58206 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

4. Section 199.11 is amended as 

follows: 

a. Revising paragraph (f)(3) to read as 

follows: 

§ 199.11 Overpayments Recovery. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(3) Claims arising from erroneous 

TRICARE payments in situations where 

the beneficiary has entitlement to an 

insurance, medical service, health and 

medical plan, including any plan 

offered by a third party payer as defined 

in 10 U.S.C. 1095(h)(1) or other 

government program, except in the case 

of a plan administered under Title XIX 

of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

1396, et seq.) through employment, by 

law, through membership in an 

organization, or as a student, or through 

the purchase of a private insurance or 

health plan, shall be recouped following 

the procedures in paragraph (f) of this 

section. If the other plan has not made 

payment to the beneficiary or provider, 

the contractor shall first attempt to 

recover the overpayment from the other 

plan through the contractor’s 

coordination of benefits procedures. If 

the overpayment cannot be recovered 

from the other plan, or if the other plan 

has made payment, the overpayment 

will be recovered from the party that 

received the erroneous payment from 

TRICARE. Nothing in this section shall 

be construed to require recoupment 

from any sponsor, beneficiary, provider, 

supplier and/or the Medicare Program 

under Title XVIII of the Social Security 

Act in the event of a retroactive 

determination of entitlement to SSDI 

and Medicare Part A coverage made by 

the Social Security Administration as 

discussed in section 199.8(d) of this 

part. 

Dated: August 24, 2011. 

Patricia L. Toppings, 

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, 

Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2011–23765 Filed 9–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0986; FRL–9468–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; District 

of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia; 

Determinations of Attainment of the 

1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard for the 

Washington, DC–MD–VA 8-Hour Ozone 

Moderate Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to make two 

determinations regarding the 

Washington, DC–MD–VA moderate 8- 

hour ozone nonattainment area (the 

Washington Area). First, EPA is 

proposing to make a determination that 

the Washington Area has attained the 

1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This 

proposed 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 

2007–2009 and 2008–2010 monitoring 

periods. If this proposal becomes final, 

the requirement for this area to submit 

an attainment demonstration, 

reasonably available control measures 

(RACM), a reasonable further progress 

(RFP) plan, and contingency measures 

related to attainment of the 1997 8- 

hours ozone NAAQS shall be suspended 

for so long as the area continues to 

attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Although these requirements are 

suspended, EPA is not precluded from 

acting upon these elements at any time 

if submitted to EPA for review and 

approval. Second, EPA is also proposing 

to determine that the Washington Area 

has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS by its attainment date of June 

15, 2010. These actions are being taken 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before October 20, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2010–0986 by one of the 

following methods: 

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

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. E-mail: 

fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0986, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Quality Planning, Mailcode 

3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2010– 

0986. 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 information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

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 

during normal business hours at the Air 

Protection Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 58207 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Maria A. Pino, (215) 814–2181, or by 

e-mail at pino.maria@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

detailed information regarding this 

proposal, EPA prepared a Technical 

Support Document (TSD). The TSD can 

be viewed at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. The following 

outline is provided to aid in locating 

information in this action. 

I. What is EPA proposing? 

II. What is the background for these actions? 

III. What are the effects of these actions? 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the relevant air 

quality data? 

V. General Information Pertaining to SIP 

Submittals From the Commonwealth of 

Virginia 

VI. Proposed Actions 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is EPA proposing? 

Pursuant to sections 181(b)(2)(A) and 

179(c) of the CAA, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Washington Area 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

by its attainment date, June 15, 2010. 

This proposed determination is based 

upon complete, quality assured, and 

certified ambient air monitoring data for 

the 2007–2009 monitoring period that 

show the area has monitored attainment 

of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

during this monitoring period. 

Complete, quality assured, and certified 

ambient air monitoring data for the 

2008–2010 monitoring period shows 

continued attainment. 

EPA is also proposing to make a 

determination that the Washington Area 

has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. This proposed 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 2007–2009 and 2008– 

2010 monitoring periods. Once this 

proposal is final, the requirement for 

this area to submit an attainment 

demonstration, reasonably available 

control measures, a reasonable further 

progress plan, and contingency 

measures related to attainment of the 

1997 8-hours ozone NAAQS shall be 

suspended for so long as the area 

continues to attain the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. Although these 

requirements are suspended, EPA is not 

precluded from acting upon these 

elements at any time if submitted to 

EPA for review and approval. The 

District of Columbia, the State of 

Maryland, and the Commonwealth of 

Virginia submitted these SIP elements 

for the Washington Area to EPA for 

review and approval in June 2007. 

On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436), 

EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour 

ozone standard of 0.075 parts per 

million (ppm). On January 6, 2010, EPA 

again addressed this 2008 revised 

standard and proposed to set the 

primary 8-hour ozone standard within 

the range of 0.060 to 0.070 ppm, rather 

than at 0.075 ppm. EPA is working to 

complete reconsideration of the 

standard and thereafter will proceed 

with attainment/nonattainment area 

designations. This proposed rulemaking 

relates only to a determination of 

attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard and is not affected by the 

ongoing process of reconsidering the 

2008 standard. This action addresses 

only the 1997 8-hour ozone standard of 

0.08 ppm, and does not address any 

subsequently revised 8-hour ozone 

standard. 

II. What is the background for these 

actions? 

A. The Washington Area 

In 1997, EPA revised the health-based 

NAAQS for ozone, setting it at 0.08 ppm 

averaged over an 8-hour time frame. 

EPA set the 8-hour ozone standard 

based on scientific evidence 

demonstrating that ozone causes 

adverse health effects at lower ozone 

concentrations and over longer periods 

of time, than was understood when the 

pre-existing 1-hour ozone standard was 

set. EPA determined that the 8-hour 

standard would be more protective of 

human health, especially children and 

adults who are active outdoors, and 

individuals with a pre-existing 

respiratory disease, such as asthma. 

On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951), EPA 

finalized its attainment/nonattainment 

designations for areas across the country 

with respect to the 8-hour ozone 

standard. These actions became 

effective on June 15, 2004. Among those 

nonattainment areas is the Washington 

Area. The Washington Area includes the 

District of Columbia; Arlington, Fairfax, 

Loudoun, and Prince William Counties 

and the cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, 

Falls Church, Manassas, and Manassas 

Park in Virginia; and Calvert, Charles, 

Frederick, Montgomery, and Prince 

George’s Counties in Maryland. The 

Washington Area was classified as a 

moderate nonattainment area. See, 40 

CFR 81.309, 81.321 and 81.347. 

Moderate areas are required to attain the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by no later 

than six years after designation, or June 

15, 2010. See, 40 CFR 51.903. 

B. Requirement to Determine 

Attainment by the Attainment Date 

Under CAA sections 179(c) and 

181(b)(2), EPA is required to make a 

determination that a nonattainment area 

has attained by its attainment date, and 

publish that determination in the 

Federal Register. Under CAA section 

181(b)(2), which is specific to ozone 

nonattainment areas, if EPA determines 

that an area failed to attain the ozone 

NAAQS by its attainment date, EPA is 

required to reclassify that area to a 

higher classification. 

C. Clean Data Determination 

Under the provisions of EPA’s ozone 

implementation rule (See, 40 CFR 

section 51.918), if EPA issues a 

determination that an area is attaining 

the relevant standard (through a 

rulemaking that includes public notice 

and comment), it will suspend the area’s 

obligations to submit an attainment 

demonstration, RACM, RFP, 

contingency measures and other 

planning requirements related to 

attainment for as long as the area 

continues to attain. The determination 

of attainment is not equivalent to a 

redesignation. The state must still meet 

the statutory requirements for 

redesignation in order to be 

redesignated to attainment. 

D. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data 

Complete, quality assured, certified 8- 

hour ozone air quality monitoring data 

for 2007 through 2009 show that the 

Washington Area has attained the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Washington 

Area continues to attain the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS considering complete, 

quality assured, certified 8-hour ozone 

air quality monitoring data for 2008 

through 2010. 

III. What are the effects of these 

actions? 

If finalized, the proposed actions will 

not constitute a redesignation to 

attainment under section 107(d)(3) of 

the CAA. The designation status of the 

Washington Area will remain 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS until such time as EPA 

determines that the area meets the CAA 

requirements for redesignation to 

attainment, including an approved 

maintenance plan. 

A. Proposed Determination of 

Attainment by the Attainment Date 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Washington Area has attained the 

1997 ozone NAAQS by its applicable 

attainment date of June 15, 2010. Once 

this determination of attainment is 

made final, EPA will have met its 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58208 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

requirement pursuant to CAA sections 

181(b)(2)(A) and 179(c) to determine, 

based on the area’s air quality as of the 

attainment date, whether the area 

attained the standard by that date. The 

effect of a final determination of 

attainment by the area’s attainment date 

will be to discharge EPA’s obligation 

under CAA sections 181(b)(2)(A) and 

179, and to establish that, in accordance 

with CAA section 181(b)(2)(A), the area 

will not be reclassified for failure to 

attain by its applicable attainment date. 

B. Clean Data Determination 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Washington Area is attaining the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Once EPA 

finalizes this determination of 

attainment, the CAA requirement for the 

Washington Area to submit an 

attainment demonstration and 

associated reasonably available control 

measures, a reasonable further progress 

plan, contingency measures, and any 

other planning SIPs related to 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS would be suspended for so long 

as the area continues to attain the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

The determination of attainment will: 

1. Suspend the requirements to 

submit an attainment demonstration, 

RACM, RFP plan, contingency 

measures, and any other planning SIPs 

related to attainment of the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS; 

2. Continue until such time, if any, 

that EPA (i) redesignates the area to 

attainment at which time those 

requirements no longer apply, or (ii) 

subsequently determines that the area 

has violated the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS; 

3. Be separate from, and not influence 

or otherwise affect, any future 

designation determination or 

requirements for the area based on any 

new or revised ozone NAAQS; and 

4. Remain in effect regardless of 

whether EPA designates this area as a 

nonattainment area for purposes of any 

new or revised ozone NAAQS. 

Although these requirements are 

suspended, EPA is not precluded from 

acting upon these elements, which were 

submitted to EPA in June 2007. 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

relevant air quality data? 

Consistent with the requirements 

contained in 40 CFR part 50, EPA has 

reviewed the complete, quality assured 

and certified ozone ambient air 

monitoring data for the monitoring 

periods 2007–2009 and 2008–2010 for 

the Washington Area, as recorded in the 

EPA Air Quality System (AQS) 

database. On the basis of that review, 

EPA has concluded that this area 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

based on data for the 2007–2009 ozone 

seasons, and continues to attain based 

on data for the 2008–2010 ozone 

seasons. 

A. Data Requirements 

Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 

50, the 1997 8-hour ozone standard is 

attained at a site when the 3-year 

average of the annual fourth-highest 

daily maximum 8-hour average ozone 

concentrations at an ozone monitor is 

less than or equal to 0.08 parts per 

million (ppm) (i.e., 0.084 ppm, based on 

the rounding convention in 40 CFR part 

50, appendix I). This 3-year average is 

referred to as the design value. When 

the design value is less than or equal to 

0.084 ppm at each monitoring site 

within the area, then the area is meeting 

the NAAQS. 

Also, the data completeness 

requirement is met when the average 

percent of days with valid ambient 

monitoring data is greater than 90%, 

and no single year has less than 75% 

data completeness as determined in 

appendix I of 40 CFR part 50. 

B. 2007–2009 Ozone Data 

Table 1 shows the ozone design 

values for each monitor in the 

Washington Area for the years 2007– 

2009. All 2007–2009 design values are 

below 0.084 ppm, and all monitors meet 

the data completeness requirements. 

Therefore, the Washington Area has 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

considering 2007–2009 data. 

TABLE 1—2007–2009 WASHINGTON AREA 1997 8-HOUR OZONE DESIGN VALUES

State County Monitor ID 

2007–2009 

Design value 

(ppm) 

2007–2009 

Average % 

data 

completeness 

Maryland ......................................................... Calvert ............................................................ 240090011 0.074 92 

Charles ........................................................... 240170010 0.075 99 

Frederick ........................................................ 240210037 0.076 98 

Montgomery ................................................... 240313001 0.078 93 

Prince George’s ............................................. 240330030 0.078 95 

240338003 0.078 98 

Virginia ............................................................ Arlington ......................................................... 510130020 0.079 100 

Fairfax ............................................................ 510590005 0.073 99 

510590018 0.080 100 

510590030 0.080 99 

510591005 0.078 93 

510595001 0.077 100 

Loudoun ......................................................... 511071005 0.077 99 

Prince William ................................................ 511530009 0.071 98 

Alexandria City ............................................... 515100009 0.075 97 

District of Columbia ......................................... 110010025 0.077 95 

110010041 0.078 100 

110010043 0.080 100 

C. 2008–2010 Ozone Data 

In 2010, four monitors in Fairfax 

County, Virginia were shutdown due to 

lack of funding. Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality (VADEQ) 

worked with EPA prior to the Fairfax 

County Health Department shutting 

down these monitors. Because the 

Washington Area has more ozone 

monitoring sites than minimally 

required, and because VADEQ 

performed an analysis on the sites that 

were being shutdown showing a strong 

correlation between the ambient ozone 

data collected at the Fairfax County 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 58209 

ozone sites targeted for discontinuation 

and existing VADEQ ozone air 

monitoring sites currently operating in 

proximity to the Fairfax County area, 

EPA approved the shutdowns in 

VADEQ’s 2010 Annual Network Plan. 

Therefore, EPA will not consider these 

monitors for comparison to the NAAQS 

with respect to 2010 data. 

Table 2 summarizes the 2008–2010 

design values for the Washington Area. 

All 2008–2010 design values are below 

0.084 ppm, and all monitors meet the 

data completeness requirements. 

Therefore, 2008–2010 data indicates 

that the Washington Area continues to 

attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

TABLE 2–2008–2010 WASHINGTON AREA 8-HOUR OZONE DESIGN VALUES

State County Monitor ID 

2008–2010 

Design value 

(ppm) 

2008–2010 

Average % 

data 

completeness 

Maryland ......................................................... Calvert ............................................................ 240090011 0.077 93 

Charles ........................................................... 240170010 0.075 99 

Frederick ........................................................ 240210037 0.076 98 

Montgomery ................................................... 240313001 0.074 93 

Prince George’s ............................................. 240330030 0.079 93 

240338003 0.077 99 

Virginia ............................................................ Arlington ......................................................... 510130020 0.079 95 

Fairfax ............................................................ 510590030 0.081 94 

Loudoun ......................................................... 511071005 0.075 94 

Prince William ................................................ 511530009 0.070 94 

Alexandria City ............................................... 515100009 0.074 91 

District of Columbia ......................................... ......................................................................... 110010025 0.075 90 

110010041 0.077 94 

110010043 0.079 95 

D. Conclusion 

EPA’s review of the complete, quality 

assured and certified ozone ambient air 

monitoring data for the monitoring 

periods 2007–2009 and 2008–2010 

indicates that the Washington Area has 

met the 19978-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Additional information on air quality 

data for the Washington Area can be 

found in the TSD. 

V. General Information Pertaining to 

SIP Submittals From the 

Commonwealth of Virginia 

In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation 

that provides, subject to certain 

conditions, for an environmental 

assessment (audit) ‘‘privilege’’ for 

voluntary compliance evaluations 

performed by a regulated entity. The 

legislation further addresses the relative 

burden of proof for parties either 

asserting the privilege or seeking 

disclosure of documents for which the 

privilege is claimed. Virginia’s 

legislation also provides, subject to 

certain conditions, for a penalty waiver 

for violations of environmental laws 

when a regulated entity discovers such 

violations pursuant to a voluntary 

compliance evaluation and voluntarily 

discloses such violations to the 

Commonwealth and takes prompt and 

appropriate measures to remedy the 

violations. Virginia’s Voluntary 

Environmental Assessment Privilege 

Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, provides 

a privilege that protects from disclosure 

documents and information about the 

content of those documents that are the 

product of a voluntary environmental 

assessment. The Privilege Law does not 

extend to documents or information (1) 

that are generated or developed before 

the commencement of a voluntary 

environmental assessment; (2) that are 

prepared independently of the 

assessment process; (3) that demonstrate 

a clear, imminent and substantial 

danger to the public health or 

environment; or (4) that are required by 

law. 

On January 12, 1998, the 

Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the 

Attorney General provided a legal 

opinion that states that the Privilege 

law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, precludes 

granting a privilege to documents and 

information ‘‘required by law,’’ 

including documents and information 

‘‘required by Federal law to maintain 

program delegation, authorization or 

approval,’’ since Virginia must ‘‘enforce 

Federally authorized environmental 

programs in a manner that is no less 

stringent than their Federal 

counterpartsm * * *.’’ The opinion 

concludes that ‘‘[r]egarding § 10.1–1198, 

therefore, documents or other 

information needed for civil or criminal 

enforcement under one of these 

programs could not be privileged 

because such documents and 

information are essential to pursuing 

enforcement in a manner required by 

Federal law to maintain program 

delegation, authorization or approval.’’ 

Virginia’s Immunity law, Va. Code 

Sec. 10.1–1199, provides that ‘‘[t]o the 

extent consistent with requirements 

imposed by Federal law,’’ any person 

making a voluntary disclosure of 

information to a State agency regarding 

a violation of an environmental statute, 

regulation, permit, or administrative 

order is granted immunity from 

administrative or civil penalty. The 

Attorney General’s January 12, 1998 

opinion states that the quoted language 

renders this statute inapplicable to 

enforcement of any Federally authorized 

programs, since ‘‘no immunity could be 

afforded from administrative, civil, or 

criminal penalties because granting 

such immunity would not be consistent 

with Federal law, which is one of the 

criteria for immunity.’’ 

Therefore, EPA has determined that 

Virginia’s Privilege and Immunity 

statutes will not preclude the 

Commonwealth from enforcing its 

program consistent with the Federal 

requirements. In any event, because 

EPA has also determined that a state 

audit privilege and immunity law can 

affect only state enforcement and cannot 

have any impact on Federal 

enforcement authorities, EPA may at 

any time invoke its authority under the 

CAA, including, for example, sections 

113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the 

requirements or prohibitions of the state 

plan, independently of any state 

enforcement effort. In addition, citizen 

enforcement under section 304 of the 

CAA is likewise unaffected by this, or 

any, state audit privilege or immunity 

law. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58210 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

VI. Proposed Action 

Pursuant to sections 179 and 

181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA, EPA is 

proposing to determine that the 

Washington Area has attained the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS by its moderate 

area attainment date, June 15, 2010. If 

EPA finalizes this determination, the 

requirements 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 will be suspended, as provided 

in 40 CFR section 51.918, so long as the 

area continues to attain the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. EPA is soliciting public 

comments on the issues discussed in 

this document. These comments will be 

considered before taking final action. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this 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 

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 Clean Air Act; 

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, these proposed 

determinations of attainment of the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 

Washington Area do not have Tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because this proposed action 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, Intergovernmental 

relations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: August 31, 2011. 

W.C. Early, 

Garvin, Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2011–24098 Filed 9–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2009–1010–201063; FRL– 

9467–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; North Carolina: 

Redesignation of the HickoryMorganton-Lenoir 1997 Annual Fine 

Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area 

to Attainment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

SIP revisions submitted on December 

18, 2009, and December 22, 2010 

(supplemental submission) by the State 

of North Carolina, through the North 

Carolina Department of Environment 

and Natural Resources (NC DENR), 

Division of Air Quality (DAQ), to 

support North Carolina’s request to 

redesignate the Hickory-MorgantonLenoir fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

nonattainment area (hereafter the 

‘‘Hickory Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’) to 

attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS). The Hickory Area is 

comprised of Catawba County in its 

entirety. EPA is now proposing four 

separate but related actions. First, EPA 

is proposing to approve the December 

18, 2009, PM2.5 redesignation request, 

including the December 22, 2010, Motor 

Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES) 

mobile model supplement for the 

Hickory Area, provided that EPA takes 

final action to approve specific 

provisions of the North Carolina Clean 

Smokestacks Act (NCCSA). Second, 

EPA is proposing to approve North 

Carolina’s 2008 emissions inventory for 

the Hickory Area under section 

172(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or 

Act). Third, subject to the same proviso 

regarding the NCCSA and final approval 

of the 2008 emissions inventory, EPA is 

proposing to approve the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan for the 

Hickory Area, including the 2008 

baseline emissions inventory, and the 

motor vehicle emission budgets 

(MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides (NOX) for 

the years 2011 and 2021, and the mobile 

insignificance determination for direct 

PM2.5 for the Hickory Area. EPA is also 

describing the status of its 

transportation conformity adequacy 

determination for the new 2011 and 

2021 MVEBs for NOX that are contained 

in the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

maintenance plan for the Hickory Area. 

Fourth and separate from the action to 

redesignate the Hickory Area, EPA is 

proposing to determine that the Area 

has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS by its applicable attainment 

date of April 5, 2010. These proposed 

actions are being taken pursuant to the 

CAA and its implementing regulations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 20, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2009–1010, by one of the 

following methods: 

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

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2009–1010, 

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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS