Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 73391 

1The monitoring data from the 2007–2009, 2008– 

2010, and 2009–2011 monitoring periods that is 

relied on in this notice may be impacted by 

reductions associated with the Clean Air Interstate 

Rule (CAIR), which was remanded to EPA in 2008. 

North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896, as modified 

on reh’g, 550 F.3d 1176 (DC Cir. 2008). Nonetheless, 

because this action addresses only whether the 

monitoring data shows attainment, EPA need not 

address at this time whether such attainment was 

due to the remanded CAIR. 

determination is based upon complete, 

quality assured, and certified ambient 

air monitoring data that show the area 

has monitored attainment of the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS for the 2009–2011 

monitoring period. Available 

preliminary 2012 data is consistent with 

continued attainment. Pursuant to 40 

CFR 51.918, if this clean data 

determination is finalized, it would 

suspend the requirements for the 

Pittsburgh Area to submit an attainment 

demonstration and associated RACM, 

RFP plan, contingency measures, and 

any other planning requirements related 

to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for so long as the area 

continues to attain the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

Finalizing both of these 

determinations or either of them would 

not constitute a redesignation of the 

Pittsburgh Area to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS under CAA 

section 107(d)(3). Neither determination 

of attainment involves approving a 

maintenance plan for the Pittsburgh 

Area, nor determines that the Pittsburgh 

Area has met all the requirements for 

redesignation under the CAA, including 

that the attainment be due to permanent 

and enforceable measures.1 Therefore, 

the designation status of the Pittsburgh 

Area will remain nonattainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS until such 

time as EPA takes final rulemaking 

action to determine that the Pittsburgh 

Area meets the CAA requirements for 

redesignation to attainment. EPA is 

soliciting public comments on the 

issues discussed in this document. 

These comments will be considered 

before EPA takes final action. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action proposes to make 

determinations based on air quality, and 

would, if finalized, result in the 

suspension of certain federal 

requirements, and/or would not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

these proposed actions: 

• Are 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); 

• 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 an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Are not a significant regulatory 

action 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 CAA; 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 proposed 

determinations that the Pittsburgh Area 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

do not have tribal implications as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because 

the determinations do not 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, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: November 21, 2012. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2012–29790 Filed 12–7–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0732; FRL–9739–4] 

Approval of Air Quality Implementation 

Plans; California; Eastern Kern, 

Imperial County, Placer County, and 

Yolo-Solano; Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing approval of 

revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). EPA is 

proposing approval of four permitting 

rules submitted for the Eastern Kern Air 

Pollution Control District (EKAPCD), 

Imperial County Air Pollution Control 

District (ICAPCD), Placer County Air 

Pollution Control District (PCAPCD), 

and Yolo-Solano Air Quality 

Management District (YSAQMD) 

portions of the California SIP. The State 

of California is required under Part C of 

title I of the Act to adopt and implement 

a SIP-approved Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit 

program. We are proposing to revise the 

SIP to incorporate EKAPCD Rule 

210.4—Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration, ICAPCD Rule 904— 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) Permit Program, PCAPCD Rule 

518—Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) Permit Program, and 

YSAQMD Rule 3.24—Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration. The approval 

of these rules would establish a PSD 

permit program in each District for preconstruction review of certain new and 

modified major stationary sources in 

attainment or unclassifiable areas. We 

are soliciting comments on this 

proposal. In the ‘‘Rules’’ section of this 

Federal Register, we are approving 

these California SIP revisions as a direct 

final rule without a prior proposed rule. 

If we receive no adverse comment, we 

will not take further action on this 

proposed rule. If we receive adverse 

comment, we will publish a timely 

withdrawal in the Federal Register 

informing the public that this rule, or 

the relevant provisions of the rule, will 

not take effect, and all public comments 

received will be addressed in any 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. 

DATES: Any comments must be 

submitted no later than January 9, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

73392 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

OAR–2012–0732, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: R9airpermits@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air3), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the ‘‘Rules’’ section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa 

Beckham, Permits Office (AIR–3), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region IX, (415) 972–3811, 

beckham.lisa@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document proposes to approve revisions 

to the California SIP to incorporate 

EKAPCD Rule 210.4—Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration, ICAPCD Rule 

904—Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) Permit Program, 

PCAPCD Rule 518—Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permit 

Program, and YSAQMD Rule 3.24— 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration. 

The State of California is required under 

Part C of title I of the Act to adopt and 

implement a SIP-approved PSD permit 

program. The approval of these rules 

would establish a PSD permit program 

in each District for pre-construction 

review of certain new and modified 

major stationary sources in attainment 

or unclassifiable areas. Because the 

State of California does not currently 

have a SIP-approved PSD program 

within EKAPCD, ICAPCD, PCAPCD, and 

YSAQMD (referred to hereinafter as the 

‘‘Districts’’), EPA is currently the PSD 

permitting authority for each District. 

Inclusion of these rules into the SIP will 

transfer PSD permitting authority from 

EPA to the Districts. EPA will assume 

the role of overseeing the PSD 

permitting program within each District. 

We have published a direct final rule 

approving these revisions in the ‘‘Rules’’ 

section of this Federal Register because 

we view this as a noncontroversial 

action and anticipate no adverse 

comment. We have explained our 

reasons for this action and provided 

detailed information about the action in 

the preamble to the direct final rule. The 

regulatory text for this proposal is 

identical to that for the direct final rule. 

For additional information, including 

the regulatory text, see the direct final 

rule in the ‘‘Rules’’ section of this 

Federal Register. 

If no adverse comments are received, 

we will not take further action on this 

proposed rule. If EPA receives adverse 

comment, we will publish a timely 

withdrawal in the Federal Register 

informing the public that this rule will 

not take effect, and all public comments 

received will be addressed in any 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. Please note that if EPA 

receives adverse comment on a distinct 

provision of this rule and that provision 

may be severed from the remainder of 

the rule, EPA may adopt as final those 

provisions of the rule that are not the 

subject of an adverse comment. In such 

case, EPA would publish a timely 

withdrawal in the Federal Register 

indicating which provisions we are 

withdrawing. The provisions that are 

not withdrawn would then become 

effective on the date set out in the direct 

final rule, notwithstanding adverse 

comment on any other provision. 

EPA does not intend to institute a 

second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action must do so at this time. 

For further information about 

commenting on this action, please see 

the information provided in the 

ADDRESSES section of this document and 

refer to the direct final rule in the 

‘‘Rules’’ section of this Federal Register. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides, Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: September 25, 2012. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2012–29536 Filed 12–7–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0808; FRL–9750–3] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, Monterey Bay 

Unified Air Pollution Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Monterey Bay Unified 

Air Pollution Control District 

(MBUAPCD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). This 

revision concerns opacity standards 

related to multiple pollutants, including 

particulate matter (PM) emissions from 

several different types of sources, 

ranging from fugitive dust to gas 

turbines. We are proposing to approve a 

local rule to regulate these emission 

sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or the Act). 

DATES: Any comments on this proposal 

must arrive by January 9, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2012–0808, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments 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 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. 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: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California 94105–3901. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps), and some may not 

be publicly available in either location 

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with