73386 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

directive from the DC Circuit in EME 

Homer ensures that the reductions 

associated with CAIR will be 

sufficiently permanent and enforceable 

for the necessary time period. EPA has 

been ordered by the court to develop a 

new rule and the opinion makes clear 

that after promulgating that new rule, 

EPA must provide states an opportunity 

to draft and submit SIPs to implement 

that rule. Thus, CAIR cannot be 

replaced until EPA has promulgated a 

final rule through a notice-and-comment 

rulemaking process, states have had an 

opportunity to draft and submit regional 

haze SIPs, EPA has reviewed the SIPs to 

determine if they can be approved, and 

EPA has taken action on the SIPs, 

including promulgating a federal 

implementation plan if appropriate. 

These steps alone will take many years, 

even with EPA and the states acting 

expeditiously. The court’s clear 

instruction to EPA that it must continue 

to administer CAIR until a ‘‘valid 

replacement’’ exists provides an 

additional backstop; by definition, any 

rule that replaces CAIR and meets the 

court’s direction would require upwind 

states to eliminate significant 

downwind contributions. 

Further, in vacating the Transport 

Rule and requiring EPA to continue 

administering CAIR, the DC Circuit 

emphasized that the consequences of 

vacating CAIR ‘‘might be more severe 

now in light of the reliance interests 

accumulated over the intervening four 

years.’’ EME Homer, slip op. at 60. The 

accumulated reliance interests include 

the interests of states who reasonably 

assumed they could rely on reductions 

associated with CAIR to meet certain 

regional haze requirements. For these 

reasons also, EPA believes it is 

appropriate to allow Florida to rely on 

reductions associated with CAIR in 

other states as sufficiently permanent 

and enforceable pending a valid 

replacement rule for purposes such as 

evaluating RPGs in the regional haze 

program. Following promulgation of the 

replacement rule, EPA will review 

regional haze SIPs as appropriate to 

identify whether there are any issues 

that need to be addressed. 

Finally, unlike the enforceable 

emissions limitations and other 

enforceable measures in the LTS, RPGs 

are not directly enforceable. See 64 FR 

35733, 40 CFR 51.308(d)(1)(v). The data 

provided by Florida indicate that EPA 

can reasonably expect the projected SO2

emissions reductions in 2018 to be 

sufficient to meet the projected RPGs. 

As noted in the May 25, 2012, proposal, 

EPA believes that the five-year progress 

report is the appropriate time to address 

any changes, if necessary, to the RPG 

demonstration and/or the LTS. EPA 

expects that this demonstration will 

address the impacts on the RPGs of any 

needed adjustments to the projected 

2018 emissions due to updated 

information on the emissions for EGUs 

and other sources and source categories. 

If this assessment determines that an 

adjustment to the regional haze plan is 

necessary, EPA regulations require a SIP 

revision within a year of the five-year 

progress report. See 40 CFR 

51.308(h)(4). 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is proposing a full approval of 

the BART and reasonable progress 

determinations identified in Tables 1 

and 2, above. In addition, EPA proposes 

to find that Florida’s September 17, 

2012, regional haze SIP amendment 

corrects the deficiencies that led to the 

proposed May 25, 2012, limited 

approval and proposed December 30, 

2011, limited disapproval of the State’s 

entire regional haze SIP and that 

Florida’s regional haze SIP now meets 

all of the applicable regional haze 

requirements as set forth in sections 

169A and 169B of the CAA and in 40 

CFR 51.300–308. EPA is therefore 

withdrawing the previously proposed 

limited disapproval of Florida’s entire 

regional haze SIP and is now proposing 

full approval. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this 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 F43255, 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 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, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen oxides, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: November 30, 2012. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2012–29764 Filed 12–7–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0143; FRL–9759–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Maryland; the 2002 Base Year 

Inventory for the Baltimore, MD 

Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Fine 

Particulate Matter National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 73387 

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the 

fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 2002 base 

year emissions inventory portion of the 

State of Maryland State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the 

State of Maryland, through the 

Maryland Department of the 

Environment (MDE), on June 6, 2008 for 

Baltimore, Maryland. 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 Agency views this as a 

noncontroversial submittal and 

anticipates no adverse comments. A 

more detailed description of the State 

submittal and EPA’s evaluation is 

included in a Technical Support 

Document (TSD) prepared in support of 

this rulemaking action. A copy of the 

TSD is available, upon request, from the 

EPA Regional Office listed in the 

ADDRESSES section of this document. If 

no adverse comments are received in 

response to this action, no further 

activity is contemplated. If EPA receives 

adverse comments, the direct final rule 

will be withdrawn and all public 

comments received will be addressed in 

a subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period. Any parties 

interested in commenting on this action 

should do so at this time. 

DATES: Comments must be received in 

writing by January 9, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2010–0143 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: mastro.donna@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0143, 

Donna Mastro, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Program Planning, 

Mailcode 3AP30, 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–2010– 

0143. 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 Maryland Department of 

the Environment, 1800 Washington 

Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21230. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Asrah Khadr, (215) 814–2071, or by 

email at khadr.asrah@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

further information, please see the 

information provided in the direct final 

action, with the same title, that is 

located in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ 

section of this Federal Register 

publication. 

Dated: November 21, 2012. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2012–29608 Filed 12–7–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0409; FRL–9759–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; Determinations of 

Attainment of the 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

Standard for the Pittsburgh-Beaver 

Valley Moderate Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to make two 

separate and independent 

determinations regarding the PittsburghBeaver Valley 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area (the Pittsburgh 

Area). First, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Pittsburgh Area 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone national 

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) 

by the applicable attainment date of 

June 15, 2010. This proposal is based 

upon complete, quality assured, and 

certified ambient air monitoring data for 

the 2007–2009 monitoring period 

showing monitored attainment of the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Second, 

EPA is proposing to determine that the 

Pittsburgh Area is attaining the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS, based on 

complete, quality assured, and certified 

ambient air monitoring data for the 

2009–2011 monitoring period, and 

available preliminary data for 2012. If 

finalized, this determination would 

suspend the requirement for the 

Pittsburgh Area to submit an attainment 

demonstration, reasonably available 

control measures (RACM), a reasonable 

further progress (RFP) plan, and 

contingency measures related to 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for so long as the area 

continues to attain that NAAQS. These 

determinations do not constitute a 

redesignation to attainment. The 

Pittsburgh Area will remain designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS until such time as EPA 

determines that the Pittsburgh Area 

meets the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

requirements for redesignation to 

attainment, including an approved 

maintenance plan. These actions are 

being taken under the CAA. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before January 9, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID EPA–R03–OAR– 

2012–0409 by one of the following 

methods: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with