42774 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 138 / Monday, July 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

local entities related to the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS when necessary. 

V. Proposed Action 

With the exception of the PSD 

permitting requirements for major 

sources of sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 

of (D)(i) and (J), and the state board 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), 

EPA is proposing to approve that 

ADEM’s infrastructure SIP submission, 

submitted November 4, 2011, for the 

2008 Lead NAAQS meets the above 

described infrastructure SIP 

requirements. EPA is proposing to 

disapprove section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) of 

Alabama’s infrastructure submission 

because the State’s implementation plan 

does not contain provisions to comply 

with section 128 of the Act, and thus 

Alabama’s November 4, 2011, 

infrastructure SIP submission does not 

meet the requirements of the Act. This 

proposed approval in part and 

disapproval in part, however, does not 

include the PSD permitting 

requirements for major sources of 

section 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of (D)(i) 

and (J) because the Agency has taken 

final action on these requirements for 

2008 Lead NAAQS for Alabama in a 

separate rulemaking. 

Under section 179(a) of the CAA, final 

disapproval of a submittal that 

addresses a requirement of a CAA Part 

D Plan or is required in response to a 

finding of substantial inadequacy as 

described in CAA section 110(k)(5) (SIP 

call) starts a sanctions clock. The 

portion of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) 

provisions (the provisions being 

proposed for disapproval in today’s 

notice) were not submitted to meet 

requirements for Part D or a SIP call, 

and therefore, if EPA takes final action 

to disapprove this submittal, no 

sanctions will be triggered. However, if 

this disapproval action is finalized, that 

final action will trigger the requirement 

under section 110(c) that EPA 

promulgate a federal implementation 

plan (FIP) no later than 2 years from the 

date of the disapproval unless the State 

corrects the deficiency, and EPA 

approves the plan or plan revision 

before EPA promulgates such FIP. 

VI. 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 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it 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, Intergovernmental relations, 

Lead, and Recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: July 6, 2015. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2015–17733 Filed 7–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0163; FRL–9930–75– 

Region 4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Mississippi: 

Miscellaneous Changes 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

portions of a State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) revision submitted by the 

Mississippi Department of 

Environmental Quality (MDEQ), to EPA 

on July 25, 2010. The SIP revision 

includes multiple changes to 

Mississippi’s SIP to add definitions in 

accordance with federal regulations and 

to implement clarifying language. EPA 

is not proposing to take action on the 

aspects of the SIP revision related to the 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) or 

hazardous air pollutants at this time. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before August 19, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2013–0163, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4-ARMS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2013– 

0163,’’ Air Regulatory Management 

Section (formerly Regulatory 

Development Section), Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Air Regulatory 

Management Section (formerly 

Regulatory Development Section), Air 

Planning and Implementation Branch, 

Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 138 / Monday, July 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 42775 

1MDEQ’s submission includes a revision to APC– 

S–1, Section 8—‘‘Provisions for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants’’ that updates the incorporate by 

reference date to October 3, 2008, for relevant 

federal regulations related to National Emission 

Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) 

and the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR). However, 

EPA has not incorporated APC–S–1, Section 8 into 

the Mississippi SIP, and therefore, EPA is not 

proposing to approve these changes related to 

NESHAPS and CAMR into the SIP. 

2Under the federal definition, ‘‘direct PM2.5

emissions’’ means ‘‘solid particles emitted directly 

from an air emissions source or activity, or gaseous 

emissions or liquid droplets from an air emissions 

Continued 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2013– 

0163. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information 

may not be publicly available, i.e., CBI 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation 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 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sean Lakeman, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. 

Lakeman can be reached by phone at 

(404) 562–9043 or via electronic mail at 

lakeman.sean@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On June 25, 2010, MDEQ submitted a 

SIP revision to EPA for approval into 

the Mississippi SIP. MDEQ’s July 25, 

2010, SIP revision includes multiple 

changes to Mississippi’s air pollution 

control regulation APC–S–1, entitled 

‘‘Air Emission Regulations for the 

Prevention, Abatement, and Control of 

Air Contaminants,’’ to add and amend 

definitions in accordance with federal 

regulations and to implement clarifying 

language. Specifically, these changes 

include amendments to Section 2— 

‘‘Definitions’’ and Section 3—‘‘Specific 

Criteria for Sources of Particulate 

Matter.’’ With the exception of the 

changes in Section 8 related to 

hazardous air pollutants and the 

changes in Section 14 related to 

Mississippi’s CAIR provisions, EPA is 

proposing to approve Mississippi’s July 

25, 2010, SIP revision, which became 

state effective on February 6, 2009.1

EPA will consider action on 

Mississippi’s changes to its CAIR 

provisions and its hazardous air 

pollutants provisions in a separate 

action. 

II. Mississippi’s July 25, 2010, SIP 

Revision 

A. Changes to APC–S–1, Section 2— 

‘‘Definitions’’ 

1. ‘‘Air Cleaning Device’’ 

Mississippi is amending the 

definition of ‘‘Air Cleaning Device’’ by 

adding language to clarify that the term 

‘‘air pollution control device’’ is 

synonymous with the term ‘‘air cleaning 

device.’’ The definition of ‘‘air cleaning 

device’’ includes ‘‘[a]ny method, 

process or equipment which removes, 

reduces or renders less noxious air 

contaminants discharged into the 

atmosphere.’’ Mississippi’s July 25, 

2010, SIP revision, simply clarifies that 

the term ‘‘air pollution control device’’ 

has the same definition as ‘‘air cleaning 

device’’ by adding a phrase noting that 

these two terms are ‘‘synonymous.’’ 

Mississippi chose to link the two terms 

rather than provide a separate definition 

entry for ‘‘air pollution control device.’’ 

Mississippi is making this change to 

provide clarity to the regulated 

community regarding the definition for 

the term ‘‘air pollution control device.’’ 

2. ‘‘Ozone Action Day’’ 

Mississippi’s July 25, 2010, SIP 

submission amends the definition for 

‘‘Ozone Action Day’’ by changing the 

dates from April 1 and September 30 to 

March 1 and October 30, respectively, to 

align with the time period for ozone 

monitoring in Mississippi as specified 

in 40 CFR part 58. See table in 40 CFR 

part 58 entitled, ‘‘Table D–3 of 

Appendix D to Part 58—Ozone 

Monitoring Season by State.’’ 

3. ‘‘PM2.5’’ 

Mississippi added a definition of 

‘‘PM2.5’’ as ‘‘[p]articulate matter with an 

aerodynamic diameter less than or equal 

to a nominal 2.5 micrometers as 

measured by a reference method based 

on appendix L of 40 CFR part 50 and 

designated in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 53 or by an equivalent method 

designated in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 53.’’ This definition is consistent 

with EPA’s definition codified at 40 

CFR part 53 as well as the agency’s 

longstanding characterization of fine 

particular matter. This change, if 

approved, will result in a renumbering 

of definitions at APC–S–1. 

4. ‘‘PM2.5 emissions’’ 

Mississippi added a definition of 

‘‘PM2.5 emissions’’ as ‘‘[f]inely divided 

solid or liquid material, with an 

aerodynamic diameter less than or equal 

to a nominal 2.5 micrometers, emitted to 

the ambient air as measured by an 

applicable EPA Test Method, an 

equivalent or alternative method 

specified by EPA, or by a test method 

specified in the approved State 

Implementation Plan.’’ This definition 

is consistent with EPA’s definition for 

‘‘direct PM2.5 emissions’’ 2 except that 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

42776 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 138 / Monday, July 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

source or activity which condense to form 

particulate matter at ambient temperatures. Direct 

PM2.5 emissions include elemental carbon, directly 

emitted organic carbon, directly emitted sulfate, 

directly emitted nitrate, and other inorganic 

particles (including but not limited to crustal 

material, metals, and sea salt).’’ 40 CFR 51.1000. 

3The federal provisions for implementation of the 

PM2.5 NAAQS require, after January 1, 2011, that 

states must consider the condensable fraction of 

direct PM2.5 emissions when establishing limits 

under 40 CFR 51.1009 (Reasonable further progress 

requirements (RFP)) and 40 CFR 51.1010 

(Requirements for reasonably available control 

technology (RACT) and reasonably available control 

measures (RACM)). See 40 CFR 51.1002(c). 

However, Mississippi’s adopted definition of ‘‘PM2.5

emissions’’ does not explicitly include the 

condensable fraction of direct PM2.5 emissions. EPA 

notes that if PM2.5 nonattainment areas are 

designated within the State in the future, the State’s 

definition of ‘‘PM2.5 emissions’’ may need to be 

revised to include condensable emissions to ensure 

that the RFP and RACT/RACM provisions are 

properly implemented. EPA also notes that 

Mississippi’s PSD permitting program at APC–S–5 

already requires sources to account for PM2.5

condensable emissions when determining PM2.5

emission limitations and PSD applicability. 

the State’s definition does not include a 

condensable PM2.5 component.3

However, EPA considers this definition 

acceptable because there are currently 

no PM2.5 nonattainment areas in 

Mississippi and because the State’s 

prevention of significant deterioration 

(PSD) program at APC–S–5 requires 

sources to consider the condensable 

portion of PM2.5 emissions when 

determining PSD applicability. This 

change, if approved, will result in a 

renumbering of definitions at APC–S–1. 

B. Changes to APC–S–1, Section 3— 

‘‘Specific Criteria for Source of 

Particular Matter’’ 

1. Paragraph 4—‘‘Fuel Burning’’ 

As it currently exists in the SIP, APC– 

S–1, Section 3.4(b)—‘‘Combination 

Boilers’’—states that particulate matter 

emissions from combination boilers 

involved in fuel burning operations that 

utilize a mixture of combustibles are 

allowed emission rates up to 0.30 grains 

per standard dry cubic foot. 

Mississippi’s July 25, 2010, SIP 

submission added language to clarify 

that section 3.4(b) is only applicable to 

fuel burning operations that utilize a 

mixture of combustibles ‘‘to produce 

steam or heat water or any other heat 

transfer medium through indirect 

means.’’ 

2. Paragraph 6—‘‘Manufacturing 

Processes’’ 

Mississippi is amending subparagraph 

(a) relating to particulate matter 

emission limits based on process weight 

rate to clarify that the emission limit 

listed in that subparagraph applies to 

the manufacturing process including 

any associated stacks, vents, outlets, or 

combination thereof. 

3. Paragraph 7—‘‘Open Burning’’ 

Mississippi is amending subparagraph 

(a)(1) to clarify that fires set for burning 

of agricultural wastes in the field and/ 

or silvicultural wastes for forest 

management purposes must obtain a 

permit from the Mississippi Forestry 

Commission regardless of whether there 

is an available Forestry Commission 

tower servicing the area in which the 

burning occurs. 

4. Paragraph 8—‘‘Incineration’’ 

Mississippi is adding subparagraph 

(c) to clarify that the particulate matter 

emission limit for incinerators, 0.2 

grains per standard dry cubic foot of 

flue gas, does not apply to ‘‘afterburners, 

flares, thermal oxidizers, and other 

similar devices used to reduce the 

emissions of air pollutants from 

processes.’’ EPA notes that all 

particulate matter emissions discharged 

from such control devices are part of the 

total emissions from the process unit 

and are not excluded from 

determinations of compliance with 

applicable emission limitations. 

Mississippi also amended the text of 

subparagraph (a) to reference 

subparagraph (c) to further clarify that 

devices listed at paragraph (c) are not 

required to apply the particulate matter 

emission limit for incinerators 

identified in subparagraph (a). 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

certain changes to Mississippi’s air 

pollution control regulation APC–S–1, 

entitled ‘‘Air Emission Regulations for 

the Prevention, Abatement, and Control 

of Air Contaminants.’’ Specifically, 

these changes include the amendments 

to Section 2—‘‘Definitions’’ and Section 

3—‘‘Specific Criteria for Sources of 

Particulate Matter’’ described in section 

II, above. EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these documents 

generally available electronically 

through www.regulations.gov and/or in 

hard copy at the appropriate EPA office 

(see the ADDRESSES section of this 

preamble for more information). 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve portions 

of Mississippi’s July 25, 2010, SIP 

submission revising Rule APC–S–1 to 

add and amend definitions in 

accordance with federal regulations and 

to implement clarifying language. EPA 

has preliminarily determined that these 

changes to the Mississippi SIP are in 

accordance with the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act) and EPA policy and regulations. 

With the exception of changes in 

Section 8 related to hazardous air 

pollutants and the changes in Section 14 

related to Mississippi’s CAIR 

provisions, EPA is proposing to approve 

Mississippi’s SIP revisions provided to 

EPA on July 25, 2010. EPA will consider 

action on Mississippi’s changes to its 

CAIR provisions and its hazardous air 

pollutants provisions in a separate 

action. 

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. 

See 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: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 138 / Monday, July 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 42777 

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). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it 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, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: July 9, 2015. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2015–17744 Filed 7–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0368; FRL–9930–77– 

Region 4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; North Carolina; 

Nitrogen Dioxide and Sulfur Dioxide 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan revision 

submitted by the State of North 

Carolina, through the North Carolina 

Department of Environment and Natural 

Resources on August 13, 2012, 

pertaining to definition changes for the 

Nitrogen Dioxide and Sulfur Dioxide 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards. EPA is approving this SIP 

revision because the State has 

demonstrated that it is consistent with 

the Clean Air Act. In the Final Rules 

section of this issue of the Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

implementation plan revision as a direct 

final rule without prior proposal 

because the Agency views this as a 

noncontroversial submittal and 

anticipates no adverse comments. A 

detailed rationale for the approval is set 

forth in the direct final rule. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before August 19, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2015–0368, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4-ARMS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2015– 

0368,’’ Air Regulatory Management 

Section (formerly the Regulatory 

Development Section), Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch (formerly the 

Air Planning Branch), Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zuri 

Farngalo, Air Regulatory Management 

Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9152. 

Mr. Farngalo can also be reached via 

electronic mail at farngalo.zuri@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

additional information see the direct 

final rule which is published in the 

Rules Section of this Federal Register. 

A detailed rationale for the approval is 

set forth in the direct final rule. If no 

adverse comments are received in 

response to this rule, no further activity 

is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse 

comments, the direct final rule will be 

withdrawn and all public comments 

received will be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period on this 

document. Any parties interested in 

commenting on this document should 

do so at this time. 

Dated: July 6, 2015. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2015–17682 Filed 7–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0696; FRL–9930–85– 

Region 4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Georgia 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 

2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

portions of the May 14, 2012, State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submission, 

provided by the Georgia Department of 

Natural Resources, Environmental 

Protection Division (hereafter referred to 

as GA EPD) for inclusion into the 

Georgia SIP. This proposal pertains to 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) 

infrastructure requirements for the 2008 

8-hour ozone national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS). The CAA 

requires that each state adopt and 

submit a SIP for the implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of each 

NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is 

commonly referred to as an 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP. GA EPD certified 

that the Georgia SIP contains provisions 

that ensure the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and 

maintained in Georgia. With the 

exception of provisions pertaining to 

prevention of significant deterioration 

(PSD) permitting and interstate 

transport requirements, EPA is 

proposing to approve Georgia’s 

infrastructure SIP submission provided 

to EPA on May 14, 2012, as satisfying 

the required infrastructure elements for 

the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS