Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 20715 

1Previously, PSD permits in Illinois have been 

issued under a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). 

Since April 7, 1980, IEPA has issued PSD permits 

under a delegation agreement with EPA that 

authorizes IEPA to implement the FIP (January 29, 

1981, 46 FR 9580). Under a November 16, 1981 

amendment to the 1980 Delegation Agreement, 

IEPA also had the authority to amend or revise any 

PSD permit issued by EPA under the FIP. See 86 

FR 22372, 22373 (April 28, 2021). On September 22, 

2020, IEPA submitted to EPA a request to revise the 

Illinois SIP to establish a SIP-approved PSD 

program in Illinois, which was approved on 

September 9, 2021 (86 FR 50459), and addressed 

comments received during EPA’s public comment 

period. 

2See 46 FR 44476, 44477 (Sept. 4, 1981) 

(‘‘Because of the straightforward nature of some 

actions or the narrowness of their scope, many SIP 

revisions get few, if any, comments from the public 

during the comment period.’’); 47 FR 27073, 27074 

(June 23, 1982) (‘‘as part of EPA’s new SIP 

processing program, a SIP revision that is judged by 

Continued 

directory and shall confirm the currency 

of the information on an annual basis. 

Dated: April 4, 2022. 

Shira Perlmutter, 

Register of Copyrights and Director of the 

U.S. Copyright Office. 

Approved by: 

Carla D. Hayden, 

Librarian of Congress. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07543 Filed 4–7–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0583; EPA–R05– 

OAR–2019–0311; EPA–R05–OAR–2020– 

0501; FRL–9056–04–R5] 

Air Plan Approval; Illinois; 

Infrastructure SIP Requirements for 

the 2012 PM2.5 and 2015 Ozone NAAQS 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving elements of 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of 

Illinois regarding the infrastructure 

requirements of section 110 of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA) for the 2012 annual fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) and 2015 

ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS). Further, EPA is 

approving the infrastructure 

requirements related to Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) for 

previous NAAQS. The infrastructure 

requirements are designed to ensure that 

the structural components of each 

state’s air quality management program 

are adequate to meet the state’s 

responsibilities under the CAA. EPA 

received comments on its September 29, 

2021, proposed rule and withdrew the 

accompanying Direct Final Rule (DFR). 

After considering the comments, EPA is 

approving the revisions to the Illinois 

SIP as requested by the State on 

September 29, 2017, May 16, 2019, and 

September 22, 2020. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

May 9, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established dockets 

for this action under Docket ID No. 

EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0583 (for PM2.5), 

EPA–R05–OAR–2019–0311 (for ozone), 

and EPA–R05–OAR–2020–0501 (for 

PSD) at https://www.regulations.gov. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., Confidential Business Information 

(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 through 

www.regulations.gov or at the 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays and 

facility closures due to COVID–19. We 

recommend that you telephone Olivia 

Davidson, Environmental Scientist, at 

(312) 886–0266 before visiting the 

Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Olivia Davidson, Environmental 

Scientist, Attainment Planning and 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR18J), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–0266, 

davidson.olivia@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. 

I. Background 

On September 29, 2021 (86 FR 53872), 

EPA published a DFR approving 

elements of infrastructure SIP revisions 

submitted by the Illinois Environmental 

Protection Agency (IEPA) on September 

29, 2017, May 16, 2019, and September 

22, 2020, to address the infrastructure 

requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) 

and (2) for the 2012 PM2.5 and 2015 

ozone NAAQS, respectively. In the DFR, 

EPA also approved the infrastructure 

requirements related to Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) 1 for 

1997 ozone, 1997 PM2.5, 2006 PM2.5, 

2008 ozone, 2008 lead, 2010 Nitrogen 

Dioxide (NO2), and 2010 Sulfur Dioxide 

(SO2) NAAQS. An explanation of the 

CAA requirements, a detailed analysis 

of the SIP submission, and EPA’s 

reasons for proposing approval were 

provided in the DFR and will not be 

restated here. 

In the DFR, EPA stated that if adverse 

comments were received by October 29, 

2021, the rule would be withdrawn and 

not take effect. On October 27, 2021, 

EPA received one set of adverse 

comments and, as a result, revised its 

regulations on January 18, 2022 (87 FR 

2554), because EPA was unable to 

withdraw the DFR before it took effect. 

EPA is addressing the comments in this 

final action based upon the notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) also 

published on September 29, 2021. See 

86 FR 53915. 

II. EPA’s Response to Comments 

A summary of the comments, and 

EPA’s response, is provided below. 

Comment: The commenters state that 

EPA should not have used a DFR for 

this action because EPA did not have 

good cause under 5 U.S.C. to forgo 

normal notice-and-comment procedures 

(i.e., publishing an NPRM and accepting 

comments 30 days before the rule’s 

effective date), because EPA allegedly 

did not find that compliance with the 

30-day requirement was either 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest,’’ nor did EPA 

incorporate such a finding ‘‘and a brief 

statement of the reasons therefor’’ in the 

DFR. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). In the DFR, 

EPA stated that this action was a 

‘‘noncontroversial amendment’’ to the 

existing Illinois SIP and that it 

anticipated no adverse comments. The 

commenters argue that these statements 

fail to satisfy the good cause exemption 

under 5 U.S.C. 553. The commenters 

assert that infrastructure SIP actions, 

even when the public fails to comment, 

are not necessarily ‘‘noncontroversial,’’ 

because such actions involve detailed 

reviews and have been subject to 

litigation. For this reason, the 

commenters argue EPA should never 

use DFRs to approve an infrastructure 

SIP submission. The commenters 

encourage EPA to commence a separate 

rulemaking to govern its use of DFRs. 

Response: EPA disagrees that it was 

inappropriate to use a DFR for this 

infrastructure SIP action. Since 

September 1981, EPA has used DFRs for 

SIP actions that are noncontroversial 

and where it reasonably expects no 

adverse public comments.2 These 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
20716 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA to be noncontroversial and where no adverse 

public comments are anticipated, will be published 

as a final rulemaking without first going through a 

proposed rulemaking phase’’); 59 FR 24054, 24054 

(May 10, 1994) (actions that are noncontroversial, 

and where no adverse public comment is 

anticipated, ‘‘do not have to be limited to trivial 

administrative changes’’). See also Ronald M. 

Levin, Direct Final Rulemaking, 64 Geo. Wash. L. 

Rev. 1, 4–6 (1995); Memorandum from Leslye 

Fraser, Asst. Gen. Counsel, U.S. EPA, Guidance on 

Direct Final Rulemaking (Oct. 29, 1998), available 

at https://cfpub.epa.gov/oarwebadmin/sipman/ 

sipman/mAppContent.cfm?chap=99&OtherFile= 

appendix/dfrguide&RequestTimeOut=500 (actions 

that are noncontroversial and for which EPA 

expects no adverse comment ‘‘generally include 

non-controversial amendments, non-controversial 

rulemakings, and routine or minor actions’’). 

3For recent examples, see 85 FR 14578 (March 

13, 2020) and 82 FR 43848 (September 20, 2017). 

4 86 FR 53880 (September 29, 2021). 

5For EPA’s description of this procedure, see 59 

FR at 24054 (May 10, 1994) and Fraser, supra note 

2. See also 47 FR 27074 (June 23, 1982) (requiring 

EPA to state in DFRs for SIP revisions that ‘‘no 

comments are anticipated and that, unless notice is 

received within 30 days that someone wishes to 

submit adverse or critical comments, the 

rulemaking will be effective 60 days from the date 

the notice is published’’). 

6 46 FR 44777 (September 8, 1981). 

7 Illinois’ September 22, 2020, submittal also 

requested a SIP revision to establish a SIP-approved 

PSD program in Illinois. EPA approved the PSD 

permitting program on September 9, 2021 (86 FR 

50459). In the final rule, EPA responded to adverse 

comments received during the public comment 

period for its proposed approval of Illinois’ PSD 

program. Further, IEPA received comments on 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) Prongs 1 and 2 pertaining 

to interstate transport requirements, of which EPA 

disapproved on February 22, 2022 (87 FR 9838). 

8 86 FR at 53873. 

9 Id. at 53880. Nearly identical statements appear 

in recent DFRs, supra n.3. See 85 FR at 14584 

(March 13, 2020); 82 FR at 43849 (September 20, 

2017). They are all consistent with the guidance in 

the Fraser Memorandum, supra n.2. 

10The 2022 plan is available on IEPA’s website 

and was available for public comment in July 2021. 

The 2022 plan has since been approved by EPA as 

of December 21, 2021. 11See generally, 40 CFR part 58. 

actions have included approvals of 

infrastructure SIP submittals.3 EPA’s 

current procedure for these types of 

actions, as described in the DFR,4 has 

been to publish a DFR for the SIP action 

and at the same time commence a 

conventional rulemaking proceeding for 

the same rule by publishing a NPRM.5

If EPA receives adverse comments 

within 30 days after publishing the DFR, 

it withdraws the DFR by publishing a 

withdrawal action in the Federal 

Register; the substance of the DFR then 

serves as the detailed basis for the 

NPRM, and EPA addresses the adverse 

comments in the final rule. EPA 

believes this approach ‘‘can save time 

and resources while maintaining the 

public’s right to comment.’’ 6

EPA viewed Illinois’ infrastructure 

SIP submissions for these specific 

NAAQS as noncontroversial and 

anticipated no adverse comment for two 

reasons. First, EPA believed that 

Illinois’ SIP submissions for these 

NAAQS straightforwardly met the 

relevant CAA infrastructure SIP 

requirements. Second, IEPA in its own 

state level rulemaking process to 

develop the infrastructure SIP 

submissions held 30-day periods for the 

public to comment on or to submit 

public hearing requests for the 2012 

PM2.5 and 2015 ozone NAAQS (on June 

23, 2017 and November 16, 2018, 

respectively), but IEPA received no 

requests for a public hearing during the 

comment periods and no comments on 

the portions of the Illinois submission 

addressed in the DFR.7 The DFR 

included these details on the state level 

actions.8 Because IEPA received no 

comments on the portions of Illinois’ 

submissions on which EPA is acting 

during its own public comment periods, 

EPA did not believe the proposed SIP 

revision was controversial and expected 

no public comments for this action. 

As the commenters point out, and 

consistent with Agency policy, EPA 

made a brief statement in the DFR that 

it viewed the action as a 

noncontroversial SIP amendment and 

anticipated no adverse comments.9 In 

response to the adverse comments, EPA 

removed the DFR and is addressing the 

comments in this rule. As the NPRM 

and the DFR appeared on the same day 

in the Federal Register (September 29, 

2021), EPA’s procedure preserved the 

public’s opportunity to comment on this 

action. 

Comment: The commenters argue that 

the EPA’s proposed approval of Illinois’ 

submittal, which considered the 2021 

Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan 

(the ‘‘plan’’) for satisfaction of CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(B), should have 

considered the 2022 plan. 

Response: EPA disagrees that 

approval of the monitoring plan 

requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(B) cannot be finalized without 

approval of the 2022 plan. At the time 

of the proposal, EPA was still in the 

process of reviewing the 2022 plan. The 

2021 plan was the most recently 

approved plan, and hence was the 

correct plan to reference for satisfaction 

of CAA section 110(a)(2)(B). As the 

commenters suggest, EPA was working 

with IEPA to establish a lead monitor 

location for approval as part of the 2022 

plan, but this change would not affect 

the ability of the State to monitor PM2.5

and ozone; in fact, the number of ozone 

and PM2.5 monitors will not change 

under the 2022 plan.10 Further, IEPA’s 

submittal satisfies other requirements of 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(B) as discussed in 

the proposal. To fulfill monitoring 

network obligations, the submission 

must demonstrate that the state: (i) 

Monitors air quality at appropriate 

locations throughout the state using 

EPA-approved Federal Reference 

Method or Federal Equivalent Method 

monitors; (ii) submits data to EPA’s Air 

Quality System in a timely manner; and 

(iii) provides EPA Regional Offices with 

prior notification of any planned 

changes to monitoring sites or the 

network plan.11 All of the above 

elements are met by IEPA’s submittal. 

Therefore, EPA continues to find that 

Illinois has met the infrastructure SIP 

requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(B) with respect to the 2012 

PM2.5 and 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

Comment: Lastly, the commenters 

claim that Illinois failed to provide 

necessary assurances under CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(E) that the state will 

have adequate funding and personnel to 

carry out its approved SIP. In particular, 

the commenters claim that the 

assurances IEPA did provide are vague 

and limited to permitting activities. The 

commenters also allege that IEPA has 

for many years been understaffed and 

under-resourced to handle its existing 

volume of regulatory obligations. 

Response: EPA disagrees that IEPA 

has not provided sufficient information 

about its funding and personnel to 

provide necessary assurances as 

required by section 110(a)(2)(E). EPA 

acknowledges that IEPA has had staff 

and funding declines over the years due 

to reduced legislative budget 

allocations, facility shutdowns that 

result in reduced permitting fees 

(particularly by large emitters such as 

coal-fired power plants), and other 

factors. However, EPA disagrees that 

IEPA’s assurances to meet CAA section 

110(a)(2)(E) are too vague and limited to 

permitting. In response to the 

commenter’s concern, EPA has again 

evaluated the information provided 

concerning its funding and personnel 

for implementation of its SIP and has 

concluded that IEPA has provided 

necessary assurances sufficient to meet 

the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E) 

with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 and 2015 

ozone NAAQS. 

While CAA section 110(a)(2)(E) 

requires each state to provide necessary 

assurances that the state will have 

adequate personnel, funding, and 

authority under state law to carry out 

the SIP, it does not mandate a specific 

methodology for EPA to use when 

evaluating the adequacy of resources to 

implement the SIP. See 76 FR 42549, 

42554 (July 19, 2011). Even so, the 

commenters only highlight budget cuts 

at IEPA leading up to 2018, but do not 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 20717 

12See Chapter 415, section 5 of the Illinois 

Compiled Statutes (415 ILCS 5/9.6). 

13See https://www2.illinois.gov/sites/budget/ 

Pages/InteractiveBudget.aspx (last visited Feb. 1, 

2022). The enacted total IEPA budget for 2021 

appears to be the same figure as proposed by the 

Illinois Governor. See https://www2.illinois.gov/ 

sites/budget/Documents/Budget%20Book/FY2021- 

Budget-Book/Fiscal-Year-2021-Operating-BudgetBook.pdf at 79. 

14See Ill. Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office 

of the Governor, Ill. State Operating Budget, Fiscal 

Year 2022, available at https://www2.illinois.gov/ 

sites/budget/Documents/Budget%20Book/FY2022- 

Budget-Book/Fiscal-Year-2022-OperatingBudget.pdf. 

15See https://www2.illinois.gov/epa/about-us/ 

Pages/performance-partnership-agreement.aspx. 

16See also, 86 FR 50459, 50462. 

17EPA emphasizes that the recently approved 

PSD provisions discussed in 110(a)(2)(C), (D) and (J) 

are not limited to ozone and PM2.5. See 

Applicability of PSD requirements section in the 

DFR for more information on elements approved for 

the 1997 ozone, 2008 ozone, 2008 lead, 2010 NO2,

1997 PM2.5, 2006 PM2.5, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 86 

FR at 53879. 

18 In the time since proposed approval of this 

action, the portion of IEPA’s submission addressing 

2015 ozone transport, section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

prongs 1 and 2 has been proposed for disapproval 

(February 22, 2022, 87 FR 9838). 

consider increases in IEPA’s revenue 

and budget. For instance, as discussed 

in IEPA’s referenced submissions, 

Public Act 097–0095/House Bill 1297 12

was signed into effect in 2011 by the 

Illinois Governor to increase operating 

permit fees. More recently, EPA notes 

the increase in enacted funding for IEPA 

to $380 million in 2019, $450 million in 

2020, and $514 million in 2021.13

Further, staff in IEPA’s Bureau of Air 

has increased from 164 to an estimated 

185 (with 194 targeted for FY 2022), and 

the enacted appropriation for the 

Bureau of Air has increased from 

$147,825,800 in FY 2020 to 

$156,808,200 in FY 2021 (with 

$158,536,300 proposed for FY 2022).14

While the commenters expressed 

concern that that IEPA’s statement about 

its current number of full-time permit 

engineers and the revenue stream from 

permit fees is unreasonably vague and 

can’t be relied upon for SIP approval, 

EPA did not rely solely on this 

statement in evaluating Illinois’ 

submittal with respect to funding and 

personnel. In addition to the budget 

figures cited above and other sources of 

funding available to the State under 

State statutes and rules pursuant to CAA 

section 110(a)(2), EPA considered 

IEPA’s fulfillment of its obligations 

under the Performance Partnership 

Agreement with EPA.15 EPA also 

considered IEPA’s fulfillment of its 

grant obligations under CAA section 

105, which provides monies to help 

support the foundation of the state’s air 

quality program, including air 

monitoring, enforcement, and SIP 

development. States are required to 

provide matching monies to receive 

their grant, and EPA evaluates the 

performance of the State each year. EPA 

determined in July 2021 that, as of fiscal 

year 2020, Illinois has satisfactorily 

completed its air program obligations as 

called for under the CAA section 105 

grant, including meeting specific 

measures related to maintenance of an 

EPA-approved statewide air quality 

surveillance network required by 

section 110(a)(2)(B) of the CAA. 

If, in the future, EPA determines that 

Illinois does not have adequate 

personnel or funding to carry out its 

SIP, or for any other reason fails to meet 

any requirement of its approved SIP, 

then EPA may exercise its authority 

pursuant to CAA sections 110(a)(2)(E), 

179, or 110(k)(5) to impose sanctions 

and other remedies on the State as 

allowed by the CAA. The action that 

EPA is taking here does not limit EPA’s 

authority pursuant to those CAA 

sections.16

III. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is approving the majority of two 

infrastructure SIP submissions from 

IEPA to address the required 

infrastructure elements under sections 

110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2012 PM2.5 and 

2015 ozone NAAQS.17 The table below 

summarizes EPA’s actions on Illinois’ 

submittal in satisfaction of the 

infrastructure SIP requirements 

pursuant to section 110(a)(2).18

Additionally, EPA is approving Illinois’ 

submission as meeting the infrastructure 

SIP requirements of sections 

110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J) 

pertaining to PSD requirements with 

respect to the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM2.5, 

2006 PM2.5, 2008 ozone, 2008 lead, 2010 

NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

Element 2012 PM2.5 2015 ozone 

(A)—Emission limits and other control measures ................................................................................................... A A 

(B)—Ambient air quality monitoring/data system .................................................................................................... A A 

(C)1—Program for enforcement of control measures ............................................................................................. A A 

(C)2—Minor NSR ..................................................................................................................................................... A A 

(C)3—PSD ............................................................................................................................................................... A A 

(D)1—I Prong 1: Interstate transport—significant contribution to nonattainment ................................................... PA PD 

(D)2—I Prong 2: Interstate transport—interference with maintenance ................................................................... PA PD 

(D)3—II Prong 3: Interstate transport—interference with PSD ............................................................................... A A 

(D)4—II Prong 4: Interstate transport—interference with visibility protection ......................................................... NA NA 

(D)5—Interstate and international pollution abatement ........................................................................................... A A 

(E)1—Adequate resources ...................................................................................................................................... A A 

(E)2—State board requirements .............................................................................................................................. A A 

(F)—Stationary source monitoring system .............................................................................................................. A A 

(G)—Emergency powers ......................................................................................................................................... A A 

(H)—Future SIP revisions ........................................................................................................................................ A A 

(I)—Nonattainment planning requirements of part D .............................................................................................. * * 

(J)1—Consultation with government officials .......................................................................................................... A A 

(J)2—Public notification ........................................................................................................................................... A A 

(J)3—PSD ................................................................................................................................................................ A A 

(J)4—Visibility protection ......................................................................................................................................... * * 

(K)—Air quality modeling/data ................................................................................................................................. A A 

(L)—Permitting fees ................................................................................................................................................. A A 

(M)—Consultation/participation by affected local entities ....................................................................................... A A 

In the above table, the key is as 

follows: A ............ Approve. 

NA .......... No Action/Separate Rulemaking. 

PA .......... Previously Approved. 

PD .......... Previous Proposed Disapproval. 

D ............ Disapprove. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
20718 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

* ............. Not germane to infrastructure 

SIPs. 

IV. 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 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 

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, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where 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 and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

This action is subject to the 

Congressional Review Act, and EPA will 

submit a rule report to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. This action 

is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 

U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by June 7, 2022. Filing a petition 

for reconsideration by the Administrator 

of this final rule does not affect the 

finality of this action for the purposes of 

judicial review nor does it extend the 

time within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. This action may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: April 1, 2022. 

Debra Shore, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52 

as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 52.720, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended under the heading 

‘‘Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure 

Requirements’’ by: 

■ a. Revising the entries for ‘‘1997 8- 

hour Ozone NAAQS Infrastructure 

Requirements’’, ‘‘1997 PM2.5 NAAQS 

Infrastructure Requirements’’, ‘‘2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 Infrastructure 

Requirements’’, ‘‘2008 Lead 

Infrastructure Requirements’’, ‘‘2008 

Ozone NAAQS Infrastructure 

Requirements’’, ‘‘2010 NO2 NAAQS 

Infrastructure Requirements’’, ‘‘2010 

SO2 NAAQS Infrastructure 

Requirements’’, and ‘‘2012 PM2.5

NAAQS Infrastructure Requirements’’; 

and 

■ b. Adding an entry for ‘‘2015 Ozone 

NAAQS Infrastructure Requirements’’ at 

the end of the table. 

The revisions and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 52.720 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED ILLINOIS NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of SIP provision 

Applicable 

geographic or 

nonattainment area 

State submittal date EPA approval date Comments 

*******

Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements 

1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS Infrastructure Requirements.Statewide ........ 12/12/2007 and 9/22/ 

2020.

4/8/2022, [Insert Federal Register Citation].All CAA infrastructure elements under 110(a)(2) 

have been approved except (D)(i)(I) [Prongs 1 

and 2]. A FIP is in place for these elements. 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS Infrastructure Requirements.

Statewide ........ 12/12/2007 and 9/22/ 

2020.

4/8/2022, [Insert Federal Register Citation].All CAA infrastructure elements under 110(a)(2) 

have been approved except (D)(i)(I) [Prongs 1 

and 2]. A FIP is in place for these elements. 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS Infrastructure Requirements.

Statewide ........ 8/9/2011, supplemented 

on 8/25/2011, 6/27/ 

2012, 7/5/2017 and 9/ 

22/2020.

4/8/2022, [Insert Federal Register Citation].All CAA infrastructure elements under 110(a)(2) 

have been approved except (D)(i)(I) [Prongs 1 

and 2]. A FIP is in place for these elements. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 20719 

EPA-APPROVED ILLINOIS NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY PROVISIONS—Continued 

Name of SIP provision 

Applicable 

geographic or 

nonattainment 

area 

State submittal date EPA approval date Comments 

2008 Lead NAAQS Infrastructure 

Requirements.

Statewide ........ 12/31/2012, 7/5/2017 and 

9/22/2020.

4/8/2022, [Insert Federal Register Citation].All CAA infrastructure elements under 110(a)(2) 

have been approved. 

2008 Ozone NAAQS Infrastructure Requirements.Statewide ........ 12/31/2012, 7/5/2017 and 

9/22/2020.

4/8/2022, [Insert Federal Register Citation].All CAA infrastructure elements under 110(a)(2) 

have been approved except (D)(i)(I) [Prongs 1 

and 2]. A FIP is in place for these elements. 

2010 NO2 NAAQS Infrastructure 

Requirements.

Statewide ........ 12/31/2012, 7/5/2017 and 

9/22/2020.

4/8/2022, [Insert Federal Register Citation].All CAA infrastructure elements under 110(a)(2) 

have been approved. 

2010 SO2 NAAQS Infrastructure 

Requirements.

Statewide ........ 12/31/2012, 7/5/2017 and 

9/22/2020.

4/8/2022, [Insert Federal Register Citation].All CAA infrastructure elements under 110(a)(2) 

have been approved except (D)(i)(I) [Prongs 1 

and 2], which have not yet been submitted. 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS Infrastructure Requirements.

Statewide ........ 9/29/2017 and 9/22/2020 4/8/2022, [Insert Federal Register Citation].All CAA infrastructure elements under 110(a)(2) 

have been approved except (D)(i)(II) Prong 4. 

2015 Ozone NAAQS Infrastructure Requirements.Statewide ........ 5/16/2019 and 9/22/2020 4/8/2022, [Insert Federal Register Citation].All CAA infrastructure elements under 110(a)(2) 

have been approved except (D)(i)(I) and 

Prong 4 of (D)(i)(II) Prong 4. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2022–07346 Filed 4–7–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2020–0495; FRL–8920–01– 

OCSPP] 

Bacillus Subtilis Strain AFS032321; 

Exemption From the Requirement of a 

Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of Bacillus subtilis 

strain AFS032321 in or on all food 

commodities when used in accordance 

with label directions and good 

agricultural practices. AFS32321 Crop 

Protection, Inc., submitted a petition to 

EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and 

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance. This regulation eliminates the 

need to establish a maximum 

permissible level for residues of Bacillus 

subtilis strain AFS032321 under FFDCA 

when used in accordance with this 

exemption. 

DATES: This regulation is effective April 

8, 2022. Objections and requests for 

hearings must be received on or before 

June 7, 2022 and must be filed in 

accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also 

Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION). 

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2020–0495, is 

available at https://www.regulations.gov 

or at the Office of Pesticide Programs 

Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) 

in the Environmental Protection Agency 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William 

Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001. The Public Reading Room 

is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the OPP 

Docket is (703) 305–5805. 

Due to the public health concerns 

related to COVID–19, the EPA Docket 

Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room are 

closed to visitors with limited 

exceptions. The staff continues to 

provide remote customer service via 

email, phone, and webform. For the 

latest status information on EPA/DC 

services and docket access, visit https:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charles Smith, Biopesticides and 

Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), 

Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001; main telephone number: 

(703) 305–7090; email address: 

BPPDFRNotices@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

B. How can I get electronic access to 

other related information? 

You may access a frequently updated 

electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 

through the Office of the Federal 

Register’s e-CFR site at https://

ecfr.federalregister.gov/current/title-40. 

C. How can I file an objection or hearing 

request? 

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 

U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file an 

objection to any aspect of this regulation 

and may also request a hearing on those 

objections. You must file your objection 

or request a hearing on this regulation 

in accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure 

proper receipt by EPA, you must 

identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2020–0495 in the subject line on 

the first page of your submission. All 

objections and requests for a hearing 

must be in writing and must be received 

by the Hearing Clerk on or before June 

7, 2022. Addresses for mail and hand 

delivery of objections and hearing 

requests are provided in 40 CFR 

178.25(b), although EPA strongly 

encourages those interested in 

submitting objections or a hearing 

request to submit objections and hearing 

requests electronically. See Order 

Urging Electronic Service and Filing 

(April 10, 2020), https://www.epa.gov/ 

sites/production/files/2020-05/ 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1