Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 223 / Monday, November 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 69399 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 

360i, 360j, 371, 374. 

Subpart B—[Amended] 

2. Revise § 801.20(b) to read as 

follows: 

§ 801.20 Label to bear a unique device 

identifier (UDI). 

* * * * * 

(b) Effective dates. The requirements 

of paragraph (a) of this section become 

effective: 

(1) If the device is a class III medical 

device or is a device licensed under 

section 351 of the Public Health Service 

Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 262, [A DATE 

WILL BE ADDED THAT IS 1 YEAR 

AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF 

THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal 

Register]; 

(2) If the device is an implantable, 

life-supporting, or life-sustaining 

device, and is not a class III device or 

a device licensed under section 351 of 

the Public Health Service Act, as 

amended, 5 U.S.C. 262, [A DATE WILL 

BE ADDED THAT IS 2 YEARS AFTER 

DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE 

FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register]; 

(3) If the device is a class II medical 

device not covered by paragraph (2), [A 

DATE WILL BE ADDED THAT IS 3 

YEARS AFTER DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE 

IN THE Federal Register]; 

(4) If the device is a class I medical 

device not covered by paragraph (2), [A 

DATE WILL BE ADDED THAT IS 5 

YEARS AFTER DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE 

IN THE Federal Register]; 

(5) If the device is not classified into 

class I, II, or III, [A DATE WILL BE 

ADDED THAT IS 5 YEARS AFTER 

DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE 

FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register]. 

* * * * * 

3. Revise § 801.50(d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 801.50 Devices that must be directly 

marked with a unique device identifier. 

* * * * * 

(d) Effective dates. The requirements 

of this section apply to a device that is 

an implantable, life-supporting, or lifesustaining device [A DATE WILL BE 

ADDED THAT IS 2 YEARS AFTER 

DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE 

FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], 

and to any other device 2 years after the 

date that applies to the device under 

§ 801.20(b). 

* * * * * 

Dated: November 14, 2012. 

Leslie Kux, 

Assistant Commissioner for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2012–28015 Filed 11–16–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0141; FRL–9752–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Delaware; Attainment Plan for the 

Philadelphia-Wilmington, 

Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Delaware 

1997 Fine Particulate Matter 

Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by Delaware on 

April 3, 2008, as amended on April 25, 

2012. The SIP revision demonstrates 

attainment of the 1997 annual fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) national 

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) 

for the Philadelphia-Wilmington, 

Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Delaware 

(PA–NJ–DE) nonattainment area 

(Philadelphia Area). This Delaware SIP 

revision (herein called the ‘‘attainment 

plan’’) includes the Philadelphia Area’s 

attainment demonstration and motor 

vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) used 

for transportation conformity purposes 

for New Castle County in Delaware. The 

attainment plan also includes an 

analysis of reasonably available control 

measures (RACM) and reasonably 

available control technology (RACT), a 

base year emissions inventory, and 

contingency measures. The April 25, 

2012 submittal is a SIP revision that 

replaces the MVEBs in the April 3, 2008 

submittal with a budget that is based on 

the Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator 

(MOVES) model. In a separate and 

concurrent process, EPA is conducting a 

procedure to find adequate the MVEBs 

for New Castle County. Furthermore, 

EPA has determined that a reasonable 

further progress (RFP) plan is not 

required because Delaware projected 

that attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS occurred in the Philadelphia 

Area by the attainment date of April 

2010. This action is being taken in 

accordance with the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) and the Clean Air Fine 

Particulate Implementation Rule (PM2.5

Implementation Rule) published on 

April 25, 2007. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 19, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2010–0141 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: mastro.donna@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0141, 

Donna Mastro, Acting Associate 

Director, Office of Air Planning 

Program, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2010– 

0141. 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 information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. 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. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
69400 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 223 / Monday, November 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

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 during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Delaware Department of 

Natural Resources and Environmental 

Control, 89 Kings Highway, P.O. Box 

1401, Dover, Delaware 19903. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose 

Quinto, (215) 814–2182, or by email at 

quinto.rose@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, whenever 

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

EPA. The following is provided to aid 

in locating information in this preamble. 

I. Summary of Action 

II. Background 

A. Designation History 

B. Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation 

Rule 

C. Determinations of Attainment 

III. Description of the Delaware Attainment 

Plan 

IV. EPA’s Analysis 

A. Attainment Demonstration 

1. Pollutants Addressed 

2. Emission Inventory Requirements 

3. Modeling 

4. Reasonably Available Control Measures/ 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology 

5. Reasonable Further Progress 

6. Contingency Measures 

7. Attainment Date 

B. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

(MVEBs) 

V. Proposed Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Summary of Action 

EPA is proposing to approve 

Delaware’s SIP revision which was 

submitted by the State of Delaware 

through the Delaware Department of 

Natural Resources and Environmental 

Control (DNREC) to EPA on April 3, 

2008, as amended on April 25, 2012, 

which demonstrates attainment of the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the 

Philadelphia Area. This PM2.5

attainment plan includes Delaware’s 

attainment demonstration and MVEBs 

used for transportation conformity 

purposes for New Castle County in 

Delaware. The April 25, 2012 SIP 

revision submittal (1) replaced the 

onroad emissions budget in the April 3, 

2008 submittal with a budget that is 

based on a new onroad mobile 

emissions model—MOVES model; (2) 

demonstrated that the MOVES based 

mobile source budget is consistent with 

attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS by 

2010; and (3) demonstrated that the 

contingency requirements of the CAA 

are met. The April 25, 2012 submittal 

only impacts PM2.5 and nitrogen oxide 

(NOX) emissions and calculations. 

The attainment plan also includes a 

base year emissions inventory, an 

analysis of RACM/RACT, and 

contingency measures. EPA has 

determined that a RFP plan is not 

required because Delaware 

demonstrated that attainment with the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS occurred in 

the Philadelphia Area by the attainment 

date of April 2010. 

In a separate and concurrent process, 

EPA is conducting a process to find 

adequate the MVEBs for New Castle 

County which are associated with the 

Delaware attainment demonstration for 

the Philadelphia Area. Concurrently 

with EPA’s proposal to approve the SIP, 

a notice will be posted on EPA’s Web 

site at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 

stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm 

for the purpose of opening a 30-day 

public comment period on the adequacy 

of the MVEBs for New Castle County in 

the April 25, 2012 SIP revision’s 

attainment demonstration for the 

Philadelphia Area. That notice will 

inform the public of the availability of 

the Delaware SIP revision on DNREC’s 

Web site. Interested members of the 

public could access Delaware’s April 25, 

2012 SIP revision on line at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA– 

R03–OAR–2010–0141. Following EPA’s 

public comment period, responses to 

any comments received will be 

addressed. EPA has reviewed the 

revised MVEBs developed with MOVES 

and found them consistent with the 

attainment demonstration and found 

that the budgets meet the criteria for 

adequacy and approval. 

EPA has determined that Delaware’s 

PM2.5 attainment plan meets the 

applicable requirements of the CAA, as 

described in the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule published on April 25, 2007 (72 FR 

20586). EPA’s analysis and findings are 

discussed in this proposed rulemaking. 

In addition, technical support 

documents (TSDs) for this proposal are 

available on line at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA– 

R03–OAR–2010–0141. These TSDs 

provide additional explanation of EPA’s 

analysis supporting this proposal. 

II. Background 

A. Designation History 

On July 16, 1997, EPA established the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, including an 

annual standard of 15.0 micrograms per 

cubic meter (mg/m3) based on a 3-year 

average of annual mean PM2.5

concentrations and a 24-hour (or daily) 

standard of 65 mg/m3 based on a 3-year 

average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour 

concentrations. See 62 FR 38652 (July 

18, 1997). EPA established these 

standards based on significant evidence 

and numerous health studies 

demonstrating that serious health effects 

are associated with exposures to PM2.5.

