Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 37 / Monday, February 26, 2007 / Proposed Rules 8329 

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 2116(c) and 2307. 

2. Amend § 1258.4 by revising 

paragraph (d) to read as follows: 

§ 1258.4 What reproductions are not 

covered by the NARA fee schedule? 

* * * * * 

(d) Reproduction of the following 

types of records using the specified 

order form: 

Type of record Order form Fee 

(1) Passenger arrival lists .................................................................................................. NATF Form 81 ............................................ $25.00 

(2) Federal Census requests ............................................................................................. NATF Form 82 ............................................ 25.00 

(3) Eastern Cherokee applications to the Court of Claims ............................................... NATF Form 83 ............................................ 25.00 

(4) Land entry records ....................................................................................................... NATF Form 84 ............................................ 40.00 

(5) Full pension file more than 75 years old (Civil War period) ........................................ NATF Form 85 ............................................ 125.00 

(6) Full pension file more than 75 years old (non-Civil War) ............................................ NATF Form 85 ............................................ 60.00 

(7) Pension documents packet (selected records) ........................................................... NATF Form 85 ............................................ 25.00 

(8) Bounty land warrant application files ........................................................................... NATF Form 85 ............................................ 25.00 

(9) Military service files more than 75 years old ............................................................... NATF Form 86 ............................................ 25.00 

* * * * * 

3. Amend § 1258.10 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 1258.10 What is NARA’s mail order 

policy? 

(a) There is a minimum fee of $15.00 

per order for reproductions that are sent 

by mail to the customer. 

* * * * * 

4. Revise § 1258.12 to read as follows: 

§ 1258.12 NARA reproduction fee 

schedule. 

(a) Certification: $15.00. 

(b) Electrostatic copying (in order to 

preserve certain records that are in poor 

physical condition, NARA may restrict 

customers to photographic or other 

kinds of copies instead of electrostatic 

copies): 

Service Fee 

Paper-to-paper copy made by the 

customer on a NARA self-service 

copier in the Washington, DC, 

area ............................................. $0.25 

Paper-to-paper copy made by the 

customer on a NARA self-service 

copier outside the Washington, 

DC, area (regional archives and 

Presidential libraries) .................. 0.20 

Paper-to-paper copy made by 

NARA .......................................... 0.75 

Microfilm-to-paper copy made by 

the customer on a NARA selfservice copier .............................. 0.50 

(c) Unlisted processes: For 

reproductions not covered by this fee 

schedule, see also § 1258.4. Fees for 

other reproduction processes are 

computed upon request. 

5. Revise § 1258.16 to read as follows: 

§ 1258.16 Effective date. 

The fees in this part are effective on 

[effective date of the final rule.] If your 

order was received by NARA before this 

effective date, we will charge the fees in 

effect at the time the order was received. 

Dated: February 20, 2007. 

Allen Weinstein, 

Archivist of the United States. 

[FR Doc. E7–3160 Filed 2–23–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7515–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07-OAR–2007–0015; FRL–8281–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of Iowa 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submission by the State of Iowa which 

revises the air quality rules to include 

portions of the Federal New Source 

Review (NSR) regulations promulgated 

by EPA in December 2002. These 

revisions do not include the portion of 

the rules for nonattainment areas as 

there are currently no nonattainment 

areas in the State of Iowa; therefore, 

those portions of the State rules remain 

in effect. The definitions and 

applicability portions of the Prevention 

of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 

program were written into the State 

rules while the remaining portions of 

the PSD program were adopted by 

reference. All references to clean units 

and pollution control projects are not 

adopted by reference. Iowa has also not 

adopted portions of the Federal rule 

relating to exceptions from 

recordkeeping requirements. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

action must be received in writing by 

March 28, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–

OAR–2007–0015 by one of the following 

methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: hamilton.heather@epa.gov. 

3. Mail: Heather Hamilton, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Air 

Planning and Development Branch, 901 

North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 

66101. 

4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to Heather Hamilton, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Air 

Planning and Development Branch, 901 

North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 

66101. 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 to 4:30, 

excluding legal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2007–

0015. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with PROPOSALS
8330 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 37 / Monday, February 26, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

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 

http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Air Planning and Development Branch, 

901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, 

Kansas. EPA requests that you contact 

the person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The 

interested persons wanting to examine 

these documents should make an 

appointment with the office at least 24 

hours in advance. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Heather Hamilton at (913) 551–7039, or 

by e-mail at hamilton.heather@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This section provides additional 

information by addressing the following 

questions: 

What is a SIP? 

What is the Federal approval process for a 

SIP? 

What does Federal approval of a State 

regulation mean to me? 

What is the background for this action? 

What is being addressed in this document? 

Have the requirements for approval of a 

SIP revision been met? 

What action is EPA proposing? 

What is a SIP? 

Section 110 of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) requires States to develop air 

pollution regulations and control 

strategies to ensure that State air quality 

meets the national ambient air quality 

standards established by EPA. These 

ambient standards are established under 

section 109 of the CAA, and they 

currently address six criteria pollutants. 

These pollutants are: carbon monoxide, 

nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead, 

particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. 

Each State must submit these 

regulations and control strategies to us 

for approval and incorporation into the 

Federally-enforceable SIP. 

Each Federally-approved SIP protects 

air quality primarily by addressing air 

pollution at its point of origin. These 

SIPs can be extensive, containing State 

regulations or other enforceable 

documents and supporting information 

such as emission inventories, 

monitoring networks, and modeling 

demonstrations. 

What is the Federal approval process 

for a SIP? 

In order for State regulations to be 

incorporated into the Federallyenforceable SIP, States must formally 

adopt the regulations and control 

strategies consistent with State and 

Federal requirements. This process 

generally includes a public notice, 

public hearing, public comment period, 

and a formal adoption by a Stateauthorized rulemaking body. 

Once a State rule, regulation, or 

control strategy is adopted, the State 

submits it to us for inclusion into the 

SIP. We must provide public notice and 

seek additional public comment 

regarding the proposed Federal action 

on the State submission. If adverse 

comments are received, they must be 

addressed prior to any final Federal 

action by us. 

All State regulations and supporting 

information approved by EPA under 

section 110 of the CAA are incorporated 

into the Federally-approved SIP. 

Records of such SIP actions are 

maintained in the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) at title 40, part 52, 

entitled ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans.’’ The actual State 

regulations which are approved are not 

reproduced in their entirety in the CFR 

outright but are ‘‘incorporated by 

reference,’’ which means that we have 

approved a given State regulation with 

a specific effective date. 

What does Federal approval of a State 

regulation mean to me? 

Enforcement of the State regulation 

before and after it is incorporated into 

the Federally-approved SIP is primarily 

a State responsibility. However, after the 

regulation is Federally approved, we are 

authorized to take enforcement action 

against violators. Citizens are also 

offered legal recourse to address 

violations as described in section 304 of 

the CAA. 

What is the background for this action? 

The 2002 NSR Reform rules are part 

of EPA’s implementation of parts C and 

D of title I of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7470–

7515. Part C of title I of the CAA, 42 

U.S.C. 7470–7492, is the Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) program, 

which applies in areas that meet the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS), also known as ‘‘attainment 

areas’’ and in areas for which there is 

insufficient information to determine 

whether the area meets the NAAQS, 

also known as ‘‘unclassifiable’’ areas. 

Part D of Title I of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 

7501–7515, is the nonattainment New 

Source Review (NNSR) program, which 

applies in areas that are not in 

attainment of the NAAQS, also known 

as ‘‘nonattainment areas.’’ Collectively, 

the PSD and NNSR programs are 

referred to as the ‘‘New Source Review’’

or NSR programs. EPA regulations 

implementing these programs are 

contained in 40 CFR 51.165, 51.166, 

52.21, 52.24 and part 51, appendix S. 

The SIP submittal from the State of Iowa 

does not include the portion of the rules 

relating to NSR reform provisions for 

nonattainment areas as the State of Iowa 

currently has no areas designated 

nonattainment. 

The 2002 NSR Reform rules made 

changes to five areas of the NSR 

programs. In summary, the 2002 rules: 

(1) Provide a new method for 

determining baseline actual emissions; 

(2) adopt an actual-to-projected-actual 

methodology for determining whether a 

major modification has occurred; (3) 

allow major stationary sources to 

comply with plantwide applicability 

limits (PALs) to avoid having a 

significant emission increase that 

triggers the requirements of the major 

NSR program; (4) provide a new 

applicability provision for emissions 

units that are designated clean units; 

and (5) exclude pollution control 

projects (PCPs). 

After the 2002 NSR Reform rules were 

finalized and effective, various 

petitioners challenged numerous 

aspects of the 2002 NSR Reform rules, 

along with portions of EPA’s 1980 NSR 

rules (45 FR 5276, August 7, 1980). On 

June 24, 2005, the District of Columbia 

Court of Appeals issued a decision on 

the challenges to the 2002 NSR Reform 

Rules. New York v. United States, 413 

F.3d (DC Cir. 2005). In summary, the 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia vacated portions of the rules 

pertaining to clean units and pollution 

control projects, remanded a portion of 

the rules regarding exemption from 

recordkeeping, e.g., 40 CFR 52.21(r)(6) 

and 40 CFR 51.166(r)(6), and let stand 

the other provisions included as part of 

the 2002 NSR Reform rules. EPA has not 

yet responded to the Court’s remand 

regarding recordkeeping provisions. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 37 / Monday, February 26, 2007 / Proposed Rules 8331 

What is being addressed in this 

document? 

EPA is proposing to approve the Iowa 

Department of Natural Resources’

(IDNR) request to revise the Iowa SIP to 

include the PSD portion of the NSR 

regulations. In general, the Iowa 

revisions consist of incorporation by 

reference of substantial portions of the 

Federal Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) rule and inclusion 

of other portions of the Federal rule 

almost verbatim. Iowa has not adopted 

provisions of the 2002 reform rule 

which were either vacated or remanded 

by the Court, as previously described. 

IDNR has identified portions of its rule 

which are at variance with the Federal 

rule and has provided conclusions with 

respect to equivalency of the State rule 

with the Federal requirements. 

Revisions to the Iowa Administrative 

Code (567–20.1 and 567–22.4) add 

language to reference the new Chapter 

33 entitled ‘‘Special Regulations and 

Construction Permit Requirements for 

Major Stationary Sources—Prevention 

of Significant Deterioration (PSD) of Air 

Quality.’’ These revisions are 

informational in nature and do not 

include substantive requirements. 

Chapter 33 of the Iowa rules contains 

the substantive PSD rule revisions 

which include EPA’s NSR reform rules 

as previously described. The Federal 

provisions are adopted as follows: (1) 

The definitions, applicability 

provisions, public participation 

procedures, and source obligation 

provisions (the requirements in 40 CFR 

52.21(r) of the Federal rule with the 

exception of the provision in 40 CFR 

52.21(r)(6) which exempts certain 

emissions changes from the record 

keeping requirements) are set forth in 

language which tracks the relevant 

language of the corresponding federal 

rules; and, (2) the remainder of the 

Federal PSD rules upheld by the Court 

are adopted by reference. 

The State’s definition section (567–

33.3(1)) contains several definitions 

with wording which differs from the 

wording in the Federal rule, but the 

differences are either not substantive or 

do not affect the stringency of the rule. 

These differences are described in the 

technical support document, and EPA 

believes that the differences do not 

affect the approvability of the rule. 

Another example of a difference is that 

the State does not incorporate by 

reference the Federal definitions 

relating to the clean unit exemption and 

pollution control project exclusion, 

which provisions were vacated by the 

court. 

The applicability section (567–

33.3(2)) discusses the application of 

PSD program requirements as they 

apply to the construction of any new 

major stationary source, or any project 

at an existing major stationary source in 

an area designated as attainment or 

unclassifiable. This section extracts the 

language from 40 CFR 51.166(a)(7), 

including the actual-to-projected-actual 

test for determining whether a 

modification is subject to the rule and 

other provisions of the Federal rule. 

The public participation procedures 

in the State rule (567–33.3(17)) are 

substantially the same as the rules in the 

existing SIP. EPA believes that these 

procedures meet the corresponding 

requirements in 40 CFR 51.166. 

The following sections were adopted 

by reference as specified in 40 CFR 

52.21: Ambient air increments; Ambient 

air ceilings; Restrictions on area 

classifications; Redesignation; Stack 

heights; Exemptions; Control technology 

review; Source impact analysis; Air 

quality models; Air quality analysis; 

Source information, and Additional 

impact analyses. 

The provisions of the State rule 

relating to exclusions from increment 

consumption, sources impacting Federal 

Class I areas—additional requirements, 

and innovative control technology adopt 

by reference the relevant portions of 40 

CFR 51.166 except for the phrases that 

contain ‘‘the plan may provide that,’’

‘‘the plan provides that,’’ ‘‘it shall also 

provide that,’’ and ‘‘mechanism 

whereby.’’ These phrases are excluded 

to convert the language of 40 CFR 

51.166 to substantive rules rather than 

minimum program requirements. The 

EPA provisions for plantwide 

applicability limitations are adopted by 

reference except that the term 

‘‘Administrator’’ used in the Federal 

rule means ‘‘the department of natural 

resources’’ in the State rule. These 

provisions were reviewed by EPA for 

consistency with the Federal 

requirements and are acceptable. 

The reference to Clean Units and 

Pollution Control Projects as set forth in 

40 CFR 52.21 and 51.166 are not 

adopted by reference. In addition, the 

provision of the Federal rule (40 CFR 

52.21(r)(6)), which exempts certain 

projects from recordkeeping, is not 

adopted, so that recordkeeping 

requirements apply to all modifications 

which use the actual-to-projected-actual 

test to show nonapplicability. Iowa 

intended these deviations from the 

Federal rule to address the Court ruling 

on EPA’s reform rules, and EPA believes 

they are approvable. 

Have the requirements for approval of 

a SIP revision been met? 

The State submittal has met the 

public notice requirements for SIP 

submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 

51.102. The submittal also satisfied the 

completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, 

appendix V. In addition, as explained 

above and in more detail in the 

technical support document that is part 

of this document, EPA believes that the 

revisions meet the substantive SIP 

requirements of the CAA, including 

section 110 and implementing 

regulations. 

What action is EPA proposing? 

We are proposing to approve revisions 

to Iowa’s rule at Chapter 20, ‘‘Scope of 

Title-Definitions-Forms-Rules of 

Practice,’’ and Chapter 22, ‘‘Controlling 

Pollution,’’ as the revisions relate to the 

NSR regulations. We are also proposing 

to approve new Chapter 33, ‘‘Special 

Regulations and Construction Permit 

Requirements for Major Stationary 

Sources—Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) of Air Quality.’’ It 

should be noted that IDNR has no 

nonattainment areas so those portions of 

the NSR reform rules are not being 

addressed with this rulemaking. 

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed 

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ and therefore is not subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget. For this reason, this action is 

also not subject to Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This proposed action merely 

proposes to approve State law as 

meeting Federal requirements and 

imposes no additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by State law. 

Accordingly, the Administrator certifies 

that the proposed approvals in this 

proposed rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). Because this rule proposes to 

approve pre-existing requirements 

under State law and does not impose 

any additional enforceable duty beyond 

that required by State law, it 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). 

This proposed rule also does not have 

tribal implications because it will not 

have a substantial direct effect on one or 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with PROPOSALS
8332 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 37 / Monday, February 26, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

action also does not have Federalism 

implications because it does not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This action merely 

proposes to approve a State rule 

implementing a Federal standard, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the CAA. 

This proposed rule also is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it approves a 

State rule implementing a Federal 

Standard. 

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve State choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. In this context, in the absence 

of a prior existing requirement for the 

State to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a SIP submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the CAA. Thus, the requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not 

apply. This proposed rule does not 

impose an information collection 

burden under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: February 14, 2007. 

John B. Askew, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. E7–3204 Filed 2–23–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 70 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2006–0625; FRL–8280–9] 

State Operating Permit Programs; 

West Virginia; Amendments to the 

Definition of ‘‘a Major Source’’ and 

‘‘Volatile Organic Compound’’

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve an 

amendment to the State of West 

Virginia’s operating permit program to 

correct the definition of ‘‘a major 

source’’ and ‘‘volatile organic 

compound.’’ West Virginia’s revision 

was submitted in response to the Clean 

Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990 

that required States to submit to EPA 

program revisions in accordance with 

the Federal Title V regulations. The EPA 

granted final approval of West Virginia’s 

operating permit program on November 

23, 2001. West Virginia amended its 

operating permit program to address the 

Federal EPA amendment to the Federal 

Title V regulations, which went into 

effect on November 27, 2001. In the 

Final Rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

amendment to its operating permit 

program as a direct final rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this action, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. The EPA 

will not institute a second comment 

period. Any parties interested in 

commenting on this action should do so 

at this time. 

DATES: Comments must be received in 

writing by March 28, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA–

R03–OAR–2006–0625 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. E-mail: campbell.dave@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2006–0625, 

David Campbell, Chief, Permits and 

Technical Assessment Branch, Mailcode 

3AP11, 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–2006–

0625. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available on-line at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. 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 e-mail 

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 

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 http:// 

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 West Virginia 

Department of Environmental Protection 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with PROPOSALS