Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 72377 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2011–0711; A–1–FRL– 

9496–2] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Connecticut; Determinations of 

Attainment of the One-Hour Ozone 

Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Greater Connecticut 

serious one-hour ozone nonattainment 

area did not meet the applicable 

deadline of November 15, 2007, for 

attaining the one-hour National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

for ozone. This proposed determination 

is based upon complete, qualityassured, certified ambient air 

monitoring data that show the area had 

an expected ozone exceedance rate 

above the level of the now revoked onehour ozone NAAQS for the 2005–2007 

monitoring period. Separate from and 

independent of this proposed 

determination, EPA is also proposing to 

determine that the Greater Connecticut 

serious one-hour ozone nonattainment 

area currently attains the now revoked 

one-hour NAAQS for ozone, based upon 

complete, quality-assured, certified 

ambient air monitoring data for 2008– 

2010. The area first attained the onehour NAAQS during the 2006–2008 

monitoring period, and continued in 

attainment during the 2007–2009, and 

2008–2010 monitoring periods. 

Preliminary data available for 2011 also 

show the area continues to meet the 

one-hour NAAQS for ozone. EPA is 

proposing these determinations under 

the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 23, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R01–OAR–2011–0711 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: arnold.anne@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (617) 918–0047. 

4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification 

Number EPA–R01–OAR–2011–0711, ’’ 

Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square, 

Suite 100 (mail code: OEP05–2), Boston, 

MA 02109–3912. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to: Anne Arnold, 

Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, 

Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, 5 Post 

Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 

02109–3912. 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, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding legal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R01–OAR–2011– 

0711. 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 through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. 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 email comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

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 

http://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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, 5 Post 

Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA. 

EPA requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding legal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard P. Burkhart, Air Quality 

Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square, 

Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109–3912, 

telephone number (617) 918–1664, fax 

number (617) 918–0664, email 

Burkhart.Richard@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. 

Organization of this document. The 

following outline is provided to aid in 

locating information in this preamble: 

I. What is EPA proposing? 

A. Proposed Determination of Failure to 

Attain by Applicable Attainment Date 

B. Proposed Determination of Current 

Attainment 

II. What is the background for these proposed 

actions? 

A. Statutory and Regulatory Background 

B. Basis and Effect of Proposed 

Determinations 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of data for 

purposes of determining attainment of 

the one-hour ozone standard? 

A. How does EPA compute whether an 

area meets the one-hour ozone standard? 

B. EPA’s Analysis of the One-Hour Ozone 

Data for the Greater Connecticut Area 

IV. Proposed Determinations 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is EPA proposing? 

EPA is proposing two separate and 

independent actions for the Greater 

Connecticut one-hour ozone serious 

nonattainment area (hereafter, ‘‘the 

Greater Connecticut area’’). 

A. Proposed Determination of Failure to 

Attain by Applicable Attainment Date 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Greater Connecticut area did not 

attain the one-hour ozone NAAQS by 

the applicable attainment date, 

November 15, 2007. This proposed 

determination is based upon complete, 

quality-assured and certified air quality 

monitoring data for the 2005 through 

2007 ozone seasons. 

B. Proposed Determination of Current 

Attainment 

In addition, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Greater Connecticut 

area is currently attaining the one-hour 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

72378 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard—Phase 1, 

69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004). 

ozone NAAQS based upon complete, 

quality-assured and certified ambient air 

monitoring data showing the area 

currently monitors monitored 

attainment of the one-hour ozone 

NAAQS, and that it has done so 

continuously since the 2006–2008 

monitoring period. If this proposed 

determination is finalized, any 

obligations related to one-hour ozone 

contingency measures in the Greater 

Connecticut area shall be suspended for 

so long as the area continues to attain 

the one-hour ozone NAAQS. 

II. What is the background for these 

proposed actions? 

A. Statutory and Regulatory Background 

EPA designated the Greater 

Connecticut area as nonattainment for 

one-hour ozone following the enactment 

of the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

Amendments of 1990. Most areas of the 

country that EPA designated 

nonattainment for the one-hour ozone 

NAAQS were classified by operation of 

law as marginal, moderate, serious, 

severe, or extreme, depending on the 

severity of the area’s air quality 

problem. See CAA sections 107(d)(1)(C) 

and 181(a). The Greater Connecticut 

area was classified as serious. The onehour ozone attainment deadline for the 

Greater Connecticut serious area was 

initially set for November 15, 1999, and 

later extended to November 15, 2007 

based on EPA’s Attainment Date 

Extension Policy. See 66 FR 634, 

January 3, 2001. The Greater 

Connecticut one-hour ozone 

nonattainment area consists of most of 

Connecticut, with the following 

exceptions: Bridgetown and New 

Milford in Litchfield County are 

excluded. Also, Fairfield County is 

excluded, save the City of Sheldon. See 

40 CFR 81.307. The entire state was 

designated nonattainment for the onehour standard, and divided into two 

nonattainment areas: Greater 

Connecticut and the Connecticut 

portion of the New York City area. 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA 

promulgated a new, standard for ozone 

based on an 8-hour average 

concentration (the ‘‘1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS’’). EPA designated and 

classified most areas of the country 

under the eight-hour ozone NAAQS in 

an April 30, 2004 final rule. See 69 FR 

23858. EPA designated Greater 

Connecticut as nonattainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and at the 

time of designation the area did not 

meet the one-hour ozone standard. 

Again, the entire state was designated 

nonattainment for the 8-hour NAAQS, 

and divided into two nonattainment 

areas, with the same names as the onehour areas, but with slightly different 

boundaries than the two one-hour areas. 

See 40 CFR 81.307. 

On April 30, 2004, EPA issued a final 

rule (69 FR 23951) entitled ‘‘Final Rule 

To Implement the 8-Hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard—Phase 1,’’ referred to as the 

Phase 1 Rule. Among other matters, this 

rule revoked the one-hour ozone 

NAAQS in most areas of the country, 

effective June 15, 2005. See 40 CFR 

50.9(b); 69 FR at 23996; and 70 FR 

44470. The Phase 1 Rule also set forth 

how anti-backsliding principles will 

ensure continued progress toward 

attainment of the eight-hour ozone 

NAAQS by identifying which one-hour 

requirements remain applicable in an 

area after revocation of the one-hour 

ozone NAAQS. Although, EPA revoked 

the one-hour ozone standard (effective 

June 15, 2005), eight-hour ozone 

nonattainment areas remain subject to 

certain one-hour, anti-backsliding 

requirements based on their one-hour 

ozone classification. Initially, in our 

rules to address the transition from the 

one-hour to the eight-hour ozone 

standard, EPA did not include one-hour 

contingency measures among the 

measures retained as one-hour ozone 

anti-backsliding requirements.1

However, on December 23, 2006, the 

United States Court of Appeals for the 

District of Columbia Circuit determined 

that EPA should not have excluded 

these requirements (and certain others 

not relevant here) from its antibacksliding requirements. See South 

Coast Air Quality Management District 

v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (DC Cir. 2006), 

rehearing denied 489 F.3d 1245 

(clarifying that the vacatur was limited 

to the issues on which the court granted 

the petitions for review. Thus, the Court 

vacated the provisions that excluded 

these requirements. As a result, States 

must continue to meet the obligations 

for one-hour ozone NAAQS contingency 

measures and, EPA has issued a 

proposed rule, that would remove the 

vacated provisions of 40 CFR 51.905(e), 

and addresses contingency measures for 

failure to attain, or make reasonable 

further progress toward attainment, for 

the one-hour standard. See 74 FR 2936, 

January 16, 2009 (proposed rule); and 74 

FR 7027, February 12, 2009 (notice of 

public hearing and extension of 

comment period). 

B. Basis and Effect of Proposed 

Determinations 

After revocation of the one-hour 

ozone standard, EPA must continue to 

provide a mechanism to give effect to 

the one-hour anti-backsliding 

requirements. See SCAQMD v. EPA, 47 

F.3d 882, at 903. In keeping with this 

responsibility with respect to specific 

one-hour anti-backsliding measures, 

such as contingency measures, EPA 

proposes to determine that Greater 

Connecticut failed to attain the one-hour 

ozone standard by its applicable 

attainment date. Consistent with 40 CFR 

51.905(e)(2), and the South Coast 

decision, upon revocation of the onehour ozone NAAQS for an area, EPA is 

no longer obligated to determine 

whether an area has attained the onehour NAAQS, except insofar as it relates 

to effectuating the anti-backsliding 

requirements that are specifically 

retained. EPA’s determination here is 

linked solely to required, one-hour, antibacksliding, contingency measures. A 

final determination of failure to attain 

will not result in reclassification of the 

area under the revoked one-hour 

standard, nor is EPA identifying or 

determining any new one-hour 

reclassification for the area. EPA is no 

longer required to reclassify an area to 

a higher classification for the one-hour 

ozone NAAQS based upon a 

determination that the area failed to 

attain that NAAQS by its attainment 

date. See 40 CFR 51.905(e)(2)(i)(B). 

Thus, even if we finalize our proposed 

determination that the area failed to 

attain the one-hour ozone NAAQS by its 

attainment deadline, the area will not be 

reclassified to a higher classification. 

Moreover, EPA has previously approved 

the attainment demonstration and 

Reasonable Further Progress (ROP) 

plans for this area, and in doing so 

noted that although there were no state 

implementation plan contingency 

measure reductions applicable to the 

Greater Connecticut area for failure to 

attain, there were federal measures the 

state had not accounted for in its 

attainment demonstration that provided 

more reductions than necessary to serve 

the purpose of contingency measures for 

this area. See 66 FR 634, January 3, 

2001. In addition, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Greater Connecticut 

area has attained the one-hour ozone 

standard since 2008. In this context, 

even if EPA’s proposed determination 

that the area did not attain the standard 

in 2007 deadline is finalized, it will not 

trigger any additional obligations for the 

area under the one-hour ozone standard. 

Under EPA’s ‘‘Clean Data Policy’’ 

interpretation, which was first 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 72379 

2The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit upheld the provisions of 40 CFR 

51.918, which codified the Clean Data Policy. 

Previously Courts of Appeals for several other 

Circuits upheld the Clean Data Policy under the 

one-hour standard. See NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 

1245 (DC Cir. 2009); Sierra Club v. EPA, 99 F.3d 

1551 (10th Cir. 1996); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 

537 (7th Cir. 2004) and Our Children’s 

EarthFoundation v. EPA, No. 04–73032 (9th Cir. 

June 28, 2005) (memorandum opinion). 

articulated for the one-hour standard 

and then codified for the 8-hour ozone 

standard (40 CFR 51.918),2 a 

determination of attainment suspends 

obligations for attainment-related 

requirements for that standard, 

including contingency measures. See, 

for example, determination of one-hour 

ozone attainment for Baton Rouge, 75 

FR 6570 (February 10, 2010). 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of data for 

purposes of determining attainment of 

the one-hour ozone standard? 

A. How does EPA compute whether an 

area meets the one-hour ozone 

standard? 

Although the one-hour ozone NAAQS 

as promulgated in 40 CFR 50.9 includes 

no discussion of specific data handling 

conventions, EPA’s publicly articulated 

position and the approach long since 

universally adopted by the air quality 

management community is that the 

interpretation of the one-hour ozone 

standard requires rounding ambient air 

quality data consistent with the stated 

level of the standard, which is 0.12 parts 

per million (ppm). 40 CFR 50.9(a) states 

that: ‘‘The level of the national one-hour 

primary and secondary ambient air 

quality standards for ozone * * * is 

0.12 parts per million. * * * The 

standard is attained when the expected 

number of days per calendar year with 

maximum hourly average 

concentrations of 0.12 parts per million 

* * * is equal to or less than 1, as 

determined by appendix H to this part.’’ 

