### 61308 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules

4 Id. According to the Postal Service, the impact of individual modifications can be estimated by manipulating the toggle switches. The Postal Service has not provided explicit estimates of the impact of individual modifications in Proposal Nine, nor has it provided an estimate of aggregate impact. de-average the mail processing cost by shape estimate for all Parcel Select in the FY 2012 ACR. Id.

Proposal Nine: Modify First-Class Mail, Standard Mail, and Periodicals Flats Cost Models. The Postal Service proposes to make eight modifications to the Periodicals Flats model. The Postal Service also proposes to apply four of the modifications to the First-Class Mail and Standard Mail Flats models. Id. at 5. The Postal Service states that the model for each class is contained in library reference USPS–LR–RM2012–8/ 1, with the proposed modifications incorporated (via toggle switches). 4 Some of the modifications are straightforward. Others, however, involve significant changes, particularly for Periodicals.

The first proposed modification removes the ability to isolate (via toggle switches) the effect of individual changes proposed in Docket No.
RM2012–2. Id. Those changes were approved by the Commission. The Postal Service considers the switches to be superfluous. Id. This modification affects the models for all three classes.

The second modification corrects what the Postal Service describes as ‘‘cell referencing errors’’ in the Periodicals model. Id.

The third modification accounts for more sources of rejects and adjusts some reject rates to make them consistent with Management Operating Data System (MODS) estimates. Id. at 6–8. This modification affects the models for all three classes.

The fourth modification accounts for changes in allied operations resulting from the introduction of the AFSM 100 and FSS. The modifications only apply to the Periodicals model. Id. at 9–10.

The fifth modification creates classspecific FSS coverage factors. Each coverage factor is the ratio of MODS FSS total pieces fed (by class) to volume as reported in the Revenue, Pieces, and Weight report. Id. at 10–11. This modification affects the models for all three classes.

The sixth modification removes the costs of sorting mail to post office boxes from all three flats models anddesignates these costs as ‘‘nonmodeled.’’ Id. at 11.

The seventh modification updates the estimates of the average number of cross-dock movements by container type by entry facility for Periodicals. The update relies on Mail.dat files by publication and a Postal Service database of individual transportation routes. The Postal Service states that the new estimates are generally similar to those provided in Docket No. R2006–1. Id. at 11–15.

The eighth modification uses the results of the seventh modification to simplify the development of costs by container type by entry facility for Periodicals. According to the Postal Service, simply having the number of facilities that a container passes through before it reaches the destination facility is sufficient to calculate the number of times the average container incurs each

process. Id. at 15–18.

It is ordered: 1. The Petition of the United States Postal Service Requesting Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed Changes in Analytical Principles (Proposals Eight and Nine), filed September 28, 2012, is granted.

2. The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2012–8 to consider the matters raised by the Postal Service’s Petition.

3. Interested persons may submit comments on Proposals Eight and Nine no later than October 29, 2012.

4. Reply comments are due no later than November 8, 2012.

5. Lawrence Fenster is appointed to serve as the Public Representative to represent the interests of the general public in this proceeding.

6. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this notice in the Federal Register

.

By the Commission. Shoshana M. Grove, Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2012–24706 Filed 10–5–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 55**

**[OAR–2004–0091; FRL–9737–7]**

**Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations; Consistency Update for**  **California**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (‘‘EPA’’).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule—Consistency Update.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is proposing to update a portion of the Outer Continental Shelf (‘‘OCS’’) Air Regulations. Requirements applying to OCS sources located within 25 miles of States’ seaward boundaries must be updated periodically to remain consistent with the requirements of the corresponding onshore area (‘‘COA’’), as mandated by section 328(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (‘‘the Act’’). The portions of the OCS air regulations that are being updated pertain to the requirements for OCS sources by the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (Ventura County APCD). The intended effect of approving the OCS requirements for the Ventura County APCD is to regulate emissions from OCS sources in accordance with the requirements onshore. The change to the existing requirements discussed below is proposed to be incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations and is listed in the appendix to the OCS air regulations.

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before November 8, 2012.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit comments, identified by docket number OAR– 2004–0091, by one of the following methods:

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www. regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.

Instructions: All comments 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 Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through www. regulations.gov or email. www. regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. 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: The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all


### 61309 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules

1 The reader may refer to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, December 5, 1991 (56 FR 63774), and the preamble to the final rule promulgated September 4, 1992 (57 FR 40792) for further background and information on the OCS regulations.

2 Each COA which has been delegated the authority to implement and enforce part 55, will use its administrative and procedural rules as onshore. However, in those instances where EPA has not delegated authority to implement and enforce part 55, EPA will use its own administrative and procedural requirements to implement the substantive requirements. 40 CFR 55.14(c)(4). documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the **FOR**

**FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** section.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Cynthia Allen, Air Division (Air-4), U.S. EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 947–4120, allen.cynthia@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Table of Contents

I. Background Information

A. Why is EPA taking this action? II. EPA’s Evaluation

A. What criteria were used to evaluate

rules submitted to update 40 CFR part
55? B. What requirements were submitted to

update 40 CFR part 55? III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory

Planning and Review B. Paperwork Reduction Act C. Regulatory Flexibility Act D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination

With Indian Tribal Government G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of

Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use I. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions

To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
I. Background Information
A. Why is EPA taking this action?

On September 4, 1992, EPA promulgated 40 CFR part 55, 1 which established requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources in order to attain and maintain Federal and State ambient air quality standards and to comply with the provisions of part C of title I of the Act. Part 55 applies to all OCS sources offshore of the States except those located in the Gulf of Mexico west of 87.5 degrees longitude. Section 328 of the Act requires that for such sources located within 25 miles of a State’s seaward boundary, the requirements shall be the same as would be applicable if the sources were located in the COA. Because the OCS requirements are based on onshore requirements, and onshore requirements may change, section 328(a)(1) requires that EPA update the OCS requirements as necessary to maintain consistency with onshore requirements.

Pursuant to § 55.12 of the OCS rule, consistency reviews will occur (1) at least annually; (2) upon receipt of a Notice of Intent under § 55.4; or (3) when a state or local agency submits a rule to EPA to be considered for incorporation by reference in part 55. This proposed action is being taken in response to requirements submitted by the Ventura County APCD. Public comments received in writing within 30 days of publication of this document will be considered by EPA before publishing a final rule. Section 328(a) of the Act requires that EPA establish requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources located within 25 miles of States’ seaward boundaries that are the same as onshore requirements. To comply with this statutory mandate, EPA must incorporate applicable onshore rules into part 55 as they exist onshore. This limits EPA’s flexibility in deciding which requirements will be incorporated into part 55 and prevents EPA from making substantive changes to the requirements it incorporates. As a result, EPA may be incorporating rules into part 55 that do not conform to all of EPA’s state implementation plan (SIP) guidance or certain requirements of the Act. Consistency updates may result in the inclusion of state or local rules or regulations into part 55, even though the same rules may ultimately be disapproved for inclusion as part of the SIP. Inclusion in the OCS rule does not imply that a rule meets the requirements of the Act for SIP approval, nor does it imply that the rule will be approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP.

II. EPA’s Evaluation

A. What criteria were used to evaluate rules submitted to update 40 CFR part

55?

In updating 40 CFR part 55, EPA reviewed the rules submitted for inclusion in part 55 to ensure that they are rationally related to the attainment or maintenance of Federal or State ambient air quality standards or part C of title I of the Act, that they are not designed expressly to prevent exploration and development of the OCS and that they are applicable to OCS sources. 40 CFR 55.1. EPA has also evaluated the rules to ensure they are not arbitrary or capricious. 40 CFR 55.12 (e). In addition, EPA has excluded administrative or procedural rules, 2 and requirements that regulate toxics which are not related to the attainment and maintenance of Federal and State ambient air quality standards.

B. What requirements were submitted to update 40 CFR part 55?

1. After review of the requirements submitted by the Ventura County APCD against the criteria set forth above and in 40 CFR part 55, EPA is proposing to make the following District requirements applicable to OCS sources:

Rule No. Name Adoption or amended

date

2 ................................................. Definitions ...................................................................................................................................... 04/12/11 23 ............................................... Exemptions from Permit ........................................................ ........................................................ 04/12/11 33 ............................................... Part 70 Permits—General ....................................................... ...................................................... 04/12/11 33.1 ............................................ Part 70 Permits—Definitions .................................................... ..................................................... 04/12/11
35 ............................................... Elective Emission Limits ...................................................... .......................................................... 04/12/11
42 ............................................... Permit Fees ................................................................... ................................................................ 04/12/11 74.2 ............................................ Architectural Coatings ......................................................... ........................................................... 01/12/10 74.11 .......................................... Natural Gas-Fired Water Heaters ................................................. ................................................. 05/11/10


### 61310 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules

The District submitted the following rule which is being repealed, for removal from Part 55. We are proposing to repeal this rule from part 55:

26.10 .......................................... New Source Review—Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) ................. .......................... 06/28/11

The District also submitted the following new rule which is not currently in effect on the OCS, for incorporation into Part 55. We are proposing to incorporate this rule into part 55:

26.13 .......................................... New Source Review—Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) ................. .......................... 6/28/11

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President’s priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.

This action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB Review. These rules implement requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. These OCS rules already apply in the COA, and EPA has no evidence to suggest that these OCS rules have created an adverse material effect. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this action simply updates the existing OCS requirements to make them consistent with rules in the COA.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

The OMB has approved the information collection requirements contained in 40 CFR part 55, and by extension this update to the rules, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2060–0249. Notice of OMB’s approval of EPA Information Collection Request (‘‘ICR’’) No. 1601.06 was published in the Federal Register on March 1, 2006 (71 FR 10499–10500). The approval expires January 31, 2009. As EPA previously indicated (70 FR 65897– 65898 (November 1, 2005)), the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for collection of information under 40 CFR part 55 is estimated to average 549 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and are identified on the form and/or instrument, if applicable. In addition, EPA is amending the table in 40 CFR part 9 of currently approved OMB control numbers for various regulations to list the regulatory citations for the information requirements contained in this final rule.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions.

These rules will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. These rules implement requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. These OCS rules already apply in the COA, and EPA has no evidence to suggest that these OCS rules have had a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this action simply updates the existing OCS requirements to make them consistent with rules in the COA. Therefore, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (‘‘UMRA’’), Public Law 104–4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA generally must prepare written statement, including a cost-benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million of more in any one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives andadopt the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other


### 61311 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules

than the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted.

Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements. Today’s proposed rules contain no Federal mandates (under the regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector in any one year. These rules implement requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. These OCS rules already apply in the COA, and EPA has no evidence to suggest that these OCS rules have created an adverse material effect. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this action simply updates the existing OCS requirements to make them consistent with rules in the COA.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

Executive Orders 13132, entitled ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999)), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have federalism implications’’ is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that 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.’’

This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. These rules implement requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this rule simply updates the existing OCS rules to make them consistent with current COA requirements. These rules do not amend the existing provisions within 40 CFR part 55 enabling delegation of OCS regulations to a COA, and this rule does not require the COA to implement the OCS rules. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA and state and local governments, EPA specifically solicits comments on this proposed rule from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

Executive Order 13175, entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.’’ This rule does not have a substantial direct effect on one or 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 and thus does not have ‘‘tribal implications,’’ within the meaning of Executive Order 13175. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this rule simply updates the existing OCS rules to make them consistent with current COA requirements. In addition, this rule does not impose substantial direct compliance costs tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. Consultation with Indian tribes is therefore not required under Executive Order 13175. Nonetheless, in the spirit of Executive Order 13175 and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA and tribes, EPA specifically solicits comments on this proposed rule from tribal officials. G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885 (April 23, 1997)), applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically significant’’ as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866. In addition, the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportional risk to children.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order

12866. I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law No. 104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable laws or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decided not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.

As discussed above, these rules implement requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act,


### 61312 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules

without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this rule simply updates the existing OCS rules to make them consistent with current COA requirements. In the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus standards and in light of the fact that EPA is required to make the OCS rules consistent with current COA requirements, it would be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in this action. Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards. EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking and, specifically, invites the public to identify potentially-applicable voluntary consensus standards and to explain why such standards should be used in this regulation.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States. EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental justice in this proposed action. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this rule simply updates the existing OCS rules to make them consistent with current COA requirements.

Although EPA lacks authority to modify today’s regulatory decision on the basis of environmental justice considerations, EPA nevertheless explored this issue and found the following. This action, namely, updating the OCS rules to make them consistent with current COA requirements, will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations because it increases the level of environmental protection for all affected populations without having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on any population, including any minority or low-income population. Environmental justice considerations may be appropriate to consider in the context of a specific OCS permit application.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 55

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Nitrogen oxides, Outer Continental Shelf, Ozone, Particulate matter, Permits, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

Dated: September 13, 2012. Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, Region IX.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 55, is proposed to be amended as follows:

**PART 55—OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF AIR REGULATIONS** 

1. The authority citation for part 55 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Section 328 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. ) as amended by Pub. L. 101–549.

2. Section 55.14 is amended by revising paragraphs (e)(3)(ii)(H) to read as follows:

**§ 55.14 Requirements that apply to OCS sources located within 25 miles of states**  **seaward boundaries, by State.**

* * * * *

(e) * * * (3) * * * (ii) * * * (H) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District Requirements Applicable to OCS Sources.

* * * * *

3. Appendix A to part 55 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(8) under the heading ‘‘California’’ to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 55—Listing of State and Local Requirements Incorporated by Reference Into Part 55, by State

* * * * *

California

* * * * * (b) * * *

* * * * *

(8) The following requirements are contained in Ventura County Air Pollution Control District Requirements Applicable to
OCS Sources: Rule 2 Definitions (Adopted 04/12/11) Rule 5 Effective Date (Adopted 04/13/04) Rule 6 Severability (Adopted 11/21/78) Rule 7 Zone Boundaries (Adopted 06/14/ 77) Rule 10 Permits Required (Adopted 04/13/ 04) Rule 11 Definition for Regulation II (Adopted 03/14/06) Rule 12 Applications for Permits (Adopted 06/13/95) Rule 13 Action on Applications for an Authority To Construct (Adopted 06/13/ 95) Rule 14 Action on Applications for a Permit To Operate (Adopted 06/13/95) Rule 15.1 Sampling and Testing Facilities (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 16 BACT Certification (Adopted 06/ 13/95) Rule 19 Posting of Permits (Adopted 05/23/ 72) Rule 20 Transfer of Permit (Adopted 05/23/ 72) Rule 23 Exemptions From Permits (Adopted 04/12/11) Rule 24 Source Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Emission Statements (Adopted 09/ 15/92) Rule 26 New Source Review—General (Adopted 03/14/06) Rule 26.1 New Source Review—Definitions (Adopted 11/14/06) Rule 26.2 New Source Review— Requirements (Adopted 05/14/02) Rule 26.3 New Source Review—Exemptions (Adopted 03/14/06) Rule 26.6 New Source Review— Calculations (Adopted 03/14/06) Rule 26.8 New Source Review—Permit To Operate (Adopted 10/22/91) Rule 26.10 New Source Review— Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)(Repealed 06/28/11) Rule 26.11 New Source Review—ERC Evaluation at Time of Use (Adopted 05/ 14/02) Rule 26.12 Federal Major Modifications (Adopted 06/27/06) Rule 26.13 New Source Review— Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) (Adopted 06/28/11) Rule 28 Revocation of Permits (Adopted 07/ 18/72) Rule 29 Conditions on Permits (Adopted 03/14/06) Rule 30 Permit Renewal (Adopted 04/13/ 04) Rule 32 Breakdown Conditions: Emergency Variances, A., B.1., and D. only. (Adopted 02/20/79) Rule 33 Part 70 Permits—General (Adopted 04/12/11) Rule 33.1 Part 70 Permits—Definitions (Adopted 04/12/11) Rule 33.2 Part 70 Permits—Application Contents (Adopted 04/10/01) Rule 33.3 Part 70 Permits—Permit Content (Adopted 09/12/06) Rule 33.4 Part 70 Permits—Operational Flexibility (Adopted 04/10/01) Rule 33.5 Part 70 Permits—Timeframes for Applications, Review and Issuance (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 33.6 Part 70 Permits—Permit Term and Permit Reissuance (Adopted 10/12/ 93)


### 61313 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules

Rule 33.7 Part 70 Permits—Notification (Adopted 04/10/01) Rule 33.8 Part 70 Permits—Reopening of Permits (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 33.9 Part 70 Permits—Compliance Provisions (Adopted 04/10/01) Rule 33.10 Part 70 Permits—General Part 70 Permits (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 34 Acid Deposition Control (Adopted 03/14/95) Rule 35 Elective Emission Limits (Adopted 04/12/11) Rule 36 New Source Review—Hazardous Air Pollutants (Adopted 10/06/98) Rule 42 Permit Fees (Adopted 04/12/11) Rule 44 Exemption Evaluation Fee (Adopted 04/08/08) Rule 45 Plan Fees (Adopted 06/19/90) Rule 45.2 Asbestos Removal Fees (Adopted 08/04/92) Rule 47 Source Test, Emission Monitor, and Call-Back Fees (Adopted 06/22/99) Rule 50 Opacity (Adopted 04/13/04) Rule 52 Particulate Matter-Concentration (Grain Loading) (Adopted 04/13/04) Rule 53 Particulate Matter-Process Weight (Adopted 04/13/04) Rule 54 Sulfur Compounds (Adopted 06/ 14/94) Rule 56 Open Burning (Adopted 11/11/03) Rule 57 Incinerators (Adopted 01/11/05) Rule 57.1 Particulate Matter Emissions From Fuel Burning Equipment (Adopted 01/11/05) Rule 62.7 Asbestos—Demolition and Renovation (Adopted 09/01/92) Rule 63 Separation and Combination of Emissions (Adopted 11/21/78) Rule 64 Sulfur Content of Fuels (Adopted 04/13/99) Rule 67 Vacuum Producing Devices (Adopted 07/05/83) Rule 68 Carbon Monoxide (Adopted 04/13/ 04) Rule 71 Crude Oil and Reactive Organic Compound Liquids (Adopted 12/13/94) Rule 71.1 Crude Oil Production and Separation (Adopted 06/16/92) Rule 71.2 Storage of Reactive Organic Compound Liquids (Adopted 09/26/89) Rule 71.3 Transfer of Reactive Organic Compound Liquids (Adopted 06/16/92) Rule 71.4 Petroleum Sumps, Pits, Ponds, and Well Cellars (Adopted 06/08/93) Rule 71.5 Glycol Dehydrators (Adopted 12/ 13/94) Rule 72 New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) (Adopted 09/9/08) Rule 73 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS (Adopted 09/9/08) Rule 74 Specific Source Standards (Adopted 07/06/76) Rule 74.1 Abrasive Blasting (Adopted 11/ 12/91) Rule 74.2 Architectural Coatings (Adopted 01/12/10) Rule 74.6 Surface Cleaning and Degreasing (Adopted 11/11/03—effective 07/01/04) Rule 74.6.1 Batch Loaded Vapor Degreasers (Adopted 11/11/03—effective 07/01/04) Rule 74.7 Fugitive Emissions of Reactive Organic Compounds at Petroleum Refineries and Chemical Plants (Adopted 10/10/95) Rule 74.8 Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Waste-Water Separators and Process Turnarounds (Adopted 07/05/ 83) Rule 74.9 Stationary Internal Combustion Engines (Adopted 11/08/05) Rule 74.10 Components at Crude Oil
Production Facilities and Natural Gas Production and Processing Facilities (Adopted 03/10/98)
Rule 74.11 Natural Gas-Fired Residential
Water Heaters-Control of NOX (Adopted 05/11/10) Rule 74.11.1 Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers (Adopted 09/14/99) Rule 74.12 Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products (Adopted 04/08/08) Rule 74.15 Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters (Adopted 11/08/94) Rule 74.15.1 Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters (Adopted 06/13/00) Rule 74.16 Oil Field Drilling Operations (Adopted 01/08/91)
Rule 74.20 Adhesives and Sealants (Adopted 01/11/05) Rule 74.23 Stationary Gas Turbines (Adopted 1/08/02) Rule 74.24 Marine Coating Operations (Adopted 11/11/03) Rule 74.24.1 Pleasure Craft Coating and Commercial Boatyard Operations (Adopted 01/08/02) Rule 74.26 Crude Oil Storage Tank Degassing Operations (Adopted 11/08/ 94) Rule 74.27 Gasoline and ROC Liquid Storage Tank Degassing Operations (Adopted 11/08/94) Rule 74.28 Asphalt Roofing Operations (Adopted 05/10/94) Rule 74.30 Wood Products Coatings (Adopted 06/27/06) Rule 75 Circumvention (Adopted 11/27/78) Rule 101 Sampling and Testing Facilities (Adopted 05/23/72) Rule 102 Source Tests (Adopted 04/13/04) Rule 103 Continuous Monitoring Systems (Adopted 02/09/99) Rule 154 Stage 1 Episode Actions (Adopted 09/17/91) Rule 155 Stage 2 Episode Actions (Adopted 09/17/91) Rule 156 Stage 3 Episode Actions (Adopted 09/17/91) Rule 158 Source Abatement Plans (Adopted 09/17/91)
Rule 159 Traffic Abatement Procedures (Adopted 09/17/91) Rule 220 General Conformity (Adopted 05/ 09/95) Rule 230 Notice To Comply (Adopted 9/9/ 08)

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012–24786 Filed 10–5–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**  **AGENCY**

**40 CFR Part 80**

**[EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0223; FRL 9733–4 ]**

**Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Modifications to Renewable**  **Fuel Standard and Diesel Sulfur Programs** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is proposing to amend the definition of heating oil in the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program under section 211(o) of the Clean Air Act. This amendment would expand the scope of renewable fuels that can generate Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs) as heating oil to include fuel oil produced from qualifying renewable biomass that would be used to generate heat to warm buildings or other facilities where people live, work, recreate, or conduct other activities. Fuel oils used to generate process heat, power, or other functions would not be included in the amended definition. Producers or importers of fuel oil that meets the amended definition of heating oil would be allowed to generate RINs, provided that the fuel oil meets the other requirements specified in the RFS regulations. This proposed amendment would not modify or limit fuel included in the current definition of heating oil. We are also proposing amendments to the diesel sulfur program to provide additional flexibility for transmix processors that produce locomotive and marine diesel fuel. Specifically, we are proposing to reinstate an allowance for transmix processors to produce 500 parts per million (ppm) sulfur diesel fuel for use in older technology locomotive and marine diesel outside of the Northeast Mid-Atlantic Area. We are also requesting comment on extending this allowance to outside of the Northeast Mid-Atlantic Area. These proposed amendments to the diesel transmix provisions are expected to result in reduced compliance costs for transmix processors and users of locomotive and marine diesel fuel while having a neutral or positive environmental impact. EPA is also proposing to amend the fuel marker requirements for 500 ppm sulfur locomotive and marine (LM) diesel fuel to address an oversight in the original rulemaking where the regulations failed to incorporate provisions described in the rulemaking preamble to allow for