34306 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 110 / Friday, June 7, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1Effective July 20, 2012, EPA designated one full 

county and six partial counties in the Charlotte 

metropolitan area as a marginal nonattainment area 

for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Today’s 

proposed action regarding RACT is not related to 

requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

2Portions of the bi-state Charlotte Area were 

designated as a moderate nonattainment area for the 

1-hour ozone NAAQS. The area was subsequently 

redesignated to attainment for the 1-hour ozone 

standard and a maintenance plan was approved 

into the North Carolina SIP. The original 

Charlotte—Gastonia, North Carolina 1-hour severe 

ozone nonattainment area consisted of Mecklenburg 

County and Gaston County, North Carolina. Today’s 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2009–0140; FRL–9821–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans: North 

Carolina; Control Techniques 

Guidelines and Reasonably Available 

Control Technology 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On May 1, 2013, the State of 

North Carolina, through the North 

Carolina Department of Environment 

and Natural Resources (NC DENR), 

submitted to EPA a state 

implementation plan (SIP) revision to 

satisfy North Carolina’s commitment 

associated with the conditional 

approval of its reasonably available 

control technology (RACT) requirements 

for volatile organic compound (VOC) 

sources located in the North Carolina 

portion of the Charlotte—Gastonia— 

Rock Hill, North Carolina—South 

Carolina 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area (hereafter referred to 

as the ‘‘bi-state Charlotte Area’’). NC 

DENR’s May 1, 2013, SIP revision also 

includes additional changes to North 

Carolina’s RACT rules. EPA is 

proposing to approve these SIP 

revisions to the State’s RACT rules and 

to convert the existing conditional 

approval of VOC RACT provisions in 

the North Carolina SIP to a full approval 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). 

EPA has evaluated the proposed 

changes to North Carolina’s SIP, and has 

made the preliminary determination 

that they are consistent with statutory 

and regulatory requirements and EPA 

guidance. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before July 8, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2009–0140 by one of the following 

methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4–RDS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2009–0140’’ 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 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 ID No. ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2009– 

0140.’’ 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 through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. 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. 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 

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 at the Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane 

Spann, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. 

Spann may be reached by phone at (404) 

562–9029, or via electronic mail at 

spann.jane@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. EPA’s Analysis of North Carolina’s May 1, 

2013, SIP Revision 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On April 30, 2004, EPA designated 

the bi-state Charlotte Area as a moderate 

nonattainment area with respect to the 

1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS). See 69 FR 

23858. The bi-state Charlotte Area 

includes six full counties and one 

partial county in North Carolina and 

one partial county in South Carolina. 

The South Carolina portion of the bistate Charlotte Area consists of the 

portion of York County, South Carolina 

that falls within the Rock Hill-Fort Mill 

Area Transportation Study Metropolitan 

Planning Organization Area. The North 

Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte 

Area consists of Cabarrus, Gaston, 

Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Rowan, Union 

and a portion of Iredell County which 

includes Davidson and Coddle Creek 

Townships.1 2


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 110 / Friday, June 7, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34307 

proposed action regarding RACT is not related to 

requirements for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 

3A CTG is a guidance document issued by EPA 

which, as a result of CAA section 182(b)(2), triggers 

a responsibility for states to submit, as part of their 

SIPs, RACT rules for stationary sources of VOC that 

are covered by the CTG. See 78 FR 15895. 

4Although published on May 9, 2013, EPA’s 

conditional approval final action was signed on 

April 29, 2013, prior to the Agency’s receipt of the 

May 1, 2013, North Carolina submission to address 

the State’s conditional approval commitments. 

5A change to rule 15A NCAC 02Q.0102 (hereafter 

‘‘.0102’’) is also included in the May 1, 2013, SIP 

revision. In today’s rulemaking, EPA is not taking 

action on North Carolina’s changes to rule .0102. 

EPA will contemplate action on these changes in a 

separate action. 

As a result of this designation, North 

Carolina and South Carolina were 

required to amend their SIPs for their 

respective portions of the bi-state 

Charlotte Area to satisfy the 

requirements of section 182 of the CAA. 

Today’s action specifically addresses 

the North Carolina portion of the bistate Charlotte Area. EPA approved the 

RACT requirements for the South 

Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte 

Area on November 28, 2011, at 76 FR 

72844. 

Section 182(b)(2) of the CAA requires 

states to adopt RACT rules for all areas 

designated nonattainment for ozone and 

classified as moderate or above. The 

three parts of the section 182(b)(2) 

RACT requirements are: (1) RACT for 

sources covered by an existing CTG (i.e., 

a CTG 3 issued prior to enactment of the 

1990 amendments to the CAA); (2) 

RACT for sources covered by a postenactment CTG; and (3) all major 

sources not covered by a CTG (i.e., nonCTG sources). Pursuant to 40 CFR 

51.165, a major source for a moderate 

ozone area is a source that emits 100 

tons per year or more of VOC or 

nitrogen oxides (NOX). 

On May 9, 2013, EPA took final action 

to approve, in part, and conditionally 

approve in part, North Carolina SIP 

revisions submitted on October 14, 

2004, April 6, 2007, June 15, 2007, 

January 31, 2008, November 19, 2008, 

September 18, 2009, February 3, 2010, 

April 6, 2010, and November 9, 2010, to 

address NOX RACT, VOC RACT and 

CTG requirements. Together, these SIP 

revisions established the RACT 

requirements for the major sources 

located in the North Carolina portion of 

the bi-state Charlotte Area. See 78 FR 

27065. 

NC DENR submitted a SIP revision on 

May 1, 2013, to address deficiencies 

with the State’s VOC RACT rules as 

identified in EPA’s May 9, 2013, 

conditional approval of North Carolina’s 

VOC RACT rules.4 North Carolina’s May 

1, 2013, SIP revision also included 

changes to rule 15A NCAC 02D.0903 

(hereafter ‘‘.0903’’).5

II. EPA’s Analysis of North Carolina’s 

May 1, 2013, SIP Revision 

As described above, North Carolina 

revised its VOC regulations to address 

the deficiencies identified in EPA’s May 

9, 2013, conditional approval action. 

EPA’s conditional approval was based 

on North Carolina finalizing their 

November 28, 2012, draft submittal, to 

correct deficiencies with the State’s 

VOC RACT regulations. As previously 

mentioned, section 182(b)(2) of the CAA 

requires RACT for all sources addressed 

by a CTG issued by EPA in areas 

classified as moderate nonattainment for 

ozone. North Carolina’s previous RACT 

applicability rule, 15A NCAC 02D.0902 

(hereafter ‘‘.0902’’), however, applied 

only to facilities located in the 

Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment area that have the 

potential to emit (PTE) greater than or 

equal to 100 tons of VOC per year. North 

Carolina’s May 1, 2013, SIP revision 

corrects this deficiency by extending 

applicability to all VOC sources in the 

nonattainment area for all CTG source 

categories. In addition, North Carolina’s 

May 1, 2013, SIP revision also addresses 

the conditional approval of rules 15A 

NCAC 02D.0909 (hereafter ‘‘.0909’’), 

15A NCAC 02D.0951 (hereafter 

‘‘.0951’’), 15A NCAC 02D.0961 

(hereafter ‘‘.0961’’), and 15A NCAC 

02D.0962 (hereafter ‘‘.0962’’). In today’s 

action, EPA is proposing to approve 

North Carolina’s changes to rules .0902, 

.0909, .0951, .0961, and .0962 as 

satisfying the deficiencies in the State’s 

VOC RACT rules, and thus the Agency 

is also proposing to convert the May 9, 

2013, conditional approval to a full 

approval for North Carolina VOC RACT 

rules. 

North Carolina’s May 1, 2013, SIP 

revision also proposes updates to rules 

.0903 and .0102. In today’s action, EPA 

is proposing to approve the changes to 

rule .0903. EPA will take action on rule 

.0102 in a separate action. Below is a 

summary of the changes to each rule 

being proposed for approval in today’s 

action. 

1. Rule .0902, ‘‘Applicability’’ 

North Carolina originally adopted rule 

.0902 in 1979, amended it a number of 

times and submitted this rule to EPA for 

approval. The following table shows the 

dates that rule .0902 was submitted to 

EPA and approved into the federallyapproved SIP for North Carolina. 

Date state submitted to EPA Date of EPA approval Federal Register Approval 

November 8, 1984 ......................................................... December 19, 1986 .................................... 51 FR 45468 

January 7, 1994 and August 16, 1996 .......................... August 1, 1997 ........................................... 62 FR 41277 

March 19, 1997 ............................................................. October 15, 1999 ....................................... 64 FR 55879 

July 28, 2000 ................................................................. August 27, 2001 ......................................... 66 FR 34117 

On November 9, 2010, North Carolina 

revised rule .0902 again. On May 9, 

2013, EPA conditionally approved the 

November 9, 2010, version of rule .0902. 

See 78 FR 27065. On May 1, 2013, North 

Carolina submitted a SIP revision 

correcting deficiencies for the rule as 

identified in EPA’s May 9, 2013, 

conditional approval of this rule. Based 

on changes that North Carolina made to 

rule .0902 in a May 1, 2013, SIP 

revision, EPA is proposing to convert its 

May 9, 2013, conditional approval of 

rule .0902 to a full approval. 

2. Rule .0903, ‘‘Recordkeeping: 

Reporting, Monitoring’’ 

North Carolina originally adopted rule 

.0903 in 1979, amended it a number of 

times and submitted this rule to EPA for 

approval on November 8, 1984. EPA 

approved rule .0903 into the federallyapproved North Carolina SIP on 

December 19, 1986, (51 FR 45468). The 

rule was amended again and submitted 

to EPA for SIP approval on April 16, 

2001. EPA approved these amendments 

into the federally-approved North 

Carolina SIP on August 8, 2002 (67 FR 

51461). 

Changes to rule .0903 were submitted 

to EPA on May 1, 2013. EPA is 

proposing to approve the changes to 

rule .0903 as submitted on May 1, 2013. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
34308 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 110 / Friday, June 7, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

3. Rule .0909, ‘‘Compliance Schedules 

for Sources in Nonattainment Areas’’ 

Rule .0909 was changed a number of 

times and submitted to EPA for 

approval. It was revised to add 

compliance schedules for the facilities 

to comply with RACT requirements, 

became State effective on March 1, 

2007, and was submitted to EPA for 

approval on April 6, 2007. Rule .0909 

was amended to add compliance 

schedules for the facilities to comply 

with RACT requirements should the bistate Charlotte Area fail to attain the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and as a 

result be reclassified as serious area for 

that NAAQS. This rule was State 

effective on July 1, 2007, and was 

submitted to EPA for approval on 

January 31, 2008. 

Subsequently, rule .0909 was 

amended to remove the reference to 

Stage II vapor recovery at Rules 15A 

NCAC 02D.0953, ‘‘Vapor Return Piping 

for Stage II Vapor Recovery,’’ and 15A 

NCAC 02D.0954, ‘‘Stage II Vapor 

Recovery,’’ as these provisions were 

repealed by the State. This amendment 

became State effective on January 1, 

2009, and submitted to EPA for 

approval on September 18, 2009. 

Additionally, rule .0909 was amended 

to change cross-references, became State 

effective on September 1, 2010, and 

submitted to EPA for approval on 

November 9, 2010. On May 9, 2013, 

EPA conditionally approved the 

November 9, 2010, version of rule .0909, 

which comprehensively addressed the 

above mentioned revisions to this rule. 

See 78 FR 27065. Specifically, EPA 

conditionally approved the rule .0909 

revisions based upon the State’s 

commitment to amend the rule to 

address RACT requirements for sources 

that emit less than 100 tpy of VOC. The 

State’s amendment to address this 

deficiency in rule .0909 became State 

effective on May 1, 2013, and submitted 

to EPA for approval on May 1, 2013. 

Based on these changes to rule .0909 

contained in the May 1, 2013, SIP 

revision, EPA is proposing to convert its 

May 9, 2013, conditional approval of 

rule .0909 to a full approval. 

4. Rule .0951, ‘‘RACT for Sources of 

Volatile Organic Compounds’’ 

North Carolina originally adopted rule 

.0951 in 1994 and submitted this rule 

for EPA approval on August 16, 1995. 

EPA approved the August 16, 1995, 

submittal on August 1, 1997, at 62 FR 

41277. Subsequently, North Carolina 

submitted rule .0951 amendments to 

EPA for approval into the federallyapproved SIP on July 28, 2000. EPA 

approved these amendments on June 27, 

2001, at 66 FR 34117. North Carolina 

again changed rule .0951 with a State 

effective date of September 1, 2010. The 

September 1, 2010, version of this rule 

was submitted to EPA on November 9, 

2010, for SIP approval. Specifically, the 

rule was amended to change cross 

references to other Chapter 15A NCAC 

02D.0900 rules. 

On May 9, 2013, EPA conditionally 

approved the November 9, 2010, version 

of rule .0951. See 78 FR 27065. On May 

1, 2013, North Carolina submitted a SIP 

revision correcting deficiencies for the 

rule as identified in EPA’s May 9, 2013, 

conditional approval of this rule. Based 

on these changes to rule .0951 in the 

May 1, 2013, SIP revision, EPA is 

proposing to convert its May 9, 2013, 

conditional approval of rule .0951 to a 

full approval. Additionally, EPA is 

proposing to approve a name change for 

rule .0951 as provided in North 

Carolina’s May 1, 2013, SIP revision. 

Specifically, North Carolina changed the 

title of rule .0951 from ‘‘Miscellaneous 

Volatile Organic Compound Emissions’’ 

to ‘‘RACT for Sources of Volatile 

Organic Compounds.’’ 

5. Rule .0961, ‘‘Offset Lithographic 

Printing and Letterpress Printing’’ 

In December 1978, EPA published a 

CTG for graphic arts (rotogravure 

printing and flexographic printing) that 

included flexible packaging printing. On 

October 5, 2006 (71 FR 58745), EPA 

updated the 1978 CTG, as part of Group 

II CTG, addressing the control of VOC 

emissions from graphic arts systems 

consisting of packaging rotogravure, 

publication rotogravure or flexographic 

printing operations. 

North Carolina originally adopted 

Rule 15A NCAC 02D.0936 (hereafter 

‘‘.0936’’), ‘‘Graphic Arts’’ in 1980, 

amended it, and then submitted it to 

EPA for approval on April 17, 1990. It 

was approved into the federallyapproved North Carolina SIP on June 

23, 1994 (59 FR 32362). In a November 

9, 2010, SIP revision North Carolina 

repealed rule .0936, ‘‘Graphic Arts’’ and 

replaced it in part with rule .0961, 

‘‘Offset Lithographic Printing and 

Letterpress Printing.’’ See 78 FR 15895, 

March 13, 2013, for more information 

regarding rule .0936, ‘‘Graphic Arts.’’ 

On May 9, 2013, EPA conditionally 

approved the November 9, 2010, version 

of rule .0961. See 78 FR 27065. On May 

1, 2013, North Carolina submitted a SIP 

revision correcting deficiencies for the 

rule as identified in EPA’s May 9, 2013, 

conditional approval of this rule. Based 

on these changes to rule .0961 in the 

May 1, 2013, SIP revision, EPA is 

proposing to convert its May 9, 2013, 

conditional approval of rule .0961 to a 

full approval. 

6. Rule .0962, ‘‘Industrial Cleaning 

Solvents’’ 

On October 5, 2006 (71 FR 58745), as 

part of the Group II CTG, EPA updated 

the portion of the 1977 Solvent Metal 

Cleaning CTG regarding the control of 

VOC emissions from the use of 

industrial cleaning solvents. North 

Carolina originally adopted rule .0962, 

on September 1, 2010, and submitted 

this rule to EPA for approval into the 

federally-approved North Carolina SIP 

on November 9, 2010. Rule .0962 was 

amended again, and submitted for EPA 

approval on May 1, 2013. 

On May 9, 2013, EPA conditionally 

approved the November 9, 2010, version 

of rule .0962. See 78 FR 27065. On May 

1, 2013, North Carolina submitted a SIP 

revision correcting deficiencies for the 

rule as identified in EPA’s May 9, 2013, 

conditional approval of this rule. Based 

on these changes to rule .0962 in the 

May 1, 2013, SIP revision, EPA is 

proposing to convert its May 9, 2013, 

conditional approval of rule .0962 to a 

full approval. 

III. Proposed Action 

Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

changes to North Carolina’s SIP to 

address deficiencies with the State’s 

VOC RACT rules at .0902, .0909, .0951, 

.0961, and .0962 for the North Carolina 

portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area as 

provided in a May 1, 2013, SIP revision. 

EPA has evaluated North Carolina’s May 

1, 2013, SIP revision, and has 

preliminarily determined that the 

changes to rules .0902, .0909, .0951, 

.0961, and .0962 meet the applicable 

requirements of the CAA and EPA 

regulations addressing VOC RACT 

requirements. As a result, EPA is also 

proposing to convert a May 9, 2013, 

conditional approval of rules .0902, 

.0909, .0951, .0961, and .0962, at 78 FR 

27065, to a full approval. 

Additionally, in today’s action, EPA is 

proposing to approve changes to North 

Carolina’s rule .0903, ‘‘Recordkeeping: 

Reporting, Monitoring,’’ and to approve 

the name change for rule .0951 from 

‘‘Miscellaneous Volatile Organic 

Compound Emissions’’ to ‘‘RACT for 

Sources of Volatile Organic 

Compounds,’’ as provided in SIP 

revision on May 1, 2013. EPA has made 

the preliminary determination that 

North Carolina’s changes are consistent 

with the CAA and EPA’s regulations. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 110 / Friday, June 7, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34309 

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 

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 CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely proposes to approve state law as 

meeting federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposal 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 proposed rule does not 

have tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the 

determination does not have substantial 

direct effects on an Indian Tribe. There 

are no Indian Tribes located within the 

North Carolina portion of the bi-state 

Charlotte nonattainment area. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: May 30, 2013. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2013–13574 Filed 6–6–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 2 and 25 

[IB Docket No. 12–376; Report 2980] 

Petition for Reconsideration of Action 

in Rulemaking Proceeding 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Petition for reconsideration. 

SUMMARY: In this document, a Petition 

for Reconsideration and Clarification 

(Petition) has been filed in the 

Commission’s Rulemaking proceeding 

by Bruce A. Olcott on behalf of The 

Boeing Company. 

DATES: Oppositions to the Petition must 

be filed on or before June 24, 2013. 

Replies to an opposition must be filed 

on or before July 2, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Howard Griboff or Jennifer Balatan, 

Policy Division, International Bureau, 

(202) 418–1460. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s 

document, Report No. 2980, released 

May 30, 2013. The full text of Report 

No. 2980 is available for viewing and 

copying in Room CY–B402, 445 12th 

Street SW., Washington, DC or may be 

purchased from the Commission’s copy 

contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc. 

(BCPI) (1–800–378–3160). The 

Commission will not send a copy of this 

document pursuant to the Congressional 

Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), 

because this document does not have an 

impact on any rules of particular 

applicability. 

Subject: Revisions to Parts 2 and 25 of 

the Commission’s Rules to Govern the 

Use of Earth Stations Aboard Aircraft 

Communicating with Fixed-Satellite 

Service Geostationary-Orbit Space 

Stations Operating in the 10.95–11.2 

GHz, 11.45–11.7 GHz, 11.7–12.2 GHz 

and 14.0–14.5 GHz Frequency Bands, 

published at 78 FR 14920, March 8, 

2013, and at 78 FR 14952, March 8, 

2013, in IB Docket No. 12–376, and 

published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e). 

See also 1.4(b)(1) of the Commission’s 

rules. 

Number of Petitions Filed: 1 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Gloria J. Miles, 

Federal Register Liaison, Office of the 

Secretary, Office of Managing Director. 

[FR Doc. 2013–13529 Filed 6–6–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Parts 223 and 224 

[Docket No. NOAA–NMFS–2012–0236] 

RIN 0648–XC365 

Endangered and Threatened Species; 

Extension of Public Comment Period 

Soliciting Information about Harbor 

Seals in Iliamna Lake, Alaska 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Extension of public comment 

period. 

SUMMARY: We, NMFS, are extending the 

public comment period soliciting 

information to inform our status review 

of Pacific harbor seals (Phoca vitulina 

richardii) in Iliamna Lake, Alaska. On 

May 17, 2013, we published a notice 

announcing a positive 90-day finding on 

a petition to list the harbor seals in 

Iliamna Lake as threatened or 

endangered under the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA), and we initiated a 

status review. As part of that notice, we 

solicited scientific and commercial 

information about the status of the seals 

and announced a 60-day comment 

period to end on July 16, 2013. Today, 

we extend the public comment period to 

August 16, 2013. 

DATES: The deadline for receipt of 

comments is extended from July 16, 

2013, to August 16, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

about the harbor seals in Iliamna Lake, 

identified by FDMS Docket Number 

NOAA–NMFS–2012–0236, by any of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 

www.regulations.gov/ 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1