Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules 76673 

submittal. The State held another public 

hearing on August 18, 2011. 

40 CFR 51.308(i)(3) requires that 

South Dakota provide in its Regional 

Haze SIP a description of how it 

addressed any comments provided by 

the FLMs. The FLMs communicated to 

the State (and EPA) their concerns on 

the January 15, 2010 draft Regional Haze 

SIP. South Dakota responded to the 

FLM’s comments and concerns in 

Appendix D of the Regional Haze SIP. 

The National Park Service commented 

on the Regional Haze SIP amendment 

regarding its concerns pertaining to a 

reasonable progress four-factor analysis 

to evaluate controls at GCC Dacotah’s 

Kiln 6 and additional consultation with 

Nebraska on Gerald Gentleman Station. 

South Dakota provided us with its 

rationale on GCC Dacotah’s Kiln 6 

which we discussed in section III.D.2. 

above. We also noted our agreement 

with the level of consultation with 

Nebraska for this planning period in 

section III.D.6. above. According to the 

Regional Haze Rule, South Dakota 

should consult with Nebraska during 

the next planning period. 

Lastly, 40 CFR 51.308(i)(4) specifies 

the regional haze SIP must provide 

procedures for continuing consultation 

between the state and FLMs on the 

implementation of the visibility 

protection program required by 40 CFR 

51.308, including development and 

review of implementation plan revisions 

and 5-year progress reports, and on the 

implementation of other programs 

having the potential to contribute to 

impairment of visibility in mandatory 

Class I Federal areas. South Dakota 

commits in Section 10 of its Regional 

Haze SIP to continue to coordinate and 

consult with the FLMs as required by 40 

CFR 51.308(i)(4). South Dakota states 

that it intends to consult the FLMs in 

the development and review of 

implementation plan revisions; review 

of progress reports; and development 

and implementation of other programs 

that may contribute to impairment of 

visibility at South Dakota and other 

Class I areas. 

We are proposing that the State 

complied with the requirements of 40 

CFR 51.308(i). 

I. Periodic SIP Revisions and Five-Year 

Progress Reports 

South Dakota commits in Section 11 

of the SIP to complete items required in 

the future by the Regional Haze Rule. 

South Dakota acknowledged its 

obligation under 40 CFR 51.308(f) to 

submit periodic progress reports and 

Regional Haze SIP revisions, with the 

first report due by July 31, 2018 and 

every ten years thereafter. 

South Dakota acknowledged its 

obligation under 40 CFR 51.308(g) to 

submit a progress report in the form of 

a SIP revision to us every five years 

following the initial submittal of the 

Regional Haze SIP. The report will 

evaluate the progress made towards the 

reasonable progress goals for each 

mandatory Class I area located within 

South Dakota and in each mandatory 

Class I area located outside South 

Dakota that may be affected by 

emissions from within South Dakota. 

IV. Proposed Action 

We are proposing to approve South 

Dakota’s Regional Haze SIP revision, 

including ARSD Chapter 74:36:21, that 

was submitted on January 21, 2011 and 

an amendment to this submittal that 

was submitted on September 19, 2011. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations 

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 it 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 Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxides, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: November 29, 2011. 

Howard M. Cantor, 

Acting Regional Administrator, EPA, Region 

8. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31406 Filed 12–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2005–TX–0025; FRL–9502– 

5] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Texas; 

Revisions to the New Source Review 

(NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP); 

General Definitions; Definition of 

Modification of Existing Facility 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Withdrawal of Proposed 

Disapproval. 

SUMMARY: EPA is withdrawing a 

proposed disapproval proposed on 

September 23, 2009, regarding two 

provisions that have been superseded by 

later submitted revisions. EPA is taking 

these actions under section 110 of the 

Clean Air Act. 

DATES: The proposed rule published 

September 23, 2009 (74 FR 48450) is 

withdrawn as of December 8, 2011. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

76674 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1The October 5, 2010 Submittal also redesignated 

Section 116.10(11) to Section 116.10(9). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Stanley M. Spruiell, Air Permits Section 

(6PD–R), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, 

telephone (214) 665–7212; fax number 

(214) 665–6762; email address 

spruiell.stanley@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA 

is withdrawing severable portions of its 

September 23, 2009, proposed 

disapproval of revisions to Title 30 of 

the Texas Administrative Code (30 TAC) 

Section 116.10(11)(A) and (B), 

submitted March 13, 1996; July 22, 

1998; and September 4, 2002. These are 

severable portions of the definition of 

‘‘modification of existing facility.’’ 

As noted in the September 23, 2009, 

proposed action on Subparagraphs (A) 

and (B), the two Subparagraphs are not 

severable from each other. See 74 FR 

48450, at 48452. The two provisions 

were considered in conjunction with 

each other as our basis of evaluation in 

the original proposal. Because (B) is 

now repealed, and the wording of (A) 

has been changed in an October 5, 2010, 

submitted revision,1 the basis of 

evaluation in the original proposed 

action has changed. As proposed July 

18, 2011 (76 FR 42078), EPA therefore 

withdraws its previously proposed 

action so that the submitted revised 

Subparagraph (A) and the impact of the 

repeal of Subparagraph (B) upon the 

revised Subparagraph (A) may be 

addressed in a future separate action. 

This course of action will promote 

efficiency, mitigate confusion, and 

facilitate new comments on the future 

proposed action on the October 5, 2010, 

submittal with a proper basis of 

evaluation. Given the need for 

comments and evaluation of the newly 

submitted regulatory wording changes 

to Subparagraph (A), EPA considers any 

established deadline under the Business 

Coalition for Clean Air Appeal Group 

(BCCA) Settlement Agreement to be 

inapplicable with respect to this 

provision. 

The repeal of Subparagraph (B) in the 

October 2010 SIP submittal also renders 

moot and inapplicable any obligation to 

act on that provision under the BCCA 

Settlement Agreement. Because 

Subparagraph (B) was repealed and is 

no longer before EPA for action, no 

further action is needed on this 

provision. Consequently, EPA now 

withdraws its previously proposed 

action on Subparagraph (B). 

In response to our July 18, 2011, 

proposed withdrawal of 30 TAC 

116.10(11)(A) and (B), we received 

comments from Texas Industry Project 

and BCCA Appeal Group. The 

commenters agree that it is appropriate 

to withdraw the proposed disapproval 

of these provisions because 

Subparagraph (A) has been amended 

since EPA’s proposed disapproval and 

because Subparagraph (B) has been 

repealed. Based upon the proposal and 

consideration of the comments we 

received, we are withdrawing the 

proposed September 23, 2009, 

disapproval of 30 TAC 116.10(11)(A) 

and (B), as submitted March 13, 1996; 

July 22, 1998; and September 4, 2002. 

Subparagraph (A) as it appears in the 

October 5, 2010, submittal will be 

evaluated and will be addressed in a 

separate future action. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations. 

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

Dated: November 29, 2011. 

Al Armendariz, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31529 Filed 12–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0082; FRL–9328–8] 

Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions 

Filed for Residues of Pesticide 

Chemicals in or on Various 

Commodities 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: This document announces the 

Agency’s receipt of several initial filings 

of pesticide petitions requesting the 

establishment or modification of 

regulations for residues of pesticide 

chemicals in or on various commodities. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before January 9, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number and the pesticide petition (PP) 

number of interest as shown in the body 

of this document, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. 

• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public 

Docket (7502P), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket 

Facility’s normal hours of operation 

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

Friday, excluding legal holidays). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Docket Facility telephone number is 

(703) 305–5805. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

the docket ID number and the pesticide 

petition number of interest as shown in 

the body of this document. EPA’s policy 

is that all comments received will be 

included in the docket without change 

and may be made available on-line at 

http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information provided, 

unless the comment includes 

information claimed to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Do not submit 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected through 

regulations.gov or email. The 

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 

regulations.gov, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the comment that is placed in 

the 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 docket 

are listed in the docket index available 

at http://www.regulations.gov. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., 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 in the 

electronic docket at http:// 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS