Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules 51927 

• 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, 

pertaining to Maryland’s control of 

VOCs from adhesives and sealants, does 

not have Tribal implications as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because 

the SIP is not approved to apply in 

Indian country located in the state, and 

EPA notes that it will not impose 

substantial direct costs on Tribal 

governments or preempt Tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: August 8, 2011. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2011–21272 Filed 8–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0474; FRL–9453–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; West 

Virginia; Determination of Clean Data 

for the 2006 Fine Particulate Standard 

for the Charleston Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Charleston, West 

Virginia nonattainment area for the 2006 

fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

has clean data for the 24-hour 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS. This proposed 

determination is based upon quality 

assured, quality controlled, and certified 

ambient air monitoring data showing 

that this area has monitored attainment 

of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS based on the 

2007–2009 data and data available to 

date for 2010 in EPA’s Air Quality 

System (AQS) database that show the 

area continues to attain. If this proposed 

determination is made final, the 

requirements for this area to submit an 

attainment demonstration, associated 

reasonably available control measures, a 

reasonable further progress plan, 

contingency measures, and other 

planning State Implementation Plans 

(SIPs) related to attainment of the 

standard shall be suspended for so long 

as the area continues to meet the 

24-hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before September 19, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2011–0474 by one of the 

following methods: 

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

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. E-mail: 

fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0474, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Program Planning, 

Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2011– 

0474. 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. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 

during normal business hours at the Air 

Protection Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Asrah Khadr, (215) 814–2071, or by email at Khadr.Asrah@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. 

The following outline is provided to 

aid in locating information in this 

preamble. 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

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 taking? 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

Charleston, West Virginia PM2.5

nonattainment area has clean data for 

the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. This 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS
51928 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

determination is based upon quality 

assured, quality controlled, and certified 

ambient air monitoring data showing 

that these areas have monitored 

attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

based on the 2007–2009 data and data 

available to date for 2010 in EPA’s AQS 

database. 

II. What is the effect of this action? 

If this determination is made final, 

under the provisions of EPA’s PM2.5

implementation rule (see 40 CFR section 

51.1004(c)), the requirements for the 

Charleston nonattainment area to 

submit an attainment demonstration, 

associated reasonably available control 

measures (RACM) (including reasonably 

available control technology (RACT)), a 

reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, 

contingency measures, and any other 

planning SIPs related to attainment of 

the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS would be 

suspended for so long as the area 

continues to meet the 24-hour 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Furthermore, as 

described below, a final clean data 

determination would not be equivalent 

to the redesignation of this area to 

attainment of the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

If this rulemaking is finalized and 

EPA subsequently determines, after 

notice-and-comment rulemaking in the 

Federal Register, this area has violated 

the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the 

basis for the suspension of the specific 

requirements, set forth at 40 CFR 

51.1004(c), would no longer exist and 

this area would thereafter have to 

address the pertinent requirements. 

This clean data determination that 

EPA proposes with this Federal Register 

notice, that the air quality data shows 

attainment of the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, is not equivalent to the 

redesignation of this area to attainment. 

This proposed action, if finalized, will 

not constitute a redesignation to 

attainment under section 107(d)(3) of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA), because we 

would not yet have an approved 

maintenance plan for this area as 

required under section 175A of the 

CAA, nor a determination that this area 

has met the other requirements for 

redesignation. The designation status of 

this area would remain nonattainment 

for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS until such 

time as EPA determines that this area 

meets the CAA requirements for 

redesignation to attainment. 

III. What is the background for this 

action? 

The 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS set forth at 40 

CFR 50.13 became effective on 

December 18, 2006 (71 FR 61144) and 

promulgated a 24-hour standard of 35 

micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) 

based on a 3-year average of the 98th 

percentile of 24-hour concentration. On 

December 14, 2009, (74 FR 58688), EPA 

made designation determinations, as 

required by CAA section 107(d)(1), for 

the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

Charleston area is designated as 

nonattainment for the 24-hour 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

relevant air quality data? 

EPA has reviewed the ambient air 

monitoring data, consistent with the 

requirements contained in 40 CFR part 

50 and recorded in EPA’s AQS database 

for the Charleston PM2.5 nonattainment 

area from 2007 through the present 

time. On the basis of that review, EPA 

has concluded that this area meets the 

24-hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS based on 

the 2007–2009 data and data available 

to date for 2010 in EPA’s AQS database. 

Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR part 

50, section 50.13 and in accordance 

with Appendix N, the 24-hour primary 

and secondary PM2.5 standards are met 

when the 98th percentile 24-hour 

concentration is less than or equal to 35 

μg/m3. Table 1 shows the design values 

for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for 

the years 2007–2009 and Table 2 shows 

the preliminary design values for the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the year 

2010. EPA’s review of the data indicates 

that the Charleston, West Virginia PM2.5

nonattainment area meets the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

TABLE 1—2007–2009 DAILY AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS IN THE CHARLESTON AREA1

Site name County Site No. Design value 

(μg/m3) 

Charleston .................................................................... Kanawha ....................................................................... 54–039–0010 29 

South Charleston .......................................................... Kanawha ....................................................................... 54–039–1005 32 

1The publicly available PM2.5 AQS data and information is available as part of EPA’s AirTrends Site at: http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/ 

values.html. 

TABLE 2—2010 DAILY AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS IN THE CHARLESTON AREA

Site name County Site No. 

Preliminary 

design value 

(μg/m3) 

Charleston .................................................................... Kanawha ....................................................................... 54–039–0010 25 

South Charleston .......................................................... Kanawha ....................................................................... 54–039–1005 28 

V. What’s EPA’s proposed action? 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Charleston nonattainment area has 

clean data for the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. As provided in 40 CFR 

51.1004(c), if EPA finalizes this 

determination, it will suspend the 

requirements for this area to submit an 

attainment demonstration, associated 

reasonably available control measures, a 

reasonable further progress plan, 

contingency measures, and any other 

planning SIPs related to the attainment 

of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, so long as 

these areas continues to meet the 

standard. EPA is soliciting public 

comments on the issues discussed in 

this document. These comments will be 

considered before taking final action. 

VI. What are the statutory and 

executive order reviews? 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to 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 proposed action: 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules 51929 

• 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 rulemaking 

that the Charleston, West Virginia PM2.5

nonattainment area has clean data for 

the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5 standard does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian Country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping. 

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

Dated: August 8, 2011. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2011–21224 Filed 8–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2011–0063; 

92220–1113–0000–C5] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a 

Petition To Delist the Valley Elderberry 

Longhorn Beetle 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition 

finding and initiation of status review. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 

90-day finding on a petition to delist the 

valley elderberry longhorn beetle 

(Desmocerus californicus dimorphus) 

under the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended (Act). Based on our 

review, we find that the petition 

presents substantial scientific or 

commercial information indicating that 

delisting the valley elderberry longhorn 

beetle may be warranted. Therefore, 

with the publication of this notice, we 

are initiating a status review of the 

species to determine if delisting is 

warranted. To ensure that this status 

review is comprehensive, we are 

requesting scientific and commercial 

data and other information regarding the 

valley elderberry longhorn beetle. Based 

on this status review, we will issue a 12- 

month finding on the petition, which 

will address whether the petitioned 

action is warranted under section 

4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. 

DATES: To allow us adequate time to 

conduct this review, we request that we 

receive information on or before October 

18, 2011. Please note that if you are 

using the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

(see ADDRESSES, below), the deadline for 

submitting an electronic comment is 

Eastern Standard Time on this date. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by one of the following methods: 

(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. In the Keyword 

box, enter Docket No. FWS–R8–ES– 

2011–0063, which is the docket number 

for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search 

panel on the left side of the screen, 

under the Document Type heading, 

click on the Proposed Rules link to 

locate this document. You may submit 

a comment by clicking on ‘‘Send a 

Comment or Submission.’’ 

(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail 

or hand-delivery to: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: FWS–R8–ES–2011– 

0063; Division of Policy and Directives 

Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 

2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. 

We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We 

will post all information we receive on 

http://www.regulations.gov. This 

generally means that we will post any 

personal information you provide us 

(see Request for Information below for 

more details). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karen Leyse, Listing Coordinator, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento 

Fish and Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage 

Way, Suite W–2605, Sacramento, CA 

95825; telephone 916–414–6600; 

facsimile 916–414–6712. If you use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD), call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Information 

When we make a finding that a 

petition presents substantial 

information indicating that delisting a 

species may be warranted, we are 

required to promptly review the status 

of the species (status review). For the 

status review to be complete and based 

on the best available scientific and 

commercial information, we request 

information on the valley elderberry 

longhorn beetle from governmental 

agencies, Native American Tribes, the 

scientific community, industry, and any 

other interested parties. We seek 

information on: 

(1) The species’ biology, range, and 

population trends, including: 

(a) Habitat requirements for feeding, 

breeding, and sheltering; 

(b) Genetics and taxonomy; 

(c) Historical and current range, 

including distribution patterns; 

(d) Historical and current population 

levels, and current and projected trends; 

and 

(e) Past and ongoing conservation 

measures for the species, its habitat, or 

both. 

(2) The factors that are the basis for 

making a listing/delisting/downlisting 

determination for a species under 

section 4(a) of the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are: 

(a) The present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of its habitat or range; 

(b) Overutilization for commercial, 

recreational, scientific, or educational 

purposes; 

(c) Disease or predation; 

(d) The inadequacy of existing 

regulatory mechanisms; or 

(e) Other natural or manmade factors 

affecting its continued existence. 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS