75104 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 242 / Wednesday, December 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs at 

telephone: (202) 513–7641. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

October 9, 2014, we published a 

proposed rule amending 25 CFR parts 

81 (Secretarial Elections) and 82 

(Petitioning Procedures), combining 

them into one Code of Federal 

Regulations part at 25 CFR part 81. See 

79 FR 61021. On October 20, 2014, we 

published a notice announcing three 

consultation sessions. See 79 FR 62587. 

The proposed rule is available at: 

http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/AS-IA/

ORM/SecElections/index.htm. 

Dated: December 10, 2014. 

Kevin K. Washburn, 

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2014–29606 Filed 12–16–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–4J–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0636; FRL–9920–51– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; Revision to Allegheny 

County Rules; Preconstruction Permit 

Requirements—Nonattainment New 

Source Review 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to grant full 

approval for the revisions to the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on 

June 25, 2012 by the Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental Protection 

(PADEP) on behalf of the Allegheny 

County Health Department (ACHD). 

These revisions pertain to ACHD’s 

Nonattainment New Source Review 

(NNSR) program, and implement an 

incorporation by reference (IBR) of 

Pennsylvania’s NNSR provisions. They 

also correct a citation error in ACHD’s 

NNSR regulations. This action is in 

accordance with the requirements of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before January 16, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2013–0636 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: kreider.andrew@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0636, 

Mr. Andrew Kreider, Associate Director, 

Office of Permits and Air Toxics, 

Mailcode 3AP10, 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–2013– 

0636. 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 

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 from the Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, Bureau of Air Quality 

Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market 

Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105; 

and Allegheny County Health 

Department, Bureau of Environmental 

Quality, Division of Air Quality, 301 

39th Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 

15201. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Paul T. Wentworth, (215) 814–2183, or 

by email at wentworth.paul@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On June 25, 2012, PADEP submitted 

a formal revision to its State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) (the June 

2012 SIP submittal) which revises 

ACHD’s NNSR program. By letter dated 

June 27, 2014, PADEP modified the June 

2012 SIP revision, by withdrawing 

specific language from the June 2012 

SIP submittal. The withdrawn language 

related to a proposed process for 

automatically incorporating additions, 

revisions, or deletions to PADEP’s 

NNSR regulations into ACHD’s SIP 

effective on the date of such PADEP 

NNSR regulation revision. As a result of 

PADEP’s June 27, 2014 letter, the 

language withdrawn by PADEP from the 

June 25, 2012 SIP submission is not 

being considered as part of this 

rulemaking action. The remainder of the 

SIP revision is the subject of this 

rulemaking action and consists of 

amendments to ACHD’s major NNSR 

permitting regulations under Article 

XXI of ACHD’s Rules and Regulations. 

The June 2012 SIP submittal includes 

amendments to the following sections of 

ACHD’s Rules and Regulations, Article 

XXI: Section 2102.20 (Definitions); 

2102.04 (Installation permits); section 

2102.06 (Major sources Locating in or 

Impacting a Nonattainment Area); and, 

section 2102.08 (Emissions Offset 

Registration). As discussed in greater 

detail in this proposal, the June 2012 

SIP submittal includes revisions to 

ACHD’s nonattainment NSR program 

which are consistent with currently 

promulgated federal NSR regulations 

and with NSR regulations which EPA 

has previously approved into 

Pennsylvania’s SIP. 

Generally, the June 2012 SIP revision 

incorporates provisions related to two 

Federal rulemaking actions: (a) The 

2002 ‘‘Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment 

NSR (NSR): Baseline Emissions 

Determination, Actual-to-Future-Actual 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 242 / Wednesday, December 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 75105 

1See, ‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) and Non-Attainment New Source Review 

(NSR): Reconsideration;’’ (68 FR 63021). 

2 72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007) 

3 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013) 

4The court’s opinion did not specifically address 

the point that implementation under subpart 4 

requirements would still require consideration of 

subpart 1 requirements, to the extent that subpart 

4 did not override subpart 1. EPA assumes that the 

court presumed that EPA would address this issue 

of potential overlap between subpart 1 and subpart 

4 requirements in subsequent actions. 

Methodology, Plantwide Applicability 

Limitations, Clean Units, Pollution 

Control Projects’’ (2002 NSR Reform 

Rules), see 67 FR 80186, December 31, 

2002, and (b) the 2008 ‘‘Implementation 

of the New Source Review (NSR) 

Program for Particulate Matter Less than 

2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)’’ (2008 NSR 

PM2.5 Rule), see 73 FR 28321, May 16, 

2008. 

The 2002 NSR Reform Rules made 

changes to five areas of the NSR 

programs. In summary, these rules: (1) 

Provided a new method for determining 

baseline actual emissions; (2) adopted 

an actual-to-projected-actual 

methodology for determining whether a 

major modification has occurred; (3) 

allowed major stationary sources to 

comply with a Plantwide Applicability 

Limit (PAL) to avoid having a 

significant emissions increase that 

triggers the requirements of the major 

NSR program; (4) provided a new 

applicability provision for emissions 

units that are designated clean units; 

and, (5) excluded pollution control 

projects (PCPs) from the definition of 

‘‘physical change or change in the 

method of operation.’’ On November 7, 

2003, EPA published a notice of final 

action on its reconsideration of the 2002 

NSR Reform Rules,1 which added a 

definition for ‘‘replacement unit’’ and 

clarified an issue regarding PALs. For 

additional information on the 2002 NSR 

Reform Rules, see: (a) EPA’s December 

31, 2002 final rulemaking action 

entitled: ‘‘Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment 

NSR (NSR): Baseline Emissions 

Determination, Actual-to-Future-Actual 

Methodology, Plantwide Applicability 

Limitations, Clean Units, Pollution 

Control Projects’’ (67 FR 80186), (b) the 

2003 final reconsideration: ‘‘Prevention 

of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and 

Non-Attainment New Source Review 

(NSR): Reconsideration’’ (68 FR 63021), 

and (c) the following Web site: http://

www.epa.gov/nsr. 

After the 2002 NSR Reform Rules 

were finalized and effective (March 3, 

2003), industry, state, and 

environmental petitioners challenged 

numerous aspects of the 2002 NSR 

Reform Rules, along with portions of 

EPA’s 1980 NSR Rules (45 FR 52676, 

August 7, 1980). On June 24, 2005, the 

United States Court of Appeals for the 

District of Columbia (DC Circuit) issued 

a decision on the challenges to the 2002 

NSR Reform Rules. New York v. United 

States, 413 F.3d 3 (New York I). 

In summary, the DC Circuit vacated 

portions of the rules pertaining to clean 

units and PCPs, remanded a portion of 

the rules regarding recordkeeping and 

the term ‘‘reasonable possibility’’ found 

in 40 CFR 52.21(r)(6) and 40 CFR 

51.166(r)(6), and either upheld or did 

not comment on the other provisions 

included as part of the 2002 NSR 

Reform Rules. On June 13, 2007 (72 FR 

32526), EPA took final action to revise 

the 2002 NSR Reform Rules to remove 

from federal law all provisions 

pertaining to clean units and the PCP 

exemption that were vacated by the DC 

Circuit. 

The 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule (as well as 

the 2007 ‘‘Final Clean Air Fine Particle 

Implementation Rule’’ (2007 PM2.5

Implementation Rule) 2), was also the 

subject of litigation before the DC 

Circuit in Natural Resources Defense 

Council v. EPA (DC Circuit Court 

decision).3 On January 4, 2013, the court 

remanded to EPA both the 2007 PM2.5

Implementation Rule and the 2008 NSR 

PM2.5 Rule. The court found that in both 

rules EPA erred in implementing the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS solely pursuant to 

the general implementation provisions 

of subpart 1 of part D of title I of the 

CAA (subpart 1), rather than pursuant to 

the additional implementation 

provisions specific to particulate matter 

in subpart 4 of part D of title I (subpart 

4).4 As a result, the court remanded both 

rules and instructed EPA ‘‘to repromulgate these rules pursuant to 

subpart 4 consistent with this opinion.’’ 

Although the DC Circuit declined to 

establish a deadline for EPA’s response, 

EPA intends to respond promptly to the 

court’s remand and to promulgate new 

generally applicable implementation 

regulations for the PM2.5 NAAQS in 

accordance with the requirements of 

subpart 4. In the interim, however, 

states and EPA still need to proceed 

with implementation of the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS in a timely and effective 

fashion in order to meet statutory 

obligations under the CAA and to assure 

the protection of public health intended 

by those NAAQS. 

As part of its response to the January 

4, 2013 DC Circuit Court of Appeals 

Order, EPA issued a final rulemaking 

entitled ‘‘Identification of 

Nonattainment Classification and 

Deadlines for Submission of State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) Provisions 

for the 1997 Fine Particle (PM2.5) 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS) and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS; Final 

Rule,’’ (79 FR 31566, June 2, 2014). See 

http://www.epa.gov/airquality/

particlepollution/actions.html. This rule 

classified all existing PM2.5

nonattainment areas as ‘‘Moderate’’ 

nonattainment areas and set a deadline 

of December 31, 2014, for states to 

submit any SIP submissions, including 

nonattainment NSR SIPs that may be 

necessary to satisfy the requirements of 

subpart 4 with respect to PM2.5

nonattainment areas. The existing PM2.5

nonattainment areas addressed by this 

rule included the Liberty-Clairton and 

Pittsburgh nonattainment areas, 

portions of which are regulated by 

ACHD and, therefore, subject to the 

regulatory revisions being proposed for 

approval in this action. See 79 FR 31566 

(June 2, 2014). EPA is continuing to 

evaluate the requirements of subpart 4 

as they pertain to, among other things, 

nonattainment NSR for PM2.5 emissions. 

Additionally, the 2008 NSR PM2.5

Rule authorized states to adopt 

provisions in their nonattainment NSR 

rules that would allow major stationary 

sources locating in areas designated 

nonattainment for PM2.5, and major 

modifications at stationary sources 

located in areas designated 

nonattainment for PM2.5, to offset 

emissions increases of direct PM2.5

emissions or PM2.5 precursors with 

reductions of either direct PM2.5

emissions or PM2.5 precursors in 

accordance with offset ratios contained 

in the approved SIP for the applicable 

nonattainment area. The inclusion, in 

whole or in part, of the interpollutant 

offset provisions for PM2.5 is 

discretionary on the part of the states. In 

the preamble to the 2008 NSR PM2.5

Rule, EPA included preferred or 

presumptive offset ratios, applicable to 

specific PM2.5 precursors that a state 

may adopt in conjunction with the new 

interpollutant offset provisions for 

PM2.5, and for which a state could rely 

on the EPA’s technical work to 

demonstrate the adequacy of the ratios 

for use in any PM2.5 nonattainment area. 

Alternatively, the preamble indicated 

that states may adopt their own ratios, 

subject to the EPA’s approval, that 

would have to be substantiated by 

modeling or other technical 

demonstrations of the net air quality 

benefit for ambient PM2.5

concentrations. The preferred ratios 

were subsequently the subject of a 

petition for reconsideration, which the 

Administrator granted. EPA continues 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
75106 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 242 / Wednesday, December 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

to support the basic policy that sources 

may offset increases in emissions of 

direct PM2.5 or of any PM2.5 precursor in 

a PM2.5 nonattainment area with actual 

emissions reductions in direct PM2.5 or 

PM2.5 precursors in accordance with 

offset ratios as approved in the SIP for 

the applicable nonattainment area. 

However, EPA no longer considers the 

preferred ratios set forth in the preamble 

to the 2008 PM2.5 NSR Rule for PM2.5

NSR implementation to be 

presumptively approvable. Instead, any 

ratio involving PM2.5 precursors 

adopted by the state for use in the 

interpollutant offset program for PM2.5

nonattainment areas must be 

accompanied by a technical 

demonstration that shows the net air 

quality benefits of such ratio for the 

PM2.5 nonattainment area in which it 

will be applied. 

A Technical Support Document (TSD) 

is included in the docket for this action, 

and contains additional detail regarding 

the history and background of the 

Federal counterparts to the regulations 

included in the June 2012 SIP submittal, 

which will not be restated here. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

The proposed SIP revisions include 

amendments to ACHD’s Rules and 

Regulations, Article XXI sections: 

2102.20 (Definitions), 2102.04 

(Installation permits), 2102.06 (Major 

sources Locating in or Impacting a 

Nonattainment Area), and 2102.08 

(Emissions Offset Registration). The 

revisions in the June 2012 SIP submittal 

create a revised NNSR program in 

Allegheny County which, through 

amendment and incorporation by 

reference, reflects all the changes to 

Pennsylvania’s NNSR Program from the 

revisions to Pennsylvania’s SIP 

approved on May 14, 2012 (NSR reform 

rules) and on August 13, 2012 (2008 

NSR PM2.5 rule). 

III. Analysis 

A. NSR Reform 

EPA last took action to approve 

ACHD’s NNSR program into the 

Pennsylvania SIP on November 14, 2002 

(see 67 FR 68935). At that time, a 

portion of ACHD’s approved NNSR 

program directly relied upon an 

incorporation by reference of the 

requirements then codified at 25 PA 

Code 127.211. In 2007, Pennsylvania 

revised its NNSR regulations and these 

revised NNSR regulations were 

approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on 

May 14, 2012 (77 FR 28261). These 

changes added the NSR reform elements 

into Pennsylvania’s NNSR program. 

However, those changes also deleted 

section 127.211, and re-codified those 

requirements elsewhere. That action 

created a deficiency in ACHD’s NNSR 

provisions, because they relied on the 

incorporation by reference of a 

regulatory citation that no longer 

existed. The June 2012 SIP submittal 

has incorporated by reference 

Pennsylvania’s NNSR program 

provisions which are set forth at 25 PA 

Code Chapter 127 as approved by EPA, 

including the correct citation at 25 PA 

Code 127.203a. Because EPA has 

already approved Pennsylvania’s 

revised NNSR regulations (see 77 FR 

28261), there is no need to re-evaluate 

these same NSR Reform elements which 

are set forth, or incorporated by 

reference, in the June 2012 SIP 

submittal. 

EPA has determined that the June 

2012 SIP submittal has incorporated all 

of PADEP’s NNSR construction, 

modification, reactivation, and 

operating permit program provisions at 

25 PA Code section 121.1 and 25 PA 

Code Chapter 127 (PADEP’s NNSR 

program) and is proposing to approve 

this submittal as meeting the Federal 

NNSR requirements. 

B. Implementation of NSR Requirements 

for PM2.5

On July 13, 2012, EPA took final 

action to approve the provisions 

promulgated in the 2008 NSR PM2.5

Rule into the Pennsylvania SIP. See 77 

FR 41276. By virtue of the incorporation 

by reference of Pennsylvania’s NNSR 

regulations, Pennsylvania’s June 2012 

SIP submittal includes revisions to 

ACHD’s nonattainment NSR program 

consistent with the provisions 

promulgated in the 2008 NSR PM2.5

Rule and already approved into 

Pennsylvania’s SIP. 

EPA is in the process of evaluating the 

requirements of subpart 4 as they 

pertain to nonattainment NSR. In 

particular, subpart 4 includes section 

189(e) of the CAA, which requires the 

control of major stationary sources of 

PM10 precursors (and hence under the 

DC Circuit court decision, PM2.5

precursors) ‘‘except where the 

Administrator determines that such 

sources do not contribute significantly 

to PM10 levels which exceed the 

standard in the area.’’ The evaluation of 

which precursors need to be controlled 

to achieve the standard in a particular 

area is typically conducted in the 

context of the state’s preparing and the 

EPA’s reviewing of an area’s attainment 

plan SIP. 

While ACHD’s submittal may not yet 

contain all of the elements necessary to 

satisfy the CAA requirements when 

evaluated under subpart 4, the proposed 

revisions represent a considerable 

strengthening of the currently approved 

Pennsylvania SIP, which does not 

currently address PM2.5 for Allegheny 

County. Therefore, EPA is granting full 

approval to the nonattainment NSR 

provisions in ACHD’s June 2012 SIP. 

For the reasons previously discussed, 

EPA is not evaluating at this time 

whether ACHD’s submittal will require 

additional revisions to satisfy the 

subpart 4 requirements. As discussed in 

section I (Background), by separate 

rulemaking action, EPA has identified 

the classification under subpart 4 of 

areas currently designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS as ‘‘Moderate.’’ These 

areas include the Liberty-Clairton and 

Pittsburgh nonattainment areas, 

portions of which are regulated by 

ACHD and, therefore, are subject to the 

regulatory revisions being proposed for 

approval in this action. That rulemaking 

also established a December 31, 2014 

deadline for the submission of any 

additional attainment related SIP 

elements that may be needed to meet 

the applicable requirements of subpart 

4. Therefore, those requirements are not 

yet due. EPA believes that it is 

appropriate for the EPA to take into 

consideration the timing and sequence 

of related SIP submissions as part of 

determining what it is reasonable to 

expect a State to have addressed in a SIP 

for a NAAQS at the time when the EPA 

acts on such submission. Such an 

approach is reasonable, and to adopt a 

different approach by which the EPA 

could not approve a SIP, whenever there 

was any impending or future revision to 

the SIP that will be required by another 

collateral rulemaking action would 

result in regulatory gridlock. The EPA 

believes that such an outcome would be 

an unreasonable reading of the statutory 

process for the SIP’s contemplated in 

section 110(a) (1) and (2). 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing full approval of the 

June 2012 SIP submittal, which creates 

a revised NNSR program in Allegheny 

County. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 242 / Wednesday, December 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 75107 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule, which 

concerns a revised NNSR program in 

Allegheny County, 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, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: November 21, 2014. 

Shawn M. Garvin, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2014–29579 Filed 12–16–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0008; FRL–9918–90] 

Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions 

Filed for Residues of Pesticide 

Chemicals in or on Various 

Commodities 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: This document announces the 

Agency’s receipt of several initial filings 

of pesticide petitions requesting the 

establishment or modification of 

regulations for residues of pesticide 

chemicals in or on various commodities. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before January 16, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number and the pesticide petition 

number (PP) of interest as shown in the 

body of this document, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ 

DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at http://

www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. 

Additional instructions on commenting 

or visiting the docket, along with more 

information about dockets generally, is 

available at http://www.epa.gov/

dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert McNalley, Biopesticides and 

Pollution Prevention Division (BPPD) 

(7511P), main telephone number: (703) 

305–7090; email address: 

BPPDFRNotices@epa.gov., Susan Lewis, 

Registration Division (RD) (7505P), main 

telephone number: (703) 305–7090; 

email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov. 

The mailing address for each contact 

person is: Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. As part of the mailing 

address, include the contact person’s 

name, division, and mail code. The 

division to contact is listed at the end 

of each pesticide petition summary. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

If you have any questions regarding 

the applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT for the division listed at the 

end of the pesticide petition summary of 

interest. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When preparing and submitting your 

comments, see the commenting tips at 

http://www.epa.gov/dockets/

comments.html. 

3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to 

achieve environmental justice, the fair 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS