Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Proposed Rules 39641 

country, the proposed rules regarding 

SIPs do not have tribal implications as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will 

they impose substantial direct costs on 

tribal governments or preempt tribal 

law. With respect to the South Carolina 

SIP, EPA notes that the Catawba Indian 

Nation Reservation is located within the 

boundary of York County, South 

Carolina, and pursuant to the Catawba 

Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code 

Ann. 27–16–120, ‘‘all state and local 

environmental laws and regulations 

apply to the Catawba Indian Nation and 

Reservation and are fully enforceable by 

all relevant state and local agencies and 

authorities.’’ Thus, the South Carolina 

SIP applies to the Catawba Reservation; 

however, because the proposed action 

related to South Carolina is merely 

modifying public notice provisions for 

certain types of air permits issued by SC 

DHEC, EPA has preliminarily 

determined that there are no substantial 

direct effects on the Catawba Indian 

Nation. EPA has also preliminarily 

determined that the proposed action 

related to South Carolina’s SIP will not 

impose any substantial direct costs on 

tribal governments or preempt tribal 

law. 

Furthermore, the proposed rules 

regarding Title V Operating Permit 

programs do not have tribal 

implications because they are not 

approved to apply to any source of air 

pollution over which an Indian Tribe 

has jurisdiction, nor will these proposed 

rules impose substantial direct costs on 

tribal governments or preempt tribal 

law. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

40 CFR Part 70 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Operating Permits, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: July 31, 2018. 

Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2018–17207 Filed 8–9–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 61 and 63 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2008–0063; FRL–9972– 

26—Region 6] 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants; Delegation 

of Authority to Oklahoma 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Oklahoma Department of 

Environmental Quality (ODEQ) has 

submitted updated regulations for 

receiving delegation and approval of its 

program for the implementation and 

enforcement of certain National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants (NESHAP) for all sources 

(both part 70 and non-part 70 sources), 

as provided for under previously 

approved delegation mechanisms. The 

updated state regulations incorporate by 

reference certain NESHAP promulgated 

by the EPA at parts 61 and 63, as they 

existed through September 1, 2016. The 

EPA is proposing to approve ODEQ’s 

requested delegation update. 

DATES: Written comments on this 

proposed rule must be received on or 

before September 10, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R06– 

OAR–2008–0063, at http://

www.regulations.gov or via email to 

barrett.richard@epa.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish 

any comment received to its public 

docket. Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact Mr. Rick Barrett, 214–665–7227, 

barrett.richard@epa.gov. For the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all 

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 at 

either location (e.g., CBI). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Rick Barrett (6MM–AP), (214) 665–7227; 

email: barrett.richard@epa.gov. To 

inspect the hard copy materials, please 

schedule an appointment with Mr. Rick 

Barrett or Mr. Bill Deese at (214) 665– 

7253. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

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

the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What does this action do? 

II. What is the authority for delegation? 

III. What criteria must Oklahoma’s program 

meet to be approved? 

IV. How did ODEQ meet the NESHAP 

program approval criteria? 

V. What is being delegated? 

VI. What is not being delegated? 

VII. How will statutory and regulatory 

interpretations be made? 

VIII. What authority does the EPA have? 

IX. What information must ODEQ provide to 

the EPA? 

X. What is the EPA’s oversight role? 

XI. Should sources submit notices to the EPA 

or ODEQ? 

XII. How will unchanged authorities be 

delegated to ODEQ in the future? 

XIII. Proposed Action 

XIV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What does this action do? 

EPA is proposing to update its 

approval of Oklahoma’s program for the 

implementation and enforcement of 

certain NESHAP. If finalized, the 

delegation will provide ODEQ with the 

primary responsibility to implement 

and enforce the delegated standards. 

II. What is the authority for delegation? 

Section 112(l) of the CAA and 40 CFR 

part 63, subpart E, authorize the EPA to 

delegate authority for the 

implementation and enforcement of 

emission standards for hazardous air 

pollutants to a State or local agency that 

satisfies the statutory and regulatory 

requirements in subpart E. The 

hazardous air pollutant standards are 

codified at 40 CFR parts 61 and 63. 

III. What criteria must Oklahoma’s 

program meet to be approved? 

Section 112(l)(5) of the CAA requires 

the EPA to disapprove any program 

submitted by a State for the delegation 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
39642 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

1Some NESHAP standards do not require a 

source to obtain a title V permit (e.g., certain area 

sources that are exempt from the requirement to 

obtain a title V permit). For these non-title V 

sources, the EPA believes that the State must assure 

the EPA that it can implement and enforce the 

NESHAP for such sources. See 65 FR 55810, 55813 

(Sept. 14, 2000). EPA previously approved 

Oklahoma’s program to implement and enforce the 

NESHAP as they apply to non-part 70 sources. See 

66 FR 1584 (Dec. 5, 2001). 

2ODEQ’s June 25, 2018 letter rescinds its 

previous three letters, dated January 11, 2008, 

August 23, 2012, and October 16, 2017, requesting 

EPA approval to update Oklahoma’s NESHAP 

delegation. As such, the EPA’s proposed 

rulemaking (80 FR 9678, February 24, 2015) 

associated with ODEQ’s January 11, 2008 letter is 

hereby withdrawn. 

of NESHAP standards if the EPA 

determines that: 

(A) The authorities contained in the 

program are not adequate to assure 

compliance by the sources within the 

State with respect to each applicable 

standard, regulation, or requirement 

established under section 112; 

(B) adequate authority does not exist, 

or adequate resources are not available, 

to implement the program; 

(C) the schedule for implementing the 

program and assuring compliance by 

affected sources is not sufficiently 

expeditious; or 

(D) the program is otherwise not in 

compliance with the guidance issued by 

the EPA under section 112(l)(2) or is not 

likely to satisfy, in whole or in part, the 

objectives of the CAA. 

In carrying out its responsibilities 

under section 112(l), the EPA 

promulgated regulations at 40 CFR part 

63, subpart E setting forth criteria for the 

approval of submitted programs. For 

example, in order to obtain approval of 

a program to implement and enforce 

Federal section 112 rules as 

promulgated without changes (straight 

delegation) for part 70 sources, a State 

must demonstrate that it meets the 

criteria of 40 CFR 63.91(d). 40 CFR 

63.91(d)(3) provides that interim or final 

Title V program approval will satisfy the 

criteria of 40 CFR 63.91(d).1 The 

NESHAP delegation for Oklahoma, as it 

applies to both part 70 and non-part 70 

sources, was most recently approved on 

December 13, 2005 (70 FR 73595). 

IV. How did ODEQ meet the NESHAP 

program approval criteria? 

As to the NESHAP standards in 40 

CFR parts 61 and 63, as part of its Title 

V submission ODEQ stated that it 

intended to use the mechanism of 

incorporation by reference to adopt 

unchanged Federal section 112 into its 

regulations. This commitment applied 

to both existing and future standards as 

they applied to part 70 sources. EPA’s 

final interim approval of Oklahoma’s 

Title V operating permits program 

delegated the authority to implement 

certain NESHAP, effective March 6, 

1996 (61 FR 4220, February 5, 1996). On 

December 5, 2001, EPA granted final 

full approval of the State’s operating 

permits program (66 FR 63170). These 

interim and final Title V program 

approvals satisfy the up-front approval 

criteria of 40 CFR 63.91(d). Under 40 

CFR 63.91(d)(2), once a State has 

satisfied up-front approval criteria, it 

needs only to reference the previous 

demonstration and reaffirm that it still 

meets the criteria for any subsequent 

submittals for delegation of the section 

112 standards. ODEQ has affirmed that 

it still meets the up-front approval 

criteria. With respect to non-part 70 

sources, the EPA has previously 

approved delegation of NESHAP 

authorities to ODEQ after finding 

adequate authorities to implement and 

enforce the NESHAP for such sources. 

See 66 FR 1584 (January 9, 2001). 

V. What is being delegated? 

By letter dated June 25, 2018, the EPA 

received a request from ODEQ to update 

its existing NESHAP delegation.2 With 

certain exceptions noted in section VI 

below, Oklahoma’s request included 

NESHAP in 40 CFR part 61 and 40 CFR 

part 63. ODEQ’s request included newly 

incorporated NESHAP promulgated by 

the EPA and amendments to existing 

standards currently delegated, as they 

existed though September 1, 2016. This 

proposed action is being taken in 

reponse to ODEQ’s request noted above. 

VI. What is not being delegated? 

All authorities not affirmatively and 

expressly proposed for delegation by 

this action will not be delegated. These 

include the following part 61 and 63 

authorities listed below: 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart B (National 

Emission Standards for Radon 

Emissions from Underground Uranium 

Mines); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart H (National 

Emission Standards for Emissions of 

Radionuclides Other Than Radon From 

Department of Energy Facilities); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart I (National 

Emission Standards for Radionuclide 

Emissions from Federal Facilities Other 

Than Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Licensees and Not Covered by Subpart 

H); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart K (National 

Emission Standards for Radionuclide 

Emissions from Elemental Phosphorus 

Plants); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart Q (National 

Emission Standards for Radon 

Emissions from Department of Energy 

facilities); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart R (National 

Emission Standards for Radon 

Emissions from Phosphogypsum 

Stacks); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart T (National 

Emission Standards for Radon 

Emissions from the Disposal of Uranium 

Mill Tailings); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart W (National 

Emission Standards for Radon 

Emissions from Operating Mill 

Tailings); and 

• 40 CFR part 63, subpart J (National 

Emission Standards for Polyvinyl 

Choride and Copolymers Production). 

In addition, the EPA regulations 

provide that we cannot delegate to a 

State any of the Category II Subpart A 

authorities set forth in 40 CFR 

63.91(g)(2). These include the following 

provisions: § 63.6(g), Approval of 

Alternative Non-Opacity Standards; 

§ 63.6(h)(9), Approval of Alternative 

Opacity Standards; § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and 

(f), Approval of Major Alternatives to 

Test Methods; § 63.8(f), Approval of 

Major Alternatives to Monitoring; and 

§ 63.10(f), Approval of Major 

Alternatives to Recordkeeping and 

Reporting. Also, some part 61 and part 

63 standards have certain provisions 

that cannot be delegated to the States. 

Furthermore, no authorities are being 

proposed for delegation that require 

rulemaking in the Federal Register to 

implement, or where Federal overview 

is the only way to ensure national 

consistency in the application of the 

standards or requirements of CAA 

section 112. Finally, this action does not 

propose delegation of any authority 

under section 112(r), the accidental 

release program. 

If finalized, all questions concerning 

implementation and enforcement of the 

excluded standards in the State of 

Oklahoma should be directed to the 

EPA Region 6 Office. 

EPA is proposing a determination that 

the NESHAP program submitted by 

Oklahoma meets the applicable 

requirements of CAA section 112(l)(5) 

and 40 CFR part 63, subpart E. This 

delegation to ODEQ to implement and 

enforce certain NESHAP does not 

extend to sources or activities located in 

Indian country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 

1151. Oklahoma is not seeking 

delegation for such areas, and neither 

the EPA nor ODEQ is aware of any 

existing facilities in Indian country 

subject to the NESHAP being delegated. 

ODEQ may submit a request to expand 

this program to non-reservation areas of 

Indian country in the future, at which 

time the EPA would evaluate the 

request through the appropriate process. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Proposed Rules 39643 

3This waiver only extends to the submission of 

copies of notifications and reports; the EPA does 

not waive the requirements in delegated standards 

that require notifications and reports be submitted 

to an electronic database (e.g., 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart HHHHHHH). 

4See Harardous Air Pollutants: Amendments to 

the Approval of State Programs and Delegation of 

Federal Authorities, Final Rule (65 FR 55810, 

September 14, 2000); and ‘‘Straight Delegation 

Issues Concerning Sections 111 and 112 

Requirements and Title V,’’ by John S. Seitz, 

Director of Air Qualirty Planning and Standards, 

EPA, dated December 10, 1993. 

VII. How will statutory and regulatory 

interpretations be made? 

If this NESHAP delegation is 

finalized, ODEQ will obtain 

concurrence from the EPA on any 

matter involving the interpretation of 

section 112 of the CAA or 40 CFR parts 

61 and 63 to the extent that 

implementation or enforcement of these 

provisions have not been covered by 

prior EPA determinations or guidance. 

VIII. What authority does the EPA 

have? 

We retain the right, as provided by 

CAA section 112(l)(7) and 40 CFR 

63.90(d)(2), to enforce any applicable 

emission standard or requirement under 

section 112. In addition, the EPA may 

enforce any federally approved State 

rule, requirement, or program under 40 

CFR 63.90(e) and 63.91(c)(1)(i). The EPA 

also has the authority to make certain 

decisions under the General Provisions 

(subpart A) of parts 61 and 63. We are 

proposing to delegate to the ODEQ some 

of these authorities, and retaining 

others, as explained in sections V and 

VI above. In addition, the EPA may 

review and disapprove State 

determinations and subsequently 

require corrections. See 40 CFR 

63.91(g)(1)(ii). EPA also has the 

authority to review ODEQ’s 

implementation and enforcement of 

approved rules or programs and to 

withdraw approval if we find 

inadequate implementation or 

enforcement. See 40 CFR 63.96. 

Furthermore, we retain any authority 

in an individual emission standard that 

may not be delegated according to 

provisions of the standard. Finally, we 

retain the authorities stated in the 

original delegation agreement. See 

‘‘Provisions for the Implementation and 

Enforcement of NSPS and NESHAP in 

Oklahoma,’’ effective March 25, 1982, a 

copy of which is included in the docket 

for this action. The delegation table as 

of now and how it would look if this 

proposal is finalized may be found in 

the Technical Support Document (TSD) 

included in the docket for this action. 

The table also shows the authorities that 

cannot be delegated to any State or local 

agency. 

IX. What information must ODEQ 

provide to the EPA? 

ODEQ must provide any additional 

compliance related information to EPA, 

Region 6, Office of Enforcement and 

Compliance Assurance within 45 days 

of a request under 40 CFR 63.96(a). In 

receiving delegation for specific General 

Provisions authorities, ODEQ must 

submit to EPA Region 6 on a semiannual basis, copies of determinations 

issued under these authorities. See 40 

CFR 63.91(g)(1)(ii). For part 63 

standards, these determinations include: 

§ 63.1, Applicability Determinations; 

§ 63.6(e), Operation and Maintenance 

Requirements—Responsibility for 

Determining Compliance; § 63.6(f), 

Compliance with Non-Opacity 

Standards—Responsibility for 

Determining Compliance; § 63.6(h), 

Compliance with Opacity and Visible 

Emissions Standards—Responsibility 

for Determining Compliance; 

§ 63.7(c)(2)(i) and (d), Approval of SiteSpecific Test Plans; § 63.7(e)(2)(i), 

Approval of Minor Alternatives to Test 

Methods; § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f), 

Approval of Intermediate Alternatives to 

Test Methods; § 63.7(e)(iii), Approval of 

Shorter Sampling Times and Volumes 

When Necessitated by Process Variables 

or Other Factors; § 63.7(e)(2)(iv), (h)(2) 

and (3), Waiver of Performance Testing; 

§ 63.8(c)(1) and (e)(1), Approval of SiteSpecific Performance Evaluation 

(Monitoring) Test Plans; § 63.8(f), 

Approval of Minor Alternatives to 

Monitoring; § 63.8(f), Approval of 

Intermediate Alternatives to Monitoring; 

§§ 63.9 and 63.10, Approval of 

Adjustments to Time Periods for 

Submitting Reports; § 63.10(f), Approval 

of Minor Alternatives to Recordkeeping 

and Reporting; and § 63.7(a)(4), 

Extension of Performance Test Deadline. 

X. What is the EPA’s oversight role? 

The EPA oversees ODEQ’s decisions 

to ensure the delegated authorities are 

being adequately implemented and 

enforced. We will integrate oversight of 

the delegated authorities into the 

existing mechanisms and resources for 

oversight currently in place. If, during 

oversight, we determine that ODEQ 

made decisions that decreased the 

stringency of the delegated standards, 

then ODEQ shall be required to take 

corrective actions and the source(s) 

affected by the decisions will be 

notified, as required by 40 CFR 

63.91(g)(1)(ii) and (b). We will initiate 

withdrawal of the program or rule if the 

corrective actions taken are insufficient. 

See 51 FR 20648 (June 6, 1986). 

XI. Should sources submit notices to the 

EPA or ODEQ? 

For the delegated NESHAP standards 

and authorities covered by this 

proposed action, if finalized, sources 

would submit all of the information 

required pursuant to the general 

provisions and the relevant subpart(s) of 

the delegated NESHAP (40 CFR parts 61 

and 63) directly to the ODEQ at the 

following address: State of Oklahoma, 

Department of Environmental Quality, 

Air Quality Division, P.O. Box 1677, 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73101–1677. 

The ODEQ is the primary point of 

contact with respect to delegated 

NESHAP. Sources do not need to send 

a copy to the EPA. The EPA Region 6 

proposes to waive the requirement that 

notifications and reports for delegated 

standards be submitted to EPA in 

addition to ODEQ in accordance with 40 

CFR 63.9(a)(4)(ii) and 63.10(a)(4)(ii).3

For those standards and authorties not 

delegated as discussed above, sources 

must continue to submit all appropriate 

information to the EPA. 

XII. How will unchanged authorities be 

delegated to ODEQ in the future? 

