Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 180 / Friday, September 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 56923 

required on packages; and the barcodes 

now being used are unable to 

incorporate the data necessary to meet 

the needs of the USPS Intelligent Mail 

strategy. Packages that currently bear 

barcodes designed to provide delivery 

and tracking information only do not 

always include a routing code (a 

barcode that represents the destination 

ZIPTM Code). The current barcodes have 

limited revenue protection capabilities, 

due to the absence of information 

associating the piece with its specific 

payment method; and have limited 

integration of multiple extra services. 

IMpb and Electronic Documentation 

The IMpb will provide piece-level 

data to enable the Postal Service to 

increase efficiency, add value to its 

package product line, and enhance its 

package tracking capabilities. The IMpb 

is a 34-digit modulated barcode that 

generally follows the specifications of 

the GS1–128 symbology. GS1–128 

barcodes are a special type of global 

standard Code 128 barcodes, which 

make use of Application Identifiers (AI) 

to define the encoded data and how it 

is used. The IMpb incorporates features 

of the GS1–128 symbology to allow for 

the unique identification and tracking of 

domestic packages from induction to 

delivery. The GS1–128 barcode 

symbology is already a requirement for 

users of electronic Confirmation 

Services and the Electronic Verification 

System® (eVS®). Customers currently 

participating in these programs will not 

need to change the symbology of the 

barcode; however the elements within 

the barcode and layout will change. 

There are several barcode variations 

for use at the commercial and retail 

level that will provide the flexibility to 

accommodate the diverse shipping 

needs of Postal Service customers. To 

improve routing, tracking, and service 

capabilities, the Postal Service is 

providing advance notice of a future 

proposal to require customers to include 

the correct ZIP + 4 Code in the barcode 

of each package, or to transmit this 

information to the USPS via an 

electronic file. 

Enhancements to the current 

requirements for electronic files used, in 

conjunction with parcel barcodes, will 

be necessary to support the additional 

features incorporated into IMpb. 

Electronic files now used for packages 

do not provide adequate space for 

supplemental fields, limiting their 

ability to support the additional piecelevel information received from 

customers. The new electronic file 

format will include expanded package 

identification code fields to 

accommodate up to a 34-digit barcode 

string, and will require fewer file types 

to support any combination of products 

and services. In addition, customers will 

be required to include the destination 

ZIP + 4 Code in the electronic file for 

all records. This additional ZIP Code 

information will assist in the routing 

and tracking of our package products. 

An optional field for the delivery point 

code of the destination address has also 

been added to the electronic file to 

provide additional information to 

improve service. A listing of electronic 

file formats is located in the addendum 

to Publication 91, Addendum for 

Intelligent Mail Package Barcode (IMpb) 

and 3-digit Service Type Code. 

The data construction of the IMpb 

barcode will be different from that of the 

current Confirmation Services barcode. 

Detailed specifications for IMpb barcode 

construction are available in the 

‘‘Barcode Data’’ section of the 

specification document, Barcode, 

Package, Intelligent Mail 

(USPS2000508). The most significant 

change in the barcode data is in the 

service type code. Currently, barcodes 

use a 2-digit service type code that can 

represent multiple mail classes or 

products, limiting the number of extra 

services that may be integrated into a 

single barcode. When two or more extra 

services are used, a barcode 

representing each extra service is 

usually required on the mailpiece, 

resulting in the need to scan multiple 

barcodes at delivery. 

The IMpb will use unique 3-digit 

service type codes which identify the 

exact product and extra service(s) 

combination, eliminating the need for 

separate barcodes and separate 

scanning, enabling more efficient 

package handling. A list of the 3-digit 

service type codes is available in the 

addendum to Publication 91. 

To increase package visibility, the 

Postal Service will scan the IMpb 

throughout processing using automated 

mail processing equipment and 

Intelligent Mail devices. Mailers who 

include extra services with their 

packages will have scan data, including 

acceptance, enroute, and delivery-type 

data available to them. Mailers will also 

be able to increase package visibility by 

associating each package with the 

appropriate sack, or an approved 

alternate container, which bears an 

accurately encoded Intelligent Mail tray 

label. Each sack or alternate container 

may then be electronically associated to 

a pallet (or similar container) that bears 

an accurately encoded Intelligent Mail 

container placard. 

The Intelligent Mail package barcode 

will: 

• Require a routing code to aid in 

processing packages on automated 

sorting equipment. 

• Use a channel-specific Application 

Identifier (AI) that associates the 

barcode to the payment method, 

supporting revenue assurance 

protection. 

• Contain a 3-digit service type code, 

which will identify the exact mail class 

and service combination, reducing the 

number of barcodes on a package. 

• Permit the use of a 6-digit or 9-digit 

numeric Mailer ID (MID). 

These enhancements will add datastream efficiency within mail 

processing, delivery, payment, and 

reporting. Packages without the addition 

of extra services must also bear 

Intelligent Mail package barcodes and 

will be identified through the use of 

specific mail class service type codes. 

Intelligent Mail barcodes, used on 

letters and flats, will not be permitted 

on packages in lieu of the IMpb. 

Additional Information 

Mailers can access the following 

references on the RIBBS® Web site at 

ribbs.usps.gov: 

• Proposed addendum to Publication 

91, Addendum for Intelligent Mail 

Package Barcode (IMpb) and 3-digit 

Service Type Code. 

• Specification document, Barcode, 

Package, Intelligent Mail 

(USPS2000508). 

Stanley F. Mires, 

Chief Counsel, Legislative. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23313 Filed 9–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2007–0314; FRL–9202–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Oklahoma; 

State Implementation Plan Revisions 

for Interstate Transport of Pollution, 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration, 

Nonattainment New Source Review, 

Source Registration and Emissions 

Reporting and Rules of Practice and 

Procedure 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

part of a State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) revision submitted by the State of 

Oklahoma for the purpose of addressing 

the ‘‘good neighbor’’ provisions of Clean 


wwoods2 on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS-1
56924 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 180 / Friday, September 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Air Act (the Act or CAA) section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS or standards) and the 1997 fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. This 

SIP revision satisfies a portion of the 

State’s obligation to submit a SIP 

revision that demonstrates that adequate 

provisions are in place to prohibit air 

emissions from adversely affecting 

another State’s air quality through 

interstate transport. In this action, EPA 

is proposing to approve the Oklahoma 

Interstate Transport SIP provisions that 

address the requirement of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) that emissions from 

sources in Oklahoma do not interfere 

with measures required in the SIP of 

any other State under part C of the CAA 

to prevent ‘‘significant deterioration of 

air quality.’’ EPA is also proposing to 

approve portions of the revision to the 

Oklahoma SIP submitted on February 

14, 2002, which relate to Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) and 

Nonattainment New Source Review 

(NNSR) for major sources, source 

registration and emissions reporting and 

other rules of practice and procedure 

(except for revisions relating to minor 

sources). Finally, for purposes of the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, EPA also is 

proposing to approve the portions of the 

SIP revision submitted on June 24, 2010 

to include nitrogen oxides (NOX) as an 

ozone precursor in Oklahoma’s PSD SIP. 

This action is being taken under section 

110 and parts C and D of the Act. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before October 18, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket No. EPA–R06– 

OAR–2007–0314, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

• Follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. 

• EPA Region 6 ‘‘Contact Us’’ Web 

site: http://epa.gov/region6/ 

r6coment.htm. Please click on ‘‘6PD 

(Multimedia)’’ and select ‘‘Air’’ before 

submitting comments. 

• E-mail: Mr. Guy Donaldson at 

donaldson.guy@epa.gov. Please also 

send a copy by e-mail to the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section below. 

• Fax: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air 

Planning Section (6PD–L), at fax 

number 214–665–7263. 

• Mail: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, 

Air Planning Section (6PD–L), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. 

• Hand or Courier Delivery: Mr. Guy 

Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section 

(6PD–L), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Such 

deliveries are accepted only between the 

hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. weekdays, 

and not on legal holidays. Special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket No. EPA–R06–OAR–2007–0314. 

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 docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Planning Section (6PD–L), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. The file will be made 

available by appointment for public 

inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review 

Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. 

and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal 

holidays. Contact the person listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph below or Mr. Bill Deese at 

214–665–7253 to make an appointment. 

If possible, please make the 

appointment at least two working days 

in advance of your visit. There will be 

a 15 cent per page fee for making 

photocopies of documents. On the day 

of the visit, please check in at the EPA 

Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. 

The State submittal is also available 

for public inspection during official 

business hours, by appointment, at the 

Oklahoma Department of Environmental 

Quality, 707 North Robinson, P.O. Box 

1677, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73101– 

1677. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl 

Young, Air Planning Section (6PD–L), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, telephone 

(214) 665–6645; fax number (214) 665– 

7263; e-mail address 

young.carl@epa.gov. For further 

information regarding PSD or NNSR, 

contact: Rick Barrett or Dinesh 

Senghani, Air Permits Section (6PD–R), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, telephone 

(214) 665–7227 or (214) 665–7221; fax 

number (214) 665–7263; e-mail address 

barrett.richard@epa.gov or 

senghani.dinesh@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

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

EPA. 

Outline 

I. What action is EPA proposing to take? 

II. What is a SIP? 

III. What is the background for this proposed 

Action? 

IV. What is EPA’s evaluation of the State’s 

submissions? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA proposing to 

take? 

A. Oklahoma Demonstration of 

Adequate Provisions Prohibiting 

Emissions That Interfere With 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Measures in Other States 

We are proposing to approve a 

submission from the State of Oklahoma 

demonstrating that the State has 

adequately addressed one of the 

required elements of the CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i), the element that requires 

that the State Implementation Plan 

prohibit air pollutant emissions from 

sources within a State from interfering 


wwoods2 on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 180 / Friday, September 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 56925 

1 In a separate action we have proposed to limit 

the interstate transport of NOX emissions from 

Oklahoma that affect the ability of downwind States 

to attain and maintain compliance with the 1997 

ozone NAAQS pursuant to CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

(75 FR 45210, August 2, 2010). 

with measures required to prevent 

significant deterioration of air quality in 

any other State. We are proposing to 

determine that emissions from sources 

in Oklahoma do not interfere with 

measures to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality in any other 

State for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

or of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)). In this action, 

we are not addressing the elements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, that 

pertain to prohibiting air pollutant 

emissions from within Oklahoma from: 

(1) Significantly contributing to 

nonattainment in any other State, (2) 

interfering with maintenance of the 

relevant NAAQS in any other State and 

(3) interfering with measures required to 

protect visibility in any other State. 

These will be addressed in future 

rulemakings.1

In conjunction with our proposed 

finding that emissions from sources in 

Oklahoma are not interfering with any 

other State’s PSD program, we are 

proposing to approve: (1) The portion of 

the SIP revision submitted by the State 

on February 14, 2002 related to PSD for 

major stationary sources and major 

modifications; and (2) the portion of the 

SIP revision submitted June 24, 2010 

addressing NOX as an ozone precursor 

for PSD. We are proposing to approve 

these portions of the two SIP revision 

submittals as revisions to the Oklahoma 

PSD SIP. 

EPA proposes to approve the 

foregoing revisions relevant to section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) pursuant to section 110 

and part C of the Act. 

B. Oklahoma SIP Revisions Submitted 

on February 14, 2002 and June 24, 2010 

1. February 14, 2002 Submittal 

In addition to proposing to approve 

the portion of the SIP revision 

submitted on February 14, 2002 that 

relates to PSD as a revision to the 

Oklahoma PSD SIP, we also are 

proposing to approve the portions that 

relate to: (1) NNSR permitting 

requirements for major stationary 

sources and major modifications as a 

revision to the Oklahoma NNSR SIP; (2) 

source registration and emissions 

reporting as part of the Oklahoma Major 

NSR SIP and (3) other rules of practice 

and procedure as part of the Oklahoma 

Major NSR SIP. We are proposing to 

approve (2) and (3) as meeting the PSD 

and NNSR SIP requirements. We are not 

acting upon the SIP revision submittal 

for Minor NSR SIP purposes, only for 

Major NSR SIP purposes. We will take 

separate action later in the Federal 

Register on the submittal with regard to 

the Minor NSR SIP requirements. 

The submitted revision affects Title 

252 of the Oklahoma Administrative 

Code (OAC 252), the official 

compilation of agency rules and 

executive orders for the State of 

Oklahoma. The majority of the revisions 

are administrative in nature, stemming 

from the State’s initiative to repeal or 

otherwise modify redundant or 

incorrect language within the OAC. The 

variety of revisions includes recodified 

portions of the Oklahoma SIP, deletions 

of duplicative and outdated rules, and 

edits that simplify text and correct 

errors. 

The revisions submitted in 2002 

proposed for approval are discussed in 

more detail in the Technical Support 

Document (TSD) found in the electronic 

docket for this action. The electronic 

docket can be found at the Web site 

http://www.regulations.gov (docket 

number EPA–R06–OAR–2007–0314). 

2. June 24, 2010 Submittal 

In addition, we are proposing to 

approve only the portion of the SIP 

revision submitted by Oklahoma on 

June 24, 2010 to regulate NOX emissions 

as a precursor to ozone in its PSD 

program for major sources. We are only 

acting on the June 24, 2010 submittal as 

it relates to NOX as an ozone precursor. 

We will take separate action on the 

remainder of the June 24, 2010 

submittal in a future Federal Register 

notice. 

II. What is a SIP? 

Section 110(a) of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) requires each State to develop a 

plan that provides for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of the national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS). EPA 

establishes NAAQS under section 109 of 

the CAA. Currently, the NAAQS address 

six criteria pollutants: Carbon 

monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, 

lead, particulate matter, and sulfur 

dioxide. 

The plan developed by a State is 

referred to as the State implementation 

plan (SIP). 

The content of the SIP is specified in 

section 110 of the CAA, other provisions 

of the CAA, and applicable regulations. 

SIPs can be extensive, containing State 

regulations or other enforceable 

measures and various types of 

supporting information, such as 

emissions inventories, monitoring 

networks, and modeling 

demonstrations. 

A primary purpose of the SIP is to 

provide the air pollution regulations, 

control strategies, and other means or 

techniques developed by the State to 

ensure that the ambient air within that 

State meets the NAAQS. However, 

another important aspect of the SIP is to 

ensure that emissions from within the 

State do not have certain prohibited 

impacts upon the ambient air in other 

States through interstate transport of 

pollutants. This SIP requirement is 

specified in section 110(a)(2)(D) of the 

CAA. Pursuant to that provision, each 

State’s SIP must contain provisions 

adequate to prevent, among other 

things, emissions that interfere with 

measures required to be included in the 

SIP of any other State to prevent 

significant deterioration of air quality in 

any other State. 

States are required to update or revise 

SIPs under certain circumstances. One 

such circumstance is EPA’s 

promulgation of a new or revised 

NAAQS. Each State must submit these 

revisions to EPA for approval and 

incorporation into the Federallyenforceable SIP. 

III. What is the background for this 

proposed action? 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated 

new NAAQS for 8-hour ozone and for 

fine particulate matter (PM2.5). This 

action is being taken in response to the 

promulgation of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. This 

action does not address the 

requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

or the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS; those 

standards will be addressed in later 

actions. 

Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires 

States to submit SIPs to address a new 

or revised NAAQS within 3 years after 

promulgation of such standards, or 

within such shorter period as EPA may 

prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) lists the 

elements that such new SIPs must 

address, as applicable, including section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i), which pertains to 

interstate transport of certain emissions. 

On August 15, 2006, EPA issued its 

‘‘Guidance for State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) Submission to Meet Current 

Outstanding Obligations Under Section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8-Hour Ozone and 

PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards’’ (2006 Guidance). EPA 

developed the 2006 Guidance to make 

recommendations to States for making 

submissions to meet the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standards and the 1997 

PM2.5 standards. 


wwoods2 on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS-1
56926 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 180 / Friday, September 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

2The New Source Review regulations in the 

Oklahoma SIP are found in: (1) OAC 252:100–8, 

Part 7, (PSD Requirements for Attainment Areas) 

and (2) OAC 252:100–8, Part 9, (Major Sources 

Affecting Nonattainment Areas). There are currently 

no nonattainment areas in Oklahoma. 

As identified in the 2006 Guidance, 

the ‘‘good neighbor’’ provisions in 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) require each State 

to submit a SIP that prohibits emissions 

that adversely affect another State in the 

ways contemplated in the statute. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) contains four 

distinct requirements related to the 

impacts of interstate transport. The SIP 

must prevent sources in the State from 

emitting pollutants in amounts which 

will: (1) Contribute significantly to 

nonattainment of the NAAQS in other 

States; (2) interfere with maintenance of 

the NAAQS in other States; (3) interfere 

with provisions to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality in other 

States; or (4) interfere with efforts to 

protect visibility in other States. 

On May 1, 2007, we received a SIP 

revision from the State of Oklahoma 

intended to address the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for both the 1997 

8-hour ozone standards and 1997 PM2.5

standards. In this rulemaking we are 

addressing only the requirement that 

pertains to preventing sources in 

Oklahoma from emitting pollutants that 

will interfere with measures required to 

prevent significant deterioration of air 

quality in other States. In its 

submission, the State of Oklahoma 

stated that its New Source Review 

program for major sources satisfies this 

requirement. With this submission, the 

State would meet the requirement as 

contemplated in the 2006 Guidance for 

SIP submissions to meet the third 

element of CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i). 

On February 14, 2002 and June 24, 

2010, the State of Oklahoma also 

submitted revisions to its SIP 

regulations to EPA. The 2002 revisions 

require certain stationary sources of air 

pollution to report annual emissions (an 

emissions inventory) to the State by 

March 1 of each year, with the provision 

for an extension of up to 60 days. The 

revisions also incorporate requirements 

of the Oklahoma Uniform 

Environmental Permitting Act (UEPA), 

which requires that the Oklahoma 

Department of Environmental Quality fit 

licenses, permits, certificates, approvals 

and registrations into a category, or Tier, 

established under the uniform 

environmental permitting rules. The 

UEPA was created to streamline the 

permitting process and is located in 

Oklahoma Statute Title 27A 

Environment and Natural Resources, 

Chapter 2 Oklahoma Environmental 

Quality Code, Sections 1 through 12. We 

previously approved portions of the 

February 14, 2002 submittal, (73 FR 

79400, December 29, 2008), but did not 

act on other portions. 

The June 24, 2010 submittal included 

revisions to the Oklahoma PSD 

regulations necessary to address NOX as 

a precursor for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS (PSD Requirements for 

Attainment Areas, OAC 252:100–8). 

These revisions are discussed below. 

The June 24, 2010 submittal also 

included revisions to Subchapter 8 in 

OAC 252:100 (Permits for Part 70 

Sources), which are severable from the 

NOX requirements addressed in this 

proposed action. As we are still 

reviewing the approvability of these 

other revisions, we are not proposing to 

take action on them in this proposed 

rulemaking. We intend to act on these 

other revisions in a future rulemaking. 

IV. What is EPA’s evaluation of the 

State’s submissions? 

A. Interference With PSD Measures in 

Other States 

The third element of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires a SIP to contain 

adequate provisions prohibiting 

emissions that interfere with any other 

State’s required measures to prevent 

significant deterioration of its air 

quality. EPA’s 2006 Guidance made 

recommendations for SIP submissions 

to meet this requirement with respect to 

both the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

EPA believes that Oklahoma’s 

submission is consistent with the 2006 

Guidance, when considered in 

conjunction with other PSD program 

revisions that EPA is proposing to 

approve in this action. The State’s 

submittal states that Oklahoma’s New 

Source Review (NSR) program for major 

sources prohibits any source or other 

type of emission activity within the 

State from emitting any air pollutant in 

amounts which will interfere with 

measures required to be included in the 

applicable implementation plan of any 

other State to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality. Oklahoma’s 

regulations for its PSD program were 

approved by EPA and made part of the 

SIP on August 25, 1983 (48 FR 38636).2

Oklahoma’s requirement to demonstrate 

that an emissions increase would not 

interfere with another State’s PSD 

measures (OAC 252:100–8–35(a)(1)) was 

previously approved by EPA as Section 

1.4.4(f) of Oklahoma Regulation 1.4 (see 

the table at 40 CFR 52.1920(c)). 

Oklahoma submitted OAC 252:100–35 

as a SIP revision on February 14, 2002. 

The revision recodified the regulation. 

The 2002 submittal is further discussed 

below and in the TSD for this action. 

Oklahoma submitted further revisions to 

its PSD program regulations on June 24, 

2010 as discussed below. 

Consistent with EPA’s November 29, 

2005, Phase 2 rule for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS (70 FR 71612), the State 

submitted a SIP revision on June 24, 

2010, to modify its PSD program to 

address NOX as an ozone precursor 

(OAC 252:100–8). These revisions are 

further discussed below. EPA believes 

that the PSD revision for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS that makes NOX an 

ozone precursor for PSD purposes, taken 

together with the PSD SIP, the proposed 

revisions to the PSD SIP and the 

interstate transport SIP, satisfies the 

requirements of the third element of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS, i.e., there will be 

no interference with any other State’s 

required PSD measures because the 

Oklahoma SIP as proposed for approval 

meets current CAA requirements. 

For the PM2.5 NAAQS, Oklahoma 

stated in its section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

submission that its NSR program 

includes an interim PSD permitting 

program for PM2.5. On July 29, 2010 the 

Oklahoma Department of Environmental 

Quality sent a letter to EPA and stated 

that they would implement the PM2.5

NAAQS consistent with Federal case 

law, and EPA Administrator petition 

decisions. ODEQ further stated that: (1) 

They will not proceed on the general 

presumption that PM10 is always a 

reasonable surrogate for PM2.5, (2) for 

any permit application in which the 

applicant is seeking to rely on the 

Surrogate Policy, they will include in 

the permit record an adequate rationale 

or demonstration to support the use of 

PM10 as a surrogate based on the facts 

and circumstances of the specific 

permit, (3) the permit record will 

include an explanation of how the 

impacts from the proposed source 

construction/modification on the PM2.5

levels were determined, and (4) they 

will be mindful of the limits provided 

in the policy itself, such as the need to 

identify the technical difficulties that 

justify the application of the policy in 

each specific case. The ODEQ letter is 

included in the electronic docket for 

this action. With these clarifications, 

EPA believes that Oklahoma’s approach 

to PM2.5 permitting is appropriate. 

On the basis of the analysis presented 

above EPA is proposing to determine 

that the Oklahoma SIP as revised with 

respect to PSD program requirements, 

satisfactorily addresses the requirement 

of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) that 

emissions from Oklahoma sources do 

not interfere with PSD measures in 


wwoods2 on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 180 / Friday, September 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 56927 

3The revisions also require certain stationary 

sources of air pollution to report annual emissions 

(an emissions inventory) to the State by March 1 of 

each year, with the provision for an extension of up 

to 60 days (OAC 252:100–5–2.1). The revisions 

requiring reporting of emissions from stationary 

sources is consistent with our Air Emissions 

Reporting Requirements (40 CFR 51, Subpart A), 

which calls for States to report emissions from 

stationary sources. We are approving this as it 

applies to major stationary sources and major 

modifications. 

other any other State for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

B. Oklahoma SIP Revisions Submitted 

on February 14, 2002 

As discussed above, the SIP revision 

submitted by Oklahoma on February 14, 

2002 includes revisions that are 

administrative in nature and incorporate 

requirements of the Oklahoma Uniform 

Environmental Permitting Act. 

Portions of the February 14, 2002, 

submittal already have been approved 

by EPA on December 29, 2008 (73 FR 

79400). In that action, we identified the 

portions of the submittal for which we 

took no action: Chapter 4 (Rules of 

Practice and Procedure): Subchapters 1 

(General Procedures), Subchapter 7 

(Environmental Permit Process), and 

Appendix C (Permitting Process 

Summary); Chapter 100 (Air Pollution 

Control): Subchapter 5 (Registration, 

Emission Inventory and Annual 

Operating Fees), Subchapter 7 (Permits 

for Minor Sources), Subchapter 8 

(Permits for Part 70 Sources), and 

Subchapter 9 (Excess Emissions 

Reporting Requirements). We noted we 

would take action on these sections in 

separate rulemakings. On July 16, 2010 

the State submitted a letter to EPA 

withdrawing their 2002 submittal for 

Subchapter 9 (Excess Emissions 

Reporting Requirements). 

We are proposing to approve the 

provisions of this 2002 SIP revision 

submittal as part of the Oklahoma major 

NSR SIP. We have reviewed the 

revisions being proposed for approval 

and believe they are consistent with the 

applicable requirements of the CAA for 

major NSR. Our evaluation of these 

revisions is discussed in more detail in 

the TSD found in the electronic docket 

for this action. The electronic docket 

can be found at the Web site http:// 

www.regulations.gov (docket number 

EPA–R06–OAR–2007–0314). 

The revisions also require certain 

stationary sources of air pollution to 

report annual emissions (an emissions 

inventory) to the State by March 1 of 

each year, with the provision for an 

extension of up to 60 days (OAC 

252:100–5–2.1). The revisions requiring 

reporting of emissions from stationary 

sources is consistent with our Air 

Emissions Reporting Requirements (40 

CFR 51, Subpart A), which calls for 

States to report emissions from 

stationary sources. 

The provisions submitted by the State 

that we are proposing to approve as part 

of the Oklahoma Major NSR SIP are the 

following: 

• Chapter 4 (Rules of Practice and 

Procedure): Subchapter 1 (General 

Provisions). 

• Chapter 4, Subchapter 7 

(Environmental Permit Process), Part 1 

(The Process) and Part 3 (Air Quality 

Division Tiers and Time Lines). 

• Chapter 4, Appendix C (Permitting 

Process Summary). 

• Chapter 100: Subchapter 5 

(Registration, Emission Inventory and 

Annual Operating Fees).3

• Chapter 100: Subchapter 8 (Permits 

for Part 70 Sources), Part 1 (General 

Provisions). 

• Chapter 100: Subchapter 8, Part 5 

(Permits for Part 70 Sources). 

• Chapter 100: Subchapter 8, Part 7 

(Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) Requirements for Attainment 

Areas). 

• Chapter 100: Subchapter 8, Part 9 

(Major Sources Affecting Nonattainment 

Areas). 

Thus EPA is proposing approval of 

these provisions as meeting the 

requirements of section 110 and parts C 

and D of the Act for a major NSR SIP. 

At this time we are not taking action 

on any portion of the February 14, 2002 

revision that pertains to minor new 

source review. The minor new source 

review submitted provisions are 

severable from the major NSR 

requirements and are severable from the 

transport SIP requirements addressed in 

this action. We intend to act on these 

provisions in a future rulemaking. 

C. Oklahoma PSD SIP Revisions 

Submitted on June 24, 2010 

The Oklahoma Department of 

Environmental Quality made a SIP 

revision submitted on June 24, 2010 to 

meet the requirements of the 8-hour 

NAAQS by including revisions to 

regulate NOX emissions in its PSD 

permit program as a precursor to ozone. 

The revisions add: 

• NOX as an ozone precursor in the 

definition of Regulated NSR pollutant 

(OAC 252:100–8–31), 

• That a major source that is major for 

NOX shall be considered major for 

ozone in the definition of Major 

stationary source (OAC 252:100–8–31), 

• A NOX emissions rate of 40 tons per 

year or more in the definition of 

Significant (OAC 252:100–8–31), and 

• That any net emissions increase of 

100 tons per year or more of NOX

subject to PSD would require an 

ambient impact analysis, including the 

gathering of air quality data (OAC 

252:100–8–33). 

For the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

the revision to the definition of 

Regulated NSR pollutant meets the 

Federal definition in 40 CFR 

51.166(b)(49) for NOX as an ozone 

precursor. The revision that a major 

source that is major for NOX shall be 

considered major for ozone meets the 

Federal definition in 40 CFR 

51.166(b)(1). The revision to include a 

NOX emissions rate of 40 tons per year 

or more in the definition of ‘‘Significant’’ 

meets the Federal requirement for 

significant emission rate for NOX

emissions in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(23)(i). 

The revision that any net emissions 

increase of 100 tons per year or more of 

NOX subject to PSD would require an 

ambient impact analysis, including the 

gathering of air quality data meets the 

Federal requirement for ambient air 

impact analysis for ozone precursors 

under the footnote for 40 CFR 

166(i)(5)(i)(e). Thus, EPA is proposing 

approval of these revisions as meeting 

the requirements of CAA section 110 

and 40 CFR 51.166 for establishing NOX

emissions as a precursor for ozone. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

State choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this 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 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); 


wwoods2 on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS-1
56928 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 180 / Friday, September 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule does 

not have Tribal implications as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because 

the SIP is not approved to apply in 

Indian country located in the State, and 

EPA notes that it will not impose 

substantial direct costs on Tribal 

governments or preempt Tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Incorporation by reference, 

Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: September 9, 2010. 

Al Armendariz, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23291 Filed 9–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2009–0557; FRL–9202–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Implementation Plan Revisions; State 

of North Dakota; Interstate Transport 

of Pollution for the 1997 PM2.5 and 8- 

hour Ozone NAAQS: ‘‘Interference With 

Maintenance’’ Requirements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency is proposing partial approval of 

the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revisions called ‘‘Interstate Transport of 

Air Pollution’’ addressing the 

‘‘interference with maintenance’’ 

requirement of Clean Air Act (CAA) 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) and 8-hour 

ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS). In this action EPA 

proposes to approve the North Dakota 

Interstate Transport SIP sections that 

address the requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) prohibiting a state’s 

emissions from interfering with 

maintenance by any other state of the 

1997 PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

This action is being taken under section 

110 of the CAA. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 18, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2009–0557, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: 

mastrangelo.domenico@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert 

the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing 

comments). 

• Mail: Callie Videtich, Director, Air 

Program, Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P– 

AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. 

• Hand Delivery: Callie Videtich, 

Director, Air Program, Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop, 

Denver, Colorado 80202–1129. Such 

deliveries are only accepted Monday 

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

excluding Federal holidays. Special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2009– 

0557. 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 instructions on 

submitting comments, go to Section I. 

General Information of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly-available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Program, Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop, 

Denver, Colorado 80202–1129. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the individual listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

view the hard copy of the docket. You 

may view the hard copy of the docket 

Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 

p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Domenico Mastrangelo, Air Program, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 

Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202– 

1129, (303) 312–6436, 

mastrangelo.domenico@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this document, we 

are giving meaning to certain words or 

initials as follows: 

(i) The words or initials Act or CAA 

mean or refer to the Clean Air Act, 

unless the context indicates otherwise. 


wwoods2 on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS-1