14038 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 52 / Wednesday, March 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Pennsylvania’s annual emission fees. 

Fees are increased to $85 per ton of 

emissions for emissions from title V 

sources of up to 4,000 tons of each 

regulated pollutant. The provisions for 

increasing the annual emissions fees in 

response to increases in the CPI at 25 

PA Code 127.705(d) remain unchanged. 

The revised fees are designed to cover 

all reasonable costs required to develop 

and administer the title V program as 

required by 40 CFR 70.9(a) and (b). 

These costs include those for activities 

such as reviewing and processing plan 

approvals and operating permits, 

conducting inspections, responding to 

complaints and pursuing enforcement 

actions, emissions and ambient air 

monitoring, preparing applicable 

regulations and guidance, modeling, 

analyses, demonstrations, emission 

inventories, and tracking emissions. 

Without this fee increase, 

Pennsylvania anticipates funds will not 

be sufficient to sustain the title V 

permitting program beginning fiscal 

years 2015–2016. If funds become 

insufficient to sustain the title V 

permitting program in Pennsylvania, 

EPA may determine that Pennsylvania 

has not taken ‘‘significant action to 

assure adequate administration and 

enforcement of the Program’’ and take 

subsequent required action under 40 

CFR 70.10(b) and(c) as well as impose 

mandatory and discretionary sanctions 

under the CAA. 

III. EPA Analysis of Program Revision 

The February 11, 2014 Title V 

Operating Permit Program revision 

consists of amendments to 

Pennsylvania’s rules which establish 

annual emission fees under title V of the 

CAA. This rulemaking proposes 

approval of the increase to the annual 

title V fees paid by the owner or 

operator of a title V facility from $57.50 

per ton of regulated air pollutant to $85 

per ton because the revision meets 

requirements in 40 CFR 70.9 for 

sufficient title V fees to cover permit 

program costs. The emission fees apply 

to emissions up to 4,000 tons of any 

regulated pollutant. The proposed 

revision does not establish a fee 

structure for carbon dioxide or other 

greenhouse gases (GHGs). EPA’s rules 

do not mandate revisions to state title V 

programs to account for GHG emissions. 

IV. Proposed Action 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 70.4(i)(2), EPA is 

proposing to approve the Pennsylvania 

Title V Operating Program revision 

submitted on February 11, 2014 to 

increase the annual title V fees paid by 

the owners or operators of all title V 

facilities throughout Pennsylvania, 

including Allegheny and Philadelphia 

Counties, from $57.50 per ton of 

regulated air pollutant to $85 per ton. 

The revision meets requirements in 40 

CFR 70.9. EPA is soliciting public 

comments on the issues discussed in 

this document. These comments will be 

considered before taking final action. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This proposed action merely proposes 

to approve state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no 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 proposed rule related 

to Pennsylvania title V fees does not 

have tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the program 

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 70 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: March 6, 2015. 

William C. Early, 

Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06145 Filed 3–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2014–0532, FRL–9924–72– 

Region 10] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Alaska 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

and incorporate by reference revisions 

to the Alaska State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) submitted on July 1, 2014 and 

October 24, 2014. These revisions 

primarily update the adoption by 

reference of Federal regulations and 

definitions into the Alaska SIP. The 

revisions also clarify stationary source 

permitting rules governing ownerrequested emission limits and revise the 

SIP to reflect the redesignation of the 

Eagle River area of Anchorage. Upon 

final action, the Alaska SIP will be 

updated to reflect recent Federal 

regulatory changes and actions. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 17, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2014–0532, by any of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Mail: Kristin Hall, EPA Region 10, 

Office of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT– 

150), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, 

Seattle WA, 98101. 

• Email: R10-Public_Comments@

epa.gov. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Region 10 

Mailroom, 9th Floor, 1200 Sixth 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 52 / Wednesday, March 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 14039 

Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle WA, 98101. 

Attention: Kristin Hall, Office of Air, 

Waste and Toxics, AWT–150. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R10–OAR–2014– 

0532. The 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 

the disclosure of which 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 the 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 the 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the 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 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information the disclosure of which 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 during normal business 

hours at the Office of Air, Waste and 

Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth 

Avenue, Seattle WA, 98101. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kristin Hall at telephone number: (206) 

553–6357, email address: hall.kristin@

epa.gov, or the above EPA, Region 10 

address. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

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

intended to refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. EPA Evaluation of Alaska SIP Revisions 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

Section 110 of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) specifies the general 

requirements for states to submit SIPs to 

implement, maintain and enforce the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) and the EPA’s actions 

regarding approval of those SIPs. On 

July 1, 2014 and October 24, 2014, the 

Alaska Department of Environmental 

Conservation (ADEC), on behalf of the 

Governor of Alaska, submitted SIP 

revisions to the EPA to account for 

regulatory updates effective October 6, 

2013 and November 9, 2014, 

respectively. These revisions update 

Alaska Administrative Code Title 18 

Environmental Conservation, Chapter 

50 Air Quality Control (18 AAC 50) to 

reflect the adoption by reference of 

Federal regulations and definitions into 

the Alaska SIP, and edit associated 

cross-references to definitions. The 

revisions also clarify stationary source 

permitting rules governing ownerrequested emission limits, and update 

the SIP to reflect the redesignation of 

the Eagle River area of Anchorage to 

attainment for particulate matter with 

an aerodynamic diameter less than or 

equal to a nominal 10 micrometers 

(PM10). 

We note that this action does not 

address the portions of the July 1, 2014, 

and October 24, 2014, SIP submittals 

related to Alaska’s nonattainment new 

source review permitting program. The 

nonattainment new source review 

permitting rule updates submitted as 

part of these revisions were approved in 

a previous action on January 7, 2015 (80 

FR 832). In this action, we are proposing 

to approve the remainder of the 

revisions to the Alaska SIP submitted on 

July 1, 2014 and October 24, 2014. 

Please see below for our evaluation. 

II. EPA Evaluation of Alaska SIP 

Revisions 

A. 18 AAC 50.015—Air Quality 

Designations, Classifications and 

Control Regions 

On January 7, 2013, the EPA approved 

the maintenance plan submitted by 

ADEC for the Eagle River PM10

nonattainment area and its 

accompanying request to redesignate the 

area to attainment for the PM10 NAAQS 

(78 FR 900). The redesignation became 

effective on March 8, 2013. Accordingly, 

in the July 1, 2014, submittal, ADEC 

revised 18 AAC 50.015 ‘‘Air Quality 

Designations, Classifications, and 

Control Regions’’ to reflect the change. 

We are proposing to approve the 

revision to this rule. 

B. 18 AAC 50.040—Federal Standards 

Adopted by Reference 

Guideline on Air Quality Modeling 

In the July 1, 2014, submittal, ADEC 

revised and submitted changes to 18 

AAC 50.040 ‘‘Federal Standards 

Adopted by Reference’’ to update the 

citation dates incorporating by reference 

certain Federal requirements into the 

Alaska SIP. Specifically, ADEC 

submitted the updated adoption by 

reference of 40 CFR part 51, Appendix 

W ‘‘Guideline on Air Quality Models’’ 

revised as of July 1, 2012. We are 

proposing to approve this revision as 

consistent with Federal requirements. 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) 

ADEC also submitted the updated 

incorporation by reference of Federal 

PSD permitting regulations at 40 CFR 

51.166 and 40 CFR 52.21, revised as of 

April 1, 2013, which are referenced in 

ADEC’s major source permitting rules in 

18 AAC Chapter 50, Article 3, and relied 

on to implement ADEC’s SIP-approved 

PSD permitting program. ADEC 

excluded from its submittal certain PSD 

permitting provisions in 40 CFR 51.166 

and 40 CFR 52.21 that have been 

vacated by recent Court decisions, and 

those provisions are therefore not before 

the EPA for approval. Specifically, in 

response to the Court vacatur of the EPA 

PM2.5 significant monitoring 

concentration (SMC) and significant 

impact level (SIL) regulations, ADEC 

did not submit to the EPA for approval 

the provisions in the Alaska SIP 

impacted by the Court decision (18 AAC 

50.040(h)(7) and (9)). ADEC’s July 1, 

2014, submittal cover letter confirms 

that ADEC intends to act in accordance 

with the Court vacatur, and that, 

although these provisions have not yet 

been repealed and remain in effect as a 

matter of State law, ADEC will not 

apply either the PM2.5 SMC provisions 

at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21 

(i)(5)(i)(c), or the PM2.5 SIL provisions at 

40 CFR 51.166(k)(2) and 52.21(k)(2) in 

implementing the State new source 

permitting program. For a more detailed 

discussion of this issue, please see our 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
14040 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 52 / Wednesday, March 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1 134 S.Ct. 2427 (2014). 

2Because the SIP addresses section 110 in title I 

of the CAA, the permitting obligation an owner or 

operator may seek to avoid through the SIPapproved rule at 18 AAC 50.225 is the obligation 

to obtain a major new source construction permit. 

previous action addressing revisions to 

the State PSD program (proposed May 5, 

2014, 79 FR 25533; finalized September 

19, 2014, 79 FR 56268). 

ADEC also excluded from its 

submittals the greenhouse gas (GHG) 

regulatory provision at 40 CFR 

52.21(b)(49)(v) that was recently vacated 

by the Supreme Court and that is 

adopted by reference in 18 AAC 

50.040(h)(4), effective October 6, 2013. 

On June 3, 2010, the EPA revised 

Federal PSD permitting rules addressing 

the application of the requirements to 

GHG emissions (GHG Tailoring Rule) 

(75 FR 31514). However, on June 23, 

2014, the Supreme Court, in Utility Air 

Regulatory Group v. Environmental 

Protection Agency,1 issued a decision 

addressing the application of PSD 

permitting requirements to GHG 

emissions. The Court said that the EPA 

may not treat GHGs as an air pollutant 

for purposes of determining whether a 

source is a major source (or 

modification thereof) required to obtain 

a PSD permit. The Court also said that 

the EPA could continue to require that 

PSD permits, otherwise required based 

on emissions of pollutants other than 

GHGs, contain limitations on GHG 

emissions based on the application of 

best available control technology. In 

order to act consistently with its 

understanding of the Court’s decision 

pending further judicial action before 

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia to effectuate the decision, 

the EPA is not continuing to apply the 

EPA regulations that would require that 

SIPs include permitting requirements 

that the Supreme Court found 

impermissible. Specifically, the EPA is 

not applying the requirement that a 

state’s SIP-approved PSD program 

require that sources obtain PSD permits 

when GHGs are the only pollutant (i) 

that the source emits or has the 

potential to emit above the major source 

thresholds, or (ii) for which there is a 

significant emissions increase and a 

significant net emissions increase from 

a modification (e.g. 40 CFR 

51.166(b)(48)(v)). 

The EPA anticipates a need to revise 

Federal PSD rules in light of the 

Supreme Court decision. In addition, 

the EPA anticipates that many states 

will revise their existing SIP-approved 

PSD programs in light of the Supreme 

Court’s decision. The timing and 

content of subsequent EPA actions with 

respect to the EPA regulations is 

expected to be informed by additional 

legal processes before the D.C. Circuit. 

The EPA is not expecting states to have 

revised their existing PSD program 

regulations at this juncture, before the 

D.C. Circuit has addressed these issues 

and before the EPA has revised its 

regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21. 

However, the EPA is evaluating PSD 

program submissions to assure that state 

programs correctly address GHGs, 

consistent with the Supreme Court’s 

decision. Because ADEC has excluded 

from its SIP submission the GHG 

Tailoring Rule provision that was 

vacated by the Supreme Court, that 

provision is not before the EPA for 

action. 

For the reasons discussed above, we 

are proposing to determine that the 

updated incorporation by reference of 

Federal requirements in 18 AAC 

50.040(h) is consistent with CAA 

requirements for SIP-approved PSD 

permitting programs. 

We note that in both the July 1, 2014, 

and October 24, 2014, submittals, ADEC 

included changes to 18 AAC 50.040(i) 

related to Alaska’s nonattainment new 

source review permitting program. 

These changes were previously 

approved on January 7, 2015 (80 FR 

832). 

C. 18 AAC 50.225—Owner-Requested 

Limits 

The July 1, 2014, submittal included 

a revised version of 18 AAC 50.225 

‘‘Owner-Requested Limits,’’ effective 

October 6, 2013, that removed 

paragraph (b)(7). Paragraph (a) of 18 

AAC 50.225 specifies that an ownerrequested limit under this provision 

may be requested ‘‘to avoid all 

permitting obligations under AS 

46.14.130 [Stationary sources requiring 

permits].’’ Paragraph (b)(7) of 18 AAC 

50.225 stated that, ‘‘if applying all limits 

does not avoid all permit classifications 

under AS 46.14 and this chapter, the 

owner or operator shall submit to the 

department ‘‘a description, and if 

necessary an application, for the 

remaining classifications[.]’’ In the July 

1, 2014, submittal, ADEC stated that in 

18 AAC 50.225, paragraph (b)(7) 

contradicts paragraph (a) and that the 

repeal of (b)(7) merely clarifies the 

requirements for obtaining ownerrequested limits. As explained by 

ADEC, the State’s interpretation of 18 

AAC 50.225 is that a source is only 

eligible to apply for an owner-requested 

limit under 18 AAC 50.225 to avoid all 

stationary source permitting obligations 

under AS 46.14.130. AS 46.14.130 

‘‘Stationary sources requiring permits’’ 

is the Alaska statute requiring both title 

I major new source construction permits 

and title V major source operating 

permits.2 If all obligations for major new 

source construction permitting cannot 

be avoided by requesting an emission 

limit on the source, then the owner or 

operator may not apply for an owner 

requested limit (ORL) under 18 AAC 

50.225, but could instead request an 

ORL in a permit issued under 18 AAC 

508 ‘‘Minor Permits Requested by the 

Owner or Operator.’’ This provision 

allows an owner or operator to request 

a minor permit from the department for 

‘‘establishing an owner requested limit 

(ORL) to avoid one or more permit 

classifications under AS 46.14.130 at a 

stationary source that will remain 

subject to at least one permit 

classification. . .’’ 

In the July 1, 2014, submittal ADEC 

asserted that ‘‘there is no relaxation of 

the regulations, as the two types of 

ORLs allow the applicant to avoid 

permitting classifications depending on 

their particular situation.’’ 

We agree with ADEC that the 

provision at 18 AAC 50.225(b)(7) is 

potentially confusing and contradictory 

and that the repeal of that provision 

clarifies when each of the two 

provisions authorizing owner-requested 

limits (18 AAC 50.225 and 18 AAC 

50.508) are applicable to owners and 

operators of stationary sources seeking 

an emission limit to avoid major 

permitting obligations. We therefore 

propose to approve the revision to 18 

AAC 50.225. 

D. 18 AAC 50.260—Guidelines for Best 

Available Retrofit Technology Under the 

Regional Haze Rule 

In the July 1, 2014, submittal, ADEC 

revised this provision to reference the 

definition of fugitive emissions in 18 

AAC 50.990 ‘‘Definitions’’ rather than 

the statutory definition in AS 46.14.990. 

The definition of ‘‘fugitive emissions’’ at 

18 AAC 50.990(40) states that the term 

has the meaning given in 40 CFR 

51.166(b)(20) in the Federal PSD 

regulations. This definition is 

approvable because the PSD definition 

of ‘‘fugitive emissions’’ in 40 CFR 

51.166(b)(20) is identical to the 

definition of the same term in 40 CFR 

51.301 ‘‘Definitions’’ for purposes of 40 

CFR part 51, subpart P ‘‘Protection of 

Visibility.’’ 

E. 18 AAC 50.502—Minor Permits for 

Air Quality Protection 

The October 24, 2014, submittal 

revised 18 AAC 50.502 ‘‘Minor Permits 

for Air Quality Protection’’ to add 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 52 / Wednesday, March 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 14041 

paragraph (h)(5). This paragraph defines 

‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ for new 

sources seeking minor permits under 18 

AAC 50.502 by adopting by reference 

the Federal definition of ‘‘regulated NSR 

pollutant’’ at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50). This 

is not a substantive change to Alaska’s 

minor NSR program because this 

definition was previously included in 

18 AAC 50.900. 

F. 18 AAC 50.990—Definitions 

The July 1, 2014, submittal revised 

the definition of ‘‘fugitive emissions’’ at 

18 AAC 50.990(40) to have the meaning 

given in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(20), as 

revised as of July 1, 2012. The October 

24, 2014, submittal repealed the 

definition of ‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ 

at 18 AAC 50.990(92). This action does 

not address these changes because we 

previously approved them on January 7, 

2015 (80 FR 832). 

The July 1, 2014, submittal also 

updated the citation date for the 

incorporation by reference of the 

Federal definition of ‘‘volatile organic 

compound’’ (VOC). The submittal 

revised 18 AAC 50.990(121) to define 

‘‘VOC’’ as the meaning given in 40 CFR 

51,100(s) as of April 18, 2013. We note 

that the Federal definition has been 

revised since April 18, 2013. 

Specifically, on October 22, 2013, the 

EPA removed constituents from the 

definition of VOC (78 FR 62451). While 

the definition in Alaska’s rule is not 

identical to the Federal definition, the 

Alaska definition is more stringent and 

therefore approvable. 

III. Proposed Action 

The EPA is proposing to approve and 

incorporate by reference into the Alaska 

SIP changes to the following provisions 

submitted on July 1, 2014 and October 

24, 2014: 

• 18 AAC 50.015 ‘‘Air Quality 

Designations, Classifications, and 

Control Regions’’ (State effective 10/6/

2013); 

• 18 AAC 50.040 ‘‘Federal Standards 

Adopted by Reference’’ (State effective 

10/6/2013); 

• 18 AAC 50.225 ‘‘Owner-Requested 

Limits’’ (State effective 10/6/2013); 

• 18 AAC 50.260 ‘‘Guidelines for Best 

Available Retrofit Technology under the 

Regional Haze Rule’’ (State effective 10/ 

6/2013); 

• 18 AAC 50.502 ‘‘Minor Permits for 

Air Quality Protection’’ (State effective 

11/9/2014); and 

• 18 AAC 50.990 ‘‘Definitions’’ (State 

effective 11/9/2014). 

We have made the preliminary 

determination that the submitted SIP 

revisions are approvable because they 

are consistent with section 110 and part 

C of title I of the CAA. We note that this 

action does not address the submitted 

revisions related to Alaska’s 

nonattainment NSR permitting program 

because we approved those changes on 

January 7, 2015 (80 FR 832). 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is proposing to 

include in a final rule regulatory text 

that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the provisions described above in 

Section III. Proposed Action. The EPA 

has made, and will continue to make, 

these documents generally available 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and/or in hard 

copy at the appropriate EPA office (see 

the ADDRESSES section of this preamble 

for more information). 

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 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the 

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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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 

it does not involve technical standards; 

and 

• does not provide the 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, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where the EPA or 

an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), nor will it 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, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: March 6, 2015. 

Dennis J. McLerran, 

Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06216 Filed 3–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0884; FRL–9924–55– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Maryland; Determination of Attainment 

of the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard for the 

Baltimore, Maryland Moderate 

Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to make a 

determination that the Baltimore, 

Maryland Moderate Nonattainment Area 

(Baltimore Area) has attained the 2008 

8-hour ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS). This 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS