Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules 48495 

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

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

1999), requires EPA to develop an 

accountable process to ensure 

‘‘meaningful and timely input by State 

and local officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have federalism 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have 

federalism implications’’ is defined in 

the Executive Order to include 

regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct 

effects on the States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government.’’ 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132, because it 

merely disapproves certain State 

requirements for inclusion into the SIP 

and does not alter the relationship or 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. Thus, Executive Order 13132 

does not apply to this action. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (59 FR 22951, November 9, 

2000), because the SIP EPA is proposing 

to disapprove would not apply in Indian 

country located in the State, and EPA 

notes that it will not impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive 

Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because it is not 

an economically significant regulatory 

action based on health or safety risks 

subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 

19885, April 23, 1997). This proposed 

SIP disapproval under section 110 and 

subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act 

will not in-and-of itself create any new 

regulations but simply disapproves 

certain State requirements for inclusion 

into the SIP. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This proposed rule is not subject to 

Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, 

May 22, 2001) because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law No. 

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

note) directs EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards in its regulatory 

activities unless to do so would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical 

standards (e.g., materials specifications, 

test methods, sampling procedures, and 

business practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA 

to provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. 

The EPA believes that this action is 

not subject to requirements of Section 

12(d) of NTTAA because application of 

those requirements would be 

inconsistent with the Clean Air Act. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 

(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA lacks the discretionary authority 

to address environmental justice in this 

proposed action. In reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve or 

disapprove state choices, based on the 

criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

proposes to disapprove certain State 

requirements for inclusion into the SIP 

under section 110 and subchapter I, part 

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

requirements. Accordingly, it does not 

provide EPA with the discretionary 

authority to address, as appropriate, 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects, using practicable 

and legally permissible methods, under 

Executive Order 12898. 

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: September 8, 2009. 

Lawrence E. Starfield, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. E9–22808 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0188; FRL–8960–6] 

Determination of Attainment of the 

1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard for 

Imperial County, CA 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Imperial County, 

California moderate 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area has attained the 

1997 8-hour National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. 

The State of California has requested 

this determination, which is based upon 

three years of certified ambient air 

monitoring data that show the area has 

monitored attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS since the 2006–2008 

monitoring period. If this proposed 

determination is made final, the 

requirements for the State to submit 

certain reasonable further progress 

requirements, an attainment 

demonstration, contingency measures 

and other planning requirements of the 

Clean Air Act related to attainment of 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS shall be 

suspended for so long as the area 

continues to attain the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 23, 2009. Public 

comments on this action are requested 

and will be considered before taking 

final action. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

48496 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

1See AQS Quicklook Report dated August 24, 

2009 in the docket for today’s action. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2009–0188, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: tax.wienke@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 415–947–3579. 

• Mail: Wienke Tax, Air Planning 

Office, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

• Hand Delivery: Marty Robin, Air 

Planning Office, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 9, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 

94105–3901. 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 to 4:55 

excluding Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R09–OAR–2009– 

0188. 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 information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

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, 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wienke Tax, Air Planning Office, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 9, (415) 947–4192, 

tax.wienke@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing to Take? 

II. What Is the Effect of This Action? 

III. What Is the Background for This Action? 

IV. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the Relevant 

Air Quality Data? 

V. Proposed Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing to 

Take? 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Imperial County moderate 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment area in California 

has attained the 1997 8-hour National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

for ozone. This determination is based 

upon three years of certified ambient air 

monitoring data that show that the area 

has monitored attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS of 0.08 parts per million 

(ppm) since the 2006–2008 monitoring 

period. Quality controlled and quality 

assured ozone data for 2009 that are 

available in the EPA Air Quality System 

(AQS) database, but not yet certified, 

also show that the area continues to 

attain the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.1

II. What Is the Effect of This Action? 

If this determination is made final, 

under the provisions of EPA’s ozone 

implementation rule (40 CFR section 

51.918), the requirements for the State 

to submit certain reasonable further 

progress requirements, an attainment 

demonstration, and contingency 

measures under section 172(c)(9) of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA) and any other 

planning State Implementation Plans 

(SIPs) related to attainment of the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS in Imperial 

County will be suspended for so long as 

the area continues to attain the ozone 

NAAQS. This finding does not address 

the 2008 8-hour ozone standard of 0.075 

ppm, which EPA promulgated on March 

12, 2008 (see 73 FR 16435, March 27, 

2008). 

If this rulemaking is finalized and 

EPA subsequently determines, after 

notice-and-comment rulemaking in the 

Federal Register, that the area has 

violated the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard, the basis for the suspension of 

these requirements for that area would 

no longer exist, and the area would 

thereafter have to address the pertinent 

requirements within a reasonable period 

of time. EPA would establish that period 

taking into account the individual 

circumstances surrounding the 

particular submissions at issue. 

This proposed action is not equivalent 

to the redesignation of the Imperial 

County area to attainment under CAA 

section 107(d)(3), because we would not 

yet have an approved maintenance plan 

for the area as required under section 

175A of the CAA, nor a determination 

that the area has met the other 

requirements for redesignation. The 

classification and designation status of 

the area would remain moderate 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS until such time as EPA 

determines that it meets the CAA 

requirements for redesignation to 

attainment. 

III. What Is the Background for This 

Action? 

On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857), EPA 

designated as nonattainment any area 

that was violating the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS based on the three most 

recent years (2001–2003) of air quality 

data. At that time, a number of areas in 

California, including Imperial County, 

were designated as nonattainment. See 

40 CFR 81.305. Imperial County was 

initially classified as a marginal 

nonattainment area with a maximum 

attainment date of June 15, 2007. 69 FR 

23858. On February 13, 2008, EPA 

determined that Imperial County had 

failed to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS by the applicable attainment 

deadline and reclassified the area by 

operation of law as a moderate 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment area, with a 

maximum attainment date of June 15, 

2010. 73 FR 8209 (final rule effective 

March 14, 2008). This determination 

was based on ambient air quality data 

from the 2004–2006 monitoring period. 

More recent air quality data, however, 

indicate that the Imperial County area is 

now attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. 

On February 19, 2009, the California 

Air Resources Board requested that EPA 

determine that the Imperial County area 

is attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard of 0.08 ppm, based on certified 

ambient air monitoring data from the 

2006–2008 monitoring period. 

IV. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the 

Relevant Air Quality Data? 

In California’s request and a 

subsequent certification letter, the State 

certified that the air quality monitoring 

data it submitted for the years 2006, 

2007, and 2008 was accurate and 

quality-assured, consistent with state 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules 48497 

2Letter from James Goldstene, Executive Officer, 

California Air Resources Board, to Laura Yoshii, 

Acting Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region 9, 

dated February 19, 2009. 

3Letter from Karen Magliano, Chief, Air Quality 

Data Branch, California Air Resources Board, to 

Laura Yoshii, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA 

Region 9, dated March 4, 2009. 

and EPA monitoring requirements.2 3

California submitted these data to EPA’s 

AQS, where it is available to the public 

via http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/ 

airsaqs/. Table 1 summarizes the ozone 

air quality data for Imperial County, 

from 2006 to 2008. 

TABLE 1—FOURTH HIGHEST 8-HOUR AVERAGE OZONE CONCENTRATIONS AND DESIGN VALUES (IN PARTS PER MILLION, 

PPM) IN IMPERIAL COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 2006–2008 

Monitor site 2006 2007 2008 2006–2008 

Design value 

Calexico East ................................................................................................... .078 .083 .078 .079 

Calexico Ethel .................................................................................................. .068 .087 .087 .080 

El Centro .......................................................................................................... .091 .083 .074 .082 

Niland ............................................................................................................... .072 .078 .075 .075 

Westmorland .................................................................................................... .086 .085 .077 .082 

Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 

50, the 8-hour ozone standard is 

attained when the 3-year average of the 

annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8- 

hour average ozone concentrations at an 

ozone monitor is less than or equal to 

0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm, based on the 

rounding convention in 40 CFR part 50, 

Appendix I). This 3-year average is 

referred to as the design value. When 

the design value is less than or equal to 

0.084 ppm (84 parts per billion (ppb)) at 

each monitor within the area, then the 

area is meeting the NAAQS. See 69 FR 

23857 (April 30, 2004) for further 

information. Also, the data 

completeness requirement is met when 

the average percent of days with valid 

ambient monitoring data is greater than 

90%, and no single year has less than 

75% data completeness as determined 

in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50. 

Table 1 shows the fourth highest daily 

maximum 8-hour average ozone 

concentrations for the Imperial County 

monitors for the years 2006–2008. EPA’s 

review of these data indicate that the 

Imperial County nonattainment area has 

met and continues to meet the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

EPA is soliciting public comments on 

the issues discussed in this notice or on 

other relevant matters. EPA will 

consider these comments before taking 

final action. Interested parties may 

participate in the Federal rulemaking 

procedure by submitting written 

comments to the EPA office listed in the 

ADDRESSES section of this Federal 

Register. 

V. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Imperial County, California ozone 

nonattainment area has attained the 

1997 8-hour ozone standard based on 

three years of certified ambient air 

monitoring data at all ozone monitoring 

sites in the area. Quality-assured data 

through the present demonstrate that 

the area continues to attain the standard 

through June 2009. As provided in 40 

CFR 51.918, if EPA finalizes this 

determination, it would suspend the 

requirements for California to submit an 

attainment demonstration, a reasonable 

further progress plan, and contingency 

measures under section 172(c)(9), and 

any other planning SIP related to 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for the Imperial County area. 

This suspension of requirements would 

be effective as long as the area continues 

to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. Please note that this action 

addresses only the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard of 0.08 ppm, and does not 

address the 2008 8-hour ozone standard 

of 0.075 ppm. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed 

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ and therefore is not subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget. For this reason, this action is 

also not subject to Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This action proposes to make 

a determination based on air quality 

data, and would, if finalized, result in 

the suspension of certain Federal 

requirements. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.). Because this 

rule proposes to make a determination 

based on air quality data, and would, if 

finalized, result in the suspension of 

certain Federal requirements, it 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). 

This proposed rule also does not have 

tribal implications because it will not 

have a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000). This 

proposed action also does not have 

Federalism implications because it does 

not have substantial direct effects on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999), because it merely 

proposes to make a determination based 

on air quality data and would, if 

finalized, result in the suspension of 

certain Federal requirements, and does 

not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. This proposed rule also is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 

because it proposes to determine that air 

quality in the affected area is meeting 

Federal standards. 

The requirements of section 12(d) of 

the National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply because it would 

be inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when determining the attainment 

status of an area, to use voluntary 

consensus standards in place of 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

48498 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

promulgated air quality standards and 

monitoring procedures that otherwise 

satisfy the provisions of the Clean Air 

Act. 

This proposed rule does not impose 

an information collection burden under 

the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, 

et seq.) 

Under Executive Order 12898, EPA 

finds that this rule involves a proposed 

determination of attainment based on 

air quality data and will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on any communities in the area, 

including minority and low-income 

communities. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: September 11, 2009. 

Laura Yoshii, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 9. 

[FR Doc. E9–22933 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2009–0638; FRL–8960–9] 

Determinations of Attainment of the 

One-Hour and Eight-Hour Ozone 

Standards for Various Ozone 

Nonattainment Areas in New Jersey 

and Upstate New York 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to 

determine that various ozone 

nonattainment areas in New York and 

New Jersey have attained the one-hour 

and eight-hour National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards for ozone. For the 

one-hour standard, the areas are: the 

Atlantic City and Warren County areas 

in New Jersey and the AlbanySchenectady-Troy, Buffalo-Niagara 

Falls, Essex County, Jefferson County, 

and Poughkeepsie areas in New York. 

For the eight-hour standard, the areas 

are: Buffalo-Niagara Falls, Jamestown, 

Poughkeepsie and Essex County 

(Whiteface Mountain). The States 

requested these determinations, based 

upon three years of complete, qualityassured ambient air monitoring data and 

these areas have continued to attain 

these ozone standards based on 

examination of the most recent air 

quality data from 2006–2008. These data 

demonstrate that the one-hour and 

eight-hour ozone standards have been 

attained in these areas. If EPA makes 

these proposed determinations final for 

the one-hour standard, the areas subject 

to the one-hour standard will have 

completed their progress toward 

achieving the one-hour health standard. 

In the cases where EPA determines that 

areas have attained the eight-hour 

standard, the requirements for the state 

to submit certain reasonable further 

progress plans, attainment 

demonstrations, contingency measures 

and any other planning requirements of 

the Clean Air Act related to attainment 

of the ozone standards shall be 

suspended for as long as the areas 

continue to attain the eight-hour ozone 

standard. These proposed 

determinations of attainment are not 

redesignations of these areas to 

attainment. Redesignations must meet 

additional requirements, including an 

approved plan to maintain compliance 

with the air quality standard for ten 

years after redesignation. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 23, 2009. Public 

comments on this action are requested 

and will be considered before taking 

final action. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R02– 

OAR–2008–0638, 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 ID No. EPA–R02–OAR–2009– 

0638. 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, 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert F. Kelly, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, 

New York, New York 10007–1866, (212) 

637–4249. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What Are Today’s Proposed Actions? 

II. What Is the Background for These 

Actions? 

A. When Were These Areas Designated? 

B. How Does EPA Compute Whether an Area 

Complies With the One-hour Ozone 

Standard? 

C. How Does EPA Compute Whether an Area 

Complies With the Eight-hour Ozone 

Standard? 

D. Why Is EPA Determining if These Areas 

Are Attaining The Ozone Standards? 

E. What Are the Likely Effects of These 

Determinations of Attainment? 

F. How Are These Determinations of 

Attainment Different From a 

Redesignation to Attainment? 

III. Did These Areas Attain Their Respective 

Ozone Standards? 

IV. What is EPA Proposing? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS