16612 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 60 / Monday, March 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1EPA is proposing to act on both SIP submittals 

in this notice because each submittal contains 

necessary procedural information related to West 

Virginia’s revisions to its PSD regulations and 

development of its SIP submittals, which are 

required for SIP revisions by 40 CFR parts 51 and 

52. 

pursuant to section 110 and parts C and 

D of the Federal Clean Air Act. 

DATES: Written comments should be 

received on or before April 29, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to 

Ms. Adina Wiley, Air Permits Section 

(6PD–R), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Comments 

may also be submitted electronically or 

through hand delivery/courier by 

following the detailed instructions in 

the ADDRESSES section of the direct final 

rule located in the rules section of this 

Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Adina Wiley, 214–665–2115, 

wiley.adina@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

final rules section of this Federal 

Register, the EPA is approving the 

State’s SIP submittal as a direct final 

rule without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no relevant adverse comments 

are received in response to this action 

no further activity is contemplated. If 

the EPA receives relevant adverse 

comments, the direct final rule will be 

withdrawn and those public comments 

received will be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. The EPA will not 

institute a second comment period. Any 

parties interested in commenting on this 

action should do so at this time. 

For additional information, see the 

direct final rule which is located in the 

rules section of this Federal Register. 

Dated: March 16, 2015. 

Samuel Coleman, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2015–07123 Filed 3–27–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0028; FRL–9925–47– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; West 

Virginia; Permits for Construction and 

Major Modification of Major Stationary 

Sources for the Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing conditional 

approval for two State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the 

West Virginia Department of 

Environmental Protection (WVDEP) for 

the State of West Virginia on July 1, 

2014 and June 6, 2012. These revisions 

pertain to West Virginia’s Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit 

program and include provisions for 

preconstruction permitting 

requirements for major sources of fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) found in West 

Virginia regulations. This action is being 

taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before April 29, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2015–0028 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: campbell.dave@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0028, 

David Campbell, Associate Director, 

Office of Permits and Air Toxics, 

Mailcode 3AP10, 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–2015– 

0028. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

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 during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittals are 

available at the West Virginia 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 

57th Street SE., Charleston, West 

Virginia 25304. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Paul Wentworth, (215) 814–2183, or by 

email at Wentworth.paul@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The WVDEP submitted two SIP 

revisions to EPA on June 6, 2012 (the 

2012 submittal) and on July 1, 2014 (the 

2014 submittal). EPA is acting on these 

two submittals as a whole.1 A summary 

of all the changes made in each of the 

submittals has been included in the 

docket for this action in a document 

titled, ‘‘Summary of West Virginia PSD 

Changes.’’ These SIP revision requests, 

if approved, would revise West 

Virginia’s currently approved PSD 

program by amending Series 14 under 

Title 45 of West Virginia Code of State 

Rules (45CSR14). 

On May 16, 2008, EPA promulgated a 

rule to implement the 1997 PM2.5

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS), including changes to the New 

Source Review (NSR) program (the 2008 

NSR PM2.5 Rule). See 73 FR 28321. The 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 60 / Monday, March 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 16613 

2The PSD permitting program is the NSR permit 

program in areas attaining a particular NAAQS. 

3On October 25, 2012, EPA took final action to 

amend the definition of ‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ 

promulgated in the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule regarding 

the particulate matter (PM) condensable provision 

at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(vi) and 52.21(b)(50)(i). See 

77 FR 65107. The rulemaking removed the 

inadvertent requirement in the 2008 NSR PM2.5

Rule that the measurement of condensable 

‘‘particulate matter emissions’’ be included as part 

of the measurement and regulation of ‘‘particulate 

matter emissions.’’ 

4 72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007). 

5 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). 

6The court’s opinion did not specifically address 

the point that implementation under subpart 4 

requirements would still require consideration of 

subpart 1 requirements, to the extent that subpart 

4 did not override subpart 1. EPA assumes that the 

court presumed that EPA would address this issue 

of potential overlap between subpart 1 and subpart 

4 requirements in subsequent actions. 

7That June 2, 2014 rulemaking (79 FR 31566) also 

established a December 31, 2014 deadline for the 

submission of any additional attainment related SIP 

elements that may be needed to meet the applicable 

requirements of subpart 4. 

8See 78 FR 27062 (May 9, 2013). The limited 

disapproval of the narrow portion of the August 31, 

2011 SIP provision (concerning 45CSR14 section 

2.66) is discussed in 78 FR 27062 and in 40 CFR 

52.2522(j)(1) specifically. 

2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule revised the NSR 

program requirements to establish the 

framework for implementing 

preconstruction permit review for the 

PM2.5 NAAQS in both attainment and 

nonattainment areas.2 The 2008 NSR 

PM2.5 rule: (1) Required NSR permits to 

address directly emitted PM2.5 and 

precursor pollutants; (2) established 

significant emission rates for direct 

PM2.5 and precursor pollutants 

(including sulfur dioxide (SO2) and 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX)); (3) 

established PM2.5 emission offsets; and 

(4) required states to account for gases 

that condense to form particles 

(condensables) in PM2.5 emission 

limits.3

The 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule (as well as 

the more general PM2.5 NAAQS 

implementation rule, the 2007 ‘‘Final 

Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation 

Rule’’ (2007 PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule) 4), was the subject of litigation 

before the United States Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (D.C. Circuit) in Natural 

Resources Defense Council v. EPA 

(hereafter, NRDC v. EPA).5 On January 

4, 2013, the D.C. Circuit remanded to 

EPA both the 2007 PM2.5

Implementation Rule and the 2008 NSR 

PM2.5 Rule. The court found that in both 

rules EPA erred in implementing the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS solely pursuant to 

the general implementation provisions 

of subpart 1 of part D of title I of the 

CAA (subpart 1), rather than pursuant to 

the additional implementation 

provisions specific to particulate matter 

in subpart 4 of part D of title I (subpart 

4).6 As a result, the D.C. Circuit 

remanded both rules and instructed 

EPA ‘‘to re-promulgate these rules 

pursuant to subpart 4 consistent with 

this opinion.’’ Although the D.C. Circuit 

declined to establish a deadline for 

EPA’s response, EPA intends to respond 

promptly to the court’s remand and to 

promulgate new generally applicable 

implementation regulations for the 

PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with the 

requirements of subpart 4. In the 

interim, however, states and EPA still 

need to proceed with implementation of 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in a timely and 

effective fashion in order to meet 

statutory obligations under the CAA and 

to assure the protection of public health 

intended by those NAAQS. In a June 2, 

2014 final rulemaking entitled 

‘‘Identification of Nonattainment 

Classification and Deadlines for 

Submission of State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) Provisions for the 1997 Fine 

Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) and 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS; Final Rule,’’ (79 FR 

31566), EPA identified the classification 

status under subpart 4 for areas 

currently designated nonattainment for 

the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.7

As the requirements of Subpart 4 only 

pertain to nonattainment areas, EPA 

does not consider the portions of the 

2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule that address 

requirements for PM2.5 attainment and 

unclassifiable areas to be affected by the 

NRDC v. EPA opinion. Moreover, EPA 

does not anticipate the need to revise 

any PSD permitting requirements 

promulgated in the 2008 NSR PM2.5

Rule in order to comply with the D.C. 

Circuit’s decision. This proposed 

rulemaking addresses West Virginia’s 

PSD regulations. Thus, EPA has 

evaluated the regulations with 

applicable PSD requirements in the 

CAA, its implementing regulations, and 

the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule. 

The CAA’s PSD provisions also 

establish maximum allowable increases 

over baseline concentrations—also 

known as ‘‘increments’’—for certain 

pollutants. EPA has the task of 

promulgating regulations to prevent the 

significant deterioration of air quality 

that would result from the emissions of 

pollutants EPA began regulating after 

Congress enacted the PSD provisions in 

the CAA, which includes PM2.5. The 

PSD provisions establish 

preconstruction review and permitting 

of new or modified sources of air 

pollution. In 2007, EPA proposed a rule 

establishing increments for PM2.5 and 

also proposed two screening tools that 

would exempt permit applicants from 

some air quality analysis and 

monitoring required for PSD: Significant 

impact levels (SILs) and significant 

monitoring concentration (SMC). See 72 

FR 54112 (September 21, 2007). In our 

October 20, 2010 final rule (the PM2.5

PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule), EPA 

set values for both SILs and SMC for 

PM2.5. See 75 FR 64864. 

The Sierra Club challenged EPA’s 

authority to implement PM2.5 SILs and 

SMC for PSD purposes as promulgated 

in the PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC 

Rule. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 705 F.3d 

458 (D.C. Cir. 2013). On January 22, 

2013, the D.C. Circuit granted a request 

from EPA to vacate and remand to the 

Agency the portions of the PM2.5 PSD 

Increments-SILs-SMC Rule addressing 

the SILs for PM2.5 (found in paragraph 

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

except for the parts codifying the PM2.5

SILs at 40 CFR 51.165(b)(2), so that the 

EPA could voluntarily correct an error 

in the provisions. Id. at 463–66. The 

D.C. Circuit also vacated parts of the 

PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule 

establishing the PM2.5 SMC, finding that 

the Agency had exceeded its statutory 

authority with respect to these 

provisions. Id. at 469. 

In response to the D.C. Circuit’s 

decision, EPA took final action on 

December 9, 2013 to remove the SIL 

provisions from the Federal PSD 

regulations in 40 CFR 52.21 and to 

revise the SMC for PM2.5 to zero 

micrograms per cubic meter. See 78 FR 

73698. Because the D.C. Circuit vacated 

the SMC provisions in 40 CFR 

51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c), 

EPA revised the existing concentration 

for the PM2.5 SMC listed in sections 

51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) to 

zero micrograms per cubic meter. EPA 

did not entirely remove PM2.5 as a listed 

pollutant in the SMC provisions because 

to do so might lead to the issuance of 

permits that contradict the holding of 

the D.C. Circuit as to the statutory 

monitoring requirements. Id. (providing 

EPA’s explanation for including the zero 

micrograms per cubic meter SMC). 

On May 9, 2013, EPA had 

disapproved a narrow portion of a SIP 

revision submitted by the State of West 

Virginia on August 31, 2011 for revising 

West Virginia’s PSD requirements in 45 

CSR14 because the submittal did not 

satisfy the Federal requirement for 

inclusion of condensable emissions of 

PM (condensables) within the definition 

of ‘‘regulated new source review (NSR) 

pollutant’’ (at 45CSR14 section 2.66) for 

PM2.5 and PM emissions less than or 

equal to ten micrometers in diameter 

(PM10).8


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
16614 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 60 / Monday, March 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

9West Virginia’s letter from the Secretary of 

WVDEP committing to submit a revised provision 

in 45CSR14 to address the SMC for PM2.5 is 

available in the docket for this rulemaking (EPA– 

R03–OAR–2015–0028) and available online at 

www.regulations.gov. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA 

Analysis 

A. Summary of SIP Revision 

Specifically, the revisions submitted 

by WVDEP on July 1, 2014 and June 6, 

2012 involve amendments to 45CSR14 

(Permits for Construction and Major 

Modification of Major Stationary 

Sources for the Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration) based on the Federal 

regulatory actions discussed above in 

section I. A summary of the changes 

made in the 2012 and 2014 submittals 

are available in the docket in a 

document titled, ‘‘Summary of West 

Virginia NSR Changes.’’ Generally, the 

revisions in the 2012 submittal were 

submitted to incorporate provisions 

related to the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule. The 

2014 submittal revises certain 

subdivisions of the 2012 submittal as 

shown in the table below: 

Rule 45CSR14 subdivision Description of change 

2.66.a.1 ................................... Added PM condensable emissions to definition of ‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’. 

2.66.a.2 ................................... Added language identifying precursors to NAAQS pollutants to the definition of ‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’. 

16.7.c ...................................... Deleted 24-hour de minimis air quality impact concentration value for PM2.5 (aka SMC for PM2.5). 

16.1.a & b ............................... Added provision exempting requirements of 9.1 for stationary sources based on completeness date of permit 

applications. 

9.2 ........................................... Significant Impact Levels. Deleted this provision in its entirety. 

In general, the 2014 submittal adds 

PM condensable emissions to the 

definition of ‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ 

and deletes SILs and SMC for PM2.5 in 

the 45CSR14 provisions submitted for 

SIP approval. 

B. EPA Analysis 

EPA finds the revisions to 45CSR14 

contained in the 2012 submittal and the 

2014 submittal which were submitted 

by WVDEP for approval mirror the PSD 

requirements of the 2008 NSR PM2.5

Rule with certain exceptions described 

in the next paragraph. The 2014 

submittal addresses and corrects the 

deficiency identified in EPA’s May 9, 

2013 disapproval (78 FR 27062) by 

adding language to the provision at 

45CSR14 section 2.66.a.1 which now 

includes PM condensable emissions in 

the definition of ‘‘regulated NSR 

pollutant.’’ Thus, EPA finds West 

Virginia has addressed the deficiency 

noted in our limited disapproval in 78 

FR 27062. 

However, while the 2014 submittal 

appropriately removes SILs for PM2.5

consistent with the D.C. Circuit’s Sierra 

Club v. EPA decision and our final 

December 9, 2013 rulemaking (78 FR 

73698), West Virginia’s PSD provision at 

45CSR14–16.7.c (included in the 2014 

submittal) does not include a SMC value 

of zero micrograms per cubic meter for 

PM2.5 consistent with the D.C. Circuit’s 

Sierra Club v. EPA decision and our 

December 9, 2013 rulemaking (78 FR 

73698) which addressed the D.C. 

Circuit’s vacature of the SMC provisions 

in 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 for PM2.5.

Therefore, West Virginia’s PSD 

regulation, 45CSR14, does not fully 

meet the requirements for PSD programs 

as set forth in the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule, 

the D.C. Circuit’s decision on SILs and 

SMC in Sierra Club v. EPA, and in 

EPA’s December 9, 2013 rulemaking 

addressing that decision for SILs and 

SMC. 

However, on January 20, 2015, West 

Virginia committed to submitting an 

additional SIP revision with a revised 

PSD regulation at 45CSR14–16.7.c 

which will incorporate a SMC value of 

zero micrograms per cubic meter for 

PM2.5 to address this discrepancy. West 

Virginia committed to submitting this 

SIP revision no later than one year 

following the effective date of the final 

rulemaking notice for conditional 

approval of the 2012 and the 2014 

submittals so that EPA can 

conditionally approve the 2012 and 

2014 submittals.9 See CAA section 

110(k)(4). With the exception of the 

absence of the SMC value of zero 

micrograms per cubic meter for PM2.5

which WVDEP has committed to 

address, EPA finds the 2012 and 2014 

submittals meet applicable requirements 

for a PSD permitting program in the 

CAA, its implementing regulations, and 

the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule. The EPA is 

soliciting public comments on the 

issues discussed in this document. Any 

comments submitted in a timely manner 

will be considered before taking final 

action. 

III. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing conditional 

approval of these West Virginia SIP 

revisions, the 2012 and 2014 submittals, 

because West Virginia is committing to 

submit an additional SIP revision 

addressing the deficiency identified by 

EPA regarding the deletion of the PM2.5

SMC within one year of the date of 

EPA’s final conditional approval and 

because the submittals otherwise meet 

CAA requirements as discussed in this 

proposed rulemaking. Once EPA has 

determined that West Virginia has 

satisfied this condition, the conditional 

approval of the 2012 and 2014 

submittals will become a full approval. 

Should West Virginia fail to meet the 

condition specified above, the 

conditional approval of the 2012 and 

2014 submittals will convert to a 

disapproval pursuant to CAA section 

110(k)(4). 

The full or partial disapproval of a SIP 

revision triggers the requirement under 

CAA section 110(c) that EPA 

promulgate a federal implementation 

plan (FIP) no later than two years from 

the date of the disapproval unless the 

State corrects the deficiency, and the 

Administrator approves the plan or plan 

revision before the Administrator 

promulgates such FIP. EPA has 

determined that West Virginia’s 2014 

submittal has rectified the deficiency 

regarding including condensables in the 

definition of regulated NSR pollutant 

noted in our limited disapproval in 78 

FR 27062. Therefore, upon final 

approval of the 2014 submittal, the EPA 

is no longer required to promulgate a 

FIP to address the issue of PM 

condensables in the definition of 

regulated NSR pollutant for West 

Virginia’s PSD permit program, and our 

narrow disapproval of the August 31, 

2011 PSD SIP (for failure to include 

condensables in definition of regulated 

NSR pollutant) will become a full 

approval. However, EPA is proposing 

conditional approval for the 2012 and 

2014 submittals due to West Virginia’s 

lack of a PM2.5 SMC with the value of 

zero micrograms per cubic meter. 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA 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 WV regulations at 45CSR14 

regarding the Prevention of Significant 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 60 / Monday, March 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 16615 

deterioration permitting requirements as 

discussed in section III of this preamble. 

The EPA has made, and will continue 

to make, these documents generally 

available electronically through 

www.regulations.com 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, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this 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 proposed rule, 

relating to West Virginia’s PSD program, 

does not have tribal implications as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because 

the SIP is not approved to apply in 

Indian country located in the state, and 

EPA notes that it will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, 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 12, 2015. 

William C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2015–07222 Filed 3–27–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS