72688 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

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 December 22, 2023. 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, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: October 16, 2023. 

Earthea Nance, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the Environmental Protection 

Agency amends 40 CFR part 52 as 

follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart E—Arkansas 

■ 2. In § 52.170, the table in paragraph 

(c) titled ‘‘EPA-Approved Regulations in 

the Arkansas SIP’’ is amended under the 

heading for Regulation 19 by: 

■ a. Removing the entry for Reg. 19.602 

under the heading for Chapter 6; and 

■ b. Revising the entry for Reg. 19.1004 

under the heading for Chapter 10. 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 52.170 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE ARKANSAS SIP 

State citation Title/subject 

State 

submittal/effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

Regulation No. 19: Regulations of the Arkansas Plan of Implementation for Air Pollution Control 

*******

Chapter 10: Regulations for the Control of Volatile Organic Compounds in Pulaski County 

*******

Reg. 19.1004 .......... General Provisions 1/25/2009, 5/12/ 

2022.

3/4/2015, 80 FR 11573, 10/23/2023, 

[Insert Federal Register citation].

Reg. 19.1004(H) is no longer in SIP, 

10/23/2023. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2023–23256 Filed 10–20–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2023–0206; FRL–11037– 

02–R3] 

Air Plan Disapproval; Delaware; 

Removal of Excess Emissions 

Provisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final action. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is disapproving certain 

portions of a state implementation plan 

(SIP) revision submitted by the State of 

Delaware, through the Delaware 

Department of Natural Resources and 

Environmental Control (DNREC), on 

November 22, 2016. The revision was 

submitted by Delaware in response to a 

national finding of substantial 

inadequacy and SIP call published on 

June 12, 2015, which included certain 

provisions in the Delaware SIP related 

to excess emissions during startup, 

shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) 

events. EPA is disapproving certain 

portions of the SIP revision and 

determining that such SIP revision does 

not correct the remaining deficiencies in 

Delaware’s SIP identified in the June 12, 

2015, SIP call in accordance with the 

requirements for SIP provisions under 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). This 

action addresses the remaining 

deficiencies identified in EPA’s June 

2015 SIP call that have not yet been 

addressed by prior EPA actions on 

Delaware’s November 2016 SIP 

submission. 

DATES: This final action is effective on 

November 22, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2023–0206. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov website. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., confidential business information 

(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 through www.regulations.gov, 

or please contact the person identified 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section for additional 

availability information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mallory Moser, Planning & 

Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & 

Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, Four 

Penn Center, 1600 John F. Kennedy 

Boulevard, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. The telephone number is (215) 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 72689 

1 80 FR 33839, June 12, 2015. 

2See 87 FR 41074. 

3See 88 FR 9399. 

4See 88 FR 40136. 

5The 2014 SO2 Guidance can be found at the 

following web address: https://www.epa.gov/sites/ 

default/files/2016-06/documents/

20140423guidance_nonattainment_sip.pdf. 

814–2030. Ms. Moser can also be 

reached via electronic mail at 

moser.mallory@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On June 12, 2015, pursuant to CAA 

section 110(k)(5), the EPA finalized 

‘‘State Implementation Plans: Response 

to Petition for Rulemaking; Restatement 

and Update of EPA’s SSM Policy 

Applicable to SIPs; Findings of 

Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to 

Amend Provisions Applying to Excess 

Emissions During Periods of Startup, 

Shutdown and Malfunction,’’ 1 hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘2015 SSM SIP 

Action.’’ The 2015 SSM SIP Action 

clarified, restated, and updated the 

EPA’s interpretation that SSM 

exemptions (whether automatic or 

discretionary) and affirmative defense 

SIP provisions are inconsistent with 

CAA requirements. The 2015 SSM SIP 

Action found that certain SIP provisions 

in 36 states were substantially 

inadequate to meet CAA requirements 

and issued a SIP call to those states to 

submit SIP revisions to address the 

inadequacies. EPA established an 18- 

month deadline by which the affected 

states had to submit such SIP revisions. 

States were required to submit 

corrective revisions to their SIPs in 

response to the SIP calls by November 

22, 2016. 

With respect to the Delaware SIP, in 

the 2015 SSM SIP Action, EPA 

determined that the following 7 

provisions were substantially 

inadequate to meet CAA requirements: 

Title 7 of Delaware’s Administrative 

Code (7 DE Admin. Code) 1104 Section 

(§ ) 1.5, 7 DE Admin. Code 1105 § 1.7, 

7 DE Admin. Code 1108 § 1.2, 7 DE 

Admin. Code 1109 § 1.4, 7 DE Admin. 

Code 1114 § 1.3, 7 DE Admin. Code 

1124 § 1.4 and 7 DE Admin. Code 1142 

§ 2.3.1.6. Delaware submitted a SIP 

revision on November 22, 2016, in 

response to the SIP call issued in the 

2015 SSM SIP Action. Delaware’s 

submission noted that the deficiency 

highlighted in 7 DE Admin. Code 1108 

§ 1.2 was corrected by a previous SIP 

revision submitted to EPA on July 10, 

2013. A final rule acting on this 2013 

submission and remedying 7 DE Admin. 

Code 1108 § 1.2 published in the 

Federal Register on July 11, 2022.2

Delaware’s submission also requested 

that EPA revise the Delaware SIP by 

removing 7 DE Admin. Code 1124 § 1.4 

and 7 DE Admin. Code 1142 § 2.3.1.6 in 

their entirety, thereby removing these 

provisions, and their deficiencies, from 

the Delaware SIP. A final rulemaking 

remedying 7 DE Admin. Code 1124 § 1.4 

and 7 DE Admin. Code 1142 § 2.3.1.6 

published in the Federal Register on 

February 14, 2023.3

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA 

Analysis 

On June 21, 2023, EPA published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

related to the remaining four provisions 

identified in EPA’s June 2015 SIP call 

that had not yet been addressed by prior 

EPA actions.4 In that document, EPA 

proposed disapproval of the remainder 

of Delaware’s 2016 submittal for 

multiple reasons. With regards to 7 DE 

Admin. Code 1104 and 7 DE Admin. 

Code 1105, Delaware’s 2016 submittal 

requested EPA replace both two-hour 

averaging periods for particulate 

emission limits with 30-day rolling 

averages with no change to the level of 

the limit. The increases in averaging 

times were not supported by a sufficient 

analysis explaining why these changes 

meet the requirements of CAA section 

110(l). Additionally, Delaware did not 

provide an explanation or analysis of 

how increasing the averaging time of the 

affected limits without any adjustment 

to their levels would or would not affect 

attainment or maintenance of the 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS). With regards to 7 DE Admin. 

Code 1109 and 7 DE Admin. Code 1114, 

Delaware’s 2016 submission requested 

the removal of these regulations from 

the SIP and instead noted that other 

requirements, including the CAA New 

Source Performance Standards (NSPS), 

are adequate to protect the NAAQS. 

This is problematic because the specific 

NSPS which Delaware cited allow for 

periods of excess emissions during SSM 

events. Also, these changes were not 

supported by a sufficient analysis 

explaining how these changes meet the 

requirements of CAA section 110(l). A 

more complete explanation of the 

reasons for the proposed disapproval 

can be found in the June 21, 2023, 

NPRM. 

III. EPA’s Response to Comments 

Received 

EPA received two comments which 

can be found in the docket. One 

comment, from the State of Delaware, 

notes the State is reviewing the record 

and preparing a path forward to respond 

to the concerns found within the NPRM. 

EPA acknowledges Delaware’s 

comment. The other comment, from the 

Sierra Club and Environmental Integrity 

Project (EIP), was partially adverse, and 

the adverse portions are discussed 

below. 

Comment 1: The commenters, Sierra 

Club and EIP, expressed support for 

EPA’s proposed disapproval action on 

the remaining provisions in Delaware’s 

2016 submittal, while disagreeing with 

EPA’s position in the NPRM that a 

properly set longer-term averaging 

period can be protective of a shorterterm NAAQS. Commenters also urged 

EPA to propose a Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) to address 

the remaining disapproved provisions of 

Delaware’s 2016 submittal. 

Response 1: While EPA acknowledges 

commenters’ support of this action, EPA 

continues to believe that in appropriate 

cases properly set longer-term emission 

limits can be protective of a shorter-term 

NAAQS. EPA has explained in the 2014 

Guidance for 1-Hour Sulfur dioxide 

(SO2) Nonattainment Area SIP 

Submissions (2014 SO2 Guidance) 5 how 

a short-term rate that is shown to be 

NAAQS protective for a given source 

can be converted to a comparably 

stringent longer-term limit that is also 

NAAQS protective. The 1-hour SO2

Guidance recommends that emission 

limits be expressed as short-term 

averages, but also describes the option 

to use emission limits with longer 

averaging times of up to 30 days so long 

as the state meets various suggested 

criteria to adjust the longer-term limit 

downward to account for the variability 

of the source’s emissions. EPA has 

approved several SO2 SIPs relying on 

longer term average limits derived 

according to the methods found in the 

2014 SO2 guidance. See, for example, 83 

FR 4591 (February 1, 2018) (approval of 

Illinois SO2 SIP); 83 FR 25922 (June 5, 

2018) (approval of New Hampshire SO2

SIP); 84 FR 8813 (March 12, 2019) 

(approval of Arizona SO2 SIP); 84 FR 

30920 (June 28, 2019) (approval of 

Kentucky SO2 SIP); 84 FR 51988 

(October 1, 2019) (approval of 

Pennsylvania SO2 SIP for the Beaver 

County area); 85 FR 22593 (April 23, 

2020 (approval of Pennsylvania SO2 SIP 

for the Allegheny County area), and 85 

FR 49967 (August 17, 2020) (approval of 

Indiana SO2 SIP). The principles found 

in the 2014 SO2 Guidance can be 

applied to other NAAQS pollutants with 

short-term averaging times, such as 

particulate matter, if adequately 

demonstrated in a specific case. With an 

appropriate analysis, a properly set 

longer-term averaging period can be 

protective of a shorter-term NAAQS; 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
72690 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

6The offset sanction in CAA section 179(b)(2) 

would be triggered 18 months after the effective 

date of a final disapproval, and the highway 

funding sanction in CAA section 179(b)(1) would be 

triggered 24 months after the effective date of a final 

disapproval. Although the sanctions clock would 

begin to run from the effective date of a final 

disapproval, mandatory sanctions under CAA 

section 179 generally apply only in designated 

nonattainment areas. This includes areas designated 

as nonattainment after the effective date of a final 

disapproval. As discussed in the 2015 SSM SIP 

Action, EPA will evaluate the geographic scope of 

potential sanctions at the time it makes a 

determination that the air agency has failed to make 

a complete SIP submission in response to the 2015 

SIP call, or at the time it disapproves such a SIP 

submission. The appropriate geographic scope for 

sanctions may vary depending upon the SIP 

provisions at issue. See the 2015 SSM SIP Action 

at 80 FR 33839, 33930 (June 12, 2015) EPA Docket 

ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0322 available at 

www.regulations.gov. 

however, in this matter Delaware merely 

lengthened the averaging time for the 

limit without adjusting the limit’s value 

in accordance with the SIP Guidance. 

As such, a critical portion of the 

demonstration is lacking so EPA is not 

yet prepared to apply this methodology 

in this specific action. 

In response to the request that EPA 

promulgate a FIP, EPA acknowledges 

this comment and recognizes the 

Agency’s statutory obligation to 

promulgate a FIP within 24 months of 

a final disapproval of a SIP submission 

unless the State corrects the deficiency, 

and EPA approves the plan or plan 

revision, before EPA promulgates the 

FIP. 

IV. Final Action 

For the reasons discussed in detail in 

the proposed rulemaking and 

summarized herein, EPA is 

disapproving the portion of Delaware’s 

November 22, 2016, SIP submission 

addressing 7 DE Admin. Code 1104 

§ 1.5, 7 DE Admin. Code 1105 § 1.7, 7 

DE Admin. Code 1109 § 1.4, and 7 DE 

Admin. Code 1114 § 1.3. 

As a result of our disapproval, CAA 

section 110(c)(1) would require EPA to 

promulgate a FIP within 24 months of 

the effective date of the final 

disapproval action, unless EPA first 

approves a complete SIP revision that 

corrects the deficiencies in 7 DE Admin. 

Code 1104 Section (§ ) 1.5, 7 DE Admin. 

Code 1105 § 1.7, 7 DE Admin. Code 

1109 § 1.4 and 7 DE Admin. Code 1114 

§ 1.3, within such time. In addition, 

final disapproval could trigger 

mandatory sanctions under CAA section 

179 and 40 CFR 52.31 unless the State 

submits, and EPA approves, a complete 

SIP revision that corrects the identified 

deficiencies within 18 months of the 

effective date of the final disapproval 

action.6

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 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

if they meet the criteria of the CAA. 

Accordingly, this final action 

disapproving portions of Delaware’s SIP 

revision merely ascertains that these 

State law provisions do not meet 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. Additional 

information about these statutes and 

Executive Orders can be found at 

www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/lawsand-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined by 

Executive Order 12866 and was 

therefore not submitted to the Office of 

Management and Budget for review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This proposed action does not impose 

an information collection burden under 

the PRA because it does not contain any 

information collection activities. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. This action merely 

proposes to disapprove a portion of a 

SIP submission as not meeting the CAA. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. The action imposes no 

enforceable duty on any state, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the states, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. This action does not apply 

on any Indian reservation land, any 

other area where the EPA or an Indian 

tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction, or non-reservation areas of 

Indian country. Thus, Executive Order 

13175 does not apply to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that concern 

environmental health or safety risks that 

the EPA has reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it merely proposes to 

disapprove a portion of a SIP 

submission as not meeting the CAA. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs 

the EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. The EPA believes that this 

action is not subject to the requirements 

of section 12(d) of the NTTAA because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) directs Federal 

agencies to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on minority populations 

and low-income populations to the 

greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. EPA defines 

environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 72691 

1The reader may refer to the notice of proposed 

rulemaking, December 5, 1991 (56 FR 63774), and 

the preamble to the final rule promulgated 

September 4, 1992 (57 FR 40792), for further 

background and information on the OCS 

regulations. 

of all people regardless of race, color, 

national origin, or income with respect 

to the development, implementation, 

and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies.’’ EPA further 

defines the term fair treatment to mean 

that ‘‘no group of people should bear a 

disproportionate burden of 

environmental harms and risks, 

including those resulting from the 

negative environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ 

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, the 

EPA’s role is to review state choices, 

and approve those choices if they meet 

the minimum criteria of the Act. 

Accordingly, this proposed action 

disapproves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. 

The air agency did not evaluate 

environmental justice considerations as 

part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and 

applicable implementing regulations 

neither prohibit nor require such an 

evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ 

analysis and did not consider EJ in this 

action. Due to the nature of the action 

being taken here, this action is expected 

to have a neutral to positive impact on 

the air quality of the affected area. 

Consideration of EJ is not required as 

part of this action, and there is no 

information in the record inconsistent 

with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of 

achieving environmental justice for 

people of color, low-income 

populations, and Indigenous peoples. 

This action merely proposes to 

disapprove a SIP submission as not 

meeting the CAA. 

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

This action is subject to the CRA, and

the EPA will submit a rule report to 

each House of the Congress and to the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ 

as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

L. Petitions for Judicial Review

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 June 16, 2023. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final action 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 action. This action pertaining to 

the disapproval of these portions of 

Delaware’s November 22, 2016, 

submittal, 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 oxides, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Adam Ortiz, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2023–23242 Filed 10–20–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 55 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2021–0767; FRL–9366–02– 

R3] 

Outer Continental Shelf Air 

Regulations; Consistency Update for 

Virginia 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is updating a portion of 

the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Air 

Regulations. Requirements applying to 

OCS sources located within 25 miles of 

states’ seaward boundaries must be 

updated periodically to remain 

consistent with the requirements of the 

corresponding onshore area (COA), as 

mandated by the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

The portion of the OCS air regulations 

that is being updated pertains to the 

requirements for OCS sources for which 

Virginia is the designated COA. The 

Commonwealth of Virginia’s 

requirements discussed in this 

document will be incorporated by 

reference into the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) and listed in the 

appendix to the Federal OCS air 

regulations. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

November 22, 2023. The incorporation 

by reference of certain publications 

listed in this rule is approved by the 

Director of the Federal Register as of 

November 22, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2021–0767. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov website. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., confidential business information

(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 through www.regulations.gov,

or at the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, EPA Region 3 Regional Office,

Air and Radiation Division, Four Penn

Center, 1600 JFK Blvd., Philadelphia,

PA 19103. EPA requests that you

contact the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to

schedule your inspection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gwendolyn Supplee, Permits Branch 

(3AD10), Air & Radiation Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, Four Penn Center, 1600 John 

F. Kennedy Boulevard, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone

number is (215) 814–2763. Ms. Supplee

can also be reached via electronic mail

at supplee.gwendolyn@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background and Purpose

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

III. Final Action

IV. Incorporation by Reference

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Purpose

On September 4, 1992, EPA

promulgated 40 CFR part 55,1 which 

established requirements to control air 

pollution from OCS sources in order to 

attain and maintain Federal and state 

ambient air quality standards and to 

comply with the provisions of part C of 

title I of the CAA. The regulations at 40 

CFR part 55 apply to all OCS sources 

offshore of the states except those 

located in the Gulf of Mexico west of 

87.5 degrees longitude. Section 328 of 

the CAA requires that for such sources 

located within 25 miles of a state’s 

seaward boundary, the requirements 

shall be the same as would be 

applicable if the sources were located in 

the COA. Because the OCS requirements 

are based on onshore requirements, and 

onshore requirements may change, 

section 328(a)(1) requires that EPA 

update the OCS requirements as 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1