Thus, compliance with the NAAQS is 

based on comparison of air quality 

concentrations with the standard and on 

how many days that standard has been 

exceeded, adjusted for the number of 

missing days. 

For comparison with the NAAQS, 

EPA has clearly communicated the data 

handling conventions for the one-hour 

ozone NAAQS in guidance documents. 

As early as 1979, EPA issued guidance 

stating that the level of our NAAQS 

dictates the number of significant 

figures to be used in determining 

whether the standard was exceeded. 

The stated level of the standard is taken 

as defining the number of significant 

figures to be used in comparisons with 

the standard. For example, a standard 

level of 0.12 ppm means that 

measurements are to be rounded to two 

decimal places (0.005 rounds up), and, 

therefore, 0.125 ppm is the smallest 

concentration value in excess of the 

level of the standard. See ‘‘Guideline for 

the Interpretation of Ozone Air Quality 

Standards,’’ EPA–450/4–79–003, 

OAQPS No. 1.2–108, January 1979. EPA 

has consistently applied the rounding 

convention in this 1979 guideline. See 

68 FR 19111, April 17, 2003, 68 FR 

62043, October 31, 2003, and 69 FR 

21719, April 22, 2004. Then, EPA 

determines attainment status under the 

one-hour ozone NAAQS on the basis of 

the annual average number of expected 

exceedances of the NAAQS over a threeyear period. See 60 FR 3349, January 17, 

1995 and also the ‘‘General Preamble for 

the Implementation of Title I of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ at 

57 FR 13506 April 16, 1992 (‘‘General 

Preamble’’). EPA’s determination is 

based upon data that have been 

collected and quality-assured in 

accordance with 40 CFR 58, and 

recorded in EPA’s Air Quality System 

(AQS) database. To account for missing 

data, the procedures found in appendix 

H to 40 CFR part 50 are used to adjust 

the actual number of monitored 

exceedances of the standard to yield the 

annual number of expected exceedances 

(‘‘expected exceedance days’’) at an air 

quality monitoring site. We determine if 

an area meets the one-hour ozone 

NAAQS by calculating, at each monitor, 

the average expected number of days 

over the standard per year (i.e., ‘‘average 

number of expected exceedance days’’) 

during the applicable 3-year period. See 

the General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 

April 16, 1992. The term ‘‘exceedance’’ 

is used throughout this document to 

describe a daily maximum ozone 

measurement that is equal to or exceeds 

0.125 ppm which is the level of the 

standard after rounding. An area 

violates the ozone standard if, over a 

consecutive 3-year period, more than 3 

days of expected exceedances occur at 

the same monitor. For more information 

please refer to 40 CFR 50.9, ‘‘National 

one-hour primary and secondary 

ambient air quality standards for ozone’’ 

and ‘‘Interpretation of the one-hour 

Primary and Secondary National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards for 

Ozone’’ (40 CFR part 50, appendix H). 

B. EPA’s Analysis of the One-Hour 

Ozone Data for the Greater Connecticut 

Area 

The following tables show one-hour 

ozone data for the Greater Connecticut 

area for each of the three-year periods 

2005–2007 (Table 1), 2006–2008 (Table 

2), 2007–2009 (Table 3), and 2008–2010 

(Table 4). In short, if the three-year 

average expected exceedances rate, 

shown in the far right column, is less 

than or equal to 1.0, the site meets the 

one-hour ozone NAAQS. If all sites in 

the area meet the one-hour ozone 

standard, then the area met the one-hour 

NAAQS during that time period. 

TABLE 1—AVERAGE EXPECTED EXCEEDANCE RATE FOR THE ONE-HOUR OZONE STANDARD IN THE GREATER

CONNECTICUT AREA FOR 2005–2007 

EPA AQS ID Site Year 

Actual 

exceedance 

days over 

0.124 ppm 

Adjusted 

exceedance 

days for 

missing data 

3-year 

average 

expected 

exceedance 

rate 

090050006 ........................................ Cornwall ........................................... 2005 1 1.0 0.7 

2006 0 0.0 ........................

2007 1 1.0 ........................

090031003 ........................................ East Hartford .................................... 2005 3 3.1 2.0 

2006 1 1.0 ........................

2007 2 2.0 ........................

090110008 ........................................ Groton .............................................. 2005 0 0.0 0.0 

2006 0 0.0 ........................

2007 0 0.0 ........................

090110124 ........................................ Groton 3 ............................................ 2005 ........................ ........................ 0.0 

2006 ........................ ........................ ........................

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

72380 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

3Site moved in 2007. Ozone was monitored at 

both locations in 2007, and the data collected are 

comparable. 

4AQS Number 090110008 before 2007. 

TABLE 1—AVERAGE EXPECTED EXCEEDANCE RATE FOR THE ONE-HOUR OZONE STANDARD IN THE GREATER

CONNECTICUT AREA FOR 2005–2007—Continued 

EPA AQS ID Site Year 

Actual 

exceedance 

days over 

0.124 ppm 

Adjusted 

exceedance 

days for 

missing data 

3-year 

average 

expected 

exceedance 

rate 

2007 0 0.0 ........................

090131001 ........................................ Stafford ............................................. 2005 1 1.0 1.0 

2006 1 1.0 ........................

2007 1 1.0 ........................

090070007 ........................................ Middletown ....................................... 2005 3 3.0 1.7 

2006 1 1.0 ........................

2007 1 1.0 ........................

090090027 ........................................ New Haven ....................................... 2005 1 1.0 0.7 

2006 0 0.0 ........................

2007 1 1.0 ........................

090093002 ........................................ Madison ............................................ 2005 3 3.1 1.4 

2006 1 1.0 ........................

2007 0 0.0 ........................

TABLE 2—AVERAGE EXPECTED EXCEEDANCE RATE FOR THE ONE-HOUR OZONE STANDARD IN THE GREATER

CONNECTICUT AREA FOR 2006–2008 

EPA AQS ID Site Year 

Actual 

exceedance 

days over 

0.124 ppm 

Adjusted 

exceedance 

days for 

missing data 

3-year 

average 

expected 

exceedance 

rate 

090050006 ........................................ Cornwall ........................................... 2006 0 0.0 0.3 

2007 1 1.0 ........................

2008 0 0.0 ........................

090031003 ........................................ East Hartford .................................... 2006 1 1.0 1.0 

2007 2 2.0 ........................

2008 0 0.0 ........................

090110124 ........................................ Groton 4 ............................................ 2006 0 0.0 0.0 

2007 0 0.0 ........................

2008 0 0.0 ........................

090131001 ........................................ Stafford ............................................. 2006 1 1.0 1.0 

2007 1 1.0 ........................

2008 1 1.0 ........................

090070007 ........................................ Middletown ....................................... 2006 1 1.0 1.0 

2007 1 1.0 ........................

2008 1 1.0 ........................

090090027 ........................................ New Haven ....................................... 2006 0 0.0 0.3 

2007 1 1.0 ........................

2008 0 0.0 ........................

090093002 ........................................ Madison ............................................ 2006 1 1.0 0.7 

2007 0 0.0 ........................

2008 1 1.0 ........................

TABLE 3—AVERAGE EXPECTED EXCEEDANCE RATE FOR THE ONE-HOUR OZONE STANDARD IN THE GREATER

CONNECTICUT AREA FOR 2007–2009 

EPA AQS ID Site Year 

Actual 

exceedance 

days over 

0.124 ppm 

Adjusted 

exceedance 

days for 

missing data 

3-year 

average 

expected 

exceedance 

rate 

090050006 ........................................ Cornwall ........................................... 2007 1 1.0 0.3 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 72381 

TABLE 3—AVERAGE EXPECTED EXCEEDANCE RATE FOR THE ONE-HOUR OZONE STANDARD IN THE GREATER

CONNECTICUT AREA FOR 2007–2009—Continued 

EPA AQS ID Site Year 

Actual 

exceedance 

days over 

0.124 ppm 

Adjusted 

exceedance 

days for 

missing data 

3-year 

average 

expected 

exceedance 

rate 

2008 0 0.0 ........................

2009 0 0.0 ........................

090031003 ........................................ East Hartford .................................... 2007 2 2.0 0.7 

2008 0 0.0 ........................

2009 0 0.0 ........................

090110124 ........................................ Groton .............................................. 2007 0 0.0 0.0 

2008 0 0.0 ........................

2009 0 0.0 ........................

090131001 ........................................ Stafford ............................................. 2007 1 1.0 0.7 

2008 1 1.0 ........................

2009 0 0.0 ........................

090070007 ........................................ Middletown ....................................... 2007 1 1.0 0.7 

2008 1 1.0 ........................

2009 0 0.0 ........................

090090027 ........................................ New Haven ....................................... 2007 1 1.0 0.3 

2008 0 0.0 ........................

2009 0 0.0 ........................

090093002 ........................................ Madison ............................................ 2007 0 0.0 0.3 

2008 1 1.0 ........................

2009 0 0.0 ........................

TABLE 4—AVERAGE EXPECTED EXCEEDANCE RATE FOR THE ONE-HOUR OZONE STANDARD IN THE GREATER

CONNECTICUT AREA FOR 2008–2010 

EPA AQS ID Site Year 

Actual 

exceedance 

days over 

0.124 ppm 

Adjusted 

exceedance 

days for 

missing data 

3-year 

average 

expected 

exceedance 

rate 

090050006 ........................................ Cornwall ........................................... 2008 0 0.0 0.0 

2009 0 0.0 ........................

2010 0 0.0 ........................

090031003 ........................................ East Hartford .................................... 2008 0 0.0 0.0 

2009 0 0.0 ........................

2010 0 0.0 ........................

090110124 ........................................ Groton .............................................. 2008 0 0.0 0.0 

2009 0 0.0 ........................

2010 0 0.0 ........................

090131001 ........................................ Stafford ............................................. 2008 1 1.0 0.3 

2009 0 0.0 ........................

2010 0 0.0 ........................

090070007 ........................................ Middletown ....................................... 2008 1 1.0 0.3 

2009 0 0.0 ........................

2010 0 0.0 ........................

090090027 ........................................ New Haven ....................................... 2008 0 0.0 0.0 

2009 0 0.0 ........................

2010 0 0.0 ........................

090093002 ........................................ Madison ............................................ 2008 1 1.0 0.3 

2009 0 0.0 ........................

2010 0 0.0 ........................

EPA has reviewed and evaluated 

these data in order to make two separate 

proposed determinations. First, EPA 

addresses whether the Greater 

Connecticut area attained the one-hour 

ozone standard by the applicable onehour attainment date. As shown in 

Table 1, the Greater Connecticut onehour ozone nonattainment area did not 

meet its attainment deadline of 

November 15, 2007, since three ozone 

monitors had expected exceedances 

rates above 1.0. In addition, the East 

Hartford ozone monitor recorded two 

exceedances of the now revoked onehour ozone standard in 2007. Two 

exceedances at one monitor prevented 

Connecticut from requesting a one-year 

extension of the attainment date for the 

Greater Connecticut area. See CAA 

Section 181(a)(5). 

Tables 2, 3 and 4, however, show the 

area subsequently met the one-hour 

ozone standard based on 2006–2008 

ozone data (see Table 2) and continues 

to meet the one-hour standard based on 

complete, quality-assured data for 

subsequent time periods (see Tables 3 

and 4). Preliminary ozone data available 

for 2011 also show that currently the 

area continues in attainment of the onehour ozone standard. Thus, EPA is 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

72382 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

5For the reasons set forth above, a final 

determination that the Greater Connecticut onehour ozone nonattainment area did not meet its 

applicable one-hour ozone attainment deadline will 

not result in reclassification of the area for the onehour standard, nor in any additional air quality 

obligations for the area. 

proposing to determine that based on 

the most recent three years of complete 

quality-assured ozone monitoring data, 

the Greater Connecticut area is currently 

attaining the NAAQS. 

IV. Proposed Determinations 

For the reasons set forth in this notice, 

EPA is proposing to determine that the 

Greater Connecticut one-hour ozone 

nonattainment area did not meet its 

applicable one-hour ozone attainment 

date of November 15, 2007, based on 

2005–2007 quality-assured ozone 

monitoring data.5 Separate from and 

independent of this proposed 

determination, EPA is also proposing to 

determine that the Greater Connecticut 

one-hour ozone nonattainment area is 

currently attaining the one-hour ozone 

standard, based on the most recent three 

years (2008–2010) of complete, qualityassured ozone monitoring data at all 

monitoring sites in the area. EPA’s 

review of the data shows that the area 

began attaining the one-hour ozone 

standard in the 2006–2008 period, and 

has continued through 2007–2009 and 

2008–2010. Preliminary data available 

for 2011 indicate that the area continues 

to attain the one-hour NAAQS. 

EPA is soliciting public comments on 

the issues discussed in this notice or on 

other relevant matters. These comments 

will be considered before taking final 

action. Interested parties may 

participate in the Federal rulemaking 

procedure by submitting written 

comments to the EPA New England 

Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES

section of this Federal Register. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action proposes to make 

determinations of attainment based on 

monitored air quality data and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, these proposed actions: 

• Are not ‘‘significant regulatory 

actions’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Do not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

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

• Are 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.); 

• Do 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); 

• Do not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Are not economically significant 

regulatory actions based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Are 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 

• Do 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, these actions do 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: November 14, 2011. 

H. Curtis Spalding, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 

[FR Doc. 2011–30254 Filed 11–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 635 

RIN 0648–XA823 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 

Electronic Dealer Reporting System 

Workshop 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of public workshop. 

SUMMARY: On June 28, 2011, NMFS 

published a proposed rule that 

considered requiring, among other 

things, Federal Atlantic swordfish, 

shark, and tunas dealers (except for 

dealers reporting Atlantic bluefin tuna) 

to report commercially-harvested 

Atlantic sharks, swordfish, and bigeye, 

albacore, yellowfin, and skipjack 

(BAYS) tunas to NMFS through one 

centralized electronic reporting system. 

This electronic reporting system would 

allow dealers to submit Atlantic sharks, 

swordfish, and BAYS tuna data on a 

more real-time basis and more 

efficiently, which will reduce 

duplicative data submissions from 

different regions. NMFS proposed to 

delay the effective date of the electronic 

reporting requirements until 2012 in 

order to give sufficient time for dealers 

to adjust to implementation of the new 

system and the additional requirements. 

In this notice, NMFS announces the 

date and location for an upcoming 

workshop in the Caribbean area in order 

to introduce the new reporting system to 

HMS dealers. NMFS will announce 

additional workshops in a future notice. 

DATES: The initial Workshop will be 

held on December 14, 2011, from 6 to 

8 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The initial workshop will 

be held in St. Thomas, USVI, 

Frenchman’s Reef and Morning Star 

Marriott Beach Resort, 5 Estate 

Bakkreore, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, 

00801. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

for additional details. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Delisse Ortiz or Karyl Brewster-Geisz, at 

(301) 427–8503 (phone) or (301) 713– 

1917 (fax) or http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ 

sfa/hms/index.htm. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Atlantic 

HMS are managed under the dual 

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., and 

the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS