59334 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

be available for public inspection and 

copying. 

A public hearing has been scheduled 

for October 7, 2011 beginning at 

10:00 a.m. in the IRS Auditorium, 

Internal Revenue Building, 1111 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC. Due to building security 

procedures, visitors must enter at the 

Constitution Avenue entrance. All 

visitors must present photo 

identification to enter the building. 

Because of access restrictions, visitors 

will not be admitted beyond the 

immediate entrance area more than 30 

minutes before the hearing starts. For 

information about having your name 

placed on the building access list to 

attend the hearing, see the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble. 

The rules of 26 CFR 601.601(a)(3) 

apply to the hearing. Persons who wish 

to present oral comments at the hearing 

must submit written or electronic 

comments and an outline of the topics 

to be discussed and the time to be 

devoted to each topic by October 4, 

2011. A period of 10 minutes will be 

allocated to each person for making 

comments. 

An agenda showing the scheduling of 

the speakers will be prepared after the 

deadline for receiving outlines has 

passed. Copies of the agenda will be 

available free of charge at the hearing. 

Drafting Information 

The principal author of these 

regulations is Emily M. Lesniak, Office 

of the Associate Chief Counsel 

(Procedure and Administration). 

List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 300 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, User fees. 

Proposed Amendments to the 

Regulations 

Accordingly, 26 CFR part 300 is 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

Part 300—USER FEES 

Paragraph 1. The authority citation 

for part 300 continues to read in part as 

follows: 

Authority: 31 U.S.C. 9701. 

Par. 2. Section 300.0 is amended by: 

1. Redesignating paragraph (b)(12) as 

paragraph (b)(13). 

2. Adding new paragraph (b)(12). 

3. Adding paragraph (b)(14). 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 300.0 User fees; in general. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(12) Taking the registered tax return 

preparer examination. 

* * * 

(14) Fingerprinting to apply for, or 

participate, in the preparer tax 

identification number, authorized e-file 

provider, or acceptance agent programs. 

§ 300.12 [Redesignated as § 300.13] 

Par. 3. Redesignate § 300.12 as 

§ 300.13. 

Par. 4. Add new § 300.12 to read as 

follows: 

§ 300.12 Registered tax return preparer 

competency examination fee. 

(a) Applicability. This section applies 

to the competency examination to 

become a registered tax return preparer 

pursuant to 31 CFR 10.4(c). 

(b) Fee. The fee for taking the 

registered tax return preparer 

competency examination is $27, which 

is the government cost for overseeing 

the examination and does not include 

any fees charged by the administrator of 

the examination. 

(c) Person liable for the fee. The 

person liable for the competency 

examination fee is the applicant taking 

the examination. 

(d) Effective/applicability date. This 

section is applicable on the date the 

final regulations are published in the 

Federal Register. 

Par. 5. Section 300.14 is added to read 

as follows: 

§ 300.14 Fingerprinting fee to participate in 

the preparer tax identification number, 

acceptance agent, or authorized e-file 

provider programs. 

(a) Applicability. This section applies 

to applicants and participants in the 

preparer tax identification number, 

acceptance agent, and authorized e-file 

provider programs who are required to 

be fingerprinted as prescribed by forms, 

instructions, or other appropriate 

guidance. This section does not apply, 

however, to individuals who reside and 

are employed outside of the United 

States. 

(b) Fee. The fee to be fingerprinted is 

$33, which is the cost to the government 

for processing the fingerprints and does 

not include any fees charged by the 

vendor. 

(c) Person liable for the fee. The 

person liable for the fingerprinting fee is 

the person being fingerprinted. 

(d) Effective/applicability date. This 

section is applicable on the date the 

final regulations are published in the 

Federal Register. 

Steven T. Miller, 

Deputy Commissioner for Services and 

Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 2011–24771 Filed 9–22–11; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2011–0032; FRL–9471–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; New 

Mexico; Albuquerque/Bernalillo 

County; Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration; Greenhouse Gas 

Tailoring Rule Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to 

approve a revision to the Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County, New Mexico State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) that was 

submitted by the Governor of New 

Mexico to EPA on December 15, 2010. 

The proposed SIP revision modifies 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) program to establish appropriate 

emission thresholds for determining 

which new stationary sources and 

modification projects become subject to 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s PSD 

permitting requirements for their 

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Due to 

the SIP Narrowing Rule, 75 FR 82536, 

starting on January 2, 2011, the 

approved Albuquerque/Bernalillo 

County SIP’s PSD requirements for GHG 

apply at the thresholds specified in the 

Tailoring Rule, not at the 100 or 250 

tons per year (tpy) levels otherwise 

provided under the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act), which would overwhelm 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s 

permitting resources. This rule clarifies 

the applicable thresholds in the 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County SIP, 

addresses the flaw discussed in the SIP 

Narrowing Rule, and incorporates state 

rule changes adopted at the state level 

into the federally-approved SIP. EPA is 

proposing approval of the Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County, New Mexico 

December 15, 2010 PSD SIP revision 

because the Agency has made the 

preliminary determination that this PSD 

SIP revision is in accordance with 

section 110 and part C of the Federal 

Clean Air Act and EPA regulations 

regarding PSD permitting for GHGs. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 26, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R06– 

OAR–2011–0032, by one of the 

following methods: 

(1) http://www.regulations.gov: 

Follow the on-line instructions for 

submitting comments. 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Proposed Rules 59335 

(2) E-mail: Mr. Jeff Robinson at 

robinson.jeffrey@epa.gov. Please also cc 

the person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph below. 

(3) U. S. EPA Region 6 ‘‘Contact Us’’ 

Web site: http://epa.gov/region6/ 

r6coment.htm. Please click on ‘‘6PD’’ 

(Multimedia) and select ‘‘Air’’ before 

submitting comments. 

(4) Fax: Mr. Jeff Robinson, Chief, Air 

Permits Section (6PD–R), at fax number 

214–665–6762. 

(5) Mail: Mr. Jeff Robinson, Chief, Air 

Permits Section (6PD–R), Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. 

(6) Hand or Courier Delivery: Mr. Jeff 

Robinson, Chief, Air Permits Section 

(6PD–R), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Such 

deliveries are accepted only between the 

hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. 

weekdays except for legal holidays. 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2011– 

0032. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

the disclosure of which is restricted by 

statute. Do not submit information 

through http://www.regulations.gov or 

e-mail, if you believe that it is CBI or 

otherwise protected from disclosure. 

The http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means that EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send an e-mail 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through http://www.regulations.gov, 

your e-mail 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 along with any disk or CD– 

ROM submitted. 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 and any form of encryption 

and should 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 the disclosure of which 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 Air Permits Section (6PD–R), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, 

Texas 75202–2733. The file will be 

made available by appointment for 

public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA 

Review Room between the hours of 8:30 

a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for 

legal holidays. Contact the person listed 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT paragraph below to make an 

appointment. If possible, please make 

the appointment at least two working 

days in advance of your visit. A 15 cent 

per page fee will be charged for making 

photocopies of documents. On the day 

of the visit, please check in at the EPA 

Region 6 reception area on the seventh 

floor at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, 

Dallas, Texas. 

The State submittals related to this 

SIP revision, and which are part of the 

EPA docket, are also available for public 

inspection at the Local Air Agency 

listed below during official business 

hours by appointment: 

Albuquerque Environmental Health 

Department, Suite 3023, 3rd floor, One 

Civic Plaza, 400 Marquette Av. NW, 

Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87102. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Mike Miller (6PD–R), Air Permits 

Section, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue 

(6PD–R), Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202– 

2733. The telephone number is (214) 

665–7550. Mr. Miller can also be 

reached via electronic mail at 

miller.michael@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for EPA? 

II. Summary of Albuquerque/Bernalillo 

County’s Submittal 

III. What is the background for today’s 

proposed action? 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County’s SIP revision? 

V. What action is EPA taking? 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

When submitting comments, 

remember to: 

1. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

2. Follow directions—The EPA may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

3. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

4. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

5. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

6. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

7. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

8. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. Summary of Albuquerque/Bernalillo 

County’s Submittal 

On December 15, 2010, the State of 

New Mexico submitted a SIP revision 

request to EPA to establish appropriate 

emission thresholds for determining 

which new or modified stationary 

sources become subject to Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County’s PSD permitting 

requirements for GHG emissions. The 

submitted revisions to the SIP are 

enacted at 20.11.61.7 New Mexico Air 

Code (NMAC). Final approval of this 

SIP revision request will put in place 

the GHG emission thresholds for PSD 

applicability set forth in EPA’s Tailoring 

Rule, ensuring that smaller GHG sources 

emitting less than these thresholds are 

not subject to permitting requirements. 

Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, 

EPA is proposing to approve this 

revision into the Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County SIP. New Mexico also 

submitted revisions to the remainder of 

the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County PSD 

program at 20.11.61.6, 20.11.61.11, 

20.11.61.12, 20.11.61.20 and 20.11.61.27 

NMAC that correctly update internal 

cross-references to the PSD definitions. 

EPA is also proposing approval of these 

revisions pursuant to section 110 of the 

CAA. 

Also on December 15, 2010, New 

Mexico submitted revisions to the New 

Mexico General Provisions for 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
59336 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1 ‘‘Limitation of Approval of Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning 

Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State 

Implementation Plans; Final Rule.’’ 75 FR 82536 

(December 30, 2010). 

2 ‘‘Endangerment and Cause or Contribute 

Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 

202(a) of the Clean Air Act.’’ 74 FR 66496 

(December 15, 2009). 

3 ‘‘Interpretation of Regulations that Determine 

Pollutants Covered by Clean Air Act Permitting 

Programs.’’ 75 FR 17004 (April 2, 2010). 

4 ‘‘Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission 

Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy 

Standards; Final Rule.’’ 75 FR 25324 (May 7, 2010). 

5Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title 

V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule.’’ 75 

FR 31514 (June 3, 2010). 

6Specifically, by notice dated December 13, 2010, 

EPA finalized a ‘‘SIP Call’’ that would require those 

states with SIPs that have approved PSD programs 

but do not authorize PSD permitting for GHGs to 

submit a SIP revision providing such authority. 

‘‘Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits 

Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 

Finding of Substantial Inadequacy and SIP Call,’’ 75 

FR 77698 (Dec. 13, 2010). EPA has been making 

findings of failure to submit for states unable to 

submit the required SIP revision by their deadline, 

and finalizing FIPs for such states. See, e.g. ‘‘Action 

To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program to 

Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Finding of 

Failure To Submit State Implementation Plan 

Revisions Required for Greenhouse Gases,’’ 75 FR 

81874 (December 29, 2010); ‘‘Action To Ensure 

Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of 

Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Federal Implementation 

Plan,’’ 75 FR 82246 (December 30, 2010). Because 

New Mexico’s SIP already authorizes Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County to regulate GHGs once GHGs 

become subject to PSD requirements on January 2, 

2011, Albuquerque/Bernalillo County is not subject 

to the proposed SIP Call or FIP. 

7 ‘‘Limitation of Approval of Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning 

Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State 

Implementation Plans; Final Rule.’’ 75 FR 82536 

(December 30, 2010). 

8Tailoring Rule, 75 FR 31,517/1. 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County at 

20.11.1 NMAC, and to the New Mexico 

Title V Operating Permits Program for 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County at 

20.11.42 NMAC. EPA will address these 

revisions at a later date and in a separate 

action on the General Provisions and the 

Title V Program. 

III. What is the background for today’s 

proposed action? 

This section briefly summarizes EPA’s 

recent GHG-related actions that provide 

the background for today’s proposed 

action. More detailed discussion of the 

background is found in the preambles 

for those actions. In particular, the 

background is contained in what we call 

the GHG PSD SIP Narrowing Rule,1 and 

in the preambles to the actions cited 

therein. 

A. GHG-Related Actions 

EPA has recently undertaken a series 

of actions pertaining to the regulation of 

GHGs that, although for the most part 

distinct from one another, establish the 

overall framework for today’s final 

action on the New Mexico SIP. Four of 

these actions include, as they are 

commonly called, the ‘‘Endangerment 

Finding’’ and ‘‘Cause or Contribute 

Finding,’’ which EPA issued in a single 

final action,2 the ‘‘Johnson Memo 

Reconsideration,’’ 3 the ‘‘Light-Duty 

Vehicle Rule,’’ 4 and the ‘‘Tailoring 

Rule.’’ 5 Taken together and in 

conjunction with the CAA, these actions 

established regulatory requirements for 

GHGs emitted from new motor vehicles 

and new motor vehicle engines; 

determined that such regulations, when 

they took effect on January 2, 2011, 

subjected GHGs emitted from stationary 

sources to PSD requirements; and 

limited the applicability of PSD 

requirements to GHG sources on a 

phased-in basis. EPA took this last 

action in the Tailoring Rule, which, 

more specifically, established 

appropriate GHG emission thresholds 

for determining the applicability of PSD 

requirements to GHG-emitting sources. 

PSD is implemented through the SIP 

system, and so in December 2010, EPA 

promulgated several rules to implement 

the new GHG PSD SIP program. 

Recognizing that some states had 

approved SIP PSD programs that did not 

apply PSD to GHGs, EPA issued a SIP 

call and, for some of these states, a FIP.6

Recognizing that other states had 

approved SIP PSD programs that do 

apply PSD to GHGs, but that do so for 

sources that emit as little as 100 or 250 

tpy of GHG, and that do not limit PSD 

applicability to GHGs to the higher 

thresholds in the Tailoring Rule, EPA 

issued the GHG PSD SIP Narrowing 

Rule. Under that rule, EPA withdrew its 

approval of the affected SIPs to the 

extent those SIPs covered GHG-emitting 

sources below the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds. EPA based its action 

primarily on the ‘‘error correction’’ 

provisions of CAA section 110(k)(6). 

B. Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s 

Actions 

On July 16, 2010, the City of 

Albuquerque’s Environmental Health 

Department (AEHD) provided a letter to 

EPA, in accordance with a request to all 

States from EPA in the Tailoring Rule, 

with confirmation that their local air 

board has the authority to regulate GHG 

in its PSD program. The letter confirmed 

that Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s 

current rules require regulating GHGs at 

the existing 100/250 tpy threshold, 

rather than at the higher thresholds set 

in the Tailoring Rule because 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s rules 

and could not be interpreted to apply 

the meaning of the term ‘‘subject to 

regulation’’ established in the Tailoring 

Rule. The City’s AEHD also submitted a 

letter on September 17, 2010, in 

response to the proposed GHG SIP Call 

again confirming that EPA correctly 

classified Albuquerque/Bernalillo 

County’s SIP to apply PSD requirements 

to GHGs and that they were pursuing 

revisions to their SIP to match federal 

requirements. See the docket for this 

proposed rulemaking for copies of 

AEHD’s July 16, 2010, and September 

17, 2010, letters. 

In the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, 

published on December 30, 2010, EPA 

withdrew its approval of Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County’s SIP—among other 

SIPs—to the extent that SIP applies PSD 

permitting requirements to GHG 

emissions from sources emitting at 

levels below those set in the Tailoring 

Rule.7 As a result, the Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County’s current approved 

SIP provides the local permitting 

authority with authority to regulate 

GHGs, but only at and above the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds; and federally 

requires new and modified sources to 

receive a PSD permit based on GHG 

emissions only if they emit at or above 

the Tailoring Rule thresholds. 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County has 

amended its local regulations to 

incorporate the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds for sources within 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County, and has 

submitted the adopted regulations as 

revisions to their SIP. EPA’s proposed 

approval of Albuquerque/Bernalillo 

County‘s revisions will clarify the 

applicable thresholds in the 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County SIP. 

The basis for this SIP revision is that 

limiting PSD applicability to GHG 

sources to the higher thresholds in the 

Tailoring Rule is consistent with the SIP 

provisions that provide required 

assurances of adequate resources, and 

thereby addresses the flaw in the SIP 

that led to the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule. 

Specifically, CAA section 110(a)(2)(E) 

includes as a requirement for SIP 

approval that States provide ‘‘necessary 

assurances that the State * * * will 

have adequate personnel [and] funding 

* * * to carry out such [SIP].’’ In the 

Tailoring Rule, EPA established higher 

thresholds for PSD applicability to 

GHG-emitting sources on grounds that 

the states generally did not have 

adequate resources to apply PSD to 

GHG-emitting sources below the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds,8 and no 

State, including Albuquerque/Bernalillo 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Proposed Rules 59337 

9SIP Narrowing Rule, 75 FR 82,540/2. 

10 Id. at 82,542/3. 

11 Id. at 82,544/1. 

12 Id. at 82,540/2. 

13On December 15, 2010, Governor Richardson 

also submitted revisions to the Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County’s Title V program and to the 

General Provisions portion of the SIP. EPA will take 

separate action on these revisions in a separate 

rulemaking. 

14 ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County; Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) and New Source Review’’ 72 FR 

20728 (April 26, 2007). 

County, asserted that it did have 

adequate resources to do so.9 In the PSD 

SIP Narrowing Rule, EPA found that the 

affected states, including New Mexico 

and Albuquerque/Bernalillo County, 

had a flaw in their SIP at the time they 

submitted their PSD programs, which 

was that the applicability of the PSD 

programs was potentially broader than 

the resources available to them under 

their SIP.10 Accordingly, for each 

affected state, including New Mexico 

and Albuquerque/Bernalillo County, 

EPA concluded that EPA’s action in 

approving the SIP was in error, under 

CAA section 110(k)(6), and EPA 

rescinded its approval to the extent the 

PSD program applies to GHG-emitting 

sources below the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds.11 EPA recommended that 

States adopt a SIP revision to 

incorporate the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds, thereby (i) assuring that 

under State law, only sources at or 

above the Tailoring Rule thresholds 

would be subject to PSD; and (ii) 

avoiding confusion under the federallyapproved SIP by clarifying that the SIP 

applies to only sources at or above the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds.12

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s SIP 

revision? 

The regulatory revisions that 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County ‘s 

AEHD submitted on December 15, 2010, 

establish thresholds for determining 

which stationary sources and 

modification projects become subject to 

permitting requirements for GHG 

emissions under its PSD program. 

Specifically, the submittal includes 

changes to Albuquerque/Bernalillo 

County’s PSD regulations at 20.11.61.6, 

20.11.61.7, 20.11.61.11, 20.11.61.12, 

20.11.61.20, and 20.11.61.27 NMAC.13

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County has a 

SIP-approved PSD program, and has 

incorporated EPA’s 2002 New Source 

Review (NSR) reform revisions for PSD 

into its SIP.14 In letters provided to EPA 

on June 24, 2010, and September 14, 

2010, Albuquerque/Bernalillo County 

notified EPA of its interpretation that 

the City and County have the authority 

to regulate GHGs under its PSD 

regulations. Prior to the passage of the 

submitted revisions, the City and 

County’s regulations (adopted prior to 

the promulgation of EPA’s Tailoring 

Rule) applied to major stationary 

sources having the potential to emit at 

least 100 tpy or 250 tpy or more of a 

regulated NSR pollutant, depending on 

the type of source, or major 

modifications constructing in areas 

designated attainment or unclassifiable 

with respect to the National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards. 

The changes to Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County‘s PSD program 

regulations submitted for approval here 

are substantively the same as the 

amendments to the Federal PSD 

regulatory provisions in EPA’s Tailoring 

Rule. As part of its review of this 

submittal, EPA performed a line-by-line 

review of Albuquerque/Bernalillo 

County’s revisions and has determined 

that they are consistent with the 

Tailoring Rule. EPA’s Technical 

Support Document detailing our 

analysis of the revisions to the New 

Mexico SIP is available in the docket for 

this action. 

V. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is proposing to approve 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s 

December 15, 2010, SIP submittal, 

relating to PSD requirements for GHGemitting sources in Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County. Specifically, the 

December 15, 2010, proposed SIP 

revision establishes appropriate 

emissions thresholds for determining 

PSD applicability to new and modified 

GHG-emitting sources in accordance 

with EPA’s Tailoring Rule. EPA has 

made the determination that this SIP 

submittal is approvable because it is in 

accordance with the CAA and EPA 

regulations regarding PSD permitting for 

GHGs. 

If EPA finalizes our approval of 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s 

changes to its air quality regulations to 

incorporate the appropriate thresholds 

for GHG permitting applicability into its 

SIP, then paragraph (e) in Section 

52.1634 of 40 CFR part 52, as included 

in EPA’s SIP Narrowing Rule—which 

codifies EPA’s limiting its approval of 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s PSD 

SIP to not cover the applicability of PSD 

to GHG-emitting sources below the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds—is no longer 

necessary. In today’s proposed action, 

EPA is also proposing to amend Section 

52.1634 of 40 CFR part 52 to remove 

this unnecessary regulatory language. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Clean Air 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 Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive 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 Clean Air 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 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 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
59338 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, and Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: September 13, 2011. 

Lawrence E. Starfield, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2011–24696 Filed 9–23–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0100; FRL–9471–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Montana; Revisions to the 

Administrative Rules of Montana—Air 

Quality, Subchapter 7, Exclusion for 

De Minimis Changes 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to partially 

approve and partially disapprove State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

submitted by the State of Montana on 

June 25, 2010 and May 28, 2003. The 

revisions contain new and amended 

rules in Subchapter 7 (Permit, 

Construction, and Operation of Air 

Contaminant Sources) that pertain to the 

issuance of Montana air quality permits, 

in addition to other minor 

administrative changes to the 

Administrative Rules of Montana. The 

intended effect of this action is to 

propose to approve the rules that are 

approvable and to propose to 

disapprove the rules that are 

inconsistent with the Clean Air Act 

(CAA.) This action is being taken under 

section 110 and 112 of the CAA. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 26, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2011–0100, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: leone.kevin@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert 

the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing 

comments). 

• Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air 

Program, Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P– 

AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. 

• Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director, 

Air Program, Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P– 

AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. Such deliveries 

are only accepted Monday through 

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

Federal holidays. Special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2011– 

0100. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA, without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

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. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

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

For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to Section I. 

General Information of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

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 Air Program, Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all 

possible, 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: 

Kevin Leone, Air Program, Mailcode 

8P–AR, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop 

Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, 

(303) 312–6227, or leone.kevin@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

II. Background 

III. What Authorities Apply to EPA’s 

Proposed Action 

IV. EPA’s Analysis and Proposed Actions on 

SIP Revisions 

V. Summary of Proposed Actions 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this document, we 

are giving meaning to certain words or 

initials as follows: 

(i) The words or initials Act or CAA 

mean or refer to the Clean Air Act, 

unless the context indicates otherwise. 

(ii) The words EPA, we, us or our 

mean or refer to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency. 

(iii) The initials SIP mean or refer to 

State Implementation Plan. 

(iv) The words State or Montana 

mean the State of Montana, unless the 

context indicates otherwise. 

I. General Information 

A. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD ROM the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS