Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules 72291 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0814; FRL– 9757–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Region 4 

States; Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) 

Infrastructure Requirement for the 

1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to 

conditionally approve submissions from 

Kentucky, North Carolina and 

Tennessee for inclusion into each states’ 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). This 

proposal addresses the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) requirements pertaining to 

prevention of significant deterioration 

(PSD) for the 1997 annual and 2006 24- 

hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) infrastructure SIPs. The CAA 

requires that each state adopt and 

submit a SIP for the implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of each 

NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is 

commonly referred to as an 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP. EPA is proposing 

to conditionally approve the 

submissions for Kentucky, North 

Carolina and Tennessee that relate to 

adequate provisions prohibiting 

emissions that interfere with any other 

state’s required measures to prevent 

significant deterioration of its air 

quality. The subject of this notice is 

limited to infrastructure provisions 

prohibiting emissions that interfere with 

any other state’s required measures to 

prevent significant deterioration of its 

air quality. All other applicable 

infrastructure elements for these states 

are being addressed in separate 

rulemakings. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before January 4, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2012–0814, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2012– 

0814,’’ Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 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 federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2012– 

0814. 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 through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. 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. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 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 federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9043. 

Mr. Lakeman can be reached via 

electronic mail at 

lakeman.sean@epa.gov. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. What are states required to address under 

sections 110(a)(2)(D)? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of how region 4 

states addressed element (D)(i)(II) related 

to PSD? 

IV. Proposed Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), EPA 

established an annual PM2.5 NAAQS at 

15.0 micrograms per cubic meter 

(mg/m3) based on a 3-year average of 

annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. At 

that time, EPA also established a 24- 

hour NAAQS of 65 mg/m3. See 40 CFR 

50.7. On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 

61144), EPA retained the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 mg/m3 based on a 

3-year average of annual mean PM2.5

concentrations, and promulgated a new 

24-hour NAAQS of 35 mg/m3 based on 

a 3-year average of the 98th percentile 

of 24-hour concentrations. By statute, 

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

require states to address basic SIP 

requirements, including emissions 

inventories, monitoring, and modeling 

to assure attainment and maintenance of 

the NAAQS. States were required to 

submit such SIPs to EPA no later than 

July 2000 for the 1997 annual PM2.5


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
72292 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

1On July 17, 2012, Kentucky withdrew its 

September 8, 2009, 110(a)(1)–(2) infrastructure 

submission addressing the 8-hour ozone, PM2.5 and 

Lead NAAQS. Kentucky replaced its September 8, 

2009, 110(a)(1)–(2) infrastructure submission with a 

submission provided on July 17, 2012. 

2EPA’s action today does not address the other 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). 

NAAQS, and no later than October 2009 

for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

On March 4, 2004, Earthjustice 

submitted a notice of intent to sue 

related to EPA’s failure to issue findings 

of failure to submit related to the 

‘‘infrastructure’’ requirements for the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. On March 

10, 2005, EPA entered into a consent 

decree with Earthjustice which required 

EPA, among other things, to complete a 

Federal Register notice announcing 

EPA’s determinations pursuant to 

section 110(k)(1)(B) as to whether each 

state had made complete submissions to 

meet the requirements of section 

110(a)(2) for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by 

October 5, 2008. In accordance with the 

consent decree, EPA made completeness 

findings for each state based upon what 

the Agency received from each state for 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS as of October 3, 

2008. 

On October 22, 2008, EPA published 

a final rulemaking entitled 

‘‘Completeness Findings for Section 

110(a) State Implementation Plans 

Pertaining to the Fine Particulate Matter 

(PM2.5) NAAQS’’ making a finding that 

each state had submitted or failed to 

submit a complete SIP that provided the 

basic program elements of section 

110(a)(2) necessary to implement the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 73 FR 62902. 

For those states that did receive 

findings, the findings of failure to 

submit for all or a portion of a state’s 

implementation plan established a 24- 

month deadline for EPA to promulgate 

a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to 

address the outstanding SIP elements 

unless, prior to that time, the affected 

states submitted, and EPA approved, the 

required SIPs. 

The findings that all or portions of a 

state’s submission are complete 

established a 12-month deadline for 

EPA to take action upon the complete 

SIP elements in accordance with section 

110(k). Kentucky, North Carolina and 

Tennessee’s infrastructure submissions 

were received by EPA on August 26, 

2008, April 1, 2008, and December 14, 

2007, respectively, for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS and on July 17, 2012,1

September 21, 2009, and October 19, 

2009, respectively, for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Kentucky, North 

Carolina and Tennessee were among 

other states that did not receive findings 

of failure to submit because they had 

provided a complete submission to EPA 

to address the infrastructure elements 

for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by October 

3, 2008. 

On July 6, 2011, WildEarth Guardians 

and Sierra Club filed an amended 

complaint related to EPA’s failure to 

take action on the SIP submittal related 

to the ‘‘infrastructure’’ requirements for 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. On 

October 20, 2011, EPA entered into a 

consent decree with WildEarth 

Guardians and Sierra Club which 

required EPA, among other things, to 

complete a Federal Register notice of 

the Agency’s final action either 

approving, disapproving, or approving 

in part and disapproving in part the 

Kentucky, North Carolina and 

Tennessee’s 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS Infrastructure SIP submittals 

addressing the applicable requirements 

of sections 110(a)(2)(A)–(H), (J)–(M), 

except for section 110(a)(2)(C) 

nonattainment area requirements and 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) visibility 

requirements. The rulemaking proposed 

through today’s action is consistent with 

the terms of this consent decree. 

Today’s action is proposing to 

conditionally approve Kentucky, North 

Carolina and Tennessee’s infrastructure 

submissions for the 1997 annual and 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS addressing 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), related 

to adequate provisions prohibiting 

emissions that interfere with any other 

state’s required measures to prevent 

significant deterioration of its air quality 

(referred to as ‘‘prong 3’’). EPA is taking 

action on Kentucky, North Carolina and 

Tennessee’s infrastructure submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS for 

sections 110(a)(2)(A)–(F), (H), (J)–(M), 

including other portions of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) in separate actions from 

today’s rulemaking. 

II. What are states required to address 

under sections 110(a)(2)(D)? 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) has two 

components, 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

has four components that require SIPs to 

include provisions prohibiting any 

source or other type of emissions 

activity in one state from: (1) 

Contributing significantly to 

nonattainment maintenance of the 

NAAQS in another state, and (2) 

interfering with maintenance of the 

NAAQS in another state (collectively 

codified as 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)); and from 

interfering with measures required to (3) 

prevent significant deterioration of air 

quality in another state, or (4) protect 

visibility in another state (collectively 

codified as 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)). Section 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include 

provisions insuring compliance with 

sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating 

to interstate and international pollution 

abatement. 

In previous actions, EPA has already 

taken action to address Kentucky, North 

Carolina and Tennessee’s SIP 

submissions related to sections 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) for 

the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. Today’s proposed rulemaking 

relates only to requirements related to 

prong 3 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), which 

as previously described, requires that 

the SIP contain adequate provisions 

prohibiting emissions that interfere with 

any other state’s required measures to 

prevent significant deterioration of its 

air quality.2 More information on this 

requirement and EPA’s rationale for 

today’s proposed conditional approvals 

for this requirement for purposes of the 

1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS is provided below. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of how 

region 4 states addressed element 

(D)(i)(II) related to PSD? 

EPA’s September 25, 2009, 

memorandum entitled ‘‘Guidance on 

SIP Elements Required Under Section 

110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour 

Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards’’ provided 

guidance on addressing the 

infrastructure requirements required 

under sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) of 

the CAA with respect to the 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The 2009 Guidance 

describes that a state’s PSD permitting 

program is the primary measure that 

such state must include in its SIP to 

prevent significant deterioration of air 

quality in accordance with prong of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). EPA has 

preliminarily determined that Kentucky, 

North Carolina and Tennessee’s prong 3 

infrastructure submissions, with the 

exceptions noted below are consistent 

with the 2009 Guidance, when 

considered in conjunction with each 

State’s PSD program. 

At present, there are four regulations 

that are required to be adopted into the 

SIP to meet PSD-related infrastructure 

requirements. See Sections 110(a)(2)(C), 

prong 3 of 110(a)(2)(D)(i), and 

110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA. These 

regulations are: (1) ‘‘Final Rule To 

Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard—Phase 

2; Final Rule’’ (November 29, 2005, 70 

FR 71612) (hereafter referred to as the 

‘‘Phase II Rule’’); (2) ‘‘Implementation of 

the New Source Review Program for 

Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 

Micrometers; Final Rule’’ (May 16, 

2008, 73 FR 28321) (hereafter referred to 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules 72293 

3EPA promulgated the Phase I Rule on April 30, 

2004 entitled ‘‘Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour 

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard— 

Phase 1.’’ See 69 FR 23951. 

as the ‘‘NSR PM2.5 Rule’’); (3) 

‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring 

Rule; Final Rule’’ (June 3, 2010, 75 FR 

31514) (hereafter referred to as the 

‘‘GHG Tailoring Rule’’); and, (4) ‘‘Final 

Rule on the Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate 

Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers 

(PM2.5)—Increments, Significant Impact 

Levels (SILs) and Significant monitoring 

Concentration (SMC); Final Rule’’ 

(October 20, 2010, 75 FR 64864) 

(hereafter referred to as the‘‘PM2.5 PSD 

Increment-SILs-SMC Rule (only as it 

relates to PM2.5 Increments)’’). Specific 

details on these PSD requirements can 

be found in the respective final rules 

cited above, however, a brief summary 

of each rule is provided below. 

First, as part of the framework to 

implement the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, EPA promulgated an 

implementation rule in two phases.3

The Phase 2 Rule is relevant to today’s 

action. Among other changes, this rule 

revised the PSD regulations to recognize 

nitrogen oxide (NOX) as an ozone 

precursor. 

Second, the NSR PM2.5 Rule revised 

the NSR program to establish the 

framework for implementing 

preconstruction permit review for the 

PM2.5 NAAQS in both attainment areas 

and nonattainment areas. These PSD 

requirements included: (1) A provision 

that NSR permits address directly 

emitted PM2.5 and precursor pollutants; 

(2) a requirement establishing 

significant emission rates for direct 

PM2.5 and precursor pollutants 

(including sulfur dioxide (SO2) and 

NOX); (3) exceptions to the 

grandfathering policy for permits being 

reviewed under the PM10 surrogate 

program; and, (4) a revision that states 

account for gases that condense to form 

particles (condensables) in PM2.5 and 

PM10 emission limits in PSD permits. 

Third, in the GHG Tailoring Rule, 

EPA tailored the applicability criteria 

that determine which GHG emission 

sources become subject to the PSD 

program of the CAA. See 75 FR 31514. 

Lastly, the PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILsSMC Rule (only as it relates to PM2.5

increments) provided additional 

regulatory requirements under the PSD 

program regarding the implementation 

of the PM2.5 NAAQS for NSR by 

specifically establishing PM2.5

increments pursuant to section 166(a) of 

the CAA to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality in areas 

meeting the NAAQS. 

The PSD requirements promulgated in 

the aforementioned regulations establish 

the framework for a comprehensive SIP 

PSD program which EPA has 

determined are necessary to comply 

with prong 3 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). 

The following table shows when EPA 

approved the incorporation of the 

aforementioned regulations in each of 

the States’ implementation plans: 

State Phase II Rule GHG Tailoring Rule NSR PM2.5 Rule 

PM2.5 PSD IncrementSILs-SMC Rule (only as it 

relates to PM2.5

increments) 

Kentucky .............................. 9/15/20120, 75 FR 55988 12/29/2010, 75 FR 81868 See Below ........................ See Below. 

North Carolina ..................... 8/10/2011, 76 FR 36875 10/18/2011, 76 FR 64240 See Below ........................ See Below. 

Tennessee ........................... 2/7/2012, 77 FR 6016 2/28/2012, 77 FR 11744 7/30/2012, 77 FR 44481 See Below 

Kentucky: On July 3, 2012, the 

Commonwealth submitted a 

commitment letter to EPA requesting 

conditional approval of outstanding 

requirements related to the NSR PM2.5

Rule and PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILsSMC Rule. In this letter, Kentucky 

provided a schedule as to how the 

Commonwealth will address 

outstanding requirements related to the 

NSR PM2.5 Rule and PM2.5 PSD 

Increment-SILs-SMC Rule. EPA 

determined that this letter of 

commitment met the requirements of 

section 110(k)(4) of the CAA, and 

accordingly, EPA conditionally 

approved the Commonwealth’s NSR 

PM2.5 Rule and PM2.5 PSD IncrementSILs-SMC Rule submission on October 

3, 2012. See 77 FR 60307. EPA is relying 

upon this earlier commitment to address 

the NSR PM2.5 Rule and the PM2.5 PSD 

Increment-SILs-SMC Rule (only as it 

relates to PM2.5 increments) as the basis 

for conditionally approving Kentucky’s 

infrastructure SIP as it relates to prong 

3 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). If the 

Commonwealth fails to submit these 

revisions by October 3, 2013, today’s 

conditional approval will automatically 

become a disapproval on that date and 

EPA will issue a finding of disapproval. 

EPA is not required to propose the 

finding of disapproval. If the 

conditional approval is converted to a 

disapproval, the final disapproval 

triggers the Federal Implementation 

Plan requirement under section 110(c). 

However, if the State meets its 

commitment within the applicable 

timeframe, the conditionally approved 

submission will remain a part of the SIP 

until EPA takes final action approving 

or disapproving the new submittal. 

North Carolina: On July 10, 2012, 

North Carolina submitted a commitment 

letter to EPA requesting conditional 

approval of outstanding requirements 

related to the NSR PM2.5 Rule and the 

PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule. In 

this letter, North Carolina provided a 

schedule for the State to address 

outstanding requirements related to the 

NSR PM2.5 Rule and the PM2.5 PSD 

Increment-SILs-SMC Rule. EPA 

determined that this letter of 

commitment met the requirements of 

section 110(k)(4) of the CAA, and 

accordingly, EPA conditionally 

approved North Carolina’s NSR PM2.5

Rule submission on October 16, 2012 

(77 FR 63234). EPA is relying upon this 

earlier commitment to address the NSR 

PM2.5 Rule and the PM2.5 PSD 

Increment-SILs-SMC Rule (only as it 

relates to PM2.5 increments) as the basis 

for conditionally approving North 

Carolina’s infrastructure SIP as it relates 

to prong 3 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). If 

North Carolina fails to submit these 

revisions by October 16, 2013, today’s 

conditional approval will automatically 

become a disapproval on that date and 

EPA will issue a finding of disapproval. 

EPA is not required to propose the 

finding of disapproval. If the 

conditional approval is converted to a 

disapproval, the final disapproval 

triggers the Federal Implementation 

Plan requirement under section 110(c). 

However, if the State meets its 

commitment within the applicable 

timeframe, the conditionally approved 

submission will remain a part of the SIP 

until EPA takes final action approving 

or disapproving the new submittal. 

Tennessee: On October 4, 2012, 

Tennessee submitted a commitment 

letter to EPA requesting conditional 

approval of specific enforceable 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
72294 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

measures related to prong 3 of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i); specifically, the PM2.5

PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule (only as 

it relates to PM2.5 increments). In this 

letter, Tennessee described how the 

State has already scheduled a public 

hearing/comment period and anticipates 

providing a final version as soon as 

possible after the public hearing to be 

scheduled on or before December 4, 

2012. Consistent with section 110(k)(4) 

of the Act, EPA is relying upon this 

commitment by Tennessee to address 

the PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule 

(only as it relates to PM2.5 increments) 

as the basis for conditionally approving 

Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP as it 

relates to prong 3 of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i). If Tennessee fails to 

submit these revisions within one year 

from the date of conditional approval, 

today’s proposed conditional approval 

will automatically become a disapproval 

on that date and EPA will issue a 

finding of disapproval. EPA is not 

required to propose the finding of 

disapproval. If the conditional approval 

is converted to a disapproval, the final 

disapproval triggers the Federal 

Implementation Plan requirement under 

section 110(c). However, if the State 

meets its commitment within the 

applicable timeframe, the conditionally 

approved submission will remain a part 

of the SIP until EPA takes final action 

approving or disapproving the new 

submittal. 

Kentucky, North Carolina and 

Tennessee have, or will have pending 

the commitments described above, 

demonstrated that major sources in each 

state are subject to PSD permitting 

program to comply with the prong 3 of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA for the 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore EPA has made 

the preliminary determination to 

conditionally approve that Kentucky, 

North Carolina and Tennessee’s SIP and 

practices are adequate for insuring 

compliance with the applicable PSD 

requirements relating to interstate 

transport pollution for the 1997 and 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

IV. Proposed Action 

As described above, EPA is proposing 

to conditionally approve the Kentucky, 

North Carolina and Tennessee 

infrastructure SIP submissions as 

addressing prong 3 of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA for both the 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Specifically, EPA is proposing to 

conditionally approve the portion of the 

States’ infrastructure SIP section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) submissions as they 

relate to provisions prohibiting 

emissions that interfere with any other 

state’s required measures to prevent 

significant deterioration of its air quality 

because they are consistent with section 

110 of the CAA. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 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 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this 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, 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, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: November 21, 2012. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2012–29370 Filed 12–4–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 60 and 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0234; EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2011–0044; FRL–9733–2] 

RIN 2060–AR62 

Reconsideration of Certain New 

Source and Startup/Shutdown Issues: 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants From Coaland Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam 

Generating Units and Standards of 

Performance for Fossil-Fuel-Fired 

Electric Utility, Industrial-CommercialInstitutional, and Small IndustrialCommercial-Institutional Steam 

Generating Units 

Correction 

Proposed rule document 2012–28729, 

appearing on pages 71323–71344 in the 

issue of Friday, November 30, 2012, 

should have appeared in the Proposed 

Rules section of the issue. 

[FR Doc. C1–2012–28729 Filed 12–4–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 20 

[WT Docket No. 10–254; DA 12–1898] 

Comment Deadline Extended for 

Public Notice Seeking Updated 

Information and Comment on Review 

of Hearing Aid Compatibility 

Regulations 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with