Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 163 / Monday, August 24, 2015 / Proposed Rules 51167 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), nor will it impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: August 12, 2015. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2015–20748 Filed 8–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0440; FRL–9932–88– 

Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; North Carolina; 

Conflict of Interest Infrastructure 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the North Carolina State 

Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted 

by the North Carolina Department of 

Environment and Natural Resources, 

Division of Air Quality (DAQ), on 

February 5, 2013, and supplemented on 

July 27, 2015. The submissions pertain 

to conflict of interest requirements of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and 

were submitted to satisfy the 

infrastructure SIP sub-element related to 

the State board for the 2010 Nitrogen 

Dioxide (NO2) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS), 2010 

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) NAAQS, 2008 8- 

hour Ozone NAAQS and 2008 Lead 

NAAQS. The CAA requires that each 

state adopt and submit a SIP for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of each NAAQS 

promulgated by EPA, commonly 

referred to as an ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP, 

which includes conflict of interest 

requirements. EPA is proposing to 

approve the portions of North Carolina’s 

2010 NO2 infrastructure SIP, 2010 SO2

infrastructure SIP, 2008 8-hour ozone 

infrastructure SIP, and 2008 Lead 

infrastructure SIP as meeting these State 

board requirements. EPA is also 

proposing to convert conditional 

approvals related to the State board for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and the 

1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter 

(PM2.5) and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

to full approval under the CAA. EPA 

notes that all other applicable North 

Carolina infrastructure SIP elements for 

the above listed NAAQS have been or 

will be addressed in separate 

rulemakings. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before September 23, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2015–0440, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4-ARMS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: 404–562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0440’’ 

Air Regulatory Management Section, Air 

Planning and Implementation Branch, 

Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2015– 

0440’’. EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
51168 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 163 / Monday, August 24, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1Sub-element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) was previously 

submitted by North Carolina DAQ to EPA to satisfy 

the state board requirements for the referenced 

NAAQS. EPA is proposing through today’s 

rulemaking that the February 5, 2013, and July 27, 

2015, final submissions in conjunction with the 

previously submissions for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS 

(August 23, 2013), 2010 SO2 NAAQS (March 18, 

2014), 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS (November 2, 

2012), and 2008 Lead NAAQS (July 20, 2012) satisfy 

the state board requirements for this sub-element. 

2Sub-element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) was previously 

submitted by North Carolina DAQ to EPA to satisfy 

the state board requirements for the referenced 

NAAQS. EPA is proposing through today’s 

rulemaking that the February 5, 2013, and July 27, 

2015, final submissions in conjunction with the 

previous conditional approvals for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS and 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS satisfy the state board requirements 

for this sub-element. 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information 

may not be publicly available, i.e., CBI 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sean Lakeman, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9043. 

Mr. Lakeman can be reached via 

electronic mail at lakeman.sean@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

By statute, SIPs meeting the 

requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and 

(2) of the CAA are to be submitted by 

states within three years after 

promulgation of a new or revised 

NAAQS. Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) 

require states to address basic SIP 

requirements, including emissions 

inventories, monitoring, and modeling 

to assure attainment and maintenance of 

the NAAQS. 

More specifically, section 110(a)(1) 

provides the procedural and timing 

requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) 

lists specific elements that states must 

meet for ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP 

requirements related to a newly 

established or revised NAAQS. As 

mentioned above, these requirements 

include SIP infrastructure elements 

such as modeling, monitoring, and 

emissions inventories that are designed 

to assure attainment and maintenance of 

the NAAQS. EPA is proposing to 

approve: (1) North Carolina’s February 

5, 2013, and July 27, 2015, submissions 

as satisfying the requirements of 128 of 

the CAA; and (2) the infrastructure SIP 

sub-element for section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) 

related to the State board for the 2010 

NO2 NAAQS, 2010 SO2 NAAQS, 2008 

8-hour Ozone NAAQS and 2008 Lead 

NAAQS.1

Additionally, North Carolina’s 

February 5, 2013, and July 27, 2015, 

submissions satisfy EPA’s multiple 

conditional approvals of sub-element 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) published on February 6, 

2012 (77 FR 5703), and October 16, 2012 

(77 FR 63234), for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS, and 1997 annual and 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, 

respectively.2 As a result of today’s 

proposed action related to the State’s 

submissions meeting section 128 of the 

CAA, EPA is proposing to convert the 

aforementioned conditional approvals 

to full approvals regarding North 

Carolina’s infrastructure requirements 

for section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS, and 1997 annual 

and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

II. Requirements of Section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii)—Adequate Resources 

Sub-element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) provides 

that each State ‘‘comply with the 

requirements respecting State boards 

under section [128 of the CAA] . . . .’’ 

Section 128 provides that each SIP shall 

contain requirements that: (1) Any 

board or body which approves permits 

or enforcement orders under the CAA 

shall have at least a majority of members 

who represent the public interest and do 

not derive a significant portion of their 

income from persons subject to permits 

or enforcement orders under the Act 

(hereafter ‘‘section 128(a)(1) 

requirements’’); and, (2) any potential 

conflicts of interest by members of such 

board or body or the head of an 

executive agency with similar powers be 

adequately disclosed (hereafter ‘‘section 

128(a)(2) requirements.’’). 

III. Requirements of Section 128 

Section 128 of the CAA requires that 

each state’s SIP contain provisions to 

address conflicts of interest for state 

boards or bodies that oversee CAA 

permits and enforcement orders and 

disclosure of conflict of interest 

requirements. Specifically, CAA section 

128(a)(1) necessitates that each SIP 

require that at least a majority of any 

board or body which approves permits 

or enforcement orders represent the 

public interest and meet income 

restrictions. Subsection 128(a)(2) 

requires that the members of any board 

or body, or the head of an executive 

agency with similar power to approve 

permits or enforcement orders under the 

CAA, shall also be subject to conflict of 

interest disclosure requirements. 

Furthermore, section 128 affords the 

Administrator of EPA the authority to 

incorporate conflict of interest 

provisions that go beyond those 

required by the CAA into the SIP when 

such provisions are submitted by a state 

as part of its implementation plan. 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of how 

North Carolina addressed the section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) infrastructure 

requirement? 

For purposes of section 128(a)(1), as 

of October 1, 2012, North Carolina has 

no boards or bodies with authority over 

air pollution permits or enforcement 

actions. The authority to approve CAA 

permits or enforcement orders are 

instead delegated to the Secretary of the 

Department of Environment and Natural 

Resources (DENR) and his/her 

delegatee. As such, a ‘‘board or body’’ is 

not responsible for approving permits or 

enforcement orders in North Carolina, 

and the requirements of section 

128(a)(1) are not applicable. 

For purposes of section 128(a)(2), EPA 

is proposing to approve North Carolina’s 

revisions submitted by DAQ, on 

February 5, 2013, and amended on July 

27, 2015. Section 128(a)(2) requires that 

any potential conflicts of interest by 

members of a board or body that 

approves permits or enforcement orders 

under the CAA, or head of executive 

agency with similar powers, be 

adequately disclosed. Subsection 

128(a)(2) applies to all states, regardless 

of whether the state has a multi-member 

board or body that approves permits or 

enforcement orders under the CAA. In 

instances where the head of an 

executive agency delegates his or her 

power to approve permits or 

enforcement orders, or where the 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 163 / Monday, August 24, 2015 / Proposed Rules 51169 

statutory authority to approve permits 

or enforcement orders is nominally 

vested in another state official, the 

requirement to adequately disclose 

potential conflicts of interest still 

applies. As noted above, the Secretary of 

DENR and his/her delegatees have the 

authority to issue CAA permits and 

enforcement orders in North Carolina 

and are subject to conflict of interest 

disclosure procedures. Under these 

procedures, such individuals are 

required to file a certification disclosing 

sources of income and relationships that 

constitute a potential conflict of interest 

each year, which are subject to public 

inspection. If circumstances change 

such that the certification is no longer 

complete or accurate, they are required 

to promptly file a new certification. In 

addition, disclosure of potential 

conflicts of interest are required for each 

final decision, which may merit recusal 

from the particular matter. If recusal is 

determined not to be necessary, the 

disclosure of potential conflict of 

interest is made part of the public 

record. North Carolina’s revision would 

incorporate these conflict of interest 

disclosure procedures and a 

certification form into its SIP to address 

section 128(a)(2) requirements. 

On October 1, 2012, North Carolina’s 

enacted state law that involved changes 

to how contested DENR cases are 

handled. Previously these matters where 

heard on appeal by an Administrative 

Law Judge (ALJ) in the State’s Office of 

Administrative Hearings 

(Administrative Procedures Act-type 

review). The ALJ would render a 

decision that would then go before the 

State’s Environmental Management 

Commission (EMC) for a final agency 

decision. Under the new state law, the 

EMC’s role is eliminated and instead the 

ALJ decision constitutes the final 

agency action which could then be 

appealed by either party to state 

superior court. The Director of the 

Office of Administrative Hearings 

appoints an ALJ to preside over 

contested matters such as appeals of 

CAA permits and enforcement orders. 

The Office of Administrative Hearings is 

an executive agency with quasi-judicial 

functions. 

In 1978, following the adoption of the 

section 128 provisions, EPA published a 

guidance to the states providing 

suggested definitions that the Agency 

viewed as representing the ‘‘minimum 

level of stringency necessary to meet the 

requirements of section 128.’’ The 

guidance defined ‘‘Board or body’’ as 

including instrumentalities ‘‘authorized 

to approve permits or enforcement 

orders under the CAA, in the first 

instance or on appeal.’’ Because section 

128(a)(2) applies to boards or bodies, or 

the heads of executive agencies with 

similar powers, EPA interprets the 

inclusion of appeals within the 

definition of board or bodies in the 1978 

guidance as likewise applying to 

appeals of matters handled initially by 

the head of an executive agency. 

Further, as stated above, if the statutory 

scheme vests final approval authority 

for CAA permits and orders with a state 

official other than the head of an 

executive agency, EPA interprets section 

128(a)(2) as applying to that state 

official as well because they are 

functionally equivalent. 

North Carolina’s July 27, 2015, 

supplement addresses the section 

128(a)(2) conflict of interest disclosure 

requirements for ALJs through Chapter 

7A section 754 of the North Carolina 

General Statues, which contains 

provisions related to the Office of 

Administrative Hearings addressing 

these requirements for the ALJ. 

Specifically, North Carolina is 

requesting that the following paragraph 

of 7A–754 stating ‘‘The Chief 

Administrative Law Judge and the 

administrative law judges shall comply 

with the Model Code of Judicial Conduct 

for State Administrative Law Judges, as 

adopted by the National Conference of 

Administrative Law Judges, Judicial 

Division, American Bar Association, 

(revised August 1998), as amended from 

time to time, except that the provisions 

of this section shall control as to the 

private practice of law in lieu of Canon 

4G, and G.S. 126–13 shall control as to 

political activity in lieu of Canon 5.’’ be 

adopted into the SIP. The Model Code 

of Judicial Conduct for State 

Administrative Law Judges, as adopted 

by the National Conference of 

Administrative Law Judges, Judicial 

Division, American Bar Association, 

(revised August 1998), requires ALJs to 

act impartially, which broadly includes 

financial considerations, relationships, 

and other associations. ALJs are 

prohibited from participating in any 

matter in which the ALJs impartiality 

might reasonably be questioned or the 

ALJ must disclose the potential conflict 

of interest on the record in the 

proceeding. In the case of such 

disclosures, the parties to the matter 

must agree that the disclosed conflict of 

interest is immaterial before the ALJ 

may continue to participate in the 

matter. EPA has determined that the 

provision of Chapter 7A section 754 of 

the North Carolina General Statutes 

submitted for incorporation in the SIP 

provides for adequate disclosure of 

potential conflicts of interest for any 

ALJ that will make final decisions on 

CAA permits and enforcement orders. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve 

the North Carolina SIP revision related 

to section 128(a)(2). EPA is also 

proposing to approve the portions of 

North Carolina’s 2010 NO2

infrastructure SIP (submitted on August 

23, 2013), 2010 SO2 infrastructure SIP 

(submitted on March 18, 2014), 2008 8- 

hour ozone infrastructure SIP 

(submitted on November 2, 2012), and 

2008 Lead infrastructure SIP (submitted 

on July 20, 2012) related to 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii). 

Additionally, as mentioned above, 

EPA conditionally approved North 

Carolina’s infrastructure submissions for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS as they related to 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) because provisions 

related to CAA 128 were not included 

in North Carolina’s SIP. As a result of 

EPA’s proposed approval of North 

Carolina’s February 5, 2013, and July 27, 

2015, submittals, EPA is also proposing 

to convert EPA’s previous conditional 

approval of North Carolina’s 

infrastructure submissions for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS, 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS as they relate to 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) to full approval. 

V. Proposed Action 

As described above, EPA is proposing 

to approve North Carolina’s February 5, 

2013, and July 27, 2015, submissions 

concerning conflict of interest 

requirements related to CAA section 

128(a)(2). Specifically, today, EPA is 

proposing to approve North Carolina’s 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) submission as it relates 

to the Secretary of the DENR and his/ 

her delegatee that approve permit or 

enforcement orders described at section 

110(a)(2) of the CAA. EPA is also 

proposing to approve North Carolina’s 

July 27, 2015, 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) 

submission as it relates to appealed 

matters decided by ALJs. Additionally, 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

portions of North Carolina’s 2010 NO2

infrastructure SIP, 2010 SO2

infrastructure SIP, 2008 8-hour ozone 

infrastructure SIP, and 2008 Lead 

infrastructure SIP related to 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii). EPA is also proposing to 

convert previous conditional approvals 

for North Carolina’s infrastructure 

submissions for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS addressing CAA section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requirements to 

approval. 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
51170 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 163 / Monday, August 24, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: August 12, 2015. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2015–20747 Filed 8–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 62 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2015–0509, FRL–9933–01– 

Region 2] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Plans for Designated Facilities; New 

York 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to withdraw 

its approval of a provision of the New 

York State plan that implements and 

enforces the Emission Guidelines for 

existing sewage sludge incineration 

units. This action would withdraw the 

EPA’s approval of a provision of the 

State sewage sludge incineration plan 

allowing for affirmative defenses of 

Clean Air Act violations in the case of 

malfunctions. No other provision in the 

State plan would be affected by this 

action. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 23, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R02–OAR–2015–0509 by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Ruvo.Richard@epa.gov 

• Mail: EPA–R02–OAR–2015–0509, 

Richard Ruvo, Chief, Air Programs 

Branch, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 

25th Floor, New York, New York 

10007–1866. 

• Hand Delivery: Richard Ruvo, 

Chief, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th 

Floor, New York, New York 10007– 

1866. Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Regional Office’s normal 

hours of operation. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:00 p.m. excluding federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R02–OAR–2015– 

0509. The 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 the 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 the 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the EPA may not be able to consider 

your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any 

form of encryption, and be free of any 

defects or viruses. For additional 

information about the EPA’s public 

docket visit the EPA Docket Center 

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

epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available at 

www.regulations.gov or at the 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2 Office, Air Programs Branch, 

290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 

New York 10007–1866. The EPA 

requests, if at all possible, that you 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS