Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 188 / Thursday, September 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 59335 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–23121 Filed 9–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0013(a); FRL–9732– 

7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; North Carolina: 

Approval of Rocky Mount Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budget Update 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve a revision to the North 

Carolina State Implementation Plan 

(SIP), submitted to EPA on February 7, 

2011, by the State of North Carolina, 

through the North Carolina Department 

of Environment and Natural Resources 

(NCDENR), Division of Air Quality 

(DAQ). North Carolina’s February 7, 

2011, submission supplements the 

original redesignation request and 

maintenance plan for the Rocky Mount, 

North Carolina 1997 8-hour ozone area 

submitted on June 19, 2006, and 

approved by EPA on November 6, 2006. 

The Rocky Mount, North Carolina 1997 

8-hour ozone area is comprised of 

Edgecombe and Nash Counties in North 

Carolina. North Carolina’s February 7, 

2011, SIP revision increases the safety 

margin allocated to motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (MVEBs) for both 

Edgecombe and Nash Counties to 

account for changes in the emissions 

model and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) 

projection model. EPA is approving this 

SIP revision pursuant to section 110 of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). North 

Carolina’s February 7, 2011, SIP 

revision meets all of the statutory and 

regulatory requirements, and is 

consistent with EPA’s guidance. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

November 26, 2012 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives relevant 

adverse comment by October 29, 2012. 

If EPA receives such comment, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that this rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2012–0013 by one of the following 

methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4–RDS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0013, 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 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 to 4:30, excluding federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2012– 

0013. 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 is 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zuri 

Farngalo, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Zuri 

Farngalo may be reached by phone at 

(404) 562–9152 or by electronic mail 

address farngalo.zuri@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. EPA’s Analysis of North Carolina’s SIP 

Revision 

III. Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

The Rocky Mount, North Carolina 

1997 8-hour ozone attainment and 

maintenance area is comprised of two 

counties—Edgecombe and Nash 

(hereafter referred to as the ‘‘Rocky 

Mount Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’). In accordance 

with the CAA, the Rocky Mount Area 

was designated nonattainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS) on April 30, 

2004, with an effective date of June 15, 

2004. See 69 FR 23858. 

On June 19, 2006, the State of North 

Carolina, through NCDENR, submitted a 

final request for EPA to: (1) Redesignate 

the Rocky Mount Area to attainment; 

and (2) approve a North Carolina SIP 

revision containing a maintenance plan 

for Rocky Mount, North Carolina. On 

November 6, 2006, EPA approved the 

redesignation request for the Rocky 

Mount Area. Additionally, EPA 

approved the 1997 8-hour ozone 

maintenance plan (including MVEBs for 

Edgecombe and Nash Counties) for the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
59336 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 188 / Thursday, September 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

1North Carolina established subarea MVEBs at 

the county level so each county must consider its 

individual subarea MVEBs for the purposes of 

implementing transportation conformity. 

2A safety margin is the difference between the 

attainment level of emissions from all source 

categories (i.e., point, area, and mobile) and the 

projected level of emissions from all source 

categories. The State may choose to allocate some 

of the safety margin to the MVEB, for transportation 

conformity purposes, so long as the total level of 

emissions from all source categories remains equal 

to or less than the attainment level of emissions. 

Rocky Mount Area. 71 FR 64891. These 

approvals were based on EPA’s 

determination that the State of North 

Carolina had demonstrated that the 

Rocky Mount Area met the criteria for 

redesignation to attainment specified in 

the CAA, including the determination 

that the entire Rocky Mount Area had 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

In the November 6, 2006, final 

rulemaking, EPA also found adequate 

and approved MVEBs for Edgecombe 

and Nash Counties in the Rocky Mount 

Area. Specifically, EPA found adequate 

and approved the 2008 and 2017 

MVEBs for nitrogen oxides (NOX) (for 

both Edgecombe and Nash Counties) 

that were contained in the 1997 8-hour 

ozone maintenance plan for the Rocky 

Mount Area.1 Further, in the November 

6, 2006, action, EPA found adequate and 

approved the insignificance 

determination for volatile organic 

compound (VOC) contribution from 

motor vehicle emissions to the 1997 8- 

hour ozone pollution in the Rocky 

Mount Area. 

On February 7, 2011, North Carolina 

provided a SIP revision (the subject of 

this action) to increase the amount of 

safety margins allocated to the NOX

MVEBs to account for changes in the 

projection models. Section II provides 

EPA’s analysis of North Carolina’s 

February 7, 2011, SIP revision. 

II. EPA’s Analysis of North Carolina’s 

SIP Revision 

As discussed above, on February 7, 

2011, the State of North Carolina, 

through NCDENR, submitted a SIP 

revision to revise the MVEBs for 

Edgecombe and Nash Counties in the 

Rocky Mount Area to account for the 

new emissions model, VMT projection 

models, and other emission model input 

data. The MVEBs (expressed in tons per 

day (tpd) and kilograms per day (kg/d)) 

that are being updated through today’s 

action were originally approved by EPA 

on November 6, 2006, and are outlined 

in the table below. 

TABLE 1—ORIGINAL MVEBS FOR NOX

2008 2017 

Edgecombe County ............................................................................. 8.05 tpd ............ 7,302.8 kg/d ..... 6.00 tpd ............ 5,443.1 kg/d. 

Nash County ........................................................................................ 13.32 tpd .......... 12,083.7 kg/d ... 7.41 tpd ............ 6,722.2 kg/d. 

DAQ is currently allocating portions 

of the available safety margin 2 to the 

MVEBs to account for new emissions 

models, VMT projections models, as 

well as changes to future vehicle mix 

assumptions, that influence the 

emission estimations. DAQ decided to 

allocate a majority of the safety margin 

available to the MVEBs. For 2017, DAQ 

estimated the amount needed to account 

for the current emission model and 

VMT projections model, and then added 

an additional 21 percent to account for 

any future changes to the emission 

model, projection model and other 

input data. 

At this time, North Carolina is seeking 

to adjust the safety margins. The 

following tables provide the adjusted 

NOX emissions data, in kg/d for the 

2008 base attainment year inventories, 

as well as the projected NOX emissions 

inventory 2017. 

TABLE 2—EDGECOMBE COUNTY MVEBS

[kg/d] 

NOX Emissions 

2008 2017 

Base Emissions ........................................................................................................................................... 2,483 1,143 

Safety Margin Allocated to MVEB ............................................................................................................... 1,674 1,108 

NOX Conformity MVEB ................................................................................................................................ 4,157 2,251 

TABLE 3—NASH COUNTY MVEBS

[kg/d] 

NOX Emissions 

2008 2017 

Base Emissions ........................................................................................................................................... 8,790 3,767 

Safety Margin Allocated to MVEB ............................................................................................................... 1,655 2,374 

NOX Conformity MVEB ................................................................................................................................ 10,444 6,141 

A total of 3,329 kg (3.67 tons) and 

3,482 kg (3.84 tons) of 2008 and 2017 

NOx safety margin, respectively, were 

added to the MVEBs for the Rocky 

Mount Area. Taking into consideration 

the portion of the safety margin applied 

to the MVEBs, the resulting difference 

between the attainment level of 

emissions from all sources and the 

projected level of emissions from all 

sources in the maintenance area, i.e., the 

new safety margins, for each projected 

year is listed. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 188 / Thursday, September 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 59337 

3EPA recently extended the grace period to use 

MOVES for regional emissions analysis in 

conformity determinations to March 2, 2013 (77FR 

11394). 

TABLE 4—NEW SAFETY MARGINS FOR

THE ROCKY MOUNT AREA

Year VOC tpd NOX tpd 

2005 N/A N/A 

2008 ¥0.59 0 .0 

2011 ¥0.51 ¥6 .93 

2014 ¥0.07 ¥9 .77 

2017 ¥0.07 ¥7 .79 

As shown in Tables 2 and 3 above, the 

Rocky Mount Area is projected to 

steadily decrease its total VOC and NOX

emissions from the base year of 2008 to 

the maintenance year of 2017. This VOC 

and NOX emission decrease 

demonstrates continued attainment/ 

maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for ten years from 2008 (the 

year the Area was effectively designated 

attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS) as required by the CAA. These 

projected reductions of ozone 

precursors indicates continued 

maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

The revised MVEBs that North 

Carolina submitted for the Rocky Mount 

Area were developed with projected 

mobile source emissions derived using 

the MOBILE6 motor vehicle emissions 

model. This model was the most current 

model available at the time North 

Carolina was performing its analysis. 

However, EPA has now issued an 

updated motor vehicle emissions model 

known as Motor Vehicle Emission 

Simulator or MOVES. In its 

announcement of this model, EPA 

established a two-year grace period for 

continued use of MOBILE6.2 in regional 

emissions analyses for transportation 

plan and transportation improvement 

programs (TIPs) conformity 

determinations (extending to March 2, 

2012),3 after which states (other than 

California) must use MOVES in 

conformity determinations for TIPs. As 

stated above, MOBILE6.2 was the 

applicable mobile source emissions 

model that was available when the 

original SIP was submitted. EPA’s 

‘‘Policy Guidance on the Use of 

MOVES2010 and Subsequent Minor 

Revisions for State Implementation Plan 

Development, Transportation 

Conformity, and Other Purposes’’ 

(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/ 

moves/documents/420b12010.pdf) 

explains that the CAA does not require 

states that have already submitted SIPs 

to revise these SIPs simply because a 

new motor vehicle emissions model is 

now available. The guidance further 

states that the use of MOBILE6.2 in an 

already submitted SIP should not be an 

obstacle to approval of that SIP 

assuming that it is otherwise approvable 

because it would be unreasonable to 

require revision to a SIP which in this 

case was submitted prior to the release 

of MOVES. 

III. Final Action 

EPA is taking direct final action to 

approve North Carolina’s February 7, 

2011, SIP revision to allocate a portion 

of the available safety margin to the 

MVEBs for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for the Rocky Mount, North 

Carolina Area. The revised MVEBs, for 

Edgecomb and Nash Counties in North 

Carolina ensure continued attainment of 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 

the maintenance year 2017. EPA has 

evaluated North Carolina’s February 7, 

2011, SIP revision, and has determined 

that it meets the applicable 

requirements of the CAA and EPA 

regulations, and is consistent with EPA 

policy. On March 12, 2008, EPA issued 

revised ozone NAAQS. The current 

action, however, is being taken to 

address requirements under the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. 

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a non-controversial 

amendment and anticipates no adverse 

comments. However, in the proposed 

rules section of this Federal Register 

publication, EPA is publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to approve the SIP revision 

should an adverse comment be filed. 

This rule will be effective on November 

26, 2012 without further notice unless 

the Agency receives adverse comment 

by October 29, 2012. If EPA receives 

such comments, then EPA will publish 

a document withdrawing the final rule 

and informing the public that the rule 

will not take effect. All public 

comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period 

on this action. Any parties interested in 

commenting must do so at this time. If 

no such comments are received, the 

public is advised this rule will be 

effective on November 26, 2012 and no 

further action will be taken on the 

proposed rule. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by State law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian 

country, and EPA notes that it will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
59338 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 188 / Thursday, September 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

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

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by November 26, 2012. 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. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. 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, Ozone, 

Intergovernmental relations, 

Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen 

dioxides, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, and Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: September 11, 2012. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart II—North Carolina 

■ 2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by 

adding a new entry at the end of the 

table for the ‘‘MVEB Update for the 

Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for 

the Rocky Mount, NC Area for the 1997 

8-hour Ozone Standard’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1770 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Provision State effective date EPA approval date Federal Register citation 

******

MVEB Update for the Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for 

the Rocky Mount, NC Area for the 1997 8-hour Ozone Standard.

February 7, 2011 November 26, 2012 [Insert citation of publication]. 

[FR Doc. 2012–23716 Filed 9–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002; FRL–9735–3] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: On August 20, 2012 EPA 

published a Notice of Intent to Delete 

and a direct final Notice of Deletion for 

the Hooker (Hyde Park) Superfund Site 

from the National Priorities List. The 

EPA is withdrawing the Final Notice of 

Deletion due to adverse comments that 

were received during the public 

comment period. After consideration of 

the comments received, if appropriate, 

EPA will publish a Notice of Deletion in 

the Federal Register based on the 

parallel Notice of Intent to Delete and 

place a copy of the final deletion 

package, including a Responsiveness 

Summary, if prepared, in the Site 

repositories. 

DATES: Effective Date: This withdrawal 

of the direct final action published 

August 20, 2012 (77 FR 50038) is 

effective as of September 27, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: 

Information Repositories: 

Comprehensive information on the Site, 

as well as the comments that we 

received during the comment period, 

are available in docket EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–1983–0002, accessed through 

the http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site. Although listed in the docket 

index, some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statue. 

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: 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2, Superfund Records Center, 

290 Broadway, 18th Floor, New York, 

NY 10007–1866, Phone: 212–637–4308, 

Hours: Monday to Friday from 9 a.m. to 

5 p.m. and U.S. EPA Western NY Public 

Information Office, 86 Exchange Place, 

Buffalo, NY 14204–2026, Telephone: 

(716) 551–4410, Hours: Monday to 

Friday from 8:30 a.m.–4 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gloria M. Sosa, Remedial Project 

Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 20th 

Floor, New York, NY 10007–1866, 

telephone: 212–637–4283, email: 

sosa.gloria@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous 

Waste, Hazardous substances, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Superfund, Water 

pollution control, Water Supply. 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 

9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 

1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923; 

3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193. 

Dated: September 21, 2012. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

■ Accordingly, the amendment to Table 

1 of Appendix B to CFR Part 300 to 

remove the entry ’’Hooker (Hyde Park)’’, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES