Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 169 / Wednesday, September 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules 45387 

with respect to this regulation. Instead, 

we have left it to the individual 

sponsors to exercise ‘‘those qualities of 

attention, knowledge, intelligence and 

judgment which society requires of its 

members for the protection of their own 

interest and the interests of others’’ (i.e., 

the ‘‘reasonable man’’ legal standard 

that has developed under case law) 

when deciding how much to spend for 

each background check, which 

commercial services to engage, or which 

databases to query. Most importantly, 

the Department does not dictate how 

sponsors should evaluate the results of 

these background checks, again 

allowing sponsors to apply the 

‘‘reasonable man’’ standard. The 

proliferation of media reports of 

American children being sexually 

abused across the nation, however, has 

escalated the Department’s concern that 

sponsors may not be doing enough to 

protect the foreign visitors entrusted to 

their care. 

Accordingly, the Department seeks 

information on the standards that other 

organizations use to deal with the safety 

and oversight of children to assess the 

suitability of volunteers or employees 

and the problems or benefits associated 

with adopting such practices. We also 

seek information on the identity of the 

service providers that current sponsors 

use, as well as the level and cost of the 

services obtained. Further, sponsors 

specifically are requested to recommend 

any Internet searches they may employ 

to supplement the formal background 

reports. Finally, we seek specific 

information from sponsors regarding 

their methods of evaluating the results 

of these reports, including identifying 

any acts that they believe render 

potential host families ineligible. 

Public Law 105–251, The Volunteers 

for Children Act (‘‘Act’’), amended the 

National Child Protection Act of 1993, 

42 U.S.C. 5119a, to allow organizations 

and businesses engaged in the care of 

other peoples’ children to use national 

fingerprint-based criminal history 

checks to screen out volunteers and 

employees with relevant criminal 

records. The Department seeks 

information on which, if any, State laws 

would consider a host family to be a 

‘‘qualified entity’’ as defined in the Act, 

thereby requiring sponsors to request 

national fingerprint-based checks of 

such volunteers. We seek comment on 

the costs and administrative effort that 

would result from requiring sponsors to 

vet adult members of potential host 

families through the FBI’s national 

fingerprint database and whether any 

sponsors have been using this approach. 

To the extent possible, parties should 

comment on whether there is a 

relationship between the cost of 

criminal background checks and the 

comprehensiveness and accuracy of the 

resulting reports. Sponsors should also 

provide information on the procedures 

they employ to obtain criminal 

background checks on adult members 

who join a household or children who 

turn 18 after an exchange visitor is 

placed in the home. The Department 

asks that sponsors also identify the 

criteria they use to determine when a 

frequent adult visitor in a home (e.g., a 

college student, grown child, or 

acquaintance of an adult family 

member) should also be vetted through 

the criminal background check process. 

The regulations also require sponsors 

to conduct an in-person interview with 

all family members residing in the 

home. The Department requests 

comment from sponsors regarding how 

they identify ‘‘all family members’’ 

residing in the home. They should 

specify whether they interview every 

adult who is vetted by a background 

check and whether they conduct 

multiple interviews if all family 

members are not available at the same 

time. Parties should comment on 

whether they believe that requiring such 

interviews to be conducted in the home 

provides additional insight into the 

family dynamic and its suitability to 

host an exchange student. 

The Department has never attempted 

to define a ‘‘family’’ for purposes of 

being eligible to host a foreign high 

school student. We take notice, 

however, of the fact that problematic 

placements often occur in homes of 

families that do not include a schoolaged child. As a result, we are 

considering regulations that require host 

families to be comprised of, at a 

minimum, one adult and one schoolaged child (natural, adopted, or foster) 

living in the home. Although this 

configuration would eliminate from the 

pool of host families a number of caring 

single adults or couples, such as 

‘‘empty-nesters,’’ the Department 

believes that the presence of a schoolaged child in a home may provide 

compensating advantages. The 

Department seeks information from 

sponsors on the configurations of 

families that have provided either 

successful or problematic placements in 

the past. We ask the sponsor community 

also to suggest alternative minimum 

configurations or to recommend 

extenuating circumstances under which 

minimum configurations might not be 

necessary to ensure appropriate 

placements. The Department asks 

parties to comment on the extent to 

which imposing more specific 

definitions of a family could impact the 

supply of potential host families and 

whether the increased suitability of 

selected families would compensate for 

the smaller pool of eligible host 

families. 

Finally, the Department encourages 

parties to comment on aspects of host 

family screening and selecting in 

addition to those specifically raised. For 

example, sponsors may wish to share 

the methods they use in identifying 

potential host families. More 

importantly, they may wish to 

enumerate the methods that their 

experiences have found to be 

problematic or that they believe may 

encourage inappropriate adults to agree 

to host high school students. Sponsors 

are especially encouraged to share their 

best practices with the Department to 

provide the entire industry with 

guidance on how best to protect the 

health, safety, and welfare of high 

school-aged foreign exchange students. 

Dated: August 27, 2009. 

Stanley S. Colvin, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Private Sector 

Exchanges, Bureau of Educational and 

Cultural Affairs, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. E9–21185 Filed 9–1–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–05–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[Docket: R02–OAR–2009–0508; FRL–8952– 

3] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Puerto Rico; 

Guaynabo PM10 Limited Maintenance 

Plan and Redesignation Request 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

the Limited Maintenance Plan for the 

Municipality of Guaynabo 

nonattainment area in Puerto Rico and 

grant the request by the Commonwealth 

of Puerto Rico to redesignate the area 

from nonattainment to attainment for 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

for particulate matter with an 

aerodynamic diameter less than or equal 

to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM10). 

On March 31, 2009, the Commonwealth 

of Puerto Rico submitted a Limited 

Maintenance Plan for the Guaynabo 

nonattainment area for approval and 

concurrently requested that EPA 

redesignate the Guaynabo 

nonattainment area to attainment for 

PM10. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
45388 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 169 / Wednesday, September 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 2, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket Number EPA–R02– 

OAR–2009–0508, 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–2009–0508. 

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: Kirk 

Wieber at telephone number: (212) 637– 

3381, e-mail address: 

wieber.kirk@epa.gov, fax number: (212) 

637–3901, or the above EPA Region 2 

address. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing? 

II. Background 

III. Requirements for Redesignation 

A. Clean Air Act Requirements for 

Redesignation of Nonattainment Areas 

B. The Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP) 

Option for PM10 Nonattainment Areas 

C. Conformity Under the Limited 

Maintenance Plan Option 

IV. Review of the Puerto Rico Submittal 

Addressing the Requirements for 

Redesignation and Limited Maintenance 

Plans 

A. Has the Guaynabo Nonattainnment Area 

(NAA) Attained the Applicable NAAQS? 

B. Does the Guaynabo Nonattainment Area 

(NAA) Have a Fully Approved SIP Under 

Section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act 

(Act)? 

C. Has Puerto Rico Met all Applicable 

Requirements Under Section 110 and 

Part D of the Act? 

D. Has Puerto Rico Demonstrated That the 

Air Quality Improvement Is Due to 

Permanent and Enforceable Reductions? 

E. Does the Area Have a Fully Approved 

Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 

175A of the Act? 

F. Has Puerto Rico Demonstrated That the 

Guaynabo NAA Qualifies for the LMP 

Option? 

G. Does Puerto Rico Have an Approved 

Attainment Emissions Inventory Which 

Can Be Used To Demonstrate Attainment 

of the NAAQS? 

H. Does the LMP Include an Assurance of 

Continued Operation of an Appropriate 

EPA-Approved Air Quality Monitoring 

Network, in Accordance With 40 CFR 

Part 58? 

I. Does the Plan Meet the Clean Air Act 

Requirements for Contingency 

Provisions? 

J. Has Puerto Rico Met the Conformity 

Requirements? 

V. What Are EPA’s Conclusions? 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing? 

The Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) is proposing to approve the 

Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP) for the 

Municipality of Guaynabo 

nonattainment area (Guaynabo NAA) 

and concurrently proposing to 

redesignate the Guaynabo NAA to 

attainment for the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) for 

particulate matter with an aerodynamic 

diameter less than or equal to a nominal 

10 micrometers (PM10). The reader is 

referred to the Technical Support 

Document (TSD) that accompanies this 

proposal for more detailed information 

regarding EPA’s evaluation of the LMP 

and redesignation request for the 

Guaynabo NAA. 

II. Background 

As required by the Clean Air Act (Act) 

in 1987, the EPA revised the particulate 

matter NAAQS from total suspended 

particles to PM10. The standard was 

changed to better protect public health 

and the environment. 

The Act, as amended in 1990, 

required that all areas that have 

measured a violation of the NAAQS for 

PM10 before January 1, 1989 be 

designated nonattainment. On 

November 15, 1990 by operation of law, 

the Municipality of Guaynabo in Puerto 

Rico was designated nonattainment for 

PM10 and classified as moderate based 

on violations measured in 1987. 

On November 14, 1993 the Puerto 

Rico Environmental Quality Board 

(PREQB) submitted to EPA a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

which consisted of a PM10 SIP for the 

Municipality of Guaynabo. The 

Guaynabo PM10 SIP revision was 

reviewed and approved by EPA on May 

31, 1995 and became effective on June 

30, 1995 (60 FR 28333). 

After completing the appropriate 

public notice and comment procedures, 

on March 31, 2009, the PREQB 

submitted to EPA a ‘‘Limited 

Maintenance Plan 24 Hour Particulate 

Matter (PM10) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards and Redesignation 

Request for the Municipality of 

Guaynabo Moderate Nonattainment 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 169 / Wednesday, September 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules 45389 

Area State Implementation Plan 

Revision.’’ 

III. Requirements for Redesignation 

A. Clean Air Act Requirements for 

Redesignation of Nonattainment Areas 

Nonattainment areas can be 

redesignated to attainment after the area 

has measured air quality data showing 

it has attained the NAAQS and when 

certain planning requirements are met. 

Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Act, and the 

General Preamble for the 

implementation of Title I of the Act 

(General Preamble) provide the criteria 

for redesignation. See 57 FR 13498 

(April 16, 1992). These criteria are 

further clarified in a policy and 

guidance memorandum from John 

Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, EPA Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards dated 

September 4, 1992, ‘‘Procedures for 

Processing Requests to Redesignate 

Areas to Attainment’’. The criteria for 

redesignation are: (1) The Administrator 

has determined that the area has 

attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the 

Administrator has fully approved the 

applicable SIP for the area under section 

110(k) of the Act; (3) the state 

containing the area has met all 

requirements applicable to the area 

under section 110 and part D of the Act; 

(4) the Administrator has determined 

that the improvement in air quality is 

due to permanent and enforceable 

reductions in emissions; and (5) the 

Administrator has fully approved a 

maintenance plan for the area as 

meeting the requirements of section 

175A of the Act. 

B. The Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP) 

Option for PM10 Nonattainment Areas 

On August 9, 2001, EPA issued 

guidance on streamlined maintenance 

plan provisions for certain moderate 

PM10 nonattainment areas seeking 

redesignation to attainment (Memo from 

Lydia Wegman, Director, Air Quality 

Standards and Strategies Division, 

entitled ‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan 

Option for Moderate PM10 

Nonattainment Areas,’’ referred to as the 

LMP option memo. The LMP option 

memo contains a statistical 

demonstration that areas meeting 

certain air quality criteria will, with a 

high degree of probability, maintain the 

standard 10 years into the future. It 

follows that future year emission 

inventories for these areas, and some of 

the standard analyses to determine 

transportation conformity with the SIP, 

are no longer necessary. To qualify for 

the LMP option: (1) The area should 

have attained the PM10 NAAQS; (2) the 

average annual PM10 design value for 

the area, based upon the most recent 5 

years of air quality data at all monitors 

in the area, should be at or below 40 

micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3); 

and (3) the 24 hour design value should 

be at or below 98 μg/m3. If an area 

cannot meet this test, it may still be able 

to qualify for the LMP option if the 

average design value for the site is less 

than the site-specific critical design 

values. In addition, the area should 

expect only limited growth in on-road 

motor vehicle PM10 emissions 

(including fugitive dust) and should 

have passed a motor vehicle regional 

emissions analysis test. The LMP option 

memo also identifies core provisions 

that must be included in the LMP. 

These provisions include an attainment 

year emissions inventory, assurance of 

continued operation of an EPAapproved air quality monitoring 

network, and contingency provisions. 

C. Conformity Under the Limited 

Maintenance Plan Option 

The transportation conformity rule 

and the general conformity rule (40 CFR 

part 93; also see 40 CFR part 51) apply 

to nonattainment areas and maintenance 

areas covered by an approved 

maintenance plan. Under either 

conformity rule, an acceptable method 

of demonstrating that a federal action 

conforms to the applicable SIP is to 

demonstrate that expected emissions 

from the planned action are consistent 

with the emissions budget for the area. 

While EPA’s LMP option does not 

exempt an area from the need to affirm 

conformity, it explains that the area may 

demonstrate conformity without 

submitting an emissions budget. Under 

the LMP option, emissions budgets are 

treated as essentially not constraining 

for the length of the maintenance period 

because it is unreasonable to expect that 

the qualifying areas would experience 

so much growth in that period that a 

violation of the PM10 NAAQS would 

result. For transportation conformity 

purposes, EPA would conclude that 

emissions in these areas need not be 

capped for the maintenance period and 

therefore a regional emissions analysis 

would not be required. Similarly, 

federal actions subject to the general 

conformity rule could be considered to 

satisfy the ‘‘budget test’’ specified in 40 

CFR 93.158(a)(5)(i)(A) as these budgets 

also are essentially considered to be 

unlimited. 

IV. Review of the Puerto Rico Submittal 

Addressing the Requirements for 

Redesignation and Limited 

Maintenance Plan 

A. Has the Guaynabo Nonattainment 

Area (NAA) Attained the Applicable 

NAAQS? 

There are two separate NAAQS for 

PM10, an annual standard of 50 μg/m3

and a 24-hour standard of 150 μg/m3. 

States must demonstrate that an area has 

attained the PM10 NAAQS through 

analysis of ambient air quality data from 

an ambient air monitoring network 

representing peak PM10 concentrations. 

The data should be stored in the EPA 

Air Quality System (AQS) database. 

EPA determined that the Guaynabo 

NAA attained the PM10 NAAQS by its 

due date of December 31, 1994. 

During the time period of 1995–2000, 

the EPA published in the Federal 

Register various notices identifying 

those moderate PM10 nonattainment 

areas (those designated in 1990 by 

operation of law) that did not attain by 

the December 31, 1994 attainment date. 

The Municipality of Guaynabo was not 

included in any of those notices. 

Therefore, by inference, EPA has 

determined that the Municipality of 

Guaynabo has attained the PM10 

NAAQS based on air quality data. 

Based on the most recent six years of 

air quality data in AQS, from 2002– 

2007, the area continues to be in 

compliance with both of the PM10 

NAAQS. EPA notes that during the 

period 2002–2007, the Guaynabo NAA 

had experienced several exceedances of 

the 24-hour standard as a result of 

sahara dust events influencing air 

quality data. In an April 28, 2008 letter 

to the EPA, Puerto Rico requested that 

the EPA exclude air monitoring data 

from a number of days during 2002– 

2007. Almost all of these exceedances 

were flagged by Puerto Rico as 

exceptional events due to sahara dust 

events under EPA’s Natural Events 

Policy. Based on the information 

provided by Puerto Rico about these 

events, in a September 25, 2008 letter 

from EPA to Puerto Rico, EPA 

concluded that many of the exceedances 

that occurred were due to sahara dust 

natural events. EPA concurred on the 

flagged days in AQS that were 

supported by information from Puerto 

Rico. EPA determined that the 

Guaynabo NAA was eligible for the LMP 

option when considering the flagged 

data that was influenced by exceptional 

events. Though not relevant to this 

redesignation request, EPA also notes 

that the Guaynabo NAA, and all of 

Puerto Rico, has always attained the 

more protective PM2.5 NAAQS. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
45390 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 169 / Wednesday, September 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

B. Does the Guaynabo Nonattainment 

Area (NAA) Have a Fully Approved SIP 

Under Section 110(k) of the Clean Air 

Act (Act)? 

Section 110(k) of the Act outlines 

EPA’s actions on SIP submittals. In 

order to qualify for redesignation, the 

SIP for the area must be fully approved 

under section 110(k) of the Act, and 

must satisfy all requirements that apply 

to the area. As stated above, on May 31, 

1995, EPA approved the Guaynabo 

moderate NAA plan which included a 

PM10 emissions inventory, a control 

strategy including reasonably available 

control measures (RACM) and 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT), the demonstration that the 

Municipality of Guaynabo PM10 

nonattainment area will attain the PM10 

NAAQS by December 31, 1994 and 

maintain the PM10 NAAQS through 

1999, New Source Review (NSR) permit 

provisions and contingency measures. 

See 60 FR 28333. 

C. Has Puerto Rico Met All Applicable 

Requirements Under Section 110 and 

Part D of the Act? 

Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Act 

requires that a state containing a 

nonattainment area must meet all 

applicable requirements under section 

110 and Subchapter 1, Part D (Part D) of 

the Act for an area to be redesignated to 

attainment. EPA interprets this to mean 

that the state must meet all 

requirements that applied to the area 

prior to, and at the time of, the 

submission of a complete redesignation 

request. The following is a summary of 

how Puerto Rico meets these 

requirements. 

(1) Clean Air Act Section 110 

Requirements 

Section 110(a)(2) of the Act contains 

general requirements for nonattainment 

plans. These requirements include, but 

are not limited to, submittal of a SIP that 

has been adopted by the state after 

reasonable notice and public hearing; 

provisions for establishment and 

operation of appropriate apparatus, 

methods, systems and procedures 

necessary to monitor ambient air 

quality; implementation of a permit 

program; provisions for Part C— 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) and Part D—NSR permit 

programs; criteria for stationary source 

emission control measures, monitoring 

and reporting, provisions for modeling; 

and provisions for public and local 

agency participation. See the General 

Preamble for further explanation of 

these requirements. 57 FR 13498 (April 

16, 1992). 

For purposes of redesignation, EPA’s 

review of the SIP shows that Puerto Rico 

has addressed all requirements under 

section 110(a)(2) of the Act as it relates 

to PM10 requirements. Further, in 40 

CFR 52.2722, EPA has approved Puerto 

Rico’s plan for the attainment and 

maintenance of the national standards 

under Section 110. 

(2) Part D Requirements 

Part D contains general requirements 

applicable to all areas designated 

nonattainment. The general 

requirements are followed by a series of 

subparts specific to each pollutant. All 

PM10 nonattainment areas must meet 

the general provisions of Subpart 1 and 

the specific PM10 provisions in Subpart 

4, ‘‘Additional Provisions for Particulate 

Matter Nonattainment Areas.’’ The 

following paragraphs discuss these 

requirements as they apply to the 

Guaynabo NAA. 

(3) Part D, Subpart 1, Section 172(c) 

Subpart 1, section 172(c) contains 

general requirements for nonattainment 

area plans. A thorough discussion of 

these requirements may be found in the 

General Preamble. See 57 FR 13538 

(April 16, 1992). Section 172(c)(2) of the 

Act requires nonattainment plans to 

provide for reasonable further progress 

(RFP). Section 171(1) of the Act defines 

RFP as ‘‘such annual incremental 

reductions in emissions of the relevant 

air pollutant as are required by this part 

(part D of title I) or may reasonably be 

required by the Administrator for the 

purpose of ensuring attainment of the 

applicable national ambient air quality 

standard by the applicable date.’’ Since 

EPA determined that the Guaynabo 

NAA was in attainment of the PM10 

NAAQS by 1997, no further showing of 

RFP or quantitative milestones is 

necessary. 

(4) Part D, Subpart 1, Section 172(c)(3)— 

Emissions Inventory 

Section 172(c)(3) of the Act requires a 

comprehensive, accurate, current 

inventory of actual emissions from all 

sources of the relevant pollutant or 

pollutants in the Guaynabo PM10 

nonattainment area. In addition, the 

LMP option memo states that for 

inventory purposes, the state is only 

required to submit an attainment 

inventory to EPA that is based on one 

of the years of monitoring data which 

shows attainment. There is no 

requirement to project emissions over 

the maintenance period. This means if 

2002 is a calendar year which has 

monitoring data that demonstrates 

attainment, the 2002 base year inventory 

can be used as the attainment year 

inventory and no projection inventories 

are required over the years of the 

maintenance period. Only calendar year 

2002 PM10 annual emissions summary 

data are required. In addition, this 

inventory should be consistent with 

EPA’s most recent guidance on emission 

inventories for nonattainment areas 

available at the time and should include 

emissions during the time period 

associated with the monitoring data 

showing attainment. The period of 

violation-free PM10 monitoring data for 

the Municipality of Guaynabo is 2002– 

2007. Therefore, 2002 is an appropriate 

year to select for an attainment 

inventory. EPA has determined that the 

2002 base year inventory emissions 

inventory is current, accurate and 

comprehensive and therefore meets the 

requirements of Section 172(c)(3) of the 

Act and attainment inventory 

requirements outlined in the August 9, 

2001 memorandum. 

(5) Section 172(c)(5)—New Source 

Review 

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 

1990 contained revisions to the NSR 

program requirements for the 

construction and operation of new and 

modified major stationary sources 

located in nonattainment areas. The Act 

established June 30, 1992 as the 

submittal date for the revised NSR 

programs (Section 189 of the Act). The 

Part D NSR rules for PM10 

nonattainment areas in Puerto Rico were 

approved by EPA on May 31, 1995 (60 

FR 28333). 

However, on December 31, 2002, EPA 

promulgated revisions to the NSR 

regulations. These revisions include 

among other things: (1) A new actual-toprojected-actual applicability test for 

existing sources; (2) a new Plant-wide 

Applicability Limitation option for 

existing major stationary sources with 

the ability to manage facility-wide 

emissions without triggering major NSR; 

and (3) new recordkeeping requirements 

for sources that avoid NSR review. 

Please note that there have been 

subsequent additional proposed/final 

revisions to the NSR regulations. 

However, some of these changes have 

either not yet been finalized, have been 

stayed by the Courts, or are subject to 

litigation and are not in effect yet. The 

December 31, 2002 revised regulations 

also required states to adopt these 

changes into their own state NSR rules 

and submit this revised rule to EPA no 

later than January 2, 2006. 

EPA has determined that Puerto Rico 

has not revised its regulations to be 

consistent with the NSR reform 

requirements applicable to a moderate 

PM10 nonattainment area, i.e., for the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 169 / Wednesday, September 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules 45391 

Municipality of Guaynabo. However, 

should Puerto Rico’s redesignation 

request for the Guaynabo NAA be 

approved by EPA, the NSR reform 

requirements will become unnecessary. 

The redesignation process will 

eliminate the requirement for Puerto 

Rico to submit a nonattainment NSR SIP 

for the Municipality of Guaynabo. 

(6) Section 172(c)(7) Compliance With 

Section 110(a)(2) of the Act: Air Quality 

Monitoring Requirements 

Once an area is redesignated, the state 

must continue to operate an appropriate 

air monitoring network in accord with 

40 CFR part 58 to verify attainment 

status of the area. The PREQB operates 

two PM10 State and Local Air 

Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) in the 

Guaynabo NAA. Both monitoring sites 

meet EPA SLAMS network design and 

siting requirements set forth at 40 CFR 

part 58, appendices D and E. In the LMP 

submitted by Puerto Rico, section 3.e.iv 

contains Puerto Rico’s commitment to 

continue operation of the monitoring 

network. 

(7) Section 172(c)(9)—Contingency 

Measures 

The Act requires that contingency 

measures take effect if the area fails to 

meet reasonable further progress 

requirements or fails to attain the 

NAAQS by the applicable attainment 

date. Since the Guaynabo NAA attained 

the NAAQS for PM10 by the applicable 

attainment date of December 31, 1994, 

contingency measures are no longer 

required under Section 172(c)(9) of the 

Act. However, contingency provisions 

are required for maintenance plans 

under Section 175A(d). We describe the 

contingency provisions which Puerto 

Rico provided in the Guaynabo LMP 

later in this proposed action. 

(8) Part D Subpart 4 

Part D Subpart 4, Section 189(a), (c) 

and (e) requirements apply to any 

moderate nonattainment area before the 

area can be redesignated to attainment. 

The requirements which were 

applicable prior to the submission of the 

request to redesignate the area must be 

fully approved into the SIP before 

redesignating the area to attainment. 

These requirements include: (a) 

Provisions to assure that RACM was 

implemented by December 10, 1993; (b) 

either a demonstration that the plan 

provided for attainment as 

expeditiously as practicable but not 

later than December 31, 1994, or a 

demonstration that attainment by that 

date was impracticable; (c) quantitative 

milestones which were achieved every 3 

years and which demonstrate reasonable 

further progress (RFP) toward 

attainment by December 31, 1994; and 

(d) provisions to assure that the control 

requirements applicable to major 

stationary sources of PM10 also apply to 

major stationary sources of PM10 

precursors except where the 

Administrator determined that such 

sources do not contribute significantly 

to PM10 levels which exceed the 

NAAQS in the area. These provisions 

were fully approved into the SIP upon 

EPA approval of the PM10 moderate 

area plan for the Guaynabo NAA on 

May 31, 1995 (60 FR 28333). 

D. Has Puerto Rico Demonstrated That 

the Air Quality Improvement Is Due to 

Permanent and Enforceable Reductions? 

The state must be able to reasonably 

attribute the improvement in air quality 

to permanent and enforceable emission 

reductions. In making this showing, the 

state must demonstrate that air quality 

improvements are the result of actual 

enforceable emission reductions. This 

showing should consider emission rates, 

production capacities, and other related 

information. The analysis should 

assume that sources are operating at 

permitted levels (or historic peak levels) 

unless evidence is presented that such 

an assumption is unrealistic. Permanent 

and enforceable control measures in the 

Guaynabo NAA SIP include RACM and 

RACT. The Puerto Rico RACM analysis 

for the Guaynabo NAA concentrated on 

measures to control emissions from 

fugitive dust sources such as reentrained dust from paved roads, 

unpaved roads and parking lots, 

construction sites and other areas from 

which windblown dust may emanate. 

The RACMs were implemented by the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico through 

a Memorandum of Understanding 

(MOU) between the Puerto Rico 

Environmental Quality Board and the 

following government entities: 

• The Puerto Rico Department of 

Transportation and Public Works and 

the Executive Director of the Highway 

Authority to maintain and control the 

reconstruction of existing roads and the 

construction of new roads; 

• The Municipality of Guaynabo to 

pave and maintain the streets, roads and 

parking areas located in the 

Municipality of Guaynabo; and 

• The Puerto Rico Port Authority to 

pave and maintain the streets, roads, 

and parking areas that lead into the port 

area in Puerto Nuevo, Guaynabo and 

San Juan. 

The control measures established 

through the MOUs are consistent with 

RACM requirements and have been 

implemented for at least 10 years. Table 

1 contains a list of RACM implemented 

in Guaynabo. These control measures 

were approved into the SIP, and they 

are both permanent and federally 

enforceable. See 60 FR 28333 (May 31, 

1995). 

TABLE 1—GUAYNABO NAA, REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL MEASURES

Control measure State agency Authority 

Reduce particle matter by curb paving or stabilizing shoulders for the following highways PR– 

5, PR–22, PR–24, PR–165 located in the Municipality of Guaynabo.

Department of Transportation and Public 

Works and Puerto 

Rico Highway Authority.

Rule 423(C) RCAP. 

Reduce fugitive dust from paved roads by the operation of sweeping machines in the highways listed above at least once per week.

Reduce particulate matter by paving or chemically stabilize any unpaved roads or parking 

areas and any access points where unpaved traffic surfaces adjoin paved roads in their jurisdiction.

Municipality of 

Guaynabo.

Rule 423(C) RCAP. 

Reduce fugitive dust from paved roads by the operation of sweeping machines in the roads, 

streets and parking areas above at least two times per week.

Reduce particulate matter by paving or chemically stabilize any unpaved roads or parking 

areas and any access points where unpaved traffic surfaces adjoin paved roads in the following areas: port zone of Puerto Nuevo, Guaynabo, and San Juan.

Reduce fugitive dust from paved roads by the operation of sweeping machines in the roads, 

streets and parking areas above at least two times per week.

Port Authority .............. Rule 423(C) RCAP. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
45392 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 169 / Wednesday, September 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1—GUAYNABO NAA, REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL MEASURES—Continued 

Control measure State agency Authority 

Implementation of engineering good practice for the control of particulate matter emissions 

during the construction of future projects in port zone of Puerto Nuevo, Guaynabo and San 

Juan.

The emission inventory for the 

Guaynabo NAA identified the sources 

considered in the RACT analysis. 

Several minor sources were excluded 

from the analysis because additional 

control technology for these sources was 

determined to be unreasonable since 

they do not contribute significantly to 

the modeled exceedances of the PM10 

NAAQS. However, some sources located 

outside the Guaynabo nonattainment 

area were considered in the RACT 

analysis because they contribute 

significantly to the modeled 

exceedances. 

The categories included in Puerto 

Rico’s RACT control strategy are: 

electric utilities, grain handling and 

processing facilities, petroleum 

refineries, asphalt plants, and quarries 

and rock crushing operations. 

The adopted control strategies for 

stationary sources approved by EPA 

provided the necessary control 

measures to attain and maintain the 

PM10 NAAQS for the Guaynabo NAA. 

The RACT control strategies are 

incorporated into Rule 423 of the Puerto 

Rico Regulations of Control for 

Atmospheric Pollution (RCAP). Rule 

423 is permanent and federally 

enforceable. The PREQB adopted 

revisions to Rules 102 and 423 of the 

Puerto Rico RCAP in support of its 

redesignation request and development 

of a maintenance plan for the 

Municipality of Guaynabo. The 

revisions to Rule 423 consist of 

administrative changes such as a 

revision to a definition and the title of 

Rule 423. Revisions to Rule 423 also 

included the removal of certain 

provisions applicable to sand, soda ash, 

cement and dust clinkers. These 

provisions, adopted by Puerto Rico after 

Rule 423 of the RCAP was approved 

into the SIP, had the effect of limiting 

the applicability of the PM10 SIP to 

these sources. PREQB’s recent adoption 

to remove these provisions applicable to 

these sources now makes the rule 

consistent with the previous federally 

approved version of Rule 423. See 62 FR 

3211 or the TSD for a more detailed 

discussion related to this provision. 

Finally, EPA has determined that 

areas that qualify for the LMP will meet 

the NAAQS, even under worst case 

meteorological conditions. Under the 

LMP policy, the maintenance 

demonstration is presumed to be 

satisfied if an area meets the qualifying 

criteria. Thus, by qualifying for the LMP 

option, Puerto Rico has demonstrated 

that the air quality improvements in the 

Guaynabo area are the result of 

permanent emission reductions and not 

a result of either economic trends or 

meteorology. A description of the LMP 

qualifying criteria and how the 

Guaynabo area meets these criteria is 

provided in the following section. 

E. Does the Area Have a Fully Approved 

Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 

175A of the Act? 

In this action, we are proposing to 

approve the Puerto Rico LMP for the 

Guaynabo NAA in accordance with the 

principles outlined in the LMP option 

memo. Upon the effective date of the 

final action of this proposal, the area 

will have a fully approved maintenance 

plan. 

F. Has Puerto Rico Demonstrated That 

the Guaynabo NAA Qualifies for the 

LMP Option? 

The LMP option memo outlines the 

requirements for an area to qualify for 

the LMP Option. First, the area should 

be attaining the NAAQS. As stated 

previously in Section IV.A., EPA has 

determined that the Guaynabo NAA has 

been in attainment of the PM10 NAAQS 

since 1997 and continues to meet the 

PM10 NAAQS for the period 2002– 

2007. Second, the average design value 

(ADV) for the past 5 years of monitoring 

data must be at or below the critical 

design value (CDV). The CDV is a 

margin of safety value and is the value 

at which an area has been determined 

to have a 1 in 10 probability of 

exceeding the NAAQS. The LMP option 

memo provides two methods for 

reviewing monitoring data for the 

purpose of qualifying for the LMP 

option. The first method is a 

comparison of a site’s ADV with the 

CDV of 98 μg/m3 for the 24-hour PM10 

NAAQS and 40 μg/m3 for the annual 

PM10 NAAQS. A second method that 

applies to the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS is 

the calculation of a site-specific CDV 

and a comparison of the site-specific 

CDV with the ADV for the past 5 years 

of monitoring data. The ADV for the 24- 

hour PM10 NAAQS for Guaynabo, 

based on data from all monitors located 

in the Municipality of Guaynabo for the 

years 2002–2006, is 85 μg/m3. This 

value falls below the 24-hour CDV 

provided in the LMP option memo of 98 

μg/m3. Therefore, Guaynabo meets the 

design value criteria outlined in the 

LMP option memo. 

Third, the area must meet the motor 

vehicle regional emissions analysis test 

in attachment B of the LMP option 

memo. Using the methodology outlined 

in the memo, based on monitoring data 

for the period 2002–2006, EPA has 

determined that the Guaynabo NAA 

passes the motor vehicle regional 

emissions analysis test. The monitoring 

data for the period 2002–2006 shows 

that Guaynabo has attained the NAAQS 

for PM10, and the 24-hour ADV and the 

annual ADV in Guaynabo are less than 

the site specific 24-hour PM10 CDV and 

the national annual CDV respectively. 

Finally, the area has met the regional 

vehicle emissions analysis test. Thus, 

the Guaynabo NAA area qualifies for the 

Limited Maintenance Plan option 

described in the LMP option memo. The 

LMP option memo also indicates that 

once a state selects the LMP option and 

it is in effect, the state will be expected 

to determine, on an annual basis, that 

the LMP criteria are still being met. If 

the state determines that the LMP 

criteria are not being met, it should take 

action to reduce PM10 concentrations 

enough to requalify for the LMP. One 

possible approach the state could take is 

to implement contingency measures. In 

section E of the Limited Maintenance 

Plan, Puerto Rico commits to evaluate, 

on an annual basis, the LMP criteria for 

the Guaynabo NAA. For these reasons 

and reasons explained below, we are 

proposing to approve the LMP for the 

Guaynabo NAA and the State’s request 

to redesignate the Municipality of 

Guaynabo, PR from nonattainment to 

attainment for PM10. 

G. Does Puerto Rico Have an Approved 

Attainment Emissions Inventory Which 

Can Be Used To Demonstrate 

Attainment of the NAAQS? 

Pursuant to the LMP option memo, 

the state’s approved attainment plan 

should include an emissions inventory 

(attainment inventory) which can be 

used to demonstrate attainment of the 

NAAQS. The attainment inventory 

should represent emissions during one 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 169 / Wednesday, September 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules 45393 

of the years during the same five year 

period associated with air quality data 

used to determine whether the area 

meets the applicability requirements of 

the LMP Option. The state should 

review its inventory every three years to 

ensure emissions growth is incorporated 

in the attainment inventory if necessary. 

In this instance, Puerto Rico completed 

an attainment year inventory for the 

calendar year 2002. EPA has reviewed 

the 2002 attainment year emissions 

inventory and determined that it is 

current, accurate and complete. In 

addition, the emissions inventory 

submitted with the Limited 

Maintenance Plan for the calendar year 

2002 is representative of the level of 

emissions during the time period used 

to calculate the average design value 

since 2002 is one of the years during the 

five year period used to calculate the 

design value. 

2002 GUAYNABO, PUERTO RICO PM10 ATTAINMENT EMISSION INVENTORY

[In tons per year] 

Point Area Off-highway 

mobile 

Highway 

mobile Total 

2,365 .............................................................................................................................................. 398* 130.5 49 2,942.5 

* Area source emissions inventory includes emissions from paved and unpaved roads. 

H. Does the LMP Include an Assurance 

of Continued Operation of an 

Appropriate EPA-Approved Air Quality 

Monitoring Network, in Accordance 

With 40 CFR Part 58? 

The PM10 monitoring network for the 

Municipality of Guaynabo consists of 

two monitors. These sites are identified 

as (1) Site Number 7, located at the 

USGS and Water Resources Building 

and (2) Site 24, located at the Electrical 

Substation. These monitors are in close 

proximity to each other and are 

representative of the air quality for the 

area. Also, the Commonwealth of Puerto 

Rico has been affected by natural events 

such as the dust from the Sahara desert 

transported across the Atlantic Ocean 

and volcanic ash from the Soufriere 

Hills located on Montserrat Island. 

These natural events affect the air 

quality in the Municipality of 

Guaynabo. Once flagged and justified, 

these natural events can be excluded as 

part of the determination of attainment 

with the PM10 NAAQS in accordance 

with the provisions of ‘‘Treatment of 

Data Influenced by Exceptional Events; 

Final Rule,’’ published March 22, 2007 

and Appendix K to 40 CFR Part 50. 

The monitoring network was 

developed and has been maintained in 

accordance with federal siting and 

design criteria in 40 CFR Part 58, 

Appendices D and E and in consultation 

with Region 2. In the LMP submitted by 

Puerto Rico, section 3.e.iv contains 

Puerto Rico’s commitment to continue 

to operate its monitoring network to 

meet EPA requirements. 

I. Does the Plan Meet the Clean Air Act 

Requirements for Contingency 

Provisions? 

Section 175A(d) of the Act states that 

a maintenance plan must include 

contingency provisions, as necessary, to 

promptly correct any violation of the 

NAAQS which may occur after 

redesignation of the area to attainment. 

As explained in the LMP option memo, 

these contingency measures do not have 

to be fully adopted at the time of 

redesignation. In compliance with the 

requirements of section 172(c)(9) of the 

Act, Puerto Rico included contingency 

measures in the PM10 SIP for the 

Municipality of Guaynabo approved by 

EPA on May 31, 1995. 

The contingency measures established 

in Rule 423(D) of the RCAP will 

continue to be in place for the period 

established by the LMP policy. The 

following are the contingency measures 

that are in place and will continue to be 

in place for the Municipality of 

Guaynabo: 

(1) The Puerto Rico Department of 

Transportation shall collect data on silt 

content and dust loadings for highways 

in Guaynabo Municipality using EPA 

procedures for better estimating PM10 

emissions following AP–42 procedures. 

(2) Guaynabo Municipality shall 

require vegetation, chemical 

stabilization, or other abatement of wind 

erodible soils. 

(3) Diesel fuel oil with a sulfur in fuel 

level less than 0.05% shall be used by 

all vessels while they operate in San 

Juan Bay which is specifically defined 

as the navigable waters south of the 

imaginary line connecting Punta del 

Morro and Isla de Cabras. 

(4) No visible emissions from any 

vessel shall be permitted in the San Juan 

Bay except as provided in Rule 403 of 

this Regulation. 

(5) The Puerto Rico Port Authority 

shall implement a street cleaning 

program or other program to prevent 

dust from collecting on paved surfaces 

in their jurisdiction. 

(6) The San Juan Municipality must 

revise the dust and fire abatement 

programs at its sanitary landfill in order 

to establish additional pollution 

abatement control strategies. 

EPA believes that the contingency 

measures in Guaynabo’s Limited 

Maintenance Plan meet the 

requirements for contingency measures 

as outlined in the Limited Maintenance 

Plan Option memo. 

J. Has Puerto Rico Met the Conformity 

Requirements? 

(1) Transportation Conformity 

Under the LMP option, emissions 

budgets are treated as essentially not 

constraining for the maintenance period 

because it is unreasonable to expect that 

qualifying areas would experience so 

much growth in that period that a 

NAAQS violation would result. While 

areas with maintenance plans approved 

under the LMP option memo are not 

subject to the budget test, the areas 

remain subject to other transportation 

conformity requirements of 40 CFR part 

93, subpart A. Thus, the metropolitan 

planning organization (MPO) in the area 

or the Commonwealth must document 

and ensure that: (a) Conformity of 

transportation plans is determined no 

less frequently than every three years, 

and conformity of plan amendments 

and transportation projects is 

demonstrated in accordance with the 

timing requirements specified in 40 CFR 

93.104; (b) The MPO’s interagency 

consultation procedures meet applicable 

requirements of 40 CFR 93.105; (c) 

Transportation plans and projects 

comply with the fiscal constraint 

element per 40 CFR 93.108; (d) The 

latest planning assumptions and 

emissions model are used as set forth in 

40 CFR 93.110 and 40 CFR 93.111; (e) 

Transportation plans and projects 

provide for timely implementation of 

SIP transportation control measures in 

accordance with 40 CFR 93.113; (f) 

Projects do not cause or contribute to 

any new localized carbon monoxide or 

particulate matter violations, in 

accordance with procedures specified in 

40 CFR 93.123; and (g) Project sponsors 

and/or operators provide written 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
45394 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 169 / Wednesday, September 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

commitments as specified in 40 CFR 

93.125. 

On May 12, 2009, EPA initiated an 

adequacy review of the Guaynabo LMP 

for transportation conformity purposes 

in accordance with 40 CFR 93.118(f), in 

a posting on EPA’s conformity Web site: 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 

stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm. 

As stated above, LMP budgets are 

unconstrained and consequently, the 

adequacy review period for these 

maintenance plans serves to allow the 

public to comment on whether limited 

maintenance is appropriate for these 

areas. The comment period for the 

adequacy posting for the Guaynabo LMP 

ended on June 11, 2009. EPA did not 

receive any comments on this posting. 

(2) General Conformity 

For federal actions which are required 

to address the specific requirements of 

the general conformity rule, one set of 

requirements applies particularly to 

ensuring that emissions from the action 

will not cause or contribute to new 

violations of the NAAQS, exacerbate 

current violations, or delay timely 

attainment. One way that this 

requirement can be met is to 

demonstrate that ‘‘the total of direct and 

indirect emissions from the action (or 

portion thereof) is determined and 

documented by the State or 

Commonwealth agency primarily 

responsible for the applicable SIP to 

result in a level of emissions which, 

together with all other emissions in the 

nonattainment area, would not exceed 

the emissions budgets specified in the 

applicable SIP.’’ 40 CFR 

93.158(a)(5)(i)(A). The decision about 

whether to include specific allocations 

of allowable emissions increases to 

sources is one made by the 

Commonwealth and local air quality 

agencies. These emissions budgets are 

different than those used in 

transportation conformity. Emissions 

budgets in transportation conformity are 

required to limit and restrain emissions. 

Emissions budgets in general conformity 

allow increases in emissions up to 

specified levels. Puerto Rico has chosen 

not to include specific emissions 

allocations for federal projects that 

would be subject to the provisions of 

general conformity. 

V. What Are EPA’s Conclusions? 

EPA has determined that the PM10 

Limited Maintenance Plan submitted by 

the PREQB on March 31, 2009 for the 

Municipality of Guaynabo meets all 

Clean Air Act provisions and EPA 

policy and guidance, including the 

criteria outlined in EPA’s LMP option 

memo. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

approve the PM10 Limited Maintenance 

Plan for the Municipality of Guaynabo 

and all of its components as they were 

submitted by PREQB on March 31, 

2009. Specifically, EPA is proposing to 

approve the 2002 PM10 attainment 

emissions inventory, attainment plan, 

maintenance demonstration, 

contingency measures, monitoring 

network, transportation conformity 

analysis and revisions to Rules 102 and 

423 of the Puerto Rico RCAP. 

EPA is also proposing to approve the 

redesignation request for the 

Municipality of Guaynabo submitted by 

the PREQB on March 31, 2009 based on 

EPA’s determination that the supporting 

documentation for redesignation 

satisfies all Clean Air Act requirements 

and EPA’s policy and guidance, 

including the criteria outlined in EPA’s 

redesignation guidance memorandum. 

VI. 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of 

Nitrogen, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Air pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Dated: August 18, 2009. 

Barbara A. Finazzo, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. E9–21169 Filed 9–1–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Parts 8, 12, 15, 42, and 49 

[FAR Case 2008–016; Docket 2009-0032, 

Sequence 1] 

RIN 9000–AL45 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; FAR 

Case 2008–016, Termination for Default 

Reporting 

AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1