Following promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, EPA is required by the 

CAA to designate areas throughout the 

United States as attaining or not 

attaining the NAAQS; this designation 

process is described in section 107(d)(1) 

of the CAA. In 1999, EPA and state air 

quality agencies initiated the monitoring 

process for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and 

by January 2001, established a complete 

set of air quality monitors. On January 

5, 2005 (70 FR 944), EPA promulgated 

initial air quality designations for the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, which became 

effective on April 5, 2005, based on air 

quality monitoring data for calendar 

years 2001–2003. 

On April 14, 2005 (70 FR 19844), EPA 

promulgated a supplemental rule 

amending EPA’s initial designations, 

with the same effective date (April 5, 

2005) as 70 FR 944. As a result of this 

supplemental rule, PM2.5 nonattainment 

designations are in effect for 39 areas, 

comprising 208 counties within 20 

states (and the District of Columbia) 

nationwide, with a combined 

population of about 88 million. The 

Philadelphia Area which includes New 

Castle County in Delaware is in the list 

of areas not attaining the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

It should be noted that on November 

13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), EPA relabeled 

the existing designation tables in 40 

CFR 81.308 to clarify the 1997 

designations for the 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. The designation for New Castle 

County was clarified as unclassifiable/ 

attainment for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. 

B. Clean Air Fine Particle 

Implementation Rule 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

describes the CAA framework and 

requirements for developing SIPs for 

areas designated nonattainment for the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. An attainment plan 

must include a demonstration that a 

nonattainment area will meet the 

applicable NAAQS within the 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 223 / Monday, November 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 69401 

1While Delaware listed CAIR as a control 

measure in its discussion of RACM/RACT, 

Delaware’s determination of RACM/RACT did not 

solely depend on CAIR as RACT. See Appendix 7– 

1 of Delaware’s April 3, 2008 Attainment Plan. 

timeframe provided in the statute. This 

demonstration must include modeling 

(40 CFR 51.1007) that is performed in 

accordance with EPA modeling 

guidance (EPA–454/B–07–002, April 

2007). It must also include supporting 

technical analyses and descriptions of 

all relevant adopted Federal, state, and 

local regulations and control measures 

that have been adopted in order to 

provide attainment of the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS by the proposed attainment 

date. 

For the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, an 

attainment plan must show that a 

nonattainment area will attain the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS as expeditiously as 

practicable, but within five years of 

designation (i.e. attainment date of April 

2010 based on air quality data for 2007– 

2009). If the area is not expected to meet 

the NAAQS by April 2010, a state may 

request to extend the attainment date by 

one to five years based upon the severity 

of the nonattainment problem or the 

feasibility of implementing control 

measures (section 172(a)(2) of the CAA) 

in the specific area. 

For each nonattainment area, the state 

must demonstrate that it has adopted all 

RACM, including all RACT for the 

appropriate emissions sources, needed 

to provide for attainment of the PM2.5

standards in the specific nonattainment 

area ‘‘as expeditiously as practicable.’’ 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

provided guidance for making these 

RACM/RACT determinations (see 

section IV.A.4 of this notice). Any 

measures that are necessary to meet 

these requirements that are not already 

Federally promulgated or in an EPAapproved part of the state’s SIP must be 

submitted as part of a state’s attainment 

plan. Any state measures must meet the 

applicable statutory and regulatory 

requirements, and in particular, must be 

enforceable. 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule also 

included guidance on pollutants that 

states must address in their attainment 

plans. Section 302(g) of the CAA 

authorizes EPA to regulate criteria 

pollutants and their precursors. In the 

case of PM2.5, the main chemical 

precursors are sulfur dioxide (SO2), 

NOX, ammonia (NH3), and volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs). The effect 

of reducing emissions of precursor 

pollutants that contribute to PM2.5

concentrations varies by area, however, 

depending on PM2.5 composition, 

emission levels, and other area-specific 

factors. For this reason, the PM2.5

Implementation Rule provided guidance 

recommending that states elect to 

control direct PM2.5 emissions and the 

precursor or precursors that would be 

most effective for attaining the NAAQS 

within the specific area, based upon an 

appropriate technical demonstration. 

In accordance with the PM2.5

Implementation Rule, direct PM2.5

emissions means ‘‘solid particles 

emitted directly from an air emissions 

source or activity, or gaseous emissions 

or liquid droplets from an air emissions 

source or activity which condense to 

form particulate matter at ambient 

temperatures. Direct PM2.5 emissions 

include elemental carbon, directly 

emitted organic carbon (OC), directly 

emitted sulfate (SO4), directly emitted 

nitrate (NO3), and other inorganic 

particles (including but not limited to 

crustal material, metals, and sea salt).’’ 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

requires all states to address SO2 as a 

PM2.5 precursor and to evaluate SO2 for 

possible control measures in all PM2.5

nonattainment areas. States are required 

to address NOX as a PM2.5 precursor and 

evaluate reasonable controls for NOX in 

all PM2.5 attainment plans, unless the 

state and EPA make a finding that NOX

emissions from sources in the state do 

not significantly contribute to PM2.5

concentrations in the relevant 

nonattainment area. 

Although current scientific 

information shows that certain VOC 

emissions are precursors to the 

formation of secondary organic aerosol, 

and significant progress has been made 

in understanding the role of gaseous 

organic material in the formation of 

organic particulate matter (PM), this 

relationship remains complex. Further 

research and technical tools are needed 

to better characterize emissions 

inventories for specific VOC compounds 

and to determine the extent of the 

contribution of specific VOC 

compounds to organic PM mass. 

Because of these factors, the PM2.5

Implementation Rule did not require 

states to address VOCs as PM2.5

attainment plan precursors and evaluate 

them for control measures, unless the 

state or EPA made a finding that VOCs 

significantly contribute to a PM2.5

nonattainment problem in the specific 

area or to other downwind air quality 

concerns. 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule also 

describes the formation of particles 

related to NH3 emissions, which is a 

complex, nonlinear process. Though 

recent studies have improved our 

understanding of the role of NH3 in 

aerosol formation, ongoing research is 

needed to better describe the 

relationships between NH3 emissions, 

PM concentrations, and related impacts. 

Also, area-specific data is needed to 

evaluate the effectiveness of reducing 

NH3 emissions on reducing PM2.5

concentrations in different areas, and to 

determine where NH3 decreases may 

increase the acidity of particles and 

precipitation. For these reasons, in the 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule, NH3 is 

presumed not to be a PM2.5 attainment 

plan precursor, meaning that the state is 

not required to address NH3 in its 

attainment plan or evaluate sources of 

NH3 emissions for reduction measures, 

unless the state or EPA makes a finding 

that NH3 significantly contributes to a 

PM2.5 nonattainment problem in the 

area or to other downwind air quality 

concerns. 

The presumptive inclusion of NOX

and the presumptive exclusion of VOC 

and NH3 as precursors can be reversed 

based on an acceptable technical 

demonstration for a particular 

nonattainment area by the state or EPA. 

Such a demonstration should include 

information from multiple sources, 

including results of speciation data 

analyses, air quality modeling studies, 

chemical tracer studies, emission 

inventories, or special intensive 

measurement studies to evaluate 

specific atmospheric chemistry in an 

area. See the PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

for more information. 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule also 

provided guidance for the other 

elements of a state’s attainment plan, 

including, but not limited to, emission 

inventories, contingency measures, and 

MVEBs used for transportation 

conformity purposes. There are, 

however, three aspects of the PM2.5

Implementation Rule for which EPA 

received petitions requesting 

reconsideration. These pertain to the 

presumption or advance determination 

that compliance with the requirements 

of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) 

automatically satisfies the requirements 

for RACT or RACM for NOX or SO2

emissions from electric generating unit 

(EGU) sources participating in regional 

cap and trade programs; the suggestion 

in the preamble that the economic 

feasibility element of a RACT 

determination for EGUs should include 

consideration of whether the cost of a 

measure is reasonable in light of the 

benefits; and the policy described in the 

preamble of allowing certain emissions 

reductions from outside the 

nonattainment area to be credited as 

meeting the RFP requirement. EPA has 

granted these petitions. The Delaware 

attainment plan for the Philadelphia 

Area does not rely on any of these 

aspects of the rule.1


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
69402 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 223 / Monday, November 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

2The Court’s judgment is not final at this time as 

the mandate has not yet issued. 

With regard to CAIR, EPA published 

this rule on May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162) 

to address the interstate transport 

requirements of the CAA with respect to 

the 1997 ozone and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

As originally promulgated, CAIR 

required significant reductions in 

emissions of SO2 and NOX to limit the 

interstate transport of these pollutants. 

In 2008, however, the Court of Appeals 

for the District of Columbia Circuit (‘‘the 

Court’’) remanded CAIR back to EPA. 

See North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 

1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008). The Court had 

previously found CAIR to be 

inconsistent with the requirements of 

the CAA, North Carolina v. EPA, 531 

F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately 

remanded the rule to EPA without 

vacatur because it found that ‘‘allowing 

CAIR to remain in effect until it is 

replaced by a rule consistent with [the 

Court’s] opinion would at least 

temporarily preserve the environmental 

values covered by CAIR.’’ See North 

Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d at 1178. CAIR 

thus remained in place following the 

remand, and was in place and 

enforceable through the April 5, 2010 

attainment date. 

In response to the Court’s decision, 

EPA issued a new rule to address 

interstate transport of NOX and SO2 in 

the eastern United States (i.e., the 

Transport Rule, also known as the 

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule). See 76 

FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). In the 

Transport Rule, EPA finalized 

regulatory changes to sunset (i.e., 

discontinue) CAIR and the CAIR Federal 

Implementation Plans (FIPs) for control 

periods in 2012 and beyond. See 76 FR 

48322. 

The recent Court decision on the 

Transport Rule, EME Homer City 

Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11–1302 

(D.C. Cir., August 21, 2012) 2 does not 

disturb EPA’s determination that it is 

appropriate to move forward with this 

proposed action. This action proposes to 

approve an attainment plan that 

demonstrated that the Philadelphia Area 

would attain the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS by 2010, which it did, as 

discussed in section II.C of this notice. 

The air quality analysis conducted for 

the Transport Rule demonstrates that 

the Philadelphia Area would be able to 

attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

even in the absence of CAIR or the 

Transport Rule. See Appendix B to the 

Air Quality Modeling Final Rule 

Technical Support Document for the 

Transport Rule. Nothing in the D.C. 

Circuit’s August 2012 decision disturbs 

or calls into question that conclusion or 

the validity of the air quality analysis on 

which it is based. More importantly, the 

Transport Rule is not relevant to this 

action. The Transport Rule only 

addresses emissions in 2012 and 

beyond. As such, neither the Transport 

Rule itself, nor the vacatur of the 

Transport Rule, is relevant to the 

question addressed in this proposal 

notice. The purpose of this action is to 

determine whether the attainment plan 

submitted by Delaware is sufficient to 

bring the Philadelphia Area into 

attainment by the April 2010 attainment 

date, a date before the Transport Rule 

was even promulgated. 

Similarly, the status of CAIR after the 

April 2010 attainment date is also not 

relevant to this action. While the air 

quality monitoring data that shows the 

Philadelphia Area attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the April 2010 

attainment deadline was impacted by 

CAIR, CAIR was in place and 

enforceable through the 2010 attainment 

date that is relevant to this attainment 

plan. CAIR was an enforceable control 

measure applicable to affected sources 

in the area, as well as sources 

throughout the Eastern United States. 

As such, the current status of CAIR is 

irrelevant to and does not impact our 

conclusion that the attainment plan 

should be approved. Moreover, in its 

August 2012 decision, the Court also 

ordered EPA to continue implementing 

CAIR. See EME Homer City, slip op. at 

60. For these reasons, neither the 

current status of CAIR nor the current 

status of the Transport Rule affects any 

of the criteria for proposed approval of 

this SIP revision. 

C. Determinations of Attainment 

EPA makes two different types of 

attainment determinations for 

nonattainment areas. The first, a 

Determination of Attainment by the 

attainment date, is a determination of 

whether the area attained the NAAQS as 

of the area’s applicable attainment 

deadline, which, for PM2.5, is required 

by section 179(c) of the CAA. The 

second is a Determination of Attainment 

for purposes of suspending a state’s 

obligation to submit certain attainmentrelated planning SIP requirements (i.e., 

the Clean Data Determinations for 

PM2.5). See 40 CFR 51.1004(c). A Clean 

Data Determination and the suspension 

of the planning requirements continue 

for as long as the area continues to 

attain the NAAQS. 

(1) Determination of Attainment by the 

Area’s Attainment Date 

In accordance with section 179(c) of 

the CAA, EPA determined on May 16, 

2012 (77 FR 28782) that the 

Philadelphia Area attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its required 

attainment date of April 5, 2010. This 

determination was based on complete, 

quality-assured, quality-controlled, and 

certified ambient air monitoring data for 

2007–2009 as well as the 2008–2010 

monitoring periods. See 40 CFR 

51.1004(c). 

(2) Clean Data Determination 

On May 16, 2012 (77 FR 28782), EPA 

also determined that the Philadelphia 

Area has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS and remains in attainment. The 

determination was based on complete, 

quality-assured, quality-controlled, and 

certified ambient air monitoring data for 

the 2007–2009 and the 2008–2010 

monitoring periods. See 40 CFR 

51.1004(c). 

III. Description of the Delaware 

Attainment Plan 

In accordance with section 172(c) of 

the CAA and the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule, the attainment plan submitted on 

April 3, 2008 and amended on April 25, 

2012 by DNREC for the Philadelphia 

Area included Delaware’s attainment 

demonstration, MVEBs used for 

transportation conformity purposes for 

New Castle County in Delaware, a base 

year emissions inventory, a RACM/ 

RACT analysis and contingency 

measures. 

To analyze future year emissions 

reductions and air quality 

improvements, Delaware used local, 

regional, and national modeling 

analyses that have been developed to 

support Federal and local emission 

reduction programs. This modeling was 

performed in accordance with EPA’s 

‘‘Guidance on the Use of Models and 

Other Analyses for Determining 

Attainment of Air Quality Goals for 

Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze’’ 

(EPA–454/B–07–002, April 2007). 

IV. EPA’s Analysis 

A. Attainment Demonstration 

1. Pollutants Addressed 

In accordance with policies described 

in the PM2.5 Implementation Rule, 

Delaware’s PM2.5 attainment plan 

evaluates emissions of direct PM2.5, SO2, 

and NOX in the Philadelphia Area. With 

regard to evaluation of PM2.5 precursors, 

the PM2.5 Implementation Rule requires 

that SO2 be evaluated for controls in all 

nonattainment areas, and describes 

general presumptive policies for NOX, 

NH3, and VOCs. For NOX, states are 

required to address NOX as a PM2.5

attainment plan precursor and evaluate 

reasonable controls for NOX in PM2.5

attainment plans, unless the state makes 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 223 / Monday, November 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 69403 

3Although the PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

established a transition period for including 

condensables for attainment demonstration 

controls, reporting of condensables in the emission 

inventories is still required. 

a finding that NOX emissions in the 

state do not significantly contribute to 

PM2.5 concentrations in the area. For 

NH3, because of uncertainties regarding 

NH3 emission inventories and the 

efficacy of ammonia control 

technologies, the final rule sets forth the 

presumption that NH3 is not a PM2.5

precursor and that states are not 

required to address NH3 in their 

attainment plan. Similarly, VOC 

emissions are presumed not to be an 

attainment plan precursor because of 

uncertainties regarding the role of VOC 

in secondary organic aerosol formation. 

Delaware’s attainment plan does not 

reverse any of these presumptions. 

2. Emissions Inventory Requirements 

States are required under section 

172(c)(3) of the CAA to develop 

emissions inventories of point, area, 

onroad mobile, and nonroad mobile 

sources for their attainment 

demonstrations. These inventories 

provide a detailed accounting of all 

emissions and emission sources by 

precursor or pollutant. In addition, 

inventories are used to model air quality 

to demonstrate attainment of the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS as expeditiously as 

practicable, and, if an attainment 

extension beyond 2010 is needed, to 

support the need for such an extension. 

Emissions inventory guidance was 

provided in the April 1999 document 

‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for 

Implementation of Ozone and 

Particulate Matter NAAQS and Regional 

Haze Regulations,’’ (EPA–454/R–99– 

006), which was updated in November 

2005 (EPA–454/R–05–001). Emissions 

reporting requirements were provided 

in the 2002 Consolidated Emissions 

Reporting Rule (CERR) (67 FR 39602). 

On December 17, 2008 (73 FR 76539), 

EPA promulgated the Air Emissions 

Reporting Requirements (AERR) to 

update emissions reporting 

requirements in the CERR, and to 

harmonize, consolidate and simplify 

data reporting by states. In accordance 

with the AERR and the November 2005 

guidance, the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule required states to submit inventory 

information on directly emitted PM2.5

and PM2.5 precursors and any additional 

inventory information needed to 

support an attainment demonstration. 

PM2.5 is comprised of filterable and 

condensable emissions. Condensable 

particulate matter (CPM) can comprise a 

significant percentage of direct PM2.5

emissions from certain sources, and are 

required to be included in national 

emission inventories based on emission 

factors. Test Methods 201A and 202 are 

available for source-specific 

measurement of condensable emissions. 

However, the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule acknowledged that there were 

issues and concerns related to 

availability and implementation of these 

test methods as well as uncertainties in 

existing data for condensable PM2.5. In 

recognition of these concerns, EPA 

established a transition period during 

which EPA could assess possible 

revisions to available test methods and 

allow time for states to update 

emissions inventories as needed to 

address direct PM2.5, including 

condensable emissions. Because of the 

time required for this assessment, EPA 

recognized that states would be limited 

in how to effectively address CPM 

emissions, and established a period of 

transition, up to January 1, 2011, during 

which state attainment demonstration 

submissions for PM2.5 were not required 

to address CPM emissions. 

Amendments to these test methods were 

proposed on March 25, 2009 (74 FR 

12970), and finalized on December 21, 

2010 (75 FR 80118). The amendments to 

Method 201A added a particle-sizing 

device for PM2.5 sampling, and the 

amendments to Method 202 revised the 

sample collection and recovery 

procedures of the method to reduce the 

formation of reaction artifacts that could 

lead to inaccurate measurements of 

CPM emissions. 

The period of transition for 

establishing emissions limits for 

condensable direct PM2.5 ended on 

January 1, 2011. Attainment 

demonstration PM2.5 submissions made 

during the transition period are not 

required to address CPM emissions; 

however, states must address the control 

of direct PM2.5 emissions, including 

condensable emissions, with any new 

action taken after January 1, 2011. 

Delaware submitted the attainment plan 

prior to January 1, 2011 and therefore, 

did not consider condensables. 

On June 25, 2007, EarthJustice filed a 

petition requesting reconsideration of 

EPA’s transition period for CPM 

emissions provided in the PM2.5

Implementation Rule. On April 25, 

2011, EPA denied EarthJustice’s petition 

for reconsideration which allowed states 

to continue to exclude CPM for 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) permitting during the transition 

period. Today’s action reflects a review 

of Delaware’s submittal based on 

applicable EPA guidance as described in 

the PM2.5 Implementation Rule. 

The SIP base year inventory is the 

primary inventory from which other 

inventories (3-year cycle inventories, 

RFP inventories, modeling inventories) 

are derived. The CAA calls for state, 

local, and tribal agencies to ensure that 

the base year inventory is 

comprehensive, accurate, and current 

for all actual emissions (EPA–454/R– 

05–001). The base year inventory 

includes emissions estimates from 

stationary point and nonpoint sources, 

onroad mobile sources, and nonroad 

mobile sources. For the PM2.5 NAAQS, 

the pollutants to be inventoried are 

primary emissions (including 

condensables 3) of PM10 and PM2.5, and 

emissions of SO2, NH3, VOC, and NOX, 

and are reported as actual annual 

emissions. DNREC defines 2002 as the 

base year inventory consistent with the 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule. The 

pollutants inventoried for Delaware 

include PM10, PM2.5, SO2, NH3, VOC, 

and NOX. Information on the manmade 

sources of direct PM and its potential 

precursors, SO2, NH3, VOC, and NOX, 

was compiled for point, area, onroad 

and nonroad sources. 

The stationary point source inventory 

represents facility-specific data for 

Delaware’s larger stationary sources. 

Point sources typically include large 

industrial, commercial, and institutional 

facilities. Manufacturing facilities, 

within the industrial sector, comprise 

the majority of all reporting point 

sources. The institutional sector 

includes hospitals, universities, prisons, 

military bases, landfills, and wastewater 

treatment plants. Point source emissions 

data are submitted to DNREC by the 

facilities using Terminal Server Satellite 

i-STEPS software. i-STEPS is the point 

source emission inventory electronic 

data management system. 

Area sources represent a large and 

diverse set of individual emission 

source categories. Emissions from area 

sources were estimated at the county 

level. For the area sources, DNREC has 

provided an inventory that contains 

estimations of emissions by multiplying 

an emission factor by some known 

indicator or activity level for each 

category at the county level. These 

emissions are calculated on an annual 

basis. Various sources of emission 

factors or methodologies were used, 

including EPA’s AP–42; the Factor 

Information Retrieval System (FIRE); 

EPA’s Emissions Inventory 

Improvement Program, Volume III; 

documented projects performed by the 

California Air Resource Board; and 

projects performed by the Mid-Atlantic 

Regional Air Management Association 

(MARAMA). Area source estimates were 

provided by source classification code 

(SCC). 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
69404 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 223 / Monday, November 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

Highway vehicles, which include 

passenger cars and light-duty trucks, 

other trucks, buses, and motorcycles, are 

represented by an onroad mobile source 

emissions inventory that was developed 

using the MOVES model and link-level 

vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data for 

each county from the Delaware 

Department of Transportation (DelDOT). 

The emission factors developed using 

MOVES were by month, using monthly 

temperature and fuel property data. 

DNREC provided MOVES input and 

output files for review. DNREC provided 

annual mobile emissions values in tons 

per year (tpy). 

Nonroad sources, which encompass a 

diverse collection of engines, including, 

but not limited to, outdoor power 

equipment, recreational vehicles, farm 

and construction machinery, lawn and 

garden equipment, industrial 

equipment, recreational marine vessels, 

commercial marine vessels, 

locomotives, ships, and aircraft were 

estimated using the EPA NONROAD 

2005 model. The emissions inventory 

for the base year, 2002, was developed 

in accordance with EPA guidance, 

‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for 

Implementation of Ozone and 

Particulate Matter National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards and Regional Haze 

Regulations,’’ EPA–454/R–05–001, 

August 2005, updated November 2005. 

Tables 1, 2 and 3 summarize the 

emissions for 2002. 

TABLE 1—2002 ANNUAL EMISSIONS BY COUNTY (TPY) 

County PM10 PM2.5 SO2 NOX NH3 VOC 

Kent .......................................................................................................... 3991 1097 4062 10314 2841 5296 

New Castle ............................................................................................... 8604 3430 50237 30748 1384 18062 

Sussex ..................................................................................................... 6758 2575 25552 16060 10057 10251 

Total .................................................................................................. 19353 7102 79852 57122 14284 33610 

TABLE 2—2002 STATEWIDE ANNUAL EMISSIONS (TPY) 

Source sector PM10 PM2.5 SO2 NOX NH3 VOC 

Point ......................................................................................................... 3859 3161 73708 16372 179 4773 

Area .......................................................................................................... 13870 2580 1330 2427 13194 10254 

Onroad ..................................................................................................... 581 415 584 21341 903 10564 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 1043 946 4230 16982 8 8019 

Total .................................................................................................. 19353 7102 79852 57122 14284 33610 

TABLE 3—2002 NEW CASTLE COUNTY ANNUAL EMISSIONS (TPY) 

Source sector PM10 PM2.5 SO2 NOX NH3 VOC 

Point ......................................................................................................... 2168 1733 47070 9157 118 2687 

Area .......................................................................................................... 5674 1073 780 1513 710 6198 

Onroad ..................................................................................................... 304 209 326 11799 552 5762 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 458 415 2061 8279 4 3415 

Total .................................................................................................. 8604 3430 50237 30748 1384 18062 

The review and evaluation of the 

methods used for the emissions 

inventory submitted by Delaware are 

found in the attainment plan submittal 

(section 3) and a TSD entitled 

‘‘Technical Support Document for 

Emissions Inventories for the Delaware 

Nonattainment Area PM2.5 SIP Base 

Year Inventory,’’ dated June 16, 2010, 

available on line at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA– 

R03–OAR–2010–0141. EPA is proposing 

to approve Delaware’s 2002 base year 

emissions inventory for the 

Philadelphia Area as meeting the 

requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the 

CAA. 

3. Modeling 

All attainment demonstrations must 

include modeling that is performed in 

accordance with EPA’s ‘‘Guidance on 

the Use of Models and Other Analyses 

for Demonstrating Attainment of Air 

Quality Goals for Ozone, PM2.5, and 

Regional Haze’’ (EPA–454/B–07–002, 

April 2007). This includes the 

photochemical modeling guidance 

which is divided into two parts. One 

part describes how to use a 

photochemical grid model for ozone and 

PM2.5, to assess whether an area will 

come into attainment of the air quality 

standard. A second part describes how 

the user should perform supplemental 

analyses, using various analytical 

methods, to determine if the model over 

predicts, under predicts, or accurately 

predicts the air quality improvement 

projected to occur by the attainment 

date. The guidance indicates that states 

should review these supplemental 

analyses, in combination with the 

modeling analysis, in a ‘‘weight of 

evidence’’ assessment to determine 

whether each area is likely to achieve 

timely attainment. 

A description of how the attainment 

demonstration from the April 3, 2008 

SIP revision addresses this EPA 

modeling guidance for a modeled 

attainment demonstration can be found 

in the TSD entitled, ‘‘Technical Support 

Document for the Modeling and Weight 

of Evidence Potions of the Delaware SIP 

for Attainment of the PM2.5 Annual 

NAAQS,’’ dated June 15, 2010 

(Attainment TSD), available on line at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket number 

EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0141 and section 

6 of the April 3, 2008 SIP revision 

submittal. 

In the April 3, 2008 SIP revision 

submittal, the photochemical grid 

model used projected emissions for 

2009, including emission changes due 

to regulations Delaware and its 

neighboring states were planning to 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 223 / Monday, November 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 69405 

implement and expected growth by 

2009. Meteorological conditions from 

2002, the same as the base year 

modeling, were used in the projection 

modeling for 2009. Using the base case 

meteorology allows the effect of changes 

in states’ emissions to be determined 

without being influenced by yearly 

fluctuations in meteorology and is 

consistent with EPA guidance. 

The conceptual model (describes how 

weather patterns affect the formation 

and transport of PM2.5, accounting for 

emissions and photochemistry) for 

Delaware’s attainment plan is described 

in a document prepared by the 

Northeast States for Coordinated AirUse Management (NESCAUM) final 

report entitled, ‘‘The Nature of the Fine 

Particle and Regional Haze Air Quality 

Problems in the MANE–VU Region: A 

Conceptual Description (2006).’’ This 

document is consistent with EPA’s 

guidance and was prepared for use by 

the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) 

member states which provides the 

conceptual description of PM2.5 issues 

in the OTC states. The OTC is a multistate organization consisting of the 

States of Connecticut, Delaware, District 

of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, 

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New 

Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode 

Island, Vermont and Northern Virginia. 

See section 184 of the CAA. By 

agreement of OTC, the New York State 

Department of Environmental 

Conversation (NYSEC) ran the 

Community Multi-scale Air Quality 

Model (CMAQ) for the states in the 

northeast Ozone Transport Region 

(OTR) which includes Delaware. The 

inputs of the model are described in 

section 6 of the April 3, 2008 SIP 

revision submittal. 

The attainment test for PM2.5 is 

referred to as the Speciated Modeled 

Attainment Test (SMAT). In the 

Delaware’s April 3, 2008 SIP revision 

submittal, the SMAT results 

demonstrated that the projected annual 

arithmetic mean PM2.5 concentration 

calculated at each Federal Reference 

Method (FRM) monitor attained the 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS in 2009. 

Specifically, all calculations are less 

than 15mg/m3. 

In summary, the basic photochemical 

grid modeling, presented in the 

Delaware attainment plan, used the 

methods recommended in EPA’s 

modeling guidance. When EPA’s 

attainment test is applied to the 

modeling results, the 2009 annualaverage PM2.5 design value is predicted 

to be 13.3mg/m3 in the Philadelphia 

Area. Therefore, based on EPA’s 

modeled attainment test, the 

Philadelphia Area reached attainment of 

the annual average PM2.5 standard in 

2009 before the attainment date of April 

5, 2010. 

4. Reasonably Available Control 

Measures/Reasonably Available Control 

Technology 

a. Requirements for RACM/RACT 

CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that 

each attainment plan ‘‘provide for the 

implementation of all RACM as 

expeditiously as practicable, including 

such reductions in emissions from the 

existing sources in the area as may be 

obtained through the adoption, at a 

minimum, of RACT, and shall provide 

for attainment of the national primary 

ambient air quality standards.’’ EPA 

interprets RACM including RACT under 

section 172 as measures that a state 

finds are both reasonably available and 

contribute to attainment as 

expeditiously as practicable in the 

nonattainment area. Thus, what 

constitutes RACM or RACT in a PM2.5

nonattainment area is closely tied to the 

expeditious attainment demonstration 

of the plan. See 40 CFR 51.1010; 72 FR 

20586 at 20612. 

States are required to evaluate RACM/ 

RACT for direct PM2.5 emissions and all 

of the area’s attainment plan precursors. 

See 40 CFR 51.1002(c); 72 FR 20586 at 

20589–97. Consistent with the guidance 

provided for the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule, a state initially must evaluate 

RACM/RACT for sources that emit 

direct PM2.5, SO2, and NOX. A state may 

establish with an appropriate 

demonstration that it should not 

regulate NOX in the specific 

nonattainment area, so it could thereby 

forgo evaluation of RACM/RACT for 

NOX. Because EPA concluded that VOC 

and NH3 are presumptively not 

regulatory precursors for PM2.5, unless 

the state or EPA determines that it is 

necessary to regulate them in a specific 

nonattainment area, the state is not 

required to evaluate RACM/RACT for 

sources of VOC or NH3 unless there is 

a determination supported by an 

appropriate demonstration that such 

emissions need to be regulated for 

expeditious attainment of the NAAQS 

in the specific area. 

For PM2.5 attainment plans, the PM2.5

Implementation Rule requires a 

combined approach to RACM and RACT 

under subpart 1 of part D of the CAA. 

Subpart 1, unlike subparts 2 and 4, does 

not identify specific source categories 

for which EPA must issue control 

technique documents or guidelines, or 

identify specific source categories for 

state and EPA evaluation during 

attainment plan development. See 72 FR 

20586 at 20610. Rather, under subpart 1, 

EPA considers RACT to be part of an 

area’s overall RACM obligation 

consistent with the section 172 

definition. Because of the variable 

nature of the PM2.5 problem in different 

nonattainment areas which may require 

states to develop attainment plans that 

address widely disparate circumstances, 

EPA determined not only that states 

should have flexibility with respect to 

RACM/RACT controls, but also that in 

areas needing significant emission 

reductions, RACM/RACT controls on 

smaller sources may be necessary to 

reach attainment as expeditiously as 

practicable. See 72 FR 20586 at 20612, 

20615. Thus, under the PM2.5

Implementation Rule, RACM and RACT 

are those reasonably available measures 

that contribute to attainment as 

expeditiously as practicable in the 

specific nonattainment area. See 40 CFR 

51.1010; 72 FR 20586 at 20612. 

Specifically, the PM2.5

Implementation Rule requires that 

attainment plans include the list of 

measures that a state considered and 

information sufficient to show that the 

state met all requirements for the 

determination of what constitutes 

RACM/RACT in a specific 

nonattainment area. See 40 CFR 

51.1010(a). In addition, the PM2.5

Implementation Rule requires that the 

state, in determining whether a 

particular emissions reduction measure 

or set of measures must be adopted as 

RACM/RACT, consider the cumulative 

impact of implementing the available 

measures and adopt as RACM/RACT 

any potential measures that are 

reasonably available considering 

technological and economic feasibility 

if, considered collectively, they would 

advance the attainment date by one year 

or more. If a measure or measures is not 

necessary for expeditious attainment of 

the NAAQS in the area, then by 

definition that measure is not RACM/ 

RACT for purposes of the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS in that area. Any measures that 

are necessary to meet these 

requirements which are not already 

either Federally promulgated, part of the 

state’s SIP, or otherwise creditable in 

SIPs must be submitted in enforceable 

form as part of a state’s attainment plan 

for the area. See 72 FR 20586 at 20614. 

Guidance provided in the PM2.5

Implementation Rule for evaluating 

RACM/RACT level controls for an area 

also indicated that there could be 

flexibility with respect to those areas 

that were predicted to attain the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS within five years of 

designation as a result of existing 

national or local measures. See 72 FR 

20586 at 20612. In such circumstances, 

EPA indicated that the state may 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
69406 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 223 / Monday, November 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

conduct a more limited RACM/RACT 

analysis that does not involve additional 

air quality modeling. Moreover, the 

RACM/RACT analysis for such area 

would focus on a review of reasonably 

available measures, the estimation of 

potential emissions reductions, and the 

evaluation of the time needed to 

implement the measures. Thus, the 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule guidance 

recommended that not all areas would 

need to conduct as rigorous an analysis, 

and suggested that a less rigorous 

analysis would be needed for those 

areas expected to attain within the 

initial five years from designation as a 

nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. A more comprehensive 

discussion of the RACM/RACT 

requirement for PM2.5 attainment plans 

and EPA’s guidance for it can be found 

in the PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

preamble. See 72 FR 20586 at 20609– 

20633. 

b. Delaware’s Analysis of Pollutants and 

Sources for the Delaware Portion of the 

Philadelphia Area 

Based upon the emissions inventory 

for the area, Delaware determined that 

it would be appropriate to evaluate 

sources of PM2.5, SO2, and NOX located 

in the nonattainment area for potential 

control as RACM/RACT. Delaware 

determined that controls of sources of 

VOC or NH3 would not be necessary for 

expeditious attainment of the NAAQS 

in this area, nor does EPA believe that 

there is a need to do so. Delaware’s 

determination with respect to which 

pollutants the plan should evaluate is 

found in Section 1.4 of the attainment 

plan submittal. 

After evaluating which pollutants 

should be addressed in the attainment 

plan, Delaware identified all source 

categories of those emissions located 

within the nonattainment area to 

determine available controls that could 

advance the attainment date by one year 

or more. See Section 7 of the attainment 

plan submittal. For the primary PM2.5

RACM, DNREC evaluated measures that 

are limited to the boundaries of the 

nonattainment area, i.e. New Castle 

County. However, because SO2 and NOX

can be transported over considerable 

distances to form PM2.5, SO2 and NOX

were assessed on a statewide basis. See 

Appendix 7–1 of Delaware’s attainment 

plan for ‘‘EPA’s List of Potential Control 

Measures.’’ Although VOC is not a 

regulated PM2.5 precursor for the 

Delaware portion of the Philadelphia 

area, VOC control measures approved 

by EPA are included in the modeling 

associated with this attainment plan. 

In accordance with 40 CFR 51.1010, a 

SIP revision for a PM2.5 nonattainment 

area is required to demonstrate that all 

RACM, including RACT for stationary 

sources, necessary to demonstrate 

attainment as expeditiously as 

practicable, have been adopted. The 

cumulative impact of implementing 

available measures must be considered 

in determining whether a particular 

emission reduction measure or set of 

measures is required to be adopted as 

RACM. Potential measures that are 

reasonably available considering 

technical and economic feasibility must 

be adopted as RACM if, considered 

collectively, they would advance the 

attainment date by one year or more. 

Since the Philadelphia Area attained at 

the end of 2009, any RACM measures 

needed to be in effect in 2008. Delaware 

determined that there were no 

additional control measures that could 

be adopted by January 1, 2008. In 

addition, existing measures and 

measures planned for implementation 

by 2009 enabled the Philadelphia Area 

to attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Therefore, Delaware determined no 

further actions on RACM or RACT were 

warranted. 

c. Delaware’s Evaluation of RACM/ 

RACT Control Measures for the 

Delaware Portion of the Philadelphia 

Area 

In accordance with section 172 of the 

CAA, Delaware determined it adopted 

all RACM, including RACT, needed to 

attain the standards ‘‘as expeditiously as 

practicable.’’ Delaware’s demonstration 

for attaining the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in 

the Philadelphia Area is based on the 

following Federally enforceable 

measures in Section 7 of the state’s 

submittal and listed below. From the 

control measures listed below, EPA is 

proposing not to approve CAIR as 

RACM/RACT for EGUs in Delaware for 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS but proposes to 

approve as RACM/RACT the other 

control measures identified in 

Delaware’s April 3, 2008 SIP submittal 

which were approved by EPA 

previously into the Delaware SIP (see 40 

CFR 52.420(c)) or are otherwise 

Federally enforceable. 

Section 7.2.1 Point Sources: 

• 40 CFR parts 51, 72, et al. Rule to 

Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine 

Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean 

Air Interstate Rule) 

• ‘‘Inclusion of Delaware and New 

Jersey in the Clean Air Interstate 

Rule’’ 71 FR 25288 (April 28, 2006) 

• Consent Decree, Premcor Refinery, 

Delaware City (formerly Motiva 

Enterprises) New Castle County. 

Control of SO2, and NOX Emission 

from Boilers and Heaters 

• Regulation 1146, EGUs, Electric 

Generating Unit (EGU) MultiPollutant Regulation, SO2 and NOX

emission control (effective 

December 11, 2006) 

• Regulation 1148, Control of Stationary 

Combustion Turbine Electric 

Generating Unit Emissions, NOX

emission control 

• Regulation 1144, Control of Stationary 

Generator Emissions, SO2, PM, VOC 

and NOX emission control 

• Regulation 1142, Section 1.0, Control 

of NOX Emissions from Industrial 

Boilers, NOX emission control 

• Regulation 1142, Section 2.0, Control 

of NOX Emissions from Industrial 

Boilers and Process Heaters at 

Petroleum Refineries, NOX emission 

control, New Castle County 

• Regulation 1124, Section 46.0, Crude 

Oil Lightering Operations, VOC 

emission control 

• Facility and Unit shutdowns (see 

Table 4–3 in the Delaware 

submittal) 

Section 7.2.2 Non-Point Sources: 

• Regulation 1124, Section 33.0, 

Solvent Cleaning and Drying, VOC 

emission control 

• Regulation 1124, Section 11.0, Mobile 

Equipment Repair and Refinishing, 

VOC emission control 

• Regulation 1141, Section 3.0, Portable 

Fuel Containers, VOC emission 

control 

• Regulation 1141, Section 2.0, 

Consumer Products, VOC emission 

control 

• Regulation 1141, Section 1.0, 

Architectural and Industrial 

Maintenance Coatings, VOC 

emission control 

• Regulation 1124, Section 36.0, Stage II 

Vapor Recovery, VOC emission 

control 

• Controls on Residential Woodstoves, 

40 CFR Part 60 Subpart AAA—New 

Source Performance Standards 

(‘‘NSPS’’) for PM, VOC and NOX

emission control 

• Regulation 1113, Open Burning 

Controls, PM, VOC and NOX

emission control 

Section 7.2.3 Non-Road Sources: 

• Phase I and Phase II Emissions 

Standards for Gasoline-Powered 

Non-Road Utility Engines, Federal 

Rule 

• Emissions Standards for DieselPowered Non-Road Utility Engines 

of 50 or More Horsepower, Federal 

Rule 

• Emissions Standards for Spark 

Ignition (SI) Marine Engines, 

Federal Rule 

• Emissions Standards for Large Spark 

Ignition Engines, Federal Rule 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 223 / Monday, November 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 69407 

• Reformulated Gasoline Use in NonRoad Motor Vehicles and 

Equipment, Federal Rule 

• ‘‘Control of Emissions from New 

Marine Compression-Ignition 

Engines at or above 30 liters per 

Cylinder; Final Rule,’’ 68 FR 9746 

(February 28, 2003), at pp. 9755–56 

(hereinafter EPA C3 Rule) 

Section 7.2.4 On-Road Mobile 

Sources: 

• Regulation No. 31, Low Enhanced 

Inspection and Maintenance 

Program 

• Regulation 1132, Transportation 

Conformity Regulation 

• 40 CFR Parts 80, 85, and 86—Control 

of Air Pollution from New Motor 

Vehicles: Tier 2 Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Standards and Gasoline 

Sulfur Control Requirements; Final 

Rule 

• 40 CFR parts 69, 80, and 86 Control 

of Air Pollution from New Motor 

Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and 

Vehicle Standards and Highway 

Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control 

Requirements; Final Rule 

• Regulation 1145, Controls on 

Excessive Idling of Heavy Duty 

Vehicles 

• Regulation 1140, National Low 

Emission Vehicle (NLEV) Program 

Delaware has implemented other 

control measures for SO2, NOX, VOC, 

and PM2.5 including mandatory episodic 

prohibition of lightering on ozone action 

days, and reduction of emissions from 

high electric demand day electric 

generation. 

The above measures have been 

adopted by Delaware and approved by 

EPA as Federally enforceable measures 

in the Delaware SIP (see 40 CFR 

52.420(c)) or are otherwise Federally 

enforceable. 

In addition, other voluntary measures 

that are effective in 2010 include: 

• Brandywine School District Bus 

Retrofits 

• Delaware Ride Share 

• Ozone Action Days (voluntary 

curtailment of activities that contribute 

to air pollution) 

• Use of Biodiesel (B20) in state-run 

equipment 

• Best Workplaces for Commuters 

and SmartWay Transport programs 

• Implement anti-idling outreach 

programs for schools and school 

districts 

• Clean State Program—focusing on 

greater use of alternative transportation 

fuels 

• Installation of an E85 fueling station 

in Delaware 

• Delaware continues to identify and 

implement energy efficiency 

programs for the residential and 

commercial sectors. Energy 

efficiency programs include: 

—Energy efficiency/conservation 

education, outreach, technical 

assistance 

—Energy An$wers Program 

—Home Appliances 

—Business 

—Home Performance 

—Energy Star Program 

—Sustainable Energy Utility (SEU) 

d. Proposed Action on RACM/RACT 

Demonstration and Control Strategy 

EPA is proposing to approve 

Delaware’s evaluation of RACM/RACT 

control measures for the Philadelphia 

Area, except for the reference to CAIR 

for EGUs which EPA is not proposing to 

approve as RACM/RACT. The 

monitoring data for this area indicates 

that it has attained the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS by its applicable date, 

and EPA made a determination of 

attainment on May 16, 2012 (77 FR 

28782). EPA’s guidance for the PM2.5

Implementation Rule recommended that 

if an area was predicted through the 

attainment plan to attain the standard 

within five years after designation, then 

the state could submit a more limited 

RACM/RACT analysis and the state 

could elect not to do additional 

modeling. 

Because the Philadelphia Area 

attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

by the applicable attainment date, and 

because EPA agrees with Delaware that 

no additional measures could be 

adopted that would advance the 

attainment date by one year, EPA 

proposes to determine that the Delaware 

attainment plan (except for CAIR for 

EGUs) meets the RACM/RACT 

requirements of the PM2.5

Implementation Rule and that the 

Federally enforceable control measures 

identified in the Delaware attainment 

plan (other than CAIR for EGUs) 

constitute RACM/RACT for purposes of 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Because 

the PM2.5 Implementation Rule defines 

RACM/RACT as that level of control 

that is necessary to bring the area into 

timely attainment, and because no 

additional measures could achieve 

attainment one year earlier, the level of 

Federally enforceable controls on 

sources located within the Philadelphia 

Area as of the end of the calendar year 

2009 constitutes RACM/RACT for the 

Philadelphia Area for this purpose. EPA 

is proposing not to approve CAIR as 

RACM/RACT in Delaware for the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS for EGUs but proposes to 

approve as RACM/RACT the other 

control measures, including state 

controls on EGUs, identified in 

Delaware’s April 3, 2008 SIP submittal, 

which were previously approved by 

EPA as part of the Delaware SIP (see 40 

CFR 52.420(c)) or are otherwise 

Federally enforceable, because the 

Philadelphia Area has attained the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS by the attainment date. 

5. Reasonable Further Progress 

Section 172(c)(2) of the CAA requires 

that attainment plans include RFP to 

achieve steady progress toward meeting 

air quality standards by showing 

generally linear progress toward 

attainment. The PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule set forth that an area that 

demonstrates attainment by 2010 will be 

considered to have satisfied the RFP 

requirement and need not submit any 

additional material to satisfy the RFP 

requirement. EPA views the attainment 

demonstration as also demonstrating 

that the area is making reasonable 

further progress toward attainment. A 

state is required to submit a separate 

RFP plan for any area for which the 

state seeks an extension of the 

attainment date beyond 2010. The RFP 

plan is required to provide emission 

reductions such that emissions in 2009 

represent generally linear progress from 

the 2002 baseline year to the attainment 

year. The Philadelphia Area attained by 

2010, and has therefore met the RFP 

requirements under the PM2.5

Implementation Rule. 

6. Contingency Measures 

In accordance with section 172(c)(9) 

of the CAA, the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule requires that PM2.5 attainment 

demonstrations include contingency 

measures. See 40 CFR 51.1012 and 72 

FR at 20642–20646, April 25, 2007. 

Contingency measures are additional 

measures to be implemented in the 

event an area fails to meet RFP or fails 

to attain a standard by its attainment 

date. These measures must be fully 

adopted rules or control measures that 

can be implemented quickly and 

without significant further EPA or state 

action if the area fails to meet RFP or 

fails to attain by its attainment date, and 

should contain trigger mechanisms and 

an implementation schedule. In 

addition, they should be measures not 

already included in the SIP control 

strategy and should provide for 

emission reductions equivalent to one 

year of RFP. 

Delaware submitted contingency 

measures as required by the PM2.5

Implementation Rule that were fully 

adopted rules or control measures that 

were ready to be implemented quickly 

upon failure of the area to attain and 

were at the level of reductions equal to 

at least one’s year worth of reductions 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
69408 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 223 / Monday, November 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

needed for attainment in the area. In 

accordance with section 110(k)(2) of the 

CAA, EPA must take action on the 

contingency measures that were 

submitted by Delaware. However, as 

noted in section II.C of this proposed 

rulemaking action, the Philadelphia 

Area, which consists of New Castle 

County in Delaware, has attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and meets 

the attainment date of April 5, 2010, and 

continues to attain based on the most 

recent data available. Because EPA has 

determined that the area attained by its 

required attainment date, in accordance 

with section 179(c)(9), no contingency 

measures for failure to attain by this 

date need be implemented, and further 

EPA action is unnecessary. 

Furthermore, as set forth in the PM2.5

Implementation Rule, areas that attained 

the NAAQS by the attainment date are 

considered to have satisfied the 

requirement to show RFP, and as such 

do not need to implement contingency 

measures to make further progress to 

attainment. EPA has determined that the 

Philadelphia Area has attained by the 

attainment date, therefore the 

contingency measures submitted by 

Delaware are no longer necessary for the 

Philadelphia Area to meet RFP 

requirements or attain the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS by the attainment date. 

Although the Philadelphia Area met the 

attainment date of April 5, 2010 and 

thus is not required to implement 

contingency measures, by relying on 

those contingency measures that were 

already in place, Delaware has 

effectively implemented its control 

measures in advance. 

7. Attainment Date 

Delaware provided a demonstration of 

attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS in the Philadelphia Area by 

2010. 

B. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

(MVEBs) 

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires 

Federal actions in nonattainment and 

maintenance areas to ‘‘conform to’’ the 

goals of SIPs. This means that such 

actions will not cause or contribute to 

violations of a NAAQS, worsen the 

severity of an existing violation, or 

delay timely attainment of any NAAQS 

or any interim milestone. Actions 

involving Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) or Federal 

Transit Administration (FTA) funding 

or approval are subject to the 

transportation conformity rule (40 CFR 

Part 93, subpart A). Under this rule, 

metropolitan planning organizations 

(MPOs) in nonattainment and 

maintenance areas coordinate with state 

air quality and transportation agencies, 

EPA, and the FHWA and FTA to 

demonstrate that their long range 

transportation plans and transportation 

improvement programs (TIP) conform to 

applicable SIPs. This is typically 

determined by showing that estimated 

emissions from existing and planned 

highway and transit systems are less 

than or equal to the MVEBs contained 

in the SIP. 

On April 25, 2012, Delaware 

submitted a SIP revision that is related 

to the PM2.5 and NOx onroad mobile 

source budgets that were established in 

the April 3, 2008 submittal. The April 

25, 2012 submittal replaces the MVEBs 

in the April 3, 2008 submittal with 

budgets based on the MOVES model. 

In a separate and concurrent process, 

EPA is conducting a process to find 

adequate the MVEBs for New Castle 

County which are associated with the 

Delaware attainment demonstration for 

the Philadelphia Area. Concurrently 

with EPA’s proposal to approve the SIP, 

a notice will be posted on EPA’s Web 

site at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 

stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm 

for the purpose of opening a 30-day 

public comment period on the adequacy 

of the MVEBs for New Castle County in 

the April 25, 2012 SIP revision’s 

attainment demonstration for the 

Philadelphia Area. That notice will 

inform the public of the availability of 

the Delaware SIP revision on DNREC’s 

Web site. Interested members of the 

public could access Delaware’s April 25, 

2012 SIP revision on line at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA– 

R03–OAR–2010–0141. Following EPA’s 

public comment period, responses to 

any comments received will be 

addressed. EPA has reviewed the 

revised MVEBs developed and found 

them consistent with the attainment 

demonstration and that the budgets 

meet the criteria for adequacy and 

approval. 

V. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

Delaware 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

attainment plan for the Philadelphia 

Area that was submitted on April 3, 

2008. EPA is also proposing to find 

adequate and approve the MVEBs 

revised with MOVES that were 

submitted on April 25, 2012 as a SIP 

revision. The attainment plan includes 

Delaware’s attainment demonstration, 

an analysis of RACM/RACT, the 2002 

base year emissions inventory, and 

contingency measures. EPA has 

determined that Delaware’s attainment 

demonstration meets the applicable 

requirements of the CAA, as described 

in the PM2.5 Implementation Rule. 

Specifically, EPA has determined that 

the Delaware SIP revision includes an 

attainment demonstration and adopted 

state regulations and programs needed 

to support a determination that the 

Philadelphia Area attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the April 2010 

deadline. EPA is specifically proposing 

however not to approve CAIR as RACM/ 

RACT for Delaware’s attainment plan 

for the Philadelphia Area. EPA is 

soliciting public comments on the 

issues discussed in this document. 

These comments will be considered 

before taking final action. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

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, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive 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 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 223 / Monday, November 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 69409 

• 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, 

pertaining to the Delaware 1997 annual 

PM2.5 attainment plan for the 

Philadelphia Area, 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: October 31, 2012. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2012–28091 Filed 11–16–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0751; FRL–9751–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Kentucky; Redesignation of 

the Kentucky Portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland 1997 Annual Fine 

Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area 

to Attainment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On February 12, 2012, the 

Commonwealth of Kentucky, through 

the Kentucky Energy and Environment 

Cabinet, Division for Air Quality (DAQ), 

submitted a request to redesignate the 

Kentucky portion of the tri-state 

Huntington-Ashland, West VirginiaKentucky-Ohio fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) nonattainment area (hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Huntington-Ashland 

Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’) to attainment for the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and to 

approve a State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) revision containing a maintenance 

plan for the Kentucky portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland Area. The 

Huntington-Ashland Area is comprised 

of Boyd County and a portion of 

Lawrence County in Kentucky; 

Lawrence and Scioto Counties and 

portions of Adams and Gallia Counties 

in Ohio; and Cabell and Wayne 

Counties and a portion of Mason County 

in West Virginia. EPA is proposing to 

approve the redesignation request and 

the related SIP revision for Boyd and 

Lawrence Counties in Kentucky, 

including the Commonwealth’s plan for 

maintaining attainment of the PM2.5

standard in the Kentucky portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland Area. EPA is also 

proposing to approve the on-road motor 

vehicle insignificance finding for direct 

PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides (NOX) for the 

Kentucky portion of the HuntingtonAshland Area. On May 4, 2011, and 

June 30, 2011, respectively, Ohio and 

West Virginia submitted requests to 

redesignate their portions of the Area to 

attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS. EPA is taking action on the 

requests from Ohio and West Virginia 

separately from these proposed actions. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 10, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2012–0751, 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–2012–0751, 

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: Ms. 

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– 

0751. 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: Joel 

Huey of the Regulatory Development 

Section, in the Air Planning Branch, 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1