As stated in previous NESHAP 

delegation actions, the EPA has 

approved Oklahoma’s mechanism of 

incorporation by reference of NESHAP 

standards into ODEQ regulations, as 

they apply to both part 70 and non-part 

70 sources. See, e.g., 61 FR 4224 

(February 5, 1996) and 66 FR 1584 

(January 9, 2001). Consistent with the 

EPA regulations and guidance,4 ODEQ 

may request future updates to 

Oklahoma’s NESHAP delegation by 

submitting a letter to the EPA that 

appropriately identifies the specific 

NESHAP which have been incorporated 

by reference into state regulation, 

reaffirms that it still meets up-front 

approval delegation criteria for part 70 

sources, and demonstrates that ODEQ 

maintains adequate authorites and 

resources to implememnt and enforce 

the delegated NESHAP requirements for 

all sources. We will respond in writing 

to the request stating that the request for 

delegation is either granted or denied. A 

Federal Register action will be 

published to inform the public and 

affected sources of the updated 

delegation, indicate where source 

notifications and reports should be sent, 

and amend the relevant portions of the 

Code of Federal Regulations identifying 

which NESHAP standards have been 

delegated to the ODEQ. We have not 

been using this informational notice 

process but intend to from now on upon 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
39644 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

5A request from ODEQ that raises an isuse not 

previously subject to comment, presents new data, 

requires EPA to examine its interpretion of the 

applicable law, or where EPA wishes to re-examine 

its present position on a matter will be processed 

through notice and comment rulemaking in the 

Federal Register. 

receipt of the next NESHAP delegation 

request from ODEQ.5

XIII. Proposed Action 

In today’s action, the EPA is 

proposing to approve an update to the 

Oklahoma NESHAP delegation that 

would provide the ODEQ with the 

authority to implement and enforce 

certain newly incorporated NESHAP 

promulgated by the EPA and 

amendments to existing standards 

currently delegated, as they existed 

though September 1, 2016. As requested 

in ODEQ’s June 25, 2018 letter, this 

proposed delegation to ODEQ does not 

extend to sources or activities located in 

Indian country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 

1151. 

XIV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator 

has the authority to approve section 

112(l) submissions that comply with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. In reviewing 

section 112(l) submissions, the EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria and 

objectives of the CAA and of the EPA’s 

implementing regulations. Accordingly, 

this proposed action would merely 

approve the State’s request as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive 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). 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 61 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Arsenic, Benzene, 

Beryllium, Hazardous substances, 

Mercury, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Vinyl chloride. 

40 CFR Part 63 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Hazardous 

substances, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

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

Dated: July 25, 2018. 

Wren Stenger, 

Multimedia Division Director, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2018–17139 Filed 8–9–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

45 CFR Part 153 

[CMS–9919–P] 

RIN 0938–AT66 

Patient Protection and Affordable Care 

Act; Adoption of the Methodology for 

the HHS-Operated Permanent Risk 

Adjustment Program for the 2018 

Benefit Year Proposed Rule 

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services (CMS), Department 

of Health and Human Services (HHS). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule proposes to adopt 

the risk adjustment methodology that 

HHS previously established for the 2018 

benefit year. In February 2018, a district 

court vacated the use of statewide 

average premium in the HHS-operated 

risk adjustment methodology for the 

2014 through 2018 benefit years. HHS is 

proposing to adopt the HHS-operated 

risk adjustment methodology for the 

2018 benefit year as established in the 

final rules published in the March 23, 

2012 Federal Register and the December 

22, 2016 Federal Register. 

DATES: To be assured consideration, 

comments must be received at one of 

the addresses provided below, no later 

than 5:00 p.m. on September 7, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer 

to file code CMS–9919–P. Because of 

staff and resource limitations, we cannot 

accept comments by facsimile (FAX) 

transmission. 

Comments, including mass comment 

submissions, must be submitted in one 

of the following three ways (please 

choose only one of the ways listed): 

1. Electronically. You may submit 

electronic comments on this regulation 

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

the ‘‘Submit a comment’’ instructions. 

2. By regular mail. You may mail 

written comments to the following 

address ONLY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Attention: 

CMS–9919–P, P.O. Box 8016, Baltimore, 

MD 21244–8016. 

Please allow sufficient time for mailed 

comments to be received before the 

close of the comment period. 

3. By express or overnight mail. You 

may send written comments to the 

following address ONLY: Centers for 

Medicare & Medicaid Services, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Attention: CMS–9919–P, Mail 

Stop C4–26–05, 7500 Security 

Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850. 

For information on viewing public 

comments, see the beginning of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Krutika Amin, (301) 492–5153; Jaya 

Ghildiyal, (301) 492–5149; or Adrianne 

Patterson, (410) 786–0686. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Inspection 

of Public Comments: All comments 

received before the close of the 

comment period are available for 

viewing by the public, including any 

personally identifiable or confidential 

business information that is included in 

a comment. We post all comments 

received before the close of the 

comment period on the following 

website as soon as possible after they 

have been received: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the search 

instructions on that website to view 

public comments. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS