Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 71 / Friday, April 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 21867 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 

Marine safety, Navigation (water), 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows: 

PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON 

NAVIGABLE WATERS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 100 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233. 

■ 2. Add § 100.35–T05–0181 to read as 

follows: 

§ 100.35–T05–0181 Special Local 

Regulations for Marine Events, Breton Bay; 

St. Mary’s County, Leonardtown, MD. 

(a) Regulated area. The following 

location is a regulated area: All waters 

of Breton Bay, from shoreline to 

shoreline, within an area bounded to the 

east by a line drawn along latitude38°16′45′′ N, and bounded to the west 

by a line drawn along longitude 

076°38′30′′ W, located at Leonardtown, 

MD. All coordinates reference Datum 

NAD 1983. 

(b) Definitions: (1) Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander means a commissioned, 

warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. 

Coast Guard who has been designated 

by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector 

Baltimore. 

(2) Official Patrol means any vessel 

assigned or approved by Commander, 

Coast Guard Sector Baltimore with a 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer 

on board and displaying a Coast Guard 

ensign. 

(3) Participant means all persons and 

vessels participating in the Annual 

Leonardtown Wharf Boat Race event 

under the auspices of the Marine Event 

Permit issued to the event sponsor and 

approved by Commander, Coast Guard 

Sector Baltimore. 

(c) Special local regulations: (1) The 

Coast Guard Patrol Commander may 

forbid and control the movement of all 

vessels and persons in the regulated 

area. When hailed or signaled by an 

official patrol vessel, a vessel or person 

in the regulated area shall immediately 

comply with the directions given. 

Failure to do so may result in expulsion 

from the area, citation for failure to 

comply, or both. 

(2) Vessels and persons may contact 

the Coast Guard Patrol Commander to 

request permission to pass through the 

regulated area. If permission is granted, 

vessels and persons must pass directly 

through the regulated area, at a safe 

speed and without loitering. 

(3) The Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander may terminate the event, or 

the operation of any participant in the 

event, at any time it is deemed 

necessary for the protection of life or 

property. 

(4) All Coast Guard vessels enforcing 

this regulated area can be contacted on 

marine band radio VHF–FM channel 16 

(156.8 MHz). 

(5) The Coast Guard will publish a 

notice in the Fifth Coast Guard District 

Local Notice to Mariners and issue a 

marine information broadcast on VHF– 

FM marine band radio announcing 

specific event date and times. 

(d) Enforcement periods: This section 

will be enforced from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

on July 13, 2013 and from 8 a.m. to 5 

p.m. on July 14, 2013. 

Dated: March 21, 2013. 

Kevin C. Kiefer, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Baltimore. 

[FR Doc. 2013–08581 Filed 4–11–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0192, FRL–9802–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Revision to the 

New York State Implementation Plan 

for Carbon Monoxide 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing action on a 

proposed State Implementation Plan 

revision submitted by the New York 

State Department of Environmental 

Conservation. This revision consists of a 

change to New York’s November 15, 

1992 Carbon Monoxide Attainment 

Demonstration that would remove a 

reference to a limited off-street parking 

program as it relates to the New York 

County portion of the New YorkNorthern New Jersey-Long Island, NY– 

NJ–CT Carbon Monoxide attainment 

area. EPA is proposing approval of this 

State Implementation Plan revision 

because it will not interfere with 

attainment or maintenance of the 

national ambient air quality standards 

in the affected area. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 13, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket Number EPA–R02– 

OAR–2013–0192, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Ruvo.Richard@epa.gov 

• Fax: 212–637–3901 

• Mail: Richard Ruvo, Acting Branch 

Chief, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th 

Floor, New York, New York 10007– 

1866. 

• Hand Delivery: Richard Ruvo, 

Acting Branch 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 to 4:30 

excluding federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket No. EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0192. 

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 or any form of 

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 docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

21868 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 71 / Friday, April 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2 Office, Air Programs Branch, 

290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 

New York 10007–1866. EPA requests, if 

at all possible, that you contact the 

individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to view 

the hard copy of the docket. You may 

view the hard copy of the docket 

Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 

p.m., excluding federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Henry Feingersh 

(feingersh.henry@epa.gov), Air Programs 

Branch, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New 

York, New York 10007–1866, (212) 637– 

4249. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What action is EPA proposing? 

II. What is the background information for 

this proposal? 

III. What was included in New York’s 

proposed SIP submittal? 

IV. What are the Carbon Monoxide trends? 

V. What is EPA’s evaluation? 

VI. What are EPA’s conclusions? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA proposing? 

The EPA is proposing to approve a 

revision to the New York State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) in response 

to a request submitted by the New York 

State Department of Environmental 

Conservation (New York) on April 5, 

2007. This revision consists of a change 

to New York’s November 15, 1992 

Carbon Monoxide Attainment 

Demonstration that would remove a 

reference to a limited off-street parking 

program as it relates to the New York 

County portion of the New YorkNorthern New Jersey-Long Island, NY– 

NJ–CT Carbon Monoxide attainment 

area. EPA’s proposal is to remove the 

off-street parking program that was 

identified by New York as one of the 

Transportation Control Measures in 

New York’s 1992 SIP submittal. This 

limited off-street parking program is 

imposed and enforced by the City of 

New York. EPA is proposing approval of 

this SIP revision because it will not 

interfere with attainment or 

maintenance of the national ambient air 

quality standards in the affected area. 

II. What is the background information 

for this proposal? 

New York submitted a Carbon 

Monoxide SIP on November 13, 1992 

entitled ‘‘Carbon Monoxide Attainment 

Demonstration—New York Metropolitan 

Area’’ and EPA published a final 

approval on July 25, 1996 (61 Federal 

Register (FR) 38594.) These actions 

became effective on August 26, 1996. 

On November 23, 1999, New York 

submitted a request to EPA to 

redesignate this area from 

nonattainment to attainment of the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) for Carbon Monoxide. EPA 

published a final approval of this 

request on April 19, 2002 (67 FR 19337) 

and the action became effective on May 

20, 2002. 

On April 5, 2007, New York 

submitted a request to revise the SIP to 

remove a reference to a limited off-street 

parking program as it relates to New 

York County. This proposed SIP 

revision underwent a public hearing 

and public notice and comment process. 

In a July 26, 2007 letter to the State, the 

EPA responded to the April 5, 2007 

revision request by asking for the public 

hearing record including a response to 

comments received. New York 

submitted this additional information to 

EPA in a letter dated October 5, 2012. 

The New York portion of the New 

York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, 

NY–NJ–CT CO attainment area is 

composed of the five boroughs of New 

York City and the surrounding counties 

of Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester and 

Rockland. This is collectively referred to 

as the New York City Metropolitan Area 

or NYMA. 

The NYMA has been meeting the 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) standard for 

over twenty years, since 1992, and CO 

levels have continuously trended 

downward. As discussed later in 

Section IV—‘‘What are the Carbon 

Monoxide Trends,’’ current 8-hr CO 

levels are less than 1⁄3 of the 8-hr 

standard while 1-hr CO levels not only 

achieve the 1-hour standard, they are 

much less than the 8-hr standard. 

III. What was included in New York’s 

proposed SIP submittal? 

New York submitted to EPA a 

proposed SIP revision that includes a 

change to the New York State Carbon 

Monoxide SIP. The change is a 

clarification to a commitment identified 

in New York’s November 13, 1992 

submittal. New York also submitted air 

quality monitoring data from 1997 

through 2011 along with an ambient 

monitoring trends analysis for the 

period 1988 through 2011. This analysis 

shows a marked downward trend in CO 

ambient concentrations. These 

concentrations are, and have been for a 

number of years now, lower than the 

background values used in the 1992 CO 

SIP. 

In addition, New York held a public 

hearing on July 17, 2007 and written 

comments were accepted until July 24, 

2007, which was an extension of the 

original May 30, 2007 deadline. New 

York submitted to EPA a summary of 

the public comments received and 

responses to those comments. 

IV. What are the Carbon Monoxide 

trends? 

There has been a steadily declining 

Carbon Monoxide trend in the NYMA 

since the 1980’s. The last few years have 

seen a ‘‘bottoming out’’ of these 

concentrations. CO values have been 

dropping steadily for several years and 

are now lower than background values 

were at the time of the CO SIP 

attainment demonstration in 1992. 

While we observed concentrations over 

13 ppm in the 1980’s, we are now seeing 

these values at approximately 2 ppm. 

This means we are seeing almost no 

contributions from automobiles at this 

time. Much of this improvement can be 

attributed to newer cars with advanced 

anti-pollution controls. 

The following chart shows how the 

CO monitored design values in New 

York County have declined from 1988– 

1989 through 2010–2011. The design 

values are derived by first taking the 

second highest 8-hour value for each 

site in the county for each year. Of 

these, the highest value for each year 

(from all of the sites in the county) is the 

design value for that year. Thus, the 

design value went from 13.5 ppm in 

1988–1989 to 1.8 ppm in 2010–2011. 

mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 71 / Friday, April 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 21869 

V. What is EPA’s evaluation? 

Revisions to SIP-approved control 

measures must meet the requirements of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(l) 

to be approved by EPA. Section 110(l) 

states: ‘‘The Administrator shall not 

approve a revision of a plan if the 

revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress (as defined in section 171), or 

any other applicable requirement of this 

Chapter.’’ 

EPA interprets section 110(l) to apply 

to all requirements of the CAA and to 

all areas of the country, whether 

attainment, nonattainment, 

unclassifiable, or maintenance for one 

or more of the six criteria pollutants. 

EPA also interprets section 110(l) to 

require a demonstration addressing all 

pollutants whose emissions and/or 

ambient concentrations may change as a 

result of the SIP revision. Thus, for 

example, modification of a SIPapproved measure which may impact 

nitrogen oxide emissions, may also 

impact particulate matter emissions, 

and this would have to be evaluated. 

The scope and rigor of an adequate 

section 110(l) demonstration of 

noninterference depends on the air 

quality status of the area, the potential 

impact of the revision on air quality, the 

pollutant(s) affected, and the nature of 

the applicable CAA requirements. 

As discussed previously, the air 

quality data shows a striking downward 

trend in ambient CO concentrations in 

the NYMA area for the past twenty 

years. This dramatic improvement can 

be attributed to the Federal Motor 

Vehicle Turnover Program along with 

advanced anti-pollution controls on 

motor vehicles. 

The NYMA has been attaining the CO 

standard since 1993. As discussed in 

Section II, above, on April 19, 2002, 

EPA published a final rule redesignating 

the area to attainment. A maintenance 

plan explaining how the area will 

maintain the CO standard has been in 

place since that time. Action on a 

second 10 year maintenance plan 

explaining how the area will continue to 

attain the CO standard for another 10 

years will be taken in a separate Federal 

Register Notice. 

It is important to note, aside from 

ozone, the NYMA is attaining the 

NAAQS for all of the other criteria 

pollutants. The area has been attaining 

the SO2, NO2, and Pb standards for 

many years. For CO, the area was 

redesignated to attainment in 2002 and 

is currently a maintenance area. For 

ozone, the area has been designated 

nonattainment and continues to be 

designated nonattainment. However, the 

area has attained the 1-hour ozone 

standard and has attained the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standard by its required 

attainment date. In addition, the area 

has been attaining the annual and 24- 

hour PM2.5 standards and New York has 

proposed redesignations for both PM 

standards. EPA will be taking action on 

the PM2.5 standards in a separate 

Federal Register Notice. 

EPA reviewed New York’s proposed 

change to its CO attainment 

demonstration to determine whether the 

change will add or contribute to any air 

quality violations. EPA proposes to 

determine that removal of the limited 

off-street parking program from the 

previous federally approved CO 

attainment demonstration will not add 

or contribute to an already existing air 

quality violation, primarily because 

there is no existing air quality violation. 

EPA, in essence, continues to evaluate 

the New York CO SIP because New York 

continues to have their CO maintenance 

plan in place. This plan meets the 

requirements set forth in section 175A 

of the CAA and provides for continued 

attainment of the CO NAAQS. 

As for the only other pollutants, 

ozone and PM2.5, for which there may be 

any potential impact on air quality, EPA 

notes that for each of these pollutants, 

New York has developed several other 

revisions to the SIP to continue the 

reductions of emissions toward meeting 

the NAAQS. Specifically for ozone, EPA 

approved New York’s reasonable further 

progress plan and attainment 

demonstration for NYMA (see 76 FR 

51264 (Aug. 18, 2011) and 78 FR 9596 

(Feb. 11, 2013), respectively) which 

included those measures necessary to 

attain and maintain the standard. Also, 

on June 15, 2001 and supplemented on 

October 1, 2001, New York submitted to 

EPA its assessment of whether any 

Reasonably Available Control Measures 

(RACM) are available to advance the 1- 

hour ozone attainment date from 2007 

to an earlier year for the New York 

Metro Area. In this study New York 

evaluated the emissions reductions 

associated with several transportation 

control measures. EPA approved New 

York’s RACM Analysis on February 4, 


mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP12AP13.005</GPH>
21870 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 71 / Friday, April 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

2002 (67 FR 5170) and determined that 

there were no additional RACMs 

(including the transportation control 

measures) that, when implemented, 

would advance the attainment date in 

the NYMA from 2007 to an earlier year. 

In addition, to address the RACM 

requirement for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard, New York did a similar 

analysis and determined that there were 

additional measures that New York 

State believes represent RACM as they 

are reasonably available and can be 

expected to advance the attainment date 

and contribute to reasonable further 

progress. However, the measures 

identified by New York were all 

stationary source related and have since 

been adopted and implemented by New 

York State. On July 13, 2010 (75 FR 

43066), EPA approved New York’s 

RACM analysis for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone standard. 

New York developed a RACM 

analysis for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS that was submitted to EPA on 

October 27, 2009. Although EPA has not 

yet proposed action on the PM2.5 RACM 

analysis submitted by the state, New 

York has adopted and implemented 

control measures that will provide for 

additional emissions reductions of 

PM2.5 and its precursors since the 

NYMA first demonstrated attainment 

with the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

The measures will be undergoing EPA 

rulemaking in the near future and, if 

approved, will become federally 

enforceable. These measures will 

collectively help ensure continued 

compliance with both the 1997 annual 

and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. These 

measures include New York’s Hot Mix 

Asphalt Production Plants rule (6 

NYCRR Part 212.12), Reasonably 

Available Control Technology for Major 

Facilities of Oxides of Nitrogen (6 

NYCRR Part 227–2), and Best Available 

Retrofit Technology (6 NYCRR Part 

249). 

EPA recognizes that DEC’s April 7, 

2007 SIP submittal is asserting that offstreet parking is regulated by the New 

York City Department of City Planning 

and its zoning resolutions and not by 

the CO SIP. 

EPA proposes to determine that 

removal of this one Transportation 

Control Measure (TCM) will not 

interfere with air quality or attainment 

of the NAAQS. In addition, New York 

has revised the rules which address 

TCMs before and concluded not to rely 

on these similar measures in more 

recent SIP actions. This provides further 

evidence to lead EPA to determine that 

this measure will not have an impact on 

air quality. 

We are aware that any new 

construction project using federal funds 

must undergo a review pursuant to the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA), [42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. 

Specifically, all federal agencies are to 

prepare detailed assessments of the 

environmental impacts of and 

alternatives to major federal actions 

significantly affecting the environment. 

These documents are commonly 

referred to as environmental impact 

statements (EIS). The public has an 

important role in the NEPA process, 

particularly during scoping, in 

providing input on what issues should 

be addressed in an EIS and in 

commenting on the findings in an 

agency’s NEPA documents. The public 

can participate in the NEPA process by 

attending NEPA-related hearings or 

public meetings and by submitting 

comments directly to the lead agency. 

The lead agency must take into 

consideration all comments received 

from the public and other parties on 

NEPA documents during the comment 

period. 

New York has demonstrated that the 

changes to its CO SIP will not interfere 

with attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS for all criteria pollutants. EPA 

proposes to find that New York has 

satisfied the demonstration of 

noninterference required by CAA 

section 110(l). 

VI. What are EPA’s conclusions? 

EPA is proposing to approve New 

York’s request to remove a reference to 

a limited off-street parking program in 

New York County because this SIP 

revision will not cause an exceedance of 

the NAAQS. EPA reviewed the public 

comments from the July 17, 2007 public 

hearing record. EPA agrees with New 

York’s responses that New York City 

continues to run the limited off-street 

parking program and, although New 

York City may have relaxed aspects of 

the program, there is no evidence that 

this relaxation caused any degradation 

in CO air quality in the area. In 

addition, New York did not rely on any 

emission reductions from this program 

in its SIP modeling to support the 

demonstration of attainment of the CO 

standard. Finally, any new construction 

project in the area would have to 

undergo a NEPA process. The NEPA 

process ensures that a NAAQS violation 

would not occur due to the project in 

question. 

EPA’s review of the materials 

submitted indicates that New York has 

revised its CO SIP in accordance with 

the requirements of the CAA, 40 CFR 

Part 51 and all of EPA’s technical 

requirements for a CO SIP. Therefore, 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

removal of a reference to a limited offstreet parking program in New York 

County. 

VII. 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. 

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 approves 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 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 rule 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 

mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 71 / Friday, April 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 21871 

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, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: April 1, 2013. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2013–08670 Filed 4–11–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 62 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2013–0109; A–1–FRL– 

9799–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Plans for Designated Facilities and 

Pollutants: Connecticut; 111(d)/129 

Revised State Plan for Large and Small 

Municipal Waste Combustors 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

the Clean Air Act 111(d)/129 State Plan 

revisions for Large and Small Municipal 

Waste Combustors (MWC) submitted by 

the Connecticut Department of Energy 

and Environmental Protection (DEEP) 

on October 22, 2008. The revised Plan 

is in response to amended emission 

guidelines (EGs) and new source 

performance standards (NSPS) for Large 

MWCs promulgated on May 10, 2006. 

Connecticut DEEP’s State Plan is for 

implementing and enforcing provisions 

at least as protective as the EGs 

applicable to existing Large and Small 

MWC units pursuant to 40 CFR part 60, 

Subparts Cb and BBBB, respectively. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before May 13, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R01–OAR–2013–0109 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: mcdonnell.ida@epa.gov 

3. Fax: (617) 918–0653. 

4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification 

Number EPA–R01–OAR–2013–0109’’, 

Ida McDonnell, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem 

Protection, Air Permits, Toxic, & Indoor 

Programs Unit, 5 Post Office Square— 

Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05–2), Boston, 

MA 02109–3912. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to: Ida McDonnell, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, Office of 

Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits, 

Toxic, & Indoor Programs Unit, 5 Post 

Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail code 

OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109–3912. 

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 to 4:30, 

excluding legal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules Section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patrick Bird, Air Permits, Toxic, & 

Indoor Programs Unit, Air Programs 

Branch, Office of Ecosystem Protection, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Mail 

Code: OEP05–2, Boston, MA, 02109– 

0287. The telephone number is (617) 

918–1287. Mr. Bird can also be reached 

via electronic mail at 

bird.patrick@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules Section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

State Plan revisions as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this action rule, 

no further activity is contemplated. If 

EPA receives adverse comments, the 

direct final rule will be withdrawn and 

all public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. 

For additional information, see the 

direct final rule which is located in the 

Rules Section of this Federal Register. 

Dated: March 27, 2013. 

H. Curtis Spalding, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 

[FR Doc. 2013–08644 Filed 4–11–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 82 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0580 FRL–9798–4] 

RIN 2060–AM09 

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: 

Revision of the Venting Prohibition for 

Specific Refrigerant Substitutes 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency is proposing to amend the 

regulations promulgated as part of the 

National Recycling and Emission 

Reduction Program under section 608 of 

the Clean Air Act. EPA is proposing to 

exempt from the prohibition under 

section 608 on venting, release and 

disposal certain refrigerant substitutes 

listed as acceptable or acceptable 

subject to use conditions in regulations 

promulgated as part of EPA’s Significant 

New Alternative Policy Program under 

section 612 of the Act on the basis of 

current evidence that their venting, 

release and disposal does not pose a 

threat to the environment. 

DATES: Written comments on this 

proposed rule must be received by the 

EPA Docket on or before on June 11, 

2013. Any Party requesting a public 

hearing must notify the contact listed 

below under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard 

Time on April 29, 2013. If a hearing is 

held, it will take place on or about May 

7, 2013 at EPA Headquarters in 

Washington, DC. EPA will post a notice 

in our Web site, http://www.epa.gov/ 

ozone/strathome.html, announcing 

further information should a hearing 

take place. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0580. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., confidential business information 

(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. 

mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS