permitting process. 

II. New Jersey’s SIP Revision 

A. What are New Jersey’s NOX RACT 

requirements? 

New Jersey’s NOX RACT requirements 

are contained in Subchapter 19 entitled 

‘‘Control of Oxides of Nitrogen’’, of 

Chapter 27, Title 7 of the New Jersey 

Administrative Code. New Jersey has 

made numerous revisions to Subchapter 

19 since the original SIP submission. 

The current SIP approved version of 

Subchapter 19 was approved by EPA on 

August 3, 2010 (75 FR 45483). 

B. What are New Jersey’s facility-specific 

NOX RACT requirements? 

Section 19.13 of New Jersey’s 

regulation establishes a procedure for a 

case-by-case determination of what 

represents RACT for a major NOX

facility, item of equipment, or source 

operation. This procedure applies to 

facilities considered major for NOX, 

which are in one of the following two 

situations: (1) If the NOX facility 

contains any source operation or item of 

equipment of a category not listed in 

section 19.2(b) or (c) which has the 

potential to emit more than 10 tons of 

NOX per year, or (2) if the owner or 

operator of a source operation or item of 

equipment of a category listed in section 

19.2(b) or (c) seeks approval of an 

alternative maximum allowable 

emission rate. This proposal relates to a 

facility in the second situation listed 

above. 

New Jersey’s procedure requires 

either submission of a NOX control plan, 

if specific emission limitations do not 

apply to the specific source, or 

submission of a request for an 

alternative maximum allowable 

emission rate if specific emission 

limitations do apply to the specific 

source. In either case, the owners/ 

operators must include a technical and 

economic feasibility analysis of the 

possible alternative control measures. 

Also, in either case, Subchapter 19 

requires that New Jersey establish 

emission limits which rely on a RACT 

determination specific to the facility. 

The resulting NOX control plan or 

alternative maximum allowable 

emission rate must be submitted to EPA 

for approval as a SIP revision. 

C. When was New Jersey’s RACT 

determination proposed and adopted? 

New Jersey’s RACT determination 

was proposed on January 16, 2009, with 

the public comment period ending 

February 16, 2009. New Jersey adopted 

the RACT determination on May 12, 

2009 and supplemented this 

information on May 21, 2009. 

D. When was New Jersey’s SIP revision 

submitted to EPA? 

New Jersey’s SIP revision was 

submitted to EPA on May 14, 2009 and 

supplementary information was 

provided on May 21, 2009. EPA 

determined that the submittal was 

administratively and technically 

complete on July 13, 2009. 

III. Conclusion 

EPA is proposing to approve the New 

Jersey SIP revision for an alternative 

RACT emission limit determination for 

the NWSE’s engines which includes 

source-specific NOx emissions limits for 

the engines, combustion process 

adjustments, emission testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements. EPA will 


rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
47094 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 150 / Thursday, August 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

consider all comments submitted prior 

to any final rulemaking action. 

IV. 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 

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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

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

Dated: July 26, 2011. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2011–19798 Filed 8–3–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0462; FRL–9437–7] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan; South Coast Air 

Quality Management District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a revision to the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District portion of the 

California State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). This revision concerns volatile 

organic compound (VOC) emissions 

from polymeric cellular foam product 

manufacturing operations. We are 

proposing to approve a local rule to 

regulate these emission sources under 

the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 

(CAA). 

DATES: Any comments on this proposal 

must arrive by September 6, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2011–0462, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

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

on-line instructions. 

2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

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

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at http://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

http://www.regulations.gov is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA 

will not know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the public 

comment. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

http://www.regulations.gov, some 

information may be publicly available 

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

copyrighted material, large maps), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

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

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mae 

Wang, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4124, 

wang.mae@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

proposal addresses the following local 

rule: South Coast Air Quality 

Management District Rule 1175, Control 

of Emissions from the Manufacturing of 

Polymeric Cellular (Foam) Products. In 

the Rules and Regulations section of this 

Federal Register, we are approving this 

local rule in a direct final action without 

prior proposal because we believe these 

SIP revisions are not controversial. If we 

receive adverse comments, however, we 

will publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule and address the 

comments in subsequent action based 

on this proposed rule. Please note that 

if we receive adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

we may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

We do not plan to open a second 

comment period, so anyone interested 

in commenting should do so at this 

time. If we do not receive adverse 

comments, no further activity is 


rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS