Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 18987 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD, which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. This rule is 

categorically excluded, under figure 2– 

1, paragraph (34)(h), of the Instruction. 

This rule involves implementation of 

regulations within 33 CFR Part 100 that 

apply to organized marine events on the 

navigable waters of the United States 

that may have potential for negative 

impact on the safety or other interest of 

waterway users and shore side activities 

in the event area. The category of water 

activities includes but is not limited to 

sail boat regattas, boat parades, power 

boat racing, swimming events, crew 

racing, and sail board racing. We seek 

any comments or information that may 

lead to the discovery of a significant 

environmental impact from this 

proposed rule. 

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. In § 100.501, add temporary line 

No. (c)25 in Table to § 100.501 to read 

as follows: 

§ 100.501 Special Local Regulations; 

Marine Events in the Fifth Coast Guard 

District. 

* * * * * 

Table To § 100.501.—All coordinates 

listed in the Table to § 100.501 reference 

Datum NAD 1983. 

COAST GUARD SECTOR HAMPTON ROADS—COTP ZONE

Number Date Event Sponsor Location 

*******

25 ......... June 2, 2012 .................. Yorktown Parade of Sail York County Recreation 

Parks and Tourism.

Regulated area includes all waters of the York 

River bounded by the north and south shores of 

the York River and to the west by the Coleman 

Memorial Bridge and bounded to the east by a 

line drawn from the United States Coast Guard 

pier to Gaines Point in Gloucester, VA. All coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983. 

* * * * * 

Dated: March 13, 2012. 

Mark S. Ogle, 

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

Port Hampton Roads. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7513 Filed 3–28–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0924; FRL–9653–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; Nonattainment New 

Source Review; Fine Particulate Matter 

(PM2.5) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. These 

revisions pertaining to Pennsylvania’s 

nonattainment New Source Review 

(NSR) program incorporate 

preconstruction permitting regulations 

for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) into 

the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA is approving 

these revisions in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before April 30, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2011–0924 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: cox.kathleen@epa.gov. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

18988 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0924, 

Kathleen Cox, Associate Director, Office 

of Permits and Air Toxics, Mailcode 

3AP10, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2011– 

0924. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, Bureau of Air Quality 

Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market 

Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gerallyn Duke, (215) 814–2084, or by 

email at duke.gerallyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, whenever 

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

EPA. On September 23, 2011, the 

Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection (PADEP) 

submitted a formal revision to its State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). 

I. Background 

The SIP revision consists of 

amendments to 25 Pa. Code Chapter 

121, ‘‘General Provisions;’’ and Chapter 

127, ‘‘Construction, Modification, 

Reactivation and Operation of Sources.’’ 

This SIP revision submitted by 

Pennsylvania will satisfy requirements 

that are set forth in the federal rule, 

‘‘Implementation of the New Source 

Review (NSR) Program for Particulate 

Matter less than 2.5 Micrometers 

(PM2.5)’’ (NSR PM2.5 Rule), which was 

promulgated on May 16, 2008 (73 FR 

28321). 

A. Fine Particulate Matter and the 

NAAQS 

Fine particles in the atmosphere are 

made up of a complex mixture of 

components. Common constituents 

include sulfate (SO4); nitrate (NO3); 

ammonium; elemental carbon; a great 

variety of organic compounds; and 

inorganic material (including metals, 

dust, sea salt, and other trace elements) 

generally referred to as ‘‘crustal’’ 

material, although it may contain 

material from other sources. Airborne 

particulate matter (PM) with a nominal 

aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 

micrometers or less (a micrometer is 

one-millionth of a meter, and 2.5 

micrometers is less than one-seventh the 

average width of a human hair) are 

considered to be ‘‘fine particles’’ and are 

also known as PM2.5. ‘‘Primary’’ 

particles are emitted directly into the air 

as a solid or liquid particle (e.g., 

elemental carbon from diesel engines or 

fire activities, or condensable organic 

particles from gasoline engines). 

‘‘Secondary’’ particles (e.g., sulfate and 

nitrate) form in the atmosphere as a 

result of various chemical reactions. 

The health effects associated with 

exposure to PM2.5 include potential 

aggravation of respiratory and 

cardiovascular disease (i.e., lung 

disease, decreased lung function asthma 

attacks and certain cardiovascular 

issues). Epidemiological studies have 

indicated a correlation between elevated 

PM2.5 levels and premature mortality. 

Groups considered especially sensitive 

to PM2.5 exposure include older adults, 

children, and individuals with heart 

and lung diseases. For more details 

regarding health effects and PM2.5 see 

EPA’s Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ 

oar/particlepollution/ (see heading 

‘‘Health and Welfare’’). 

On July 18, 1997, EPA revised the 

NAAQS for PM to add new standards 

for fine particles, using PM2.5 as the 

indicator. Previously, EPA used PM10

(inhalable particles smaller than or 

equal to 10 micrometers in diameter) as 

the indicator for the PM NAAQS. EPA 

established health-based (primary) 

annual and 24-hour standards for PM2.5, 

setting an annual standard at a level of 

15 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) 

and a 24-hour standard at a level of 65 

mg/m3 (62 FR 38652). At the time the 

1997 primary standards were 

established, EPA also established 

welfare-based (secondary) standards 

identical to the primary standards. The 

secondary standards are designed to 

protect against major environmental 

effects of PM2.5, such as visibility 

impairment, soiling, and materials 

damage. On October 17, 2006, EPA 

revised the primary and secondary 

NAAQS for PM2.5. In that rulemaking, 

EPA reduced the 24-hour NAAQS for 

PM2.5 to 35 mg/m3 and retained the 

existing annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15 mg/ 

m3 (71 FR 61236). 

B. Implementation of NSR Requirements 

for PM2.5—the NSR PM2.5 Rule 

After EPA promulgated the NAAQS 

for PM2.5 on October 23, 1997, the 

Agency issued a guidance document 

written by John Seitz entitled ‘‘Interim 

Implementation of New Source Review 

Requirements for PM2.5’’ (Seitz memo). 

The Seitz memo was designed to help 

states implement NSR requirements 

pertaining to the new PM2.5 NAAQS in 

light of technical difficulties posed by 

PM2.5 at that time. Specifically, the Seitz 

memo states: ‘‘PM10 may properly be 

used as a surrogate for PM2.5 in meeting 

NSR requirements until these 

difficulties are resolved.’’ 

EPA also issued a guidance document 

entitled ‘‘Implementation of New 

Source Review Requirements in PM2.5

Nonattainment Areas’’ (the ‘‘2005 PM2.5

Nonattainment NSR Guidance’’), on 

April 5, 2005, the date that EPA’s PM2.5

nonattainment area designations became 

effective for the 1997 NAAQS. This 

memorandum provided guidance on the 

implementation of the nonattainment 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 18989 

major NSR provisions in PM2.5

nonattainment areas in the interim 

period between the effective date of the 

PM2.5 nonattainment area designations 

(April 5, 2005) and EPA’s promulgation 

of final PM2.5 nonattainment NSR 

regulations. Besides reaffirming the 

continuation of the PM10 Surrogate 

Policy for PM2.5 attainment areas set 

forth in the Seitz memo, the 2005 PM2.5

nonattainment NSR Guidance 

recommended that until EPA 

promulgated the PM2.5 major NSR 

regulations, ‘‘States should use a PM10

nonattainment major NSR program as a 

surrogate to address the requirements of 

nonattainment major NSR for the PM2.5

NAAQS.’’ 

On May 16, 2008, EPA finalized a rule 

(the NSR PM2.5 Rule) to implement the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, including changes 

to the NSR program (73 FR 28321). The 

2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule revised the NSR 

program requirements to establish the 

framework for implementing 

preconstruction permit review for the 

PM2.5 NAAQS in both attainment and 

nonattainment areas. The 2008 NSR 

PM2.5 Rule required that major 

stationary sources seeking permits must 

directly satisfy the PM2.5 requirements, 

as of the effective date of the rule, rather 

than relying on PM10 as a surrogate, 

with two exceptions. The first exception 

was a ‘‘grandfathering’’ provision in the 

Federal PSD program at 40 CFR 

52.21(i)(1)(xi). This grandfathering 

provision applied to sources that had 

applied for, but had not yet received, a 

final and effective PSD permit before the 

July 15, 2008, effective date of the May 

2008 final rule. The second exception 

was that states with SIP-approved PSD 

programs could continue to implement 

the Seitz Memo’s PM10 Surrogate Policy 

for up to three years (until May 2011) 

or until the individual revised state PSD 

programs for PM2.5 are approved by 

EPA, whichever came first. For 

additional information on the NSR 

PM2.5 Rule, see (73 FR 28321). On 

February 11, 2010, EPA proposed to 

repeal the grandfathering provision for 

PM2.5 contained in the federal PSD 

program at 40 CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi) and to 

end early the PM10 Surrogate Policy 

applicable in states that have a SIP 

approved PSD program (75 FR 6827). In 

support of this proposal, EPA explained 

that the PM2.5 implementation issues 

that led to the adoption of the PM10

Surrogate Policy in 1997 have been 

largely resolved to a degree sufficient for 

sources and permitting authorities to 

conduct meaningful permit-related 

PM2.5 analyses. The repeal of the 

grandfathering rule was finalized on 

May 18, 2011 (76 FR 28646). 

The 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule also 

established the following NSR 

requirements to implement the PM2.5

NAAQS: (1) Require NSR permits to 

address directly emitted PM2.5 and 

precursor pollutants; (2) establish 

significant emission rates for direct 

PM2.5 and precursor pollutants 

(including sulfur dioxide (SO2) and 

oxides of nitrogen NOX); (3) establish 

PM2.5 emission offsets; and (4) require 

states to account for gases that condense 

to form particles (condensables) in PM2.5

emission limits. 

Additionally, the 2008 final rule 

authorized states to adopt provisions in 

their nonattainment NSR rules that 

would allow major stationary sources 

and major modifications locating in 

areas designated nonattainment for 

PM2.5 to offset emissions increases of 

direct PM2.5 emissions or PM2.5

precursors with reductions of either 

direct PM2.5 emissions or PM2.5

precursors in accordance with offset 

ratios contained in the approved SIP for 

the applicable nonattainment area. The 

inclusion, in whole or in part, of the 

interpollutant offset provisions for PM2.5

is discretionary on the part of the states. 

In the preamble to the 2008 final rule, 

EPA included preferred or presumptive 

offset ratios, applicable to specific PM2.5

precursors that states may adopt in 

conjunction with the new interpollutant 

offset provisions for PM2.5, and for 

which the state could rely on the EPA’s 

technical work to demonstrate the 

adequacy of the ratios for use in any 

PM2.5 non attainment area. 

Alternatively, the preamble indicated 

that states may adopt their own ratios, 

subject to the EPA’s approval, that 

would have to be substantiated by 

modeling or other technical 

demonstrations of the net air quality 

benefit for ambient PM2.5

concentrations. The preferred ratios 

were subsequently the subject of a 

petition for reconsideration, which the 

Administrator granted. EPA continues 

to support the basic policy that sources 

may offset increases in emissions of 

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

a PM2.5 nonattainment area with actual 

emissions reductions in direct PM2.5 or 

PM2.5 precursors in accordance with 

offset ratios as approved in the SIP for 

the applicable nonattainment area. 

However, we no longer consider the 

preferred ratios set forth in the preamble 

to the 2008 final rule for PM2.5 NSR 

implementation to be presumptively 

approvable. Instead, any ratio involving 

PM2.5 precursors adopted by the state for 

use in the interpollutant offset program 

for PM2.5 nonattainment areas must be 

accompanied by a technical 

demonstration that shows the net air 

quality benefits of such ratio for the 

PM2.5 nonattainment area in which it 

will be applied. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

The SIP revision submitted by 

Pennsylvania consists of amendments to 

the general provisions of 25 Pa. Code 

Chapters 121 and major nonattainment 

NSR permitting regulations of 25 Pa. 

Code Chapter 127. The revision fulfills 

the federal program requirements 

established by the EPA rulemaking 

actions discussed above for 

nonattainment areas. The amendments 

establish the major source threshold, 

significant emission rate and offset 

ratios for PM2.5, establish nitrogen 

oxides (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

as precursors to PM2.5, and establish 

interpollutant trading for offsets and 

NSR applicability to PM2.5 precursor 

pollutants, pursuant to the May 2008 

NSR PM2.5 Rule. Pennsylvania’s 

proposed SIP revision does not include 

the ‘‘grandfathering’’ and presumptively 

approvable interpollutant trading ratio 

provisions that have subsequently been 

repealed/reconsidered. Clarifying 

amendments, described below, for 

Chapter 127 are also made. Finally, 

minor editorial changes are included in 

the amendments. 

Section 127.203a(a)(2) is amended to 

clarify that aggregation of de minimis 

emissions for PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursors is not required. Section 

127.206(o) is amended to clarify that, 

except as provided in Section 127.210 

(which addresses offset ratios), an 

emission reduction credit (ERC) created 

for a regulated criteria pollutant shall 

only be used for offsetting or netting an 

emission increase involving the same 

criteria pollutant unless approved by 

PADEP. Section 127.203(b)(1)(i) is 

amended to clarify that the owner or 

operator must use the existing 

provisions in Section 127.203(b)(2) or 

(3) for a determination of control 

technology requirements when the net 

emission increase is equal to or exceeds 

the applicable emissions rate that is 

significant. 

The amendments add a definition of 

‘‘PM2.5.’’ The amendments revise the 

definitions of existing terms ‘‘regulated 

NSR pollutant’’ and ‘‘significant’’ to 

include the requirements for PM2.5 to 

support the amendments to Chapter 

127. Specifically, the existing term 

‘‘significant’’ is revised to establish a 

threshold for PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors 

at major modifications at existing 

sources and the existing term ‘‘regulated 

NSR pollutant’’ is revised to include 

PM2.5 and to identify precursors for 

PM2.5. The amendments delete the term 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

18990 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

‘‘maximum allowable emissions’’ since 

the term is no longer used to support 

existing regulations in Pennsylvania and 

the term is not used in the federal rules, 

set forth in 40 CFR 51.165, for 

nonattainment New Source Review 

SIPs. 

The amendments submitted by 

Pennsylvania for approval into the SIP 

were adopted by Pennsylvania on May 

18, 2011 and became effective on 

September 3, 2011. They include 

revisions to certain definitions at 25 Pa. 

Code 121.1, as well as to Chapter 127, 

Subchapter E (nonattainment NSR). The 

following regulations under Chapter 127 

are revised: Section 127.201 (General 

requirements), Section 127.201a 

(Measurements, abbreviations and 

acronyms), Section 127.202 (Effective 

date), Section 127.203 (Facilities subject 

to special permit requirements), Section 

127.203a (Applicability determination), 

Section 127.204 (Emissions subject to 

this subchapter), Section 127.206 (ERC 

general requirements), and Section 

127.210 (Offset ratios). 

III. Proposed Action 

EPA’s review of the revisions 

submitted by Pennsylvania for approval 

into the SIP finds them consistent with 

their federal counterparts. EPA is 

proposing to approve the Pennsylvania 

SIP revision to incorporate federal 

preconstruction permitting 

requirements for PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursors in nonattainment areas along 

with clarifying amendments, which was 

submitted on September 23, 2011. EPA 

is soliciting public comments on the 

issues discussed in this document. 

These comments will be considered 

before taking final action. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

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 Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule 

pertaining to NSR requirements for 

PM2.5 does not have tribal implications 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 

because the SIP is not approved to apply 

in Indian country located in the state, 

and EPA notes that it will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: March 19, 2012. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7573 Filed 3–28–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2005–NM–0006; FRL– 

9653–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; New Mexico; 

Construction Permit Fees 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions which repeal and replace 

existing rules, and revisions to the 

applicable State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) for New Mexico submitted by the 

State of New Mexico on April 11, 2002, 

and April 25, 2005, which relate to 

construction permit fee requirement 

regulations. The repeal and replace and 

SIP revisions included in this action 

would address section 110(a)(2) Clean 

Air Act (the Act or CAA) requirements 

related to fees for reviewing and acting 

on specific air quality construction 

permit applications received by the New 

Mexico Environment Department 

(NMED or Department) and for 

implementing and enforcing the terms 

and conditions of the construction 

permit, excluding any court costs or 

other costs associated with an 

enforcement action. EPA has 

determined that these SIP revisions 

comply with the Clean Air Act and EPA 

regulations and are consistent with EPA 

policies. This action is being taken 

under section 110 of the Act. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 30, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to 

Ms. Ashley Mohr, Air Permits Section 

(6PD–R), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Comments 

may also be submitted electronically of 

through hand delivery/courier by 

following the detailed instructions in 

the ADDRESSES section of the direct final 

rule located in the rules section of this 

Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Ashley Mohr, Air Permits Section (6PD– 

R), Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 

1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, 

telephone (214) 665–7289; fax number 

(214) 665–6762; email address 

mohr.ashley@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

final rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP submittal as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS