87720 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 19, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

1See Wyoming et. al. v U.S. EPA, No. 23–9529, 

Doc. 0101108374342 (10th Cir. June 15, 2023). 

2See, e.g., 84 FR 71854 (Dec. 30, 2019) and 87 

FR 9545 (Feb. 22, 2022); 85 FR 12232 (Mar. 2, 2020) 

and 87 FR 9477 (Feb. 22, 2022). 

3Wyoming et. al. v U.S. EPA, No. 23–9529, Doc. 

010110896632 (10th Cir. July 31, 2023). 

Orleans, LA, in 33 CFR 165.845(a), 

specifies the location of the regulated 

area on the Lower Mississippi River, 

between MM 95.5 and MM 96.5. During 

the enforcement period, as reflected in 

33 CFR 165.845(c), entry into this safety 

zone is prohibited unless authorized by 

the Captain of the Port or a designated 

representative. 

In addition to this notification of 

enforcement in the Federal Register, the 

Coast Guard plans to provide 

notification of this enforcement period 

via Marine Safety Information Bulletin 

and Broadcast Notice to Mariners. 

Dated: December 13, 2023. 

K.K. Denning, 

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

Port Sector New Orleans. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27842 Filed 12–18–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2023–0375; EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2021–0663; FRL–11233–02–R8] 

Air Plan Approval; Wyoming; Interstate 

Transport of Air Pollution for the 2015 

8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is finalizing approval of 

the portion of a Wyoming State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submission 

addressing interstate transport for the 

2015 8-hour ozone national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS). The ‘‘good 

neighbor’’ or ‘‘interstate transport’’ 

provision requires that each state’s SIP 

contain adequate provisions to prohibit 

emissions from within the state from 

significantly contributing to 

nonattainment or interfering with 

maintenance of the NAAQS in other 

states. This requirement is part of the 

broader set of ‘‘infrastructure’’ 

requirements, which are designed to 

ensure that the structural components of 

each state’s air quality management 

program are adequate to meet the state’s 

responsibilities under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: This rule is effective on January 

18, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: There are two dockets 

supporting this action, EPA–R08–OAR– 

2023–0375 and EPA–HQ–OAR–2021– 

0663. Docket No. EPA–R08–OAR–2023– 

0375 contains information specific to 

Wyoming, including the August 14, 

2023 notice of proposed rulemaking that 

supports this final action. Docket No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2021–0663 contains 

additional modeling files, emissions 

inventory files, technical support 

documents, and other relevant 

supporting documentation regarding 

interstate transport of emissions for the 

2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS which are 

being used to support this action. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the https://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the docket, some 

information may not be publicly 

available, e.g., confidential business 

information (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 

electronically in https://

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Thomas Uher, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Air Quality 

Policy Division, Mail Code C539–04, 

109 TW Alexander Drive, Research 

Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone 

number: (919) 541–5534; email address: 

uher.thomas@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

the EPA. 

I. Background 

On August 14, 2023 (88 FR 54998), 

the EPA proposed to approve the 

interstate transport prongs 1 and 2 

portions of Wyoming’s January 3, 2019 

submission. An explanation of the CAA 

requirements and the EPA’s reasons for 

proposing approval were provided in 

the notice of proposed rulemaking and 

will not be restated here. The public 

comment period for the proposed 

approval ended on September 13, 2023. 

The EPA received eight comment 

submissions on the proposed action, 

one of which was submitted in error as 

it pertains to a rulemaking by a different 

agency. Of the seven remaining 

submissions, six of the commenters 

were in support of our proposed action, 

and one commenter (Sierra Club) was 

opposed. A summary of the relevant 

comments and the EPA’s responses are 

provided below. 

II. Response to Comments 

Comment: Commenter PacifiCorp 

argued that the EPA lacks the authority 

to withdraw and re-propose action on 

Wyoming’s SIP, stating that ‘‘EPA does 

not have or need the authority to 

undertake the current re-proposal to 

solicit additional record evidence when 

the existing record is adequate and 

appropriate to approve Wyoming’s SIP.’’ 

The commenter asserts that, because the 

information available to the EPA 

(specifically the 2016v3 modeling) was 

also available to us when we did not 

take final action on Wyoming’s SIP 

(citing 88 FR 9336; Feb. 13, 2023), the 

EPA ‘‘cannot artificially extend its 

action by deferral and then re-propose 

to obtain more information.’’ The 

commenter states that the EPA did not 

provide a reason why a new rulemaking 

for Wyoming was necessary when we 

were able to take final action on 

Minnesota and Wisconsin’s SIPs 

although our modeling-based 

determination had changed between 

proposal and final. The commenter also 

states that ‘‘EPA’s re-proposal 

unlawfully attempts to manipulate and 

unilaterally extend EPA’s statutorilyfixed deadlines for SIP actions’’ because 

the CAA deadline for final action on 

Wyoming’s SIP had passed when the 

commenter alleges we chose to not take 

final action on Wyoming’s SIP. Other 

commenters also noted that the EPA had 

exceeded our statutory deadline for final 

action on Wyoming’s SIP, and 

commenter Basin Electric urged the EPA 

to finalize our proposed approval as 

expeditiously as practicable because our 

delays had caused them regulatory 

uncertainty. 

Response: These comments are not 

germane to the basis for the EPA’s 

action. Commenters repeat arguments 

that have been raised in a challenge to 

the EPA’s separate final action 

disapproving 21 other states’ interstate 

transport SIP submissions for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS (88 FR 9336; Feb. 13, 

2023).1 There is nothing unlawful or 

improper in providing an additional 

opportunity for public comment when 

the EPA finds, on the basis of updated 

modeling information, that a SIP 

submission on which it had proposed 

disapproval, may be approved. This is 

consistent with the EPA’s approach in 

numerous prior interstate transport SIP 

rulemakings.2 The EPA has responded 

to commenters’ legal arguments against 

the separate disapproval action in the 

Wyoming v. EPA litigation.3

Regarding comments that the EPA has 

exceeded our statutory deadlines, the 

EPA is subject to a consent decree in 

Downwinders at Risk v. EPA, No. 21– 

cv–03551 (N.D. Cal.) under which the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 19, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 87721 

4 87 FR 31495. 5 87 FR 31495. 

6See ‘‘Official 2021_2022 DVs_4th Highs.xlsx’’ in 

the docket for this action. 

EPA has a deadline to take this final 

action of December 15, 2023. The EPA 

is meeting that deadline. 

Comment: Commenter Wyoming 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(WDEQ) requested that the EPA further 

expand the details of our analysis 

specific to Wyoming’s plan, to be 

consistent with EPA action on other 

states’ SIPs. 

Response: The EPA does not consider 

it necessary to provide further detail on 

our analysis of Wyoming’s SIP. A 

proposed analysis of Wyoming’s 

submission was provided in our May 

24, 2022 proposed disapproval.4

Because under the EPA’s 2016v3 

modeling Wyoming is not projected to 

be linked to any out of state receptors 

in the 2023 analytic year above the 1 

percent of NAAQS contribution 

threshold, additional analysis is not 

necessary. 

Comment: Commenter Basin Electric 

cited language from the EPA’s August 

14, 2023 proposed approval which 

stated that the EPA did ‘‘not assess the 

data and analysis in Wyoming’s 

submission, as EPA’s updated modeling 

corroborates Wyoming’s conclusion that 

the State will not significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS in any other state.’’ The 

commenter asserted that this served as 

an acknowledgement that the EPA 

ignored the contents of Wyoming’s SIP. 

The commenter stated that in doing so, 

the EPA ‘‘is ultimately attempting to 

transform what is appropriately a statespecific assessment under the Good 

Neighbor Provision into a uniform rule 

that requires each state to conform to 

EPA’s vision of how it believes states 

should address and analyze interstate 

ozone transport,’’ which the commenter 

argues ‘‘exceeds the authority delegated 

to EPA by Congress in the CAA.’’ 

Several commenters stated that CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and EPA 

guidance provided the states broad 

discretion in developing their interstate 

transport SIPs. Commenters Idaho 

Power Company (IPC) and Mountain 

Cement Company (MCC) both asserted 

that the EPA has a more limited, 

secondary role in reviewing SIP 

submittals for consistency with the 

CAA, which explicitly states that the 

EPA ‘‘shall approve’’ a state’s plan so 

long as it is consistent with the statute. 

Commenters argued that, in performing 

this limited oversight role, the EPA 

cannot substitute its own judgment for 

that of the states, and in particular, 

cannot ‘‘force particular control 

measures on the states.’’ 

Response: As set forth in our prior 

proposal to disapprove Wyoming’s 

submission, the EPA did not ignore its 

contents. However, the EPA need not 

address these issues in order to 

conclude that Wyoming’s SIP 

submission is approvable in light of the 

2016v3 modeling. This is consistent 

with numerous other approval actions 

the EPA has taken for interstate 

transport obligations for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS, where the available modeling 

indicated that a state was not linked 

above a 1 percent of the NAAQS 

threshold to any out of state receptor. 

See 88 FR 9362 (citing approval 

actions). As for the remainder of the 

comments, the EPA notes that they 

appear to be substantially at odds with 

the statute and applicable case law. For 

the EPA’s response to similar comments 

on the separate Disapproval action 

(which we are not reopening here), see 

88 FR 9367–68. 

Comment: Several commenters stated 

that Wyoming’s SIP had been 

approvable before the release of the 

2016v3 modeling, and that the updated 

modeling only served to confirm the 

SIP’s approvability. Commenters MCC 

and IPC restated portions of the weight 

of evidence analysis WDEQ included in 

their SIP submission, and asserted that 

this analysis demonstrated that 

Wyoming met the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

requirements for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS and was in line with EPA 

guidance. 

Response: The EPA takes no final 

position on whether Wyoming’s SIP 

submission would have been approved 

in a counter-factual scenario in which 

the 2016v3 modeling was not available. 

The EPA’s prior views on Wyoming’s 

submission are stated in our now 

withdrawn May 24, 2022 proposal, and 

given the 2016v3 modeling, there is no 

need to finalize that analysis.5

Comment: Commenter Sierra Club 

requested that the EPA withdraw our 

proposed approval of Wyoming’s SIP 

and instead finalize the prior (and now 

withdrawn) proposed disapproval of the 

same plan. The commenter asserted that 

the EPA should have identified Weld 

County (Site ID 81230009) as a violating 

monitor due to its 2022 design value of 

72 ppb, and because the 2016v3 

modeling indicates a Wyoming 

contribution of 0.72 ppb at this receptor 

in 2023, the EPA should consider this 

as significant contribution to 

nonattainment or interference with 

maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

Response: The EPA disagrees that we 

should have identified the Weld County 

monitor as a violating-monitor 

maintenance-only receptor. The EPA 

considers monitoring sites with 

measured design values and 4th high 

maximum daily 8-hour average (MDA8) 

ozone that exceed the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS (i.e., greater than or equal to 71 

ppb) based on certified 2021 and 2022 

data to have the greatest risk of 

continuing to have a problem attaining 

the standard in 2023, even when the 

modeling projects these sites will attain. 

The Weld County site to which the 

commenter refers has a certified 2022 

4th high MDA8 of 70, which does not 

exceed the 2015 ozone NAAQS.6

Therefore, the EPA continues to find 

that this monitor does not meet the 

criteria of a violating-monitor 

maintenance-only receptor. 

Comment: One commenter urged the 

EPA to adopt and enforce the strongest 

possible rule to reduce air pollution in 

Wyoming that may threaten public 

health in Wyoming and other 

neighboring states. 

Response: This comment lacks 

sufficient specificity for the EPA to 

respond. 

Comment: Commenters WDEQ and 

PacifiCorp both asserted that the EPA’s 

action on Wyoming’s interstate 

transport SIP was a locally or regionally 

applicable action, rather than a 

nationally applicable action. Both 

commenters argued that under section 

307(b)(1), the appropriate venue 

depends on whether the EPA’s action is 

‘‘nationally applicable’’ or ‘‘locally or 

regionally applicable,’’ stating that the 

EPA Region 8’s proposed action on 

Wyoming’s SIP is a ‘‘purely local 

action’’ and an ‘‘indisputably regional 

action.’’ 

Response: The EPA agrees that this is 

a locally or regionally applicable action. 

However, under CAA section 307(b)(1), 

any locally or regionally applicable 

action that is based on one or more 

determinations of nationwide scope or 

effect made and published by the EPA 

may be challenged only in the D.C. 

Circuit. For the reasons provided in 

section IV. of this preamble, the 

Administrator finds that this action is 

based on multiple determinations of 

nationwide scope or effect within the 

meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1) and is 

hereby publishing that finding. While 

this final rule applies only to Wyoming, 

the EPA evaluated Wyoming’s SIP based 

on a common core of nationwide policy 

judgments and technical analysis 

concerning the interstate transport of 

ozone, including the same 

determinations made in evaluating 

every other state’s obligations under the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
87722 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 19, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

7 88 FR 9380. 

8 Id. at 9342. 

9 Id. at 9339, 9365. 

10 In deciding whether to invoke the exception by 

making and publishing a finding that an action is 

based on a determination of nationwide scope or 

effect, the Administrator takes into account a 

number of policy considerations, including his 

judgment balancing the benefit of obtaining the D.C. 

Circuit’s authoritative centralized review versus 

allowing development of the issue in other contexts 

and the best use of agency resources. 

Good Neighbor Provision for the 2015 

Ozone Standard.7 Ozone transport 

presents a ‘‘collective contribution’’ 

challenge in which many smaller 

contributors across a broad region 

combine to generate a downwind air 

quality problem.8 Given the 

‘‘interdependent nature of interstate 

pollution transport,’’ the EPA finds it 

critically important to employ ‘‘a 

consistent set of policy judgments 

across all states for purposes of 

evaluating interstate transport 

obligations,’’ 9 including Wyoming. 

Section IV. identifies the specific 

determinations of nationwide scope or 

effect that underlie this action. 

III. Final Action 

Based on the EPA’s evaluation of the 

impact of air emissions from Wyoming 

to downwind states using 2023 analytic 

year modeling as described in our 

August 14, 2023 proposed rulemaking, 

the EPA is approving Wyoming’s 

January 3, 2019 SIP submission as 

meeting the interstate transport 

requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS. 

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 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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); and 

• 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. 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where the EPA or 

an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies 

to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on minority populations 

and low-income populations to the 

greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. The EPA defines 

environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of all people regardless of race, color, 

national origin, or income with respect 

to the development, implementation, 

and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies.’’ The EPA 

further defines the term fair treatment to 

mean that ‘‘no group of people should 

bear a disproportionate burden of 

environmental harms and risks, 

including those resulting from the 

negative environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ Wyoming did not evaluate 

environmental justice considerations as 

part of its SIP submission; the CAA and 

applicable implementing regulations 

neither prohibit nor require such an 

evaluation. The EPA did not perform an 

EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in 

this action. Consideration of EJ is not 

required as part of this action, and there 

is no information in the record 

inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 

12898 of achieving environmental 

justice for people of color, low-income 

populations, and Indigenous peoples. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA governs 

judicial review of final actions by the 

EPA. This section provides, in part, that 

petitions for review must be filed in the 

D.C. Circuit: (i) when the agency action 

consists of ‘‘nationally applicable 

regulations promulgated, or final actions 

taken, by the Administrator,’’ or (ii) 

when such action is locally or regionally 

applicable, if ‘‘such action is based on 

a determination of nationwide scope or 

effect and if in taking such action the 

Administrator finds and publishes that 

such action is based on such a 

determination.’’ For locally or regionally 

applicable final actions, the CAA 

reserves to the EPA complete discretion 

to decide whether to invoke the 

exception in (ii).10

The Administrator is exercising the 

complete discretion afforded to him 

under the CAA to make and publish a 

finding that this final action (to the 

extent a court finds the action to be 

locally or regionally applicable) is based 

on a determination of ‘‘nationwide 

scope or effect’’ within the meaning of 

CAA section 307(b)(1). Through this 

rulemaking action (in conjunction with 

a series of related actions on other SIP 

submissions for the same CAA 

obligations), the EPA interprets and 

applies section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the 

CAA for the 2015 ozone NAAQS based 

on a common core of nationwide policy 

judgments and technical analysis 

concerning the interstate transport of 

pollutants throughout the continental 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 19, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 87723 

11 In the report on the 1977 Amendments that 

revised section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, Congress 

noted that the Administrator’s determination that 

the ‘‘nationwide scope or effect’’ exception applies 

would be appropriate for any action that has a 

scope or effect beyond a single judicial circuit. See 

H.R. Rep. No. 95–294 at 323, 324, reprinted in 1977 

U.S.C.C.A.N. 1402–03. 

U.S. The EPA relies on a single set of 

updated, 2016-base year photochemical 

grid modeling results for the year 2023 

as the primary basis for its assessment 

of air quality conditions and 

contributions at steps 1 and 2 of the 

EPA’s 4-step framework for assessing 

good neighbor obligations. The EPA has 

selected nationally uniform analytic 

years for its analysis under the 4-step 

framework and is applying a nationally 

uniform approach to nonattainment and 

maintenance receptors and a nationally 

uniform approach to contribution 

threshold analysis.11

Specifically, the Administrator finds 

that this action on the State of 

Wyoming’s SIP submission is based on 

several determinations of nationwide 

scope or effect, including his 

determination: (1) that use of the same 

2023 analytical year air quality 

modeling (2016v3) and monitoring data 

that were used to define all other states’ 

good neighbor obligations for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS is appropriate for 

evaluating Wyoming’s contribution in 

this action; (2) that it is appropriate to 

use the EPA’s nationwide methodology 

for identifying nonattainment and 

maintenance receptors, including 

‘‘violating monitor’’ maintenance-only 

receptors, using the 2016v3 modeling 

and recent monitoring data; (3) that it is 

appropriate to use the EPA’s nationwide 

methodology for calculating states’ 

contribution levels to out of state 

receptors in calculating Wyoming’s 

impact; and (4) that a conclusion that a 

state’s impact on all out of state 

receptors is less than 1 percent of the 

NAAQS (using the data and 

methodologies described in items (1) 

through (3)) is sufficient to approve the 

state’s good neighbor SIP submission for 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS, without further 

analysis. 

These determinations lie at the core of 

this final action and ensure consistency 

and equity in the treatment of all states 

in addressing the multistate problem of 

interstate ozone pollution under the 

good neighbor provision for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS. These determinations 

are not related to the particularities of 

the emissions sources in Wyoming or 

any specific state. 

For these reasons, the Administrator 

is exercising the complete discretion 

afforded to him under the CAA and 

hereby makes and publishes a finding 

that this action is based on multiple 

determinations of nationwide scope or 

effect for purposes of CAA section 

307(b)(1). Therefore, any petitions for 

review of this action must be filed in the 

D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Ozone. 

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

Michael S. Regan, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the Environmental Protection 

Agency amends 40 CFR part 52 as 

follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart ZZ—Wyoming 

■ 2. In § 52.2620, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding the entry ‘‘(35) 

XXXV’’ in numerical order to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2620 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

Rule No. Rule title State effective 

date 

EPA effective 

date 

Final rule citation/ 

date Comments 

(35) XXXV ............... Interstate transport SIP for section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prongs 1 and 2 for 

the 2015 Ozone NAAQS.

1/3/2019 1/18/2024 [insert Federal Register citation], 12/ 

19/2024.

[FR Doc. 2023–27754 Filed 12–18–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 302 

Designation, Reportable Quantities, 

and Notification 

CFR Correction 

This rule is being published by the 

Office of the Federal Register to correct 

an editorial or technical error that 

appeared in the most recent annual 

revision of the Code of Federal 

Regulations. 

■ In Title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, Parts 300 to 399, revised as 

of July 1, 2023, Appendix B to § 302.4 

as published in the July 1, 2021, 

revision of title 40, parts 300 to 399, is 

reinstated. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27993 Filed 12–18–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 0099–10–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 25 

[IB Docket Nos. 22–411; 22–271; FCC 23– 

73; FR ID 190672] 

Expediting Initial Processing of 

Satellite and Earth Station 

Applications; Correction 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects the 

preamble to a final rule published in the 

Federal Register of December 6, 2023, 

regarding Expediting the Initial 

Processing of Satellite and Earth Station 

Applications. This correction removes a 

sentence that erroneously stated that a 

proposed rule relating to further 

expediting satellite and earth station 

application processing was published 

elsewhere in the same issue of the 

Federal Register. The proposed rule 

published in the Federal Register of 

December 8, 2023. 

DATES: The correction is effective 

January 5, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia 

Malette, Attorney Advisor, Satellite 

Programs and Policy Division, Space 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1