Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 136 / Wednesday, July 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules 41473 

one of which will become part of the 

public record. 

(c) Document submission contents 

and process. 

* * * * * 

(4) Submission of electronic title lists. 

If a document submitted for recordation 

pertains to 100 or more titles of 

copyrighted works (including where the 

total number of titles across multiple 

title lists associated with the document 

is 100 or more), in addition to 

identifying the titles in the paper 

submission, the remitting party may 

also submit an electronic list (or lists) 

setting forth each such title, as provided 

herein. The electronic list(s) shall not be 

considered a part of the recorded 

document and shall function only as a 

means to index titles and other 

information associated with the 

recorded document. 

(i) Method of submitting electronic 

title lists. Absent a special arrangement 

with the Office, the electronic list must 

be included in the same package as the 

paper document to be recorded. The list 

must be prepared in a format consistent 

with the requirements of subparagraph 

(ii) of this paragraph (4), and stored on 

a compact disc, flash drive, or other 

digital storage medium approved by the 

Copyright Office that is clearly labeled 

with the following information: the 

name of the remitting party, the name of 

the first party listed in the paper 

document, the first title listed in the 

paper document, the number of titles 

included in the paper document, and 

the date the remitting party mailed or 

delivered the paper document. 

(ii) Format requirements for electronic 

title lists. Any electronic list of titles 

submitted pursuant to paragraph (c)(4) 

shall conform to the requirements of 

this subparagraph. The electronic list of 

titles shall: 

(A) Consist of a table contained in an 

electronic file in Excel (.xls) format or 

an equivalent electronic format 

approved by the Office; 

(B) include only letters, numbers, and 

printable characters that appear in the 

ASCII 128-character set; 

(C) include four columns respectively 

entitled, from left to right, Article, Title, 

Authorship Information, and 

Registration Number(s); 

(D) list each title on a separate row of 

the electronic table, and include the 

following information for each title in 

the appropriate column, as applicable: 

(1) First column: Article. If the title of 

the work begins with one of the articles 

specified in the following list, the article 

should be separated from the title and 

placed in this column. If the title does 

not begin with one of the specified 

articles, the column must still be 

included, but this field should be left 

blank. The list of leading articles is as 

follows: 

English: A, An, The 

Spanish: Un, Una, El, La, Lo, Las, Los 

French: L’, Le, La, Les, Un, Une 

German: Der, Die, Das, Einer, Eine, Ein 

(2) Second column: Title. The title of 

the work, not including any leading 

article; 

(3) Third column: Authorship 

Information. The word ‘‘By’’ followed 

by the author or authors of the work. 

Where applicable, include designations 

such as ‘‘performer known as’’ or ‘‘also 

known as,’’ or the abbreviated form of 

such designations. Abbreviated 

designations must omit any punctuation 

between letters, for example ‘‘pka’’ (not 

‘‘p/k/a’’); and 

(4) Fourth column: Registration 

Number(s). The copyright registration 

number or numbers. This field is 

optional; if registration numbers are not 

being supplied for any title in the 

submission, this column should still be 

included, but left blank. Regardless of 

how they appear in the paper document, 

registration numbers included in the 

electronic list must be twelve characters 

long, must include a two- or three-letter 

prefix, and must not include spaces or 

hyphens. If a given registration number 

consists of fewer than twelve characters 

in the original, the remitting party 

should add leading zeroes to the 

numeric portion of the registration 

number before adding it to the list. For 

example, a published work with the 

registration number ‘‘SR–320–918’’ 

should be transcribed into the electronic 

list as ‘‘sr0000320918,’’ and an 

unpublished work with the registration 

number ‘‘VAu-598–764’’ should be 

transcribed into the electronic list as 

‘‘vau000598764.’’ 

(iii) Remitters to bear consequences of 

inaccurate electronic title lists. The 

Office will rely on the electronic list of 

titles for purposes of indexing recorded 

documents in the Public Catalog and the 

remitter will bear the consequences of 

any inaccuracies in the electronic list in 

relation to the recorded document, 

including with respect to whether there 

is effective constructive notice or 

priority under 17 U.S.C. 205(c). For 

example, omission of a title from the 

electronic list such that the title is not 

properly indexed may affect the ability 

to claim that the public had constructive 

notice with respect to that title, even if 

the title appears in the paper document. 

If a title appears in the electronic list but 

is not included in the paper document 

that is actually recorded, the paper 

document will control. 

(iv) Treatment of improperly prepared 

electronic title lists. The Office reserves 

the right to reject an electronic title list 

from any party that is shown to have 

submitted an improperly prepared file. 

* * * * * 

(f) Return Receipt. If, with a document 

submitted for recordation, a remitter 

includes two copies of a properly 

completed Recordation Document Cover 

Sheet (Form DCS) indicating that a 

return receipt is requested, as well as a 

self-addressed, postage-paid envelope, 

the remitter will receive a date-stamped 

return receipt acknowledging the 

Copyright Office’s receipt of the 

enclosed submission. The completed 

copies of Form DCS and self-addressed, 

postage-paid envelope must be included 

in the same package as the submitted 

document. A return receipt confirms the 

Office’s receipt of the submission as of 

the date indicated, but does not 

establish eligibility for, or the date of, 

recordation. 

Dated: July 10, 2014. 

Jacqueline C. Charlesworth, 

General Counsel and Associate Register of 

Copyrights. 

[FR Doc. 2014–16726 Filed 7–15–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2014–0173; FRL–9913–71– 

Region 8] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; North Dakota; 

Revisions to the Air Pollution Control 

Rules 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

changes to North Dakota’s State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). On January 

23, 2013, the Governor of North Dakota 

submitted to EPA revisions to several 

chapters of the North Dakota SIP. These 

revisions included the removal of 

subsections 33–15–03–04.4 and 33–15– 

05–01.2.a(l) of the North Dakota 

Administrative Code (NDAC). In this 

action, EPA is proposing to approve the 

removal of these subsections from the 

SIP because such removal is consistent 

with Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements. 

The removal will correct certain 

deficiencies related to the correct 

treatment of excess emissions from 

sources. EPA will address the remaining 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41474 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 136 / Wednesday, July 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

revisions from North Dakota’s January 

23, 2013 submission in other actions. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 15, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2014–0173, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: clark.adam@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert 

the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing 

comments). 

• Mail: Director, Air Program, 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. 

• Hand Delivery: Director, Air 

Program, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P– 

AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. Such deliveries 

are only accepted Monday through 

Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

federal holidays. Special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2014– 

0173 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. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

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

For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to Section I. 

General Information of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Program, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all 

possible, you contact the individual 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to view the hard copy 

of the docket. You may view the hard 

copy of the docket Monday through 

Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adam Clark, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, 

Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, (303) 

312–7104, clark.adam@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this document, we 

are giving meaning to certain words or 

initials as follows: 

(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean 

or refer to the Clean Air Act, unless the 

context indicates otherwise. 

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

refer to the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency. 

(iii) The initials NDAC mean or refer to the 

North Dakota Administrative Code. 

(iv) The initials SIP mean or refer to state 

implementation plan. 

(v) The initials SSM mean or refer to 

startup, shutdown, and malfunction. 

(vi) The words State or North Dakota mean 

the State of North Dakota, unless the context 

indicates otherwise. 

I. General Information 

What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting Confidential Business 

Information (CBI). Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register, date, and page number); 

• Follow directions and organize your 

comments; 

• Explain why you agree or disagree; 

• Suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes; 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used; 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced; 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives; 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats; and 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. Background 

In accordance with the requirements 

of CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), SIPs must 

contain enforceable emission limitations 

and, in accordance with the definition 

of ‘‘emission limitations’’ in CAA 

section 302(k), such emission 

limitations must be continuous. In 

addition, under CAA section 304(a), any 

person may bring a civil action against 

any person alleged to have violated (if 

there is evidence that the alleged 

violation has been repeated) or to be in 

violation of an ‘‘emission standard or 

limitation’’ under the CAA. For the 

purposes of section 304, ‘‘emission 

standard or limitation’’ is defined in 

section 304(f) and includes SIP emission 

limitations. Thus, SIP emission 

limitations can be enforced in a section 

304 action and so must be capable of 

enforcement. SIP provisions that create 

exemptions such that excess emissions 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 136 / Wednesday, July 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules 41475 

1The Petition is available in the docket for this 

action. 

2For a more in-depth discussion on the 

inadequacies of NDAC 33–15–03–04.4 and NDAC 

33–15–05–01.2.a(l), see our proposed SIP call at 78 

FR 12531–12532, February 22, 2013. 

3We note that if we finalize our proposed 

approval of the removal of these provisions from 

the SIP, it will have the effect of mooting our 

proposed SIP call regarding these provisions. 

during startup, shutdown, malfunctions 

(SSM) and other conditions are not 

violations of the applicable emission 

limitations are inconsistent with these 

fundamental requirements of the CAA 

with respect to emission limitations in 

SIPs. 

NDAC 33–15–03–04.4 created 

exemptions from a number of crossreferenced opacity limits ‘‘where the 

limits specified in this article cannot be 

met because of operations and processes 

such as, but not limited to, oil field 

service and drilling operations, but only 

so long as it is not technically feasible 

to meet said specifications.’’ NDAC 33– 

15–05–01.2.a(1) created an implicit 

exemption from particulate matter 

emissions limits for ‘‘temporary 

operational breakdowns or cleaning of 

air pollution equipment’’ if the source 

met certain conditions. Because these 

provisions contemplated outright 

exemptions from the otherwise 

applicable SIP emission limits, they 

were inconsistent with CAA 

requirements. In addition, NDAC 33– 

15–03–04.4 had inherent ambiguities 

that called into question its basic 

enforceability. 

On June 30, 2011, the Sierra Club 

filed with the EPA Administrator a 

petition for rulemaking concerning 

states’ treatment of excess emissions 

from sources during SSM events (the 

Petition).1 In the Petition, the Sierra 

Club identified existing SIP provisions 

in 39 states that the Sierra Club 

considered inconsistent with the CAA, 

including provisions in the North 

Dakota SIP. Specifically, the Sierra Club 

argued that NDAC 33–15–03–04.4 and 

NDAC 33–15–05–01.2.a(l) were contrary 

to the CAA because these provisions did 

not consider each instance of excess 

emissions a violation of the applicable 

standard, and because these provisions 

could be construed to preclude EPA and 

citizen enforcement. 

On February 22, 2013, EPA published 

a proposed rulemaking in which (among 

other things) we proposed to grant the 

Petition as it pertained to NDAC 33–15– 

03–04.4 and NDAC 33–15–05–01.2.a(l). 

78 FR 12460, 12531–12532. We 

concurred with Sierra Club’s assertion 

that both provisions are inconsistent 

with the requirements of the CAA. In 

our proposed rulemaking, we also 

proposed to find that NDAC 33–15–03– 

04.3 was inconsistent with the 

requirements of the CAA. We proposed 

to find that all three of these provisions 

(NDAC 33–15–03–04.3, NDAC 33–15– 

03–04.4 and NDAC 33–15–05–01.2.a(l)) 

are substantially inadequate to meet 

CAA requirements, and concurrently 

proposed to issue a SIP call for all three 

provisions. 

On January 23, 2013, the Governor of 

North Dakota submitted to EPA SIP 

revisions that included the removal of 

both NDAC 33–15–03–04.4 and NDAC 

33–15–05–01.2.a(l), as well as 

additional revisions to the North Dakota 

SIP. We will act on the remaining 

revisions from the January 23, 2013 

submittal (aside from NDAC 33–15–03– 

04.4 and NDAC 33–15–05–01.2.a(l)) in 

separate rulemakings. The January 23, 

2013 submittal did not revise NDAC 33– 

15–03–04.3. 

III. North Dakota Revisions and EPA 

Analysis 

Under CAA section 107, states have 

the primary authority and responsibility 

to develop and implement SIPs that 

provide for attainment, maintenance, 

and enforcement of the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards and 

meet other CAA requirements. Under 

CAA section 110(k), EPA has the 

authority and responsibility to review 

state SIP submissions to assure that they 

meet all applicable requirements. CAA 

section 110(l) prohibits EPA from 

approving a SIP revision that (among 

other things) would interfere with any 

applicable requirement of the CAA. 

In this instance, the State has elected 

to revise its existing SIP by removing 

two previously approved provisions that 

created exemptions from otherwise 

applicable emission limits in the SIP. As 

noted, the State removed both NDAC 

33–15–03–04.4 and NDAC 33–15–05– 

01.2.a(l) from the North Dakota SIP in 

its January 23, 2013 submission. 

We consider the removal of these 

provisions sufficient to correct the 

inadequacies contained within them 

and to be consistent with the 

requirements of the CAA.2 As a result of 

their removal from the SIP, the 

improper exemptions from emissions 

limits contained within these provisions 

will no longer be available to sources. 

EPA’s proposed approval of these two 

revisions is also consistent with CAA 

section 110(l) because approval will not 

interfere with any applicable 

requirement of the CAA. Specifically, 

removal of the exemptions will not relax 

the existing emission limitations in the 

SIP and will in fact be more protective. 

Furthermore, these revisions will render 

the revised emission limitations 

consistent with the requirements of the 

CAA for SIP provisions by making them 

continuously applicable and more 

enforceable. Therefore, we are 

proposing to approve the removal of 

these provisions from the SIP.3

IV. EPA’s Proposed Action 

We are proposing to approve the 

removal of NDAC 33–15–03–04.4 and 

NDAC 33–15–05–01.2.a(l) from the 

North Dakota SIP, as reflected in the 

January 23, 2013 SIP submission. 

V. Statutory and Executive Orders 

Review 

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 proposes to approve state 

law as meeting federal requirements and 

does not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. For that reason, this 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 

USC 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 

USC 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 USC 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41476 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 136 / Wednesday, July 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

• 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, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, 

Greenhouse gases, Lead, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: June 24, 2014. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2014–16739 Filed 7–15–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2014–0271; FRL–9913–77– 

Region 7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Kansas; Infrastructure SIP 

Requirements for the 2008 Lead 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

elements of a State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) submission from the State of 

Kansas addressing the applicable 

requirements of Clean Air Act (CAA) 

section 110 for the 2008 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) for Lead (Pb), which requires 

that each state adopt and submit a SIP 

to support implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of each 

new or revised NAAQS promulgated by 

EPA. These SIPs are commonly referred 

to as ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIPs. The 

infrastructure requirements 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 CAA. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 15, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2014–0271, by one of the 

following methods: 

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

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: kemp.lachala@epa.gov. 

3. Mail: Ms. Lachala Kemp, Air 

Planning and Development Branch, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, Air and Waste Management 

Division, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219. 

4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver 

your comments to Ms. Lachala Kemp, 

Air Planning and Development Branch, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, Air and Waste Management 

Division, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2014– 

0271. 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 should 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, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219 from 8:00 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The interested 

persons wanting to examine these 

documents should make an 

appointment with the office at least 24 

hours in advance. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Lachala Kemp, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, KS 66219; telephone number: 

(913) 551–7214; fax number: (913) 551– 

7065; email address: 

kemp.lachala@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

to EPA. This section provides additional 

information by addressing the following 

questions: 

I. What is a Section 110(a)(1) and (2) 

infrastructure SIP? 

II. What are the applicable elements under 

Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? 

III. What is EPA’s approach to the review of 

infrastructure SIP Submissions? 

IV. What is EPA’s evaluation of how the state 

addressed the Relevant elements of 

Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? 

V. What action is EPA proposing? 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Review 

I. What is a Section 110(a)(1) and (2) 

infrastructure SIP? 

Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires, 

in part, that states make a SIP 

submission to EPA to implement, 

maintain and enforce each of the 

NAAQS promulgated by EPA after 

reasonable notice and public hearings. 

Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of 

specific elements that such 

infrastructure SIP submissions must 

address. SIPs meeting the requirements 

of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) are to be 

submitted by states within three years 

after promulgation of a new or revised 

NAAQS. These SIP submissions are 

commonly referred to as 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIPs. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS