Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 69625 

future HISA benefits will be furnished 

to the beneficiary for that application. If 

the total actual cost of the improvement 

or structural alteration is less than the 

approved HISA benefit, the balance of 

the approved amount will be credited to 

the beneficiary’s remaining HISA 

benefits lifetime balance. 

(d) Failure to submit a final payment 

request. 

(1) If an advance payment was made 

to the beneficiary, but the beneficiary 

fails to submit a final payment request 

in accordance with paragraph (b) of this 

section within 60 days of the date of the 

advance payment, VA will send a notice 

to remind the beneficiary of the 

obligation to submit the final payment 

request. If the beneficiary fails to submit 

the final payment request or to provide 

a suitable update and explanation of 

delay within 30 days of this notice, VA 

may take appropriate action to collect 

the amount of the advance payment 

from the beneficiary. 

(2) If an advance payment was not 

made to the beneficiary and the 

beneficiary does not submit a final 

payment request in accordance with 

paragraph (b) of this section within 60 

days of the date the application was 

approved, the application will be closed 

and no future HISA benefits will be 

furnished to the beneficiary for that 

application. Before closing the 

application, VA will send a notice to the 

beneficiary of the intent to close the file. 

If the beneficiary does not respond with 

a suitable update and explanation for 

the delay within 30 days, VA will close 

the file and provide a final notice of 

closure. The notice will include 

information about the right to appeal the 

decision. 

(e) Failure to make approved 

improvements or structural alterations. 

If an inspection conducted pursuant to 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section reveals 

that the improvement or structural 

alteration has not been completed as 

indicated in the final payment request, 

VA may take appropriate action to 

collect the amount of the advance 

payment from the beneficiary. VA will 

not seek to collect the amount of the 

advance payment from the beneficiary if 

the beneficiary provides documentation 

indicating that the project was not 

completed due to the fault of the 

contractor, including bankruptcy or 

misconduct of the contractor. 

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 1717) 

(The Office of Management and Budget has 

approved the information collection 

requirements in this section under control 

number 2900–0188.) 

[FR Doc. 2013–27672 Filed 11–19–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0734, FRL–9903–06– 

Region 2] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; New York State 

Ozone Implementation Plan Revision 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the New York State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone 

concerning the control of volatile 

organic compounds. The SIP revision 

consists of amendments to the New 

York Codes. The intended effect of this 

action is to approve control techniques, 

required by the Clean Air Act, which 

will result in emission reductions that 

will help attain and maintain the 

national ambient air quality standards 

for ozone. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 20, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket Number EPA–R02– 

OAR–2013–0734, 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: Mr. Richard Ruvo, Chief, Air 

Programs Branch, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007–1866. 

• Hand Delivery: Mr. 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 a.m. to 4 

p.m., excluding federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket No. EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0734. 

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 

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: Kirk 

J. Wieber (wieber.kirk@epa.gov), Air 

Programs Branch, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th 

Floor, New York, New York 10007– 

1866, (212) 637–3381. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What is required by the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) and how does it apply to New 

York? 

A. Background 

B. What are the moderate area 

requirements? 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
69626 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

II. What was included in New York’s 

submittal? 

III. What is EPA’s evaluation of Part 228, 

‘‘Surface Coating Processes, Commercial 

and Industrial Adhesives, Sealants and 

Primers’’? 

A. Background 

B. What are the requirements of Part 228, 

‘‘Surface Coating Processes, Commercial 

and Industrial Adhesives, Sealants and 

Primers’’? 

C. What is EPA’s evaluation? 

IV. What is EPA’s conclusion? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is required by the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) and how does it apply to New 

York? 

A. Background 

In 1997, EPA revised the health-based 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS or standard) for ozone, setting 

it at 0.08 parts per million averaged over 

an 8-hour period. EPA set the 8-hour 

ozone standard based on scientific 

evidence demonstrating that ozone 

causes adverse health effects at lower 

ozone concentrations and over longer 

periods of time than was understood 

when the pre-existing 1-hour ozone 

standard was set. EPA determined that 

the 8-hour standard would be more 

protective of human health, especially 

with regard to children and adults who 

are active outdoors, and individuals 

with a pre-existing respiratory disease, 

such as asthma. 

On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858), EPA 

finalized its attainment/nonattainment 

designations for areas across the country 

with respect to the 8-hour ozone 

standard. These actions became 

effective on June 15, 2004. The three 8- 

hour ozone moderate nonattainment 

areas located in New York State are: The 

New York-Northern New Jersey-Long 

Island, NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area; 

the Poughkeepsie nonattainment area; 

and the Jefferson County nonattainment 

area. The New York portion of the New 

York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, 

NY-NJ-CT nonattainment 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 Poughkeepsie 

nonattainment area is composed of 

Dutchess, Orange and Putnam counties. 

These designations triggered the 

CAA’s requirements under section 

182(b) for moderate nonattainment areas 

to submit a demonstration of 

attainment, including implementing 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT). 

B. What are the moderate area 

requirements? 

Section 182(b)(2)(A) provides that for 

moderate and above nonattainment 

areas, states must revise their SIPs to 

include RACT for each category of 

volatile organic compound (VOC) 

sources covered by a control techniques 

guidelines (CTG) document issued 

between November 15, 1990 and the 

date of attainment. 

Additionally, CAA section 

184(b)(1)(B) requires implementation of 

RACT statewide in states that are 

located within an Ozone Transport 

Region (OTR). New York is one of the 

several states located in the OTR 

required under the CAA to revise its SIP 

to include RACT requirements 

statewide for each of the source 

categories identified in the federal 

CTGs, including RACT for surface 

coating processes. 

The EPA defines RACT as ‘‘the lowest 

emission limitation that a particular 

source is capable of meeting by the 

application of control technology that is 

reasonably available considering 

technological and economic feasibility.’’ 

44 FR 53761 (Sept. 17, 1979). In 

subsequent Federal Register notices, 

EPA has addressed how states can meet 

the RACT requirements of the CAA. 

CAA section 183(e) directs EPA to list 

for regulation those categories of 

products that account for at least 80 

percent of the VOC emissions, on a 

reactivity-adjusted basis, from consumer 

and commercial products in areas that 

violate the NAAQS for ozone (i.e., ozone 

nonattainment areas). EPA issued the 

list on March 23, 1995, and has revised 

the list periodically. See 60 FR 15264 

(March 23, 1995); see also 71 FR 28320 

(May 16, 2006), 70 FR 69759 (Nov. 17, 

2005); 64 FR 13422 (Mar. 18, 1999). 

II. What was included in New York’s 

submittal? 

On July 15, 2013, the New York State 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation (NYSDEC), submitted to 

EPA revisions to the SIP, which 

included state adopted revisions to Title 

6 of the New York Code of Rules and 

Regulations (6 NYCRR) Part 228, 

‘‘Surface Coating Processes, Commercial 

and Industrial Adhesives, Sealants and 

Primers,’’ with an effective date of June 

5, 2013. These revisions are applicable 

statewide and will therefore provide 

volatile organic compound (VOC) 

emission reductions statewide and will 

help towards achieving attainment of 

the ozone standards in the NYMA and 

towards meeting the RACT 

requirements. 

New York also included a negative 

declaration in its July 15, 2013 

submittal. New York has certified, based 

on a review of operating permits and 

emissions inventory, no facilities exist 

in the State to which the Fiberglass Boat 

Manufacturing Materials CTG or the 

Industrial Cleaning Solvents CTG apply. 

EPA recently approved a SIP revision 

for prior amendments to Part 228 on 

March 8, 2012 (77 FR 13974). 

III. What is EPA’s evaluation of Part 

228, ‘‘Surface Coating Processes, 

Commercial and Industrial Adhesives, 

Sealants and Primers’’? 

A. Background 

New York State currently regulates 

VOCs emitted by surface coating 

processes under 6 NYCRR Subpart 

228–1. The revisions to Part 228 update 

the current rule by incorporating the 

latest RACT requirements for surface 

coating processes established in seven 

different CTGs issued by EPA from 

April 1996 to September 2008. These 

CTGs establish presumptive RACT for 

surface coating processes in each of the 

product categories identified below: 

(1) Wood Finishing Manufacturing 

Operations [EPA 453/R–96–007 (April 

1996); 61 FR 25223 (May 20, 1996)]; 

(2) Flat Wood Paneling Coatings [EPA 

453/R–06–004 (September 2006); 71 FR 

58745 (Oct. 5, 2006)]; 

(3) Metal Furniture Coatings [EPA 

453/R–07–005 (September 2007); 72 FR 

57215 (Oct. 9, 2007)]; 

(4) Large Appliance Coatings [EPA 

453/R–07–004 (September 2007); 72 FR 

57215 (Oct. 9, 2007)]; 

(5) Paper, Film and Foil Coatings 

[EPA 453/R–07–003 (September 2007); 

72 FR 57215 (Oct. 9, 2007)]; 

(6) Automobile and Light-Duty Truck 

Assembly Coatings [EPA–453/R–08–006 

(September 2008); 73 FR 58481 (Oct. 7, 

2008)]; and 

(7) Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic 

Parts Coatings [EPA–453/R–08–003 

(September, 2008); 73 FR 58481 (Oct. 7, 

2008)]. 

B. What are the requirements of Part 

228, ‘‘Surface Coating Processes, 

Commercial and Industrial Adhesives, 

Sealants and Primers’’? 

Section 228–1.1, ‘‘Applicability and 

Exemptions,’’ was revised to reflect the 

applicability criteria specified in seven 

of EPA’s final CTGs for specific coating 

processes. Consistent with the 

preexisting regulation, all surface 

coating facilities located in the NYMA, 

and the Orange County towns of 

Blooming Grove, Chester, Highlands, 

Monroe, Tuxedo, Warwick, and 

Woodbury, are subject to the regulation. 

Surface coating facilities located outside 

the above counties and towns have 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 69627 

specific applicability criteria for various 

surface coating processes. These criteria 

range from a facility using 55 gallons of 

coating or more per year up to having 

a potential to emit 50 tons or more of 

VOCs on an annual basis. Typically, 

only facilities that have actual emissions 

of three tons per year or more are 

subject to the control requirements of 

the revised regulation. All others are 

subject only to section 228–1.3, 

‘‘General Requirements.’’ 

Section 228–1.2, ‘‘Definitions,’’ sets 

forth several definitions specific to 

subpart 228–1. This section includes 

many new definitions that are 

consistent with the federal CTGs, 

including several added coating types 

used in the updated coating processes. 

The definitions in Part 200 also apply 

unless they are inconsistent with 

subpart 228–1. 

Section 228–1.3, ‘‘General 

Requirements,’’ is a new section added 

to subpart 228–1 which describes the 

minimum requirements applicable to all 

surface coating facilities. It combines 

provisions from the preexisting 

regulation related to: Opacity limit; 

recordkeeping; prohibition of sale or 

specification; and handling, storage and 

disposal of volatile organic compounds. 

It also sets forth acceptable application 

techniques common to many surface 

coating processes. 

Section 228–1.4, ‘‘Requirements for 

controlling VOC emissions using 

compliant materials,’’ lists the 

maximum VOC content allowed for 

coatings used in surface coating 

processes. The revisions include 

additional requirements as well as 

exceptions specific to a coating process, 

coating type or application 

requirements. 

Section 228–1.5, ‘‘Requirements for 

controlling VOC emissions using add on 

controls or coating systems,’’ provides 

alternatives to complying with the VOC 

content limits of section 228–1.4. Most 

coating processes are allowed 

alternative means of compliance. 

Pursuant to the revisions, they can 

comply with the regulation by: (1) 

Controlling their emissions using a 

capturing system followed by treatment 

of the VOCs; (2) using a combination of 

VOC content coatings compliant with 

section 228–1.4 along with noncompliant ones, and with or without 

added controls, in a ‘‘coating system’’ 

acceptable to the NYSDEC; or (3) 

providing a process-specific RACT 

demonstration, subject to the 

satisfaction of the NYSDEC, which 

shows that the requirements cannot be 

economically or technically achieved. 

Such process specific RACT 

demonstrations must be submitted to 

the EPA for approval as a revision to the 

SIP. 

Section 228–1.6, ‘‘Reports, sampling 

and analysis,’’ specifies the 

requirements necessary to determine 

and maintain compliance with the 

regulation. This section allows the 

NYSDEC to have reasonable access to 

subject facilities to obtain samples of 

any material containing VOC in order to 

determine compliance, and specifies the 

test methods used for add on control 

systems to show compliance with the 

applicable requirements. 

Revisions to subpart 228–2 make 

clarifying changes and are nonsubstantive. Also, the NYSDEC 

determined that subsection 228– 

2.7(a)(1), the labeling provision 

requiring that manufacturers specify the 

category name, is unnecessary and 

therefore removed that provision. 

C. What is EPA’s evaluation? 

Part 228 contains the required 

elements for a federally enforceable 

rule: Emission limitations, compliance 

procedures and test methods, 

compliance dates and record keeping 

provisions. 

Part 228 includes provisions that 

prohibit the selling, supplying, offering 

for sale, soliciting, using, specifying or 

requiring the use of a non-compliant 

coating on a part or product at a facility 

in New York, unless allowed by other 

provisions of Part 228. Part 228 also 

includes provisions for handling, 

storage and disposal of VOC’s. Facilities 

also have compliance options including 

the option of using add-on control 

equipment provided it achieves 90 

percent control. 

EPA has evaluated New York’s 

submittal for consistency with the CAA, 

EPA regulations, and EPA policy and 

guideline documents. EPA has 

determined that Part 228 is as effective 

in regulating the source categories as the 

following CTG’s: 

(1) Wood Furniture Manufacturing 

Operations [EPA 453/R–96–007 (April 

1996); 61 FR 25223 (May 20, 1996)]; 

(2) Flat Wood Paneling Coatings [EPA 

453/R–06–004 (September 2006); 71 FR 

58745 (Oct. 5, 2006)]; 

(3) Metal Furniture Coatings [EPA 

453/R–07–005 (September 2007); 72 FR 

57215 (Oct. 9, 2007)]; 

(4) Large Appliance Coatings [EPA 

453/R–07–004 (September 2007); 72 FR 

57215 (Oct. 9, 2007)]; 

(5) Paper, Film and Foil Coatings 

[EPA 453/R–07–003 (September 2007); 

72 FR 57215 (Oct. 9, 2007)]; 

(6) Automobile and Light-Duty Truck 

Assembly Coatings [EPA–453/R–08–006 

(September 2008); 73 FR 58481 (Oct. 7, 

2008)]; and 

(7) Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic 

Parts Coatings [EPA–453/R–08–003 

(September, 2008); 73 FR 58481 (Oct. 7, 

2008)]. 

EPA has determined that the VOC 

content limits associated with the 

various surface coating processes 

included in the revised Part 228 are 

consistent with the VOC content limits 

recommended in the applicable surface 

coating CTG’s, as are all of the other 

recommended control options (i.e., addon controls efficiency, work practices 

for coating-related activities and work 

practices for cleaning materials) and 

applicability thresholds. Therefore, EPA 

proposes to approve it as part of the SIP 

and as meeting the requirement to adopt 

a RACT rule for the CTG categories 

listed above. 

With regards to New York’s negative 

declaration for Fiberglass Boat 

Manufacturing Materials and Industrial 

Cleaning Solvents, EPA agrees with 

New York’s evaluation that no facilities 

exist in the State to which the Fiberglass 

Boat Manufacturing Materials CTG 

apply. However, EPA is still reviewing 

the negative declaration as it applies to 

the Industrial Cleaning Solvents CTG 

and will discuss our evaluation in the 

future. 

As previously noted, EPA recently 

approved a SIP revision for prior 

amendments to Part 228 on March 8, 

2012 (77 FR 13974). 

IV. What is EPA’s conclusion? 

EPA has evaluated New York’s July 

15, 2013 SIP revision submittal for 

consistency with the CAA, EPA 

regulations, and EPA policy and 

guideline documents. EPA proposes that 

the revisions made to Title 6 of the New 

York Code of Rules and Regulations (6 

NYCRR) Part 228, ‘‘Surface Coating 

Processes, Commercial and Industrial 

Adhesives, Sealants and Primers,’’ with 

an effective date of June 5, 2013, meet 

the SIP requirements of the CAA and 

fulfill the recommended controls 

identified in the applicable CTGs. EPA 

is proposing to approve these revisions 

and is also proposing to approve New 

York’s July 15, 2013 negative 

declaration, which certifies that based 

on a review of operating permits and 

emissions inventory, no facilities exist 

in the State to which the Fiberglass Boat 

Manufacturing Materials CTG apply. 

Therefore, New York will not have to 

incorporate provisions consistent with 

that CTG into Part 228 or any other 

regulation. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
69628 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

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 proposed 

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 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) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Act; 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 action 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, Hydrocarbons, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of 

nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: November 8, 2013. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2013–27679 Filed 11–19–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 80 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0479; FRL–9903–10– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AR76 

Public Hearing for the 2014 Standards 

for the Renewable Fuel Standard 

Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Announcement of public 

hearing. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is announcing a 

public hearing to be held for the 

proposed rule 2014 Standards for the 

Renewable Fuel Standard Program, 

which EPA will publish separately in 

the Federal Register. The hearing will 

be held in Washington, DC on December 

5, 2013. In the separate notice of 

proposed rulemaking EPA has proposed 

amendments to the renewable fuel 

standard program regulations to 

establish annual percentage standards 

for cellulosic biofuel, biomass-based 

diesel, advanced biofuel, and renewable 

fuels that would apply to all gasoline 

and diesel produced in the U.S. or 

imported in the year 2014. In addition, 

the separate proposal includes a 

proposed biomass-based diesel 

applicable volume for 2015. 

DATES: The public hearing will be held 

on December 5, 2013 at the location 

noted below under ADDRESSES. The 

hearing will begin at 9 a.m. and end 

when all parties present who wish to 

speak have had an opportunity to do so. 

Parties wishing to testify at the hearing 

should notify the contact person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT by November 26, 2013. 

Additional information regarding the 

hearing appears below under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 

ADDRESSES: The hearing will be held at 

the following location: Hyatt Regency 

Crystal City, 2799 Jefferson Davis 

Highway, Arlington, VA 22202 (phone 

number 703–413–6718). A complete set 

of documents related to the proposal 

will be available for public inspection at 

the EPA Docket Center, located at 1301 

Constitution Avenue NW., Room 3334, 

Washington, DC between 8:30 a.m. and 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. A reasonable 

fee may be charged for copying. 

Documents will also be available 

through the electronic docket system at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia 

MacAllister, Office of Transportation 

and Air Quality, Assessment and 

Standards Division, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood 

Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone 

number: (734) 214–4131; Fax number: 

(734) 214–4816; Email address: 

macallister.julia@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

proposal for which EPA is holding the 

public hearing has been published 

separately in the Federal Register. 

Public Hearing: The public hearing 

will provide interested parties the 

opportunity to present data, views, or 

arguments concerning the proposal 

(which can be found at http://

www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/

renewablefuels/index.htm). The EPA 

may ask clarifying questions during the 

oral presentations but will not respond 

to the presentations at that time. Written 

statements and supporting information 

submitted during the comment period 

will be considered with the same weight 

as any oral comments and supporting 

information presented at the public 

hearing. Written comments must be 

received by the last day of the comment 

period, as specified in the notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

How can I get copies of this document, 

the proposed rule, and other related 

information? 

The EPA has established a docket for 

this action under Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2013–0479. The EPA has also 

developed a Web site for the Renewable 

Fuel Standard (RFS) program, including 

the notice of proposed rulemaking, at 

the address given above. Please refer to 

the notice of proposed rulemaking for 

detailed information on accessing 

information related to the proposal. 

Dated: November 14, 2013. 

Christopher Grundler, 

Director, Office of Transportation and Air 

Quality, Office of Air and Radiation. 

[FR Doc. 2013–27827 Filed 11–19–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1