### 59250 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

1 EPA’s determination that the HickoryMorganton-Lenoir and Greensboro-Winston SalemHigh Point PM2.5 nonattainment areas have attained the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS is not equivalent to the redesignation of the areas to attainment. The designation status of the areas remains nonattainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS until such time as EPA determines that the areas meet all of the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment. See 75 FR 54 (January 4, 2010) and 75 FR 230 (January 5, 2010), respectively. usually is used in the pentahydrate form. * * *

* * * * *

■ 19. Section 184.1446 is amended by revising the first sentence of paragraph (a) to read as follows:

**§ 184.1446 Manganese chloride.**

(a) Manganese chloride (MnCl 2, CAS Reg. No. 7773–01–5) is a pink, translucent, crystalline product. * * *

* * * * *

■ 20. Section 184.1449 is amended by revising the first sentence of paragraph (a) to read as follows:

**§ 184.1449 Manganese citrate.**

(a) Manganese citrate (Mn 3 (C 6H 5 O 7 ) 2, CAS Reg. No. 10024–66–5) is a pale orange or pinkish white powder. * * *

* * * * *

■ 21. Section 184.1845 is amended by revising the fourth sentence of paragraph (a) to read as follows:

**§ 184.1845 Stannous chloride (anhydrous and dehydrated).** 

(a) * * * Dihydrated stannous chloride (SnCl 2 ·2H 2O, CAS Reg. No. 10025–69–1) is the chloride salt of metallic tin that contains two molecules of water. * * *

* * * * *

Dated: September 19, 2011. Susan Bernard, Acting Director, Office of Regulations, Policy and Social Sciences, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.
[FR Doc. 2011–24455 Filed 9–23–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4160–01–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0386–201151; FRL– 9471–1]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; North**  **Carolina: Clean Smokestacks Act**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of North Carolinafor the purpose of establishing systemwide emission limitations from the North Carolina Clean Smokestacks Act (CSA) into the North Carolina SIP. On August 21, 2009, the State of North Carolina, through the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC DENR), Division of Air Quality (DAQ), submitted an attainmentdemonstration for the HickoryMorganton-Lenoir and GreensboroWinston Salem-High Point 1997 fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ) nonattainment area. That submittal included a request that the system-wide emission limitations from the North Carolina CSA be incorporated into the State’s federally approved SIP. EPA has determined that the CSA portion of this SIP revision is approvable pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

**DATES :**  This rule will be effective October 26, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 2011–0386. All documents in the docket are listed on the http:// www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information 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 through http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the **FOR**
**FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding federal holidays.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Joel Huey or Nacosta C. Ward, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. Huey may be reached by phone at (404) 562– 9104. Mr. Huey can also be reached via electronic mail at huey.joel@epa.gov. Ms. Ward may be reached by phone at (404) 562–9140 or via electronic mail at ward.nacosta@epa.gov

. **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Table of Contents
I. What is the background of North Carolina’s CSA? II. This Action III. Final Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What is the background of North Carolina’s CSA?

In June 2002, the General Assembly of North Carolina, Session 2001, passed Session Law 2002–4, also known as Senate Bill 1078. This legislation, entitled ‘‘An Act to Improve Air Quality in the State by Imposing Limits on the Emission of Certain Pollutants from Certain Facilities that Burn Coal to Generate Electricity and to Provide for Recovery by Electric Utilities of the Costs of Achieving Compliance with Those Limits,’’ requires significantactual emission reductions from coalfired power plants in North Carolina. The State expected that emission reductions from the CSA would have significant health benefits for the citizens of North Carolina and other
states.

North Carolina’s CSA includes a schedule of system-wide limitations (or caps) on emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO
x) and sulfur dioxide (SO 2) from coal-fired power plants in the State, the first of which became effective in 2007. The State expects the resulting emission reductions will serve as a significant step towards meeting the 1997 PM 2.5 and 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), among other NAAQS, improving visibility in the mountains and other scenic vistas, and reducing acid rain. EPA notes that all areas in the State that were designated nonattainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 and 8-hour ozone NAAQS are currently attaining the standards. Although the Hickory-Morganton-Lenoir and Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point nonattainment areas for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS have not yet been redesignated to attainment, EPA determined that these areas had attaining data based on the three-year period 2006–2008. 1 Also, although the Charlotte 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is still designated nonattainment, EPA has issued a proposed determination that the Area has attaining data based on the 2008– 2010 design value period. See 76 FR 20293 (April 12, 2011). North Carolina has identified the CSA as part of its plan to attain and maintain the NAAQS. Because North Carolina is relying on


### 59251 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

emissions reductions from the CSA to demonstrate attainment and maintenance for certain areas in the State, North Carolina is now formally seeking that the CSA be included in the SIP so that the CSA’s requirements may be considered ‘‘permanent and enforceable.’’

III. This Action

EPA is approving a revision to the North Carolina SIP to incorporate the system-wide emission caps from the State’s CSA. The specific provisions being incorporated into the SIP are paragraphs (a) through (e) of Section 1 of Session Law 2002–4, Senate Bill 1078 (hereafter ‘‘Senate Bill 1078’’) enacted June 20, 2002. This approval does not include incorporation into the North Carolina SIP of paragraphs (f) through (j) of Section 1 of Senate Bill 1078 nor any of Section 2 of Senate Bill 1078. Please refer to the docket for this rulemaking for the complete text of these provisions.

On June 22, 2011, EPA published a proposed rulemaking to incorporate theCSA requirements into federallyapproved North Carolina SIP. See 76 FR 36468. The comment period for this proposed rulemaking closed on July 22, 2011. EPA did not receive any comments, adverse or otherwise, during the public comment period.

IV. Final Action

Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is approving the system-wide emission caps from the North Carolina State legislation entitled, ‘‘An Act to Improve Air Quality in the State by Imposing Limits on the Emission of Certain Pollutants from Certain Facilities that Burn Coal to Generate Electricity and to Provide for Recovery by Electric Utilities of the Costs of Achieving Compliance with Those Limits.’’ EPA has evaluated the State’s submittal and has determined that it meets the applicable requirements of the CAA and EPA regulations. In reducing system-wide NO

x and SO 2 emissions allowed by coal-fired power plants in the State, the CSA is strengthening North Carolina’s SIP and will not interfere with CAA requirements. The approval of the CSA ensures that the State may take credit for the associated NO
x and SO 2 emission reductions when pertinent to SIP submittals for other CAA requirements. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);

• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. );

• Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. );

• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);

• Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

• Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the 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 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.

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register

. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 25, 2011. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. ( See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

Dated: September 13, 2011. A. Stanley Meiburg Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

**PART 52—[AMENDED]**

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42.U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
**Subpart II—North Carolina**

■ 2. Section 52.1781 is amended by adding paragraph (h) to read as follows:

**§ 52.1781 Control strategy: Sulfur oxides and particulate matter.** 
* * * * *

(h) North Carolina submitted a control strategy plan for particulate matter entitled, ‘‘An Act to Improve Air Quality in the State by Imposing Limits on the Emission of Certain Pollutants from Certain Facilities that Burn Coal to Generate Electricity and to Provide for Recovery by Electric Utilities of the Costs of Achieving Compliance with Those Limits.’’ The State expects the resulting emission reductions of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide from this control plan will serve as a


### 59252 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

significant step towards meeting the 1997 PM 2.5 and 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), among other NAAQS, improving visibility in the mountains and other scenic vistas, and reducing acid rain. The specific approved provisions, submitted on August 21, 2009, are paragraphs (a) through (e) of Section 1 of Session Law 2002–4, Senate Bill 1078 enacted and state effective on June 20, 2002. This approval does not include paragraphs (f) through (j) of Section 1 of Senate Bill 1078 nor any of Section 2 of Senate Bill 1078.

[FR Doc. 2011–24513 Filed 9–23–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0631; FRL–9470–2]**

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;**  **Maryland; Transportation Conformity Regulations** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Direct final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Maryland State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions establish transportation conformity regulations for the State of Maryland. EPA is approving these revisions in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

**DATES :**  This rule is effective on November 25, 2011 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by October 26, 2011. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA– R03–OAR–2011–0631 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–2008–0631, Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, Office of Air Planning Programs, 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– 0631. 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. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Maryland Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland 21230.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :** Martin Kotsch, (215) 814–3335, or by email at kotsch.martin@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document, whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA.
I. What is transportation conformity?

Transportation conformity is required under section 176(c) of the CAA to ensure that Federally supported highway, transit projects, and other activities are consistent with (conform to) the purpose of the SIP. Conformity currently applies to areas that are designated nonattainment, and those redesignated to attainment after 1990 (maintenance areas), with plans developed under section 175A of the CAA for the following transportation related criteria pollutants: ozone, particulate matter (PM 2.5 and PM 10), carbon monoxide (CO), and nitrogen dioxide (NO 2). Conformity, for purposes of the SIP, means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the relevant national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The transportation conformity regulation is found in 40 CFR part 93 (‘‘Federal conformity rule’’) and provisions related to conformity SIPs are found in 40 CFR 51.390.
II. What is the background for this action?

On August 10, 2005, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act—A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU) was signed into law. SAFETEA–LU revised certain provisions of section 176(c) of the CAA, related to transportation conformity. Prior to SAFETEA–LU, states were required to address all of the Federal conformity rule’s provisions in their conformity SIPs. After SAFETEA–LU, state’s SIPs were required to contain all or portions of only the following three sections of the Federal conformity rule, modified as appropriate to each state’s circumstances: 40 CFR 93.105 (consultation procedures); 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii) (written commitments to implement certain kinds of control measures); and 40 CFR 93.125(c) (written commitments to implement certain kinds of mitigation measures). States are no longer required to submit conformity SIP revisions that address the other sections of the Federal conformity